AI Assistant Zara

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

NeoPaint

NeoPaint is a raster graphics editor for Windows and MS-DOS. It supports several file formats including JPEG, GIF, BMP, PNG, and TIFF. The developer, NeoSoft, advertises NeoPaint as "being simple enough for use by children while remaining powerful enough for the purposes of advanced image editing". The first version, NeoPaint 1.0, was released in 1992 on floppy disks. It supported video modes ranging from 640x350 to 1024x768 and multiple fonts. NeoPaint 2.2 came out for MS-DOS 3.1 in 1993, with support of for 2, 16, or 256 color images in Hercules, EGA, VGA, and Super VGA modes. NeoPaint 3.1 was released in 1995 supporting 24-bit images and formats like PCX, TIFF and BMP. NeoPaint 3.2 was released in 1996. An updated version, NeoPaint 3.2a, supported the GIF file format. NeoPaint 3.2d was released in 1998. A Windows 95 version named NeoPaint for Windows v4.0 was released in 1999 supporting the PNG file format. On September 1, 2018 the program was rebranded as PixelNEO, becoming one of the VisualNEO software products. Formats such as JPEG 2000, ICO, CUR, PSD and RAW are supported.
Read more →
Andrej Karpathy

Andrej Karpathy (born 23 October 1986) is a Slovak-Canadian AI researcher, who co-founded and formerly worked at OpenAI, where he specialized in deep learning and computer vision. He also worked as the director of artificial intelligence and Autopilot Vision at Tesla, and in 2024 he founded Eureka Labs, an AI education platform. In 2026 he joined Anthropic as part of the pretraining team. == Education and early life == Karpathy was born in Bratislava, Czechoslovakia (now Slovakia), and moved with his family to Toronto when he was 15. He completed his Computer Science and Physics bachelor's degrees at University of Toronto in 2009 and his master's degree at University of British Columbia in 2011, where he worked on physically simulated figures (for example, a simulated runner or a simulated person in a crowd) with his adviser Michiel van de Panne. In 2006, Karpathy began posting videos on YouTube on his channel, badmephisto. He garnered fame by posting Rubik's cube tutorials which have been used by famous speedcubers such as Feliks Zemdegs. The channel has over 9 million views as of June 2025. Karpathy received a PhD from Stanford University in 2015 under the supervision of Fei-Fei Li, focusing on the intersection of natural language processing and computer vision, and deep learning models suited for this task. == Career and research == He authored and was the primary instructor of the first deep learning course at Stanford, CS 231n: Convolutional Neural Networks for Visual Recognition. The course became one of the largest classes at Stanford, growing from 150 students in 2015 to 750 in 2017. Karpathy is a founding member of the artificial intelligence research group OpenAI, where he was a research scientist from 2015 to 2017. In June 2017 he became Tesla's director of artificial intelligence and reported to Elon Musk. He was named one of MIT Technology Review's Innovators Under 35 for 2020. After taking a several-months-long sabbatical from Tesla, he announced he was leaving the company in July 2022. As of February 2023, he makes YouTube videos on how to create artificial neural networks. On February 9, 2023, Karpathy announced he was returning to OpenAI. A year later on February 13, 2024, an OpenAI spokesperson confirmed that Karpathy had left OpenAI. In the same year, he was named one of Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential People in AI. On July 16, 2024, Karpathy announced on his X account that he started a new AI education company called Eureka Labs. Their first product was the AI course, LLM101n. He also has a broader educational effort, the "Zero to Hero" series on LLM fundamentals. The company also advocates for AI teaching assistants, a concept which has been criticized due to data privacy concerns and the removal of personal connection between teacher and student. In February 2025, Karpathy coined the term vibe coding to describe how AI tools allow hobbyists to construct apps and websites just by typing prompts. On May 19, 2026, he announced that he joined Anthropic via a statement on X, while the company stated that he will be leading a team for research in pretraining.
Read more →
Catastrophic interference

Catastrophic interference, also known as catastrophic forgetting, is the tendency of an artificial neural network to abruptly and drastically forget previously learned information upon learning new information. Neural networks are an important part of the connectionist approach to cognitive science. The issue of catastrophic interference when modeling human memory with connectionist models was originally brought to the attention of the scientific community by research from McCloskey and Cohen (1989), and Ratcliff (1990). It is a radical manifestation of the 'sensitivity-stability' dilemma or the 'stability-plasticity' dilemma. Specifically, these problems refer to the challenge of making an artificial neural network that is sensitive to, but not disrupted by, new information. Lookup tables and connectionist networks lie on the opposite sides of the stability plasticity spectrum. The former remains completely stable in the presence of new information but lacks the ability to generalize, i.e. infer general principles, from new inputs. On the other hand, connectionist networks like the standard backpropagation network can generalize to unseen inputs, but they are sensitive to new information. Backpropagation models can be analogized to human memory insofar as they have a similar ability to generalize, but these networks often exhibit less stability than human memory. Notably, these backpropagation networks are susceptible to catastrophic interference. This is an issue when modelling human memory, because unlike these networks, humans typically do not show catastrophic forgetting. == Discovery == The term catastrophic interference was originally coined by McCloskey and Cohen (1989) but was also brought to the attention of the scientific community by research from Ratcliff (1990). === The Sequential Learning Problem: McCloskey and Cohen (1989) === McCloskey and Cohen (1989) noted the problem of catastrophic interference during two different experiments with backpropagation neural network modelling. Experiment 1: Learning the ones and twos addition facts In their first experiment they trained a standard backpropagation neural network on a single training set consisting of 17 single-digit ones problems (i.e., 1 + 1 through 9 + 1, and 1 + 2 through 1 + 9) until the network could represent and respond properly to all of them. The error between the actual output and the desired output steadily declined across training sessions, which reflected that the network learned to represent the target outputs better across trials. Next, they trained the network on a single training set consisting of 17 single-digit twos problems (i.e., 2 + 1 through 2 + 9, and 1 + 2 through 9 + 2) until the network could represent, respond properly to all of them. They noted that their procedure was similar to how a child would learn their addition facts. Following each learning trial on the twos facts, the network was tested for its knowledge on both the ones and twos addition facts. Like the ones facts, the twos facts were readily learned by the network. However, McCloskey and Cohen noted the network was no longer able to properly answer the ones addition problems even after one learning trial of the twos addition problems. The output pattern produced in response to the ones facts often resembled an output pattern for an incorrect number more closely than the output pattern for a correct number. This is considered to be a drastic amount of error. Furthermore, the problems 2+1 and 1+2, which were included in both training sets, even showed dramatic disruption during the first learning trials of the twos facts. Experiment 2: Replication of Barnes and Underwood (1959) study In their second connectionist model, McCloskey and Cohen attempted to replicate the study on retroactive interference in humans by Barnes and Underwood (1959). They trained the model on A-B and A-C lists and used a context pattern in the input vector (input pattern), to differentiate between the lists. Specifically the network was trained to respond with the right B response when shown the A stimulus and A-B context pattern and to respond with the correct C response when shown the A stimulus and the A-C context pattern. When the model was trained concurrently on the A-B and A-C items then the network readily learned all of the associations correctly. In sequential training the A-B list was trained first, followed by the A-C list. After each presentation of the A-C list, performance was measured for both the A-B and A-C lists. They found that the amount of training on the A-C list in Barnes and Underwood study that lead to 50% correct responses, lead to nearly 0% correct responses by the backpropagation network. Furthermore, they found that the network tended to show responses that looked like the C response pattern when the network was prompted to give the B response pattern. This indicated that the A-C list apparently had overwritten the A-B list. This could be likened to learning the word dog, followed by learning the word stool and then finding that you think of the word stool when presented with the word dog. McCloskey and Cohen tried to reduce interference through a number of manipulations including changing the number of hidden units, changing the value of the learning rate parameter, overtraining on the A-B list, freezing certain connection weights, changing target values 0 and 1 instead 0.1 and 0.9. However, none of these manipulations satisfactorily reduced the catastrophic interference exhibited by the networks. Overall, McCloskey and Cohen (1989) concluded that: at least some interference will occur whenever new learning alters the weights involved in representing old learning the greater the amount of new learning, the greater the disruption in old knowledge interference was catastrophic in the backpropagation networks when learning was sequential but not concurrent === Constraints Imposed by Learning and Forgetting Functions: Ratcliff (1990) === Ratcliff (1990) used multiple sets of backpropagation models applied to standard recognition memory procedures, in which the items were sequentially learned. After inspecting the recognition performance models he found two major problems: Well-learned information was catastrophically forgotten as new information was learned in both small and large backpropagation networks. Even one learning trial with new information resulted in a significant loss of the old information, paralleling the findings of McCloskey and Cohen (1989). Ratcliff also found that the resulting outputs were often a blend of the previous input and the new input. In larger networks, items learned in groups (e.g. AB then CD) were more resistant to forgetting than were items learned singly (e.g. A then B then C...). However, the forgetting for items learned in groups was still large. Adding new hidden units to the network did not reduce interference. Discrimination between the studied items and previously unseen items decreased as the network learned more. This finding contradicts studies on human memory, which indicated that discrimination increases with learning. Ratcliff attempted to alleviate this problem by adding 'response nodes' that would selectively respond to old and new inputs. However, this method did not work as these response nodes would become active for all inputs. A model which used a context pattern also failed to increase discrimination between new and old items. == Proposed solutions == The main cause of catastrophic interference seems to be overlap in the representations at the hidden layer of distributed neural networks. In a distributed representation, each input tends to create changes in the weights of many of the nodes. Catastrophic forgetting occurs because when many of the weights where "knowledge is stored" are changed, it is unlikely for prior knowledge to be kept intact. During sequential learning, the inputs become mixed, with the new inputs being superimposed on top of the old ones. Another way to conceptualize this is by visualizing learning as a movement through a weight space. This weight space can be likened to a spatial representation of all of the possible combinations of weights that the network could possess. When a network first learns to represent a set of patterns, it finds a point in the weight space that allows it to recognize all of those patterns. However, when the network then learns a new set of patterns, it will move to a place in the weight space for which the only concern is the recognition of the new patterns. To recognize both sets of patterns, the network must find a place in the weight space suitable for recognizing both the new and the old patterns. Below are a number of techniques which have empirical support in successfully reducing catastrophic interference in backpropagation neural networks: === Orthogonality === Many of the early techniques in reducing representational overlap involved making either the input vecto
Read more →
Moral Machine

Moral Machine is an online platform, developed by Iyad Rahwan's Scalable Cooperation group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, that generates moral dilemmas and collects information on the decisions that people make between two destructive outcomes. The platform is the idea of Iyad Rahwan and social psychologists Azim Shariff and Jean-François Bonnefon, who conceived of the idea ahead of the publication of their article about the ethics of self-driving cars. The key contributors to building the platform were MIT Media Lab graduate students Edmond Awad and Sohan Dsouza. The presented scenarios are often variations of the trolley problem, and the information collected would be used for further research regarding the decisions that machine intelligence must make in the future. For example, as artificial intelligence plays an increasingly significant role in autonomous driving technology, research projects like Moral Machine help to find solutions for challenging life-and-death decisions that will face self-driving vehicles. Moral Machine was active from January 2016 to July 2020. The Moral Machine continues to be available on their website for people to experience. == The experiment == The Moral Machine was an ambitious project; it was the first attempt at using such an experimental design to test a large number of humans in over 200 countries worldwide. The study was approved by the Institute Review Board (IRB) at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The setup of the experiment asks the viewer to make a decision on a single scenario in which a self-driving car is about to hit pedestrians. The user can decide to have the car either swerve to avoid hitting the pedestrians or keep going straight to preserve the lives it is transporting. Participants can complete as many scenarios as they want to, however the scenarios themselves are generated in groups of thirteen. Within this thirteen, a single scenario is entirely random while the other twelve are generated from a space in a database of 26 million different possibilities. They are chosen with two dilemmas focused on each of six dimensions of moral preferences: character gender, character age, character physical fitness, character social status, character species, and character number. The experiment setup remains the same throughout multiple scenarios but each scenario tests a different set of factors. Most notably, the characters involved in the scenario are different in each one. Characters may include ones such as: Stroller, girl, boy, pregnant, Male Doctor, Female Doctor, Female Athlete, Executive Female, Male Athlete, Executive Male, Large Woman, Large Man, homeless, old man, old woman, dog, criminal, and a cat. Through these different characters researchers were able to understand how a wide variety of people will judge scenarios based on those involved. == Analysis == The Moral Machine collected 40 million moral decisions from 4 million participants in 233 countries, analysis of which revealed trends within individual countries and humanity as a whole. It tested for nine factors: preference for sparing humans versus pets, passengers versus pedestrians, men versus women, young versus elderly, fit versus overweight, higher versus lower social status, jaywalkers versus law abiders, larger versus smaller groups, and inaction (i.e. staying on course) versus swerving. Globally, participants favored human lives over lives of animals like dogs and cats. They preferred to spare more lives if possible, and younger lives as opposed to older. Babies were most often spared with cats being the least spared. In terms of gender variations, people tended to spare men over women for doctors and the elderly. All countries generally shared the preference to spare pedestrians over passengers and law-abiders over criminals. Participants from less wealthy countries showed a higher tendency of sparing pedestrians who crossed illegally compared to those from more wealthy and developed countries. This is most likely due to their experience living in a society where individuals are more likely to deviate from rules due to less stringent enforcement of laws. Countries of higher economic inequality overwhelmingly prefer to save wealthier individuals over poorer ones. === Cultural differences === Researchers subdivided 130 countries with similar results into three ‘cultural clusters’. North America and European countries with significant Christian populations had a higher preference for inaction on the part of the driver and thus had less of a preference for sparing pedestrians as compared to other clusters. East Asian and Islamic countries, together constituting the second cluster, did not have as much preference to spare younger humans compared to the other two clusters and had a higher preference for sparing law-abiding humans. Latin America and Francophone countries had a higher preference for sparing women, the young, the fit, and those of higher status, but a lower preference for sparing humans over pets or other animals. Individualistic cultures tended to spare larger groups, and collectivist cultures had a stronger preference for sparing the lives of older people. For instance, China ranked far below the world average for preference to spare the younger over elderly, while the average respondent from the US exhibited a much higher tendency to save younger lives and larger groups. == Applications of the data == The findings from the moral machine can help decision makers when designing self-driving automotive systems. Designers must make sure that these vehicles are able to solve problems on the road that aligns with the moral values of humans around it. This is a challenge because of the complex nature of humans who may all make different decisions based on their personal values. However, by collecting a large amount of decisions from humans all over the world, researchers can begin to understand patterns in the context of a particular culture, community, and people. == Other features == The Moral Machine was deployed in June 2016. In October 2016, a feature was added that offered users the option to fill a survey about their demographics, political views, and religious beliefs. Between November 2016 and March 2017, the website was progressively translated into nine languages in addition to English (Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish). Overall, the Moral Machine offers four different modes, with the focus being on the data-gathering feature of the website, called the Judge mode. This means that the Moral Machine, in addition to providing their own scenarios for users to judge, also invites users to create their own scenarios to be submitted and approved so that other people may also judge those scenarios. Data is also open sourced for anyone to explore via an interactive map that is featured on the Moral Machine website. == In the literature == Studies and research on the Moral Machine have taken a wide variety of approaches. However, theological examinations of the topic are still scarce where two bodies of work that examine such perspective currently exist in this regard: One is Buddhist while the other is Christian.
Read more →
Real-time transcription

Real-time transcription is the general term for transcription by court reporters using real-time text technologies to deliver computer text screens within a few seconds of the words being spoken. Specialist software allows participants in court hearings or depositions to make notes in the text and highlight portions for future reference. Real-time transcription is also used in the broadcasting environment where it is more commonly termed "captioning." == Career opportunities == Real-time reporting is used in a variety of industries, including entertainment, television, the Internet, and law. Specific careers include the following: Judicial reporters use a stenotype to provide instant transcripts on computer screens as a trial or deposition occurs. Communication access real-time translation (CART) reporters assist the hearing-impaired by transcribing spoken words, giving them personal access to the communications they need day to day. Television broadcast captioners use real-time reporting technology to allow hard-of-hearing or deaf people to see what is being said on live television broadcasts such as news, emergency broadcasts, sporting events, awards shows, and other programs. Internet information (or Webcast) reporters provide real-time reporting of sales meetings, press conferences, and other events, while simultaneously transmitting the transcripts to computers worldwide. Other rapid data entry positions. == History == Before the advent of the stenotype machine, court reporters wrote official trial transcripts by hand using a shorthand system of stenoforms that could later be translated into readable English. It often took eight years of training to learn this manual form of writing at the necessary speed. Walter Heironimus was among the first stenographers to make use of the stenotype machine during his work in the U.S. District Court system in New Jersey in 1935. A "transcript crisis" arose during the later half of the twentieth century due to the increasing volume of lawsuits. There were not enough number of court reporters to match the increasing number of trials. Not only were court reporters unavailable to attend many court proceedings, court transcripts were constantly late and the qualities varied. Some believed it was due to the non-interchangeability between court reporters, and others believed it was simply due to a labor shortage. In the meantime, magnetic audiotape recording, or known as electronic recording (ER) began to threaten all reporters' job since it could record long-hour courtroom trials and replace a court reporter's position in the courtroom. As a result, machine translation (MT) intended to serve as a solution for preventing ER from potentially replacing reporters' jobs. However, MT relied heavily on human labors operating behind the system and many started to question if it should be the right way to end the "transcript crisis." Later in 1964, set up by CIA, the Automatic Language Processing Advisory Committee (ALPAC) was set to review whether MT was capable of solving this crisis. They concluded that MT had failed to do so. Then Patrick O'Neill, a skilled and experienced court reporter, stayed to work on the stenotype-translation project with CIA and developed the prototype CAT system. After adopting the CAT system in court-reporting community, CAT was brought into the television broadcasting system, aiming to provide captions for the deaf or hard-of-hearing communities. In 1983, Linda Miller developed a further use for the CAT system. She successfully translated a lecture live on the television screen and provided a transcript for students. This technique is known as Computer-Aided Real-time Translation, or CART. == Court reporter == It is the court reporter's job to note down the exact words spoken by every participants during a court or deposition proceeding. Then court reporters will provide verbatim transcripts. The reason to have an official court transcript is that the real-time transcriptions allows attorneys and judges to have immediate access to the transcript. It also helps when there's a need to look up for information from the proceeding. Additionally, the deaf and the hard-of-hearing communities can also participate in the judicial process with the help of real-time transcriptions provided by court reporters. === Education and training === The required degree level for a court reporter to have is an Associate's degree or postsecondary certificate. In order to become a court reporter, more than 150 reporter training programs are provided at proprietary schools, community colleges, and four-year universities. After graduation, court reporters can choose to further pursue certifications to achieve a higher level of expertise and increase their marketability during a job search. In most states, Certificates of Proficiency from the NCRA or from state agencies are now required certificates for court reporters to have in order to qualify for appointments. The NCRA aims to set the national standard for the certification of court reporters, and since 1937 it has offered its certification program which is now accepted by 22 states instead of state licenses. Court reporter training programs include but not limited to: Training in rapid writing skill, or shorthand, which will enable students to record, with accuracy, at least 225 words per minute Training in typing, which will enable students to type at least 60 words per minute A general training in English, which covers aspects of grammar, word formation, punctuation, spelling and capitalization Taking Law related courses in order to understand the overall principles of civil and criminal law, legal terminology and common Latin phrases, rules of evidence, court procedures, the duties of court reporters, the ethics of the profession Visits to actual trials Taking courses in elementary anatomy and physiology and medical word study including medical prefixes, roots and suffixes. Other than official court reporters, who are assigned to and work for a particular court, other types of court reporters include free-lance reporter, who either works for a court reporting firm or self-employed. They are different from official court reporters in that they have the chances to work on a wider range of assignments and work on basis of hourly wage. Hearing reporters work at governmental agency hearings. Legislative reporters work in law-making bodies. The demand for reporters is not limited in just the court settings. Reporters are also needed in conferences, meetings, conventions, investigations, and a variety of industries with needs for employers with real-time data entry skills. == Non-English transcription == Transcription services are universally necessary, so it is not limited to the English language. A stenographer's ability to transcribe languages beyond only English is especially valuable as society as a whole becomes increasingly multilingual. Education in non-English transcription demands a comprehensive understanding of the given language. Phonetic differences between English and other languages are a particular challenge in carrying English transcription skills over into other languages. Stenography represents various sounds of a language in a formal system of shorthand, so differences within the sets of sounds that emerge in other languages require an alternative system of shorthand transcription. For example, the presence of many diphthongs and triphthongs in Spanish requires certain sounds to be distinguished that would not be present in transcribing English into shorthand. == Controversies == The usage of transcription in the context of linguistic discussions has been controversial. Typically, two kinds of linguistic records are considered to be scientifically relevant. First, linguistic records of general acoustic features, and secondly, records that only focuses on the distinctive phonemes of a language. While transcriptions are not entirely illegitimate, transcriptions without enough detailed commentary regarding any linguistic features, or transcriptions of poor quality resources, has a great chance of the content being misinterpreted. Besides misinterpretation, transcribers could also bring in cultural biases and ignorance that reflect onto their transcription. These instances may cause a disruption of reliability in the final real-time transcription, which could influence how the written utterance is seen as an evidence for a court-case. === Quality issues === Problems in the final resulting transcription can be caused by either the quality of the transcriber or the original source that is being transcribed. Transcribers can come from different levels of skill and training background. This makes the final transcription prone to poor quality, or if the transcription is being done by multiple people, lack of consistency in the content. If the source of the transcription is a recording, the problem may root back to the quality of the re
Read more →
Spark NLP

Spark NLP is an open-source text processing library for advanced natural language processing for the Python, Java and Scala programming languages. The library is built on top of Apache Spark and its Spark ML library. Its purpose is to provide an API for natural language processing pipelines that implement recent academic research results as production-grade, scalable, and trainable software. The library offers pre-trained neural network models, pipelines, and embeddings, as well as support for training custom models. == Features == The design of the library makes use of the concept of a pipeline which is an ordered set of text annotators. Out of the box annotators include, tokenizer, normalizer, stemming, lemmatizer, regular expression, TextMatcher, chunker, DateMatcher, SentenceDetector, DeepSentenceDetector, POS tagger, ViveknSentimentDetector, sentiment analysis, named entity recognition, conditional random field annotator, deep learning annotator, spell checking and correction, dependency parser, typed dependency parser, document classification, and language detection. The Models Hub is a platform for sharing open-source as well as licensed pre-trained models and pipelines. It includes pre-trained pipelines with tokenization, lemmatization, part-of-speech tagging, and named entity recognition that exist for more than thirteen languages; word embeddings including GloVe, ELMo, BERT, ALBERT, XLNet, Small BERT, and ELECTRA; sentence embeddings including Universal Sentence Embeddings (USE) and Language Agnostic BERT Sentence Embeddings (LaBSE). It also includes resources and pre-trained models for more than two hundred languages. Spark NLP base code includes support for East Asian languages such as tokenizers for Chinese, Japanese, Korean; for right-to-left languages such as Urdu, Farsi, Arabic, Hebrew and pre-trained multilingual word and sentence embeddings such as LaUSE and a translation annotator. == Usage in healthcare == Spark NLP for Healthcare is a commercial extension of Spark NLP for clinical and biomedical text mining. It provides healthcare-specific annotators, pipelines, models, and embeddings for clinical entity recognition, clinical entity linking, entity normalization, assertion status detection, de-identification, relation extraction, and spell checking and correction. The library offers access to several clinical and biomedical transformers: JSL-BERT-Clinical, BioBERT, ClinicalBERT, GloVe-Med, GloVe-ICD-O. It also includes over 50 pre-trained healthcare models, that can recognize the entities such as clinical, drugs, risk factors, anatomy, demographics, and sensitive data. == Spark OCR == Spark OCR is another commercial extension of Spark NLP for optical character recognition (OCR) from images, scanned PDF documents, and DICOM files. It is a software library built on top of Apache Spark. It provides several image pre-processing features for improving text recognition results such as adaptive thresholding and denoising, skew detection & correction, adaptive scaling, layout analysis and region detection, image cropping, removing background objects. Due to the tight coupling between Spark OCR and Spark NLP, users can combine NLP and OCR pipelines for tasks such as extracting text from images, extracting data from tables, recognizing and highlighting named entities in PDF documents or masking sensitive text in order to de-identify images. Several output formats are supported by Spark OCR such as PDF, images, or DICOM files with annotated or masked entities, digital text for downstream processing in Spark NLP or other libraries, structured data formats (JSON and CSV), as files or Spark data frames. Users can also distribute the OCR jobs across multiple nodes in a Spark cluster. == License and availability == Spark NLP is licensed under the Apache 2.0 license. The source code is publicly available on GitHub as well as documentation and a tutorial. Prebuilt versions of Spark NLP are available in PyPi and Anaconda Repository for Python development, in Maven Central for Java & Scala development, and in Spark Packages for Spark development. == Award == In March 2019, Spark NLP received Open Source Award for its contributions in natural language processing in Python, Java, and Scala.
Read more →
Babelfy

Babelfy is a software algorithm for the disambiguation of text written in any language. It performs the tasks of multilingual Word Sense Disambiguation (i.e., the disambiguation of common nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs) and Entity Linking (i.e. the disambiguation of mentions to encyclopedic entities like people, companies, places, etc.). == Overview == Babelfy uses the BabelNet multilingual knowledge graph to perform disambiguation and entity linking in three steps: It associates with each vertex of the BabelNet semantic network, i.e., either concept or named entity, a semantic signature, that is, a set of related vertices. This is a preliminary step which needs to be performed only once, independently of the input text. Given an input text, it extracts all the linkable fragments from this text and, for each of them, lists the possible meanings according to the semantic network. It creates a graph-based semantic interpretation of the whole text by linking the candidate meanings of the extracted fragments using the previously computed semantic signatures. It then extracts a dense subgraph of this representation and selects the best candidate meaning for each fragment. As a result, the text, written in any of the 271 languages supported by BabelNet, is output with possibly overlapping semantic annotations.
Read more →
Ratio Club

The Ratio Club was a small British informal dining club from 1949 to 1958 of young psychiatrists, psychologists, physiologists, mathematicians and engineers who met to discuss issues in cybernetics. == History == The idea of the club arose from a symposium on animal behaviour held in July 1949 by the Society of Experimental Biology in Cambridge. The club was founded by the neurologist John Bates, with other notable members such as W. Ross Ashby. The name Ratio was suggested by Albert Uttley, it being the Latin root meaning "computation or the faculty of mind which calculates, plans and reasons". He pointed out that it is also the root of rationarium, meaning a statistical account, and ratiocinatius, meaning argumentative. The use was probably inspired by an earlier suggestion by Donald Mackay of the 'MR club', from Machina ratiocinatrix, a term used by Norbert Wiener in the introduction to his then recently published book Cybernetics, or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. Wiener used the term in reference to calculus ratiocinator, a calculating machine constructed by Leibniz. The initial membership was W. Ross Ashby, Horace Barlow, John Bates, George Dawson, Thomas Gold, W. E. Hick, Victor Little, Donald MacKay, Turner McLardy, P. A. Merton, John Pringle, Harold Shipton, Donald Sholl, Eliot Slater, Albert Uttley, W. Grey Walter and John Hugh Westcott. Alan Turing joined after the first meeting with I. J. Good, Philip Woodward and William Rushton added soon after. Giles Brindley attended several meetings as a guest. Warren McCulloch made presentations to the club twice, the first time at its inaugural meeting (a talk which the members found disappointing), and became a correspondent with and supporter of a number of its members. Others who attended at least one Ratio Club event as guests included Walter Pitts, Claude Shannon, J.Z. Young, C.H. Waddington, Peter Elias, J. C. R. Licklider, Oliver Selfridge, Benoît Mandelbrot, Colin Cherry and Anthony Oettinger. One one occasion I.J. Good brought along the then director of the USA's National Security Agency (presumably either Ralph Canine or John Samford given the dates). Several members admired the work of psychologist and philosopher Kenneth Craik and considered him an important influence; according to Husbands and Holland "there is no doubt Craik would have been a leading member of the club" had he not died young in 1945. The club has been considered the most influential cybernetics group in the UK, and many of its members went on to become prominent scientists.
Read more →
Qapital

Qapital is a personal finance mobile application (app) for the iOS and Android operating systems, developed by Qapital, LLC. The app is designed to motivate users to save money through a gamification of their spending behavior. It moves money from a user's checking account to a separate Qapital account, when certain rules are triggered. Its database is used by psychology professor Dan Ariely to study consumer behavior. Qapital was released in Sweden in 2013, then in the US in early 2015. The application was later withdrawn from the Swedish market in April 2015, in order to focus on the US market. == History == The idea for Qapital was conceived by ex-bankers in Sweden. The software was designed by twin brothers Daniel and Andreas Källbom of Studio Källbom and released in Sweden in December 2013. The original software was a personal finance dashboard, similar to Mint.com, to show its users how they spent their money. Qapital introduced the app into the US market with a different design in 2014 and started focusing exclusively on the US market. The app was re-designed to focus on building savings rather than managing personal finances. The Swedish version shut down in April 2015. The app was initially restricted to the iOS platform, but an Android version was released at the end of 2015. Shortly after its US launch, Qapital invited psychology professor Dan Ariely to join its team as its "chief behavioral economist". He uses the app's database to conduct research into behavioral economics and Qapital in turn uses Ariely's research in design and programming decisions. In 2017, Qapital added checking and debit card services to the app. == Concept and features == Qapital is a free personal finance app for iOS and Android devices, intended to encourage its users to save money. Qapital directs each of its users to set savings goals, then automatically transfers money from their checking account to an account for savings, when a rule established in the app is met. It uses the "if this then that" (IFTTT) rule-based web-service. For example, one rule could be that if a user purchases a cup of coffee, then the app will round up the charge to the nearest dollar and deposit the difference into savings. Users connect their bank accounts to Qapital, so it knows when purchases are made. When a rule is met, money for savings are transferred to a Qapital account operated in partnership with Lincoln Savings Bank. As of 2015, Qapital can connect to more than 180 other apps, such as Facebook, Twitter, Dropbox and Instagram. For example, connecting to Jawbone allows the user to set a rule that if they take a certain number of steps during the day, a set amount of money is transferred to savings. The app also allows users to monitor activity among their other financial accounts, such as deposits and withdrawals. == Reception == In an October 2015 review, PC Magazine gave Qapital four out of five marks and an editor rating of "excellent." The review praised the app for having a "lovely design" and criticized it for being a, "bit simplistic in some of its rules." Bankrate, in a May 2015 review, gave the app a score of 3/5 for "ease of use," 5/5 for "features," 4/5 for "effectiveness," 4/5 for "value," for a total score of 16/20. The reviewer criticized Qapital's savings account for providing a low-interest rate, but concluded that its numerous features make the app "intriguing" and "it would be difficult to find a standard bank app more fun to use than Qapital."
Read more →
Region connection calculus

The region connection calculus (RCC) is intended to serve for qualitative spatial representation and reasoning. RCC abstractly describes regions (in Euclidean space, or in a topological space) by their possible relations to each other. RCC8 consists of 8 basic relations that are possible between two regions: disconnected (DC) externally connected (EC) equal (EQ) partially overlapping (PO) tangential proper part (TPP) tangential proper part inverse (TPPi) non-tangential proper part (NTPP) non-tangential proper part inverse (NTPPi) From these basic relations, combinations can be built. For example, proper part (PP) is the union of TPP and NTPP. == Axioms == RCC is governed by two axioms. for any region x, x connects with itself for any region x, y, if x connects with y, y connects with x == Remark on the axioms == The two axioms describe two features of the connection relation, but not the characteristic feature of the connect relation. For example, we can say that an object is less than 10 meters away from itself and that if object A is less than 10 meters away from object B, object B will be less than 10 meters away from object A. So, the relation 'less-than-10-meters' also satisfies the above two axioms, but does not talk about the connection relation in the intended sense of RCC. == Composition table == The composition table of RCC8 are as follows: "" denotes the universal relation, no relation can be discarded. Usage example: if a TPP b and b EC c, (row 4, column 2) of the table says that a DC c or a EC c. == Examples == The RCC8 calculus is intended for reasoning about spatial configurations. Consider the following example: two houses are connected via a road. Each house is located on an own property. The first house possibly touches the boundary of the property; the second one surely does not. What can we infer about the relation of the second property to the road? The spatial configuration can be formalized in RCC8 as the following constraint network: house1 DC house2 house1 {TPP, NTPP} property1 house1 {DC, EC} property2 house1 EC road house2 { DC, EC } property1 house2 NTPP property2 house2 EC road property1 { DC, EC } property2 road { DC, EC, TPP, TPPi, PO, EQ, NTPP, NTPPi } property1 road { DC, EC, TPP, TPPi, PO, EQ, NTPP, NTPPi } property2 Using the RCC8 composition table and the path-consistency algorithm, we can refine the network in the following way: road { PO, EC } property1 road { PO, TPP } property2 That is, the road either overlaps (PO) property2, or is a tangential proper part of it. But, if the road is a tangential proper part of property2, then the road can only be externally connected (EC) to property1. That is, road PO property1 is not possible when road TPP property2. This fact is not obvious, but can be deduced once we examine the consistent "singleton-labelings" of the constraint network. The following paragraph briefly describes singleton-labelings. First, we note that the path-consistency algorithm will also reduce the possible properties between house2 and property1 from { DC, EC } to just DC. So, the path-consistency algorithm leaves multiple possible constraints on 5 of the edges in the constraint network. Since each of the multiple constraints involves 2 constraints, we can reduce the network to 32 (25) possible unique constraint networks, each containing only single labels on each edge ("singleton labelings"). However, of the 32 possible singleton labelings, only 9 are consistent. (See qualreas for details.) Only one of the consistent singleton labelings has the edge road TPP property2 and the same labeling includes road EC property1. Other versions of the region connection calculus include RCC5 (with only five basic relations - the distinction whether two regions touch each other are ignored) and RCC23 (which allows reasoning about convexity). == RCC8 use in GeoSPARQL == RCC8 has been partially implemented in GeoSPARQL as described below: == Implementations == GQR is a reasoner for RCC-5, RCC-8, and RCC-23 (as well as other calculi for spatial and temporal reasoning) qualreas is a Python framework for qualitative reasoning over networks of relation algebras, such as RCC-8, Allen's interval algebra and more.
Read more →
Moral Machine

Moral Machine is an online platform, developed by Iyad Rahwan's Scalable Cooperation group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, that generates moral dilemmas and collects information on the decisions that people make between two destructive outcomes. The platform is the idea of Iyad Rahwan and social psychologists Azim Shariff and Jean-François Bonnefon, who conceived of the idea ahead of the publication of their article about the ethics of self-driving cars. The key contributors to building the platform were MIT Media Lab graduate students Edmond Awad and Sohan Dsouza. The presented scenarios are often variations of the trolley problem, and the information collected would be used for further research regarding the decisions that machine intelligence must make in the future. For example, as artificial intelligence plays an increasingly significant role in autonomous driving technology, research projects like Moral Machine help to find solutions for challenging life-and-death decisions that will face self-driving vehicles. Moral Machine was active from January 2016 to July 2020. The Moral Machine continues to be available on their website for people to experience. == The experiment == The Moral Machine was an ambitious project; it was the first attempt at using such an experimental design to test a large number of humans in over 200 countries worldwide. The study was approved by the Institute Review Board (IRB) at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The setup of the experiment asks the viewer to make a decision on a single scenario in which a self-driving car is about to hit pedestrians. The user can decide to have the car either swerve to avoid hitting the pedestrians or keep going straight to preserve the lives it is transporting. Participants can complete as many scenarios as they want to, however the scenarios themselves are generated in groups of thirteen. Within this thirteen, a single scenario is entirely random while the other twelve are generated from a space in a database of 26 million different possibilities. They are chosen with two dilemmas focused on each of six dimensions of moral preferences: character gender, character age, character physical fitness, character social status, character species, and character number. The experiment setup remains the same throughout multiple scenarios but each scenario tests a different set of factors. Most notably, the characters involved in the scenario are different in each one. Characters may include ones such as: Stroller, girl, boy, pregnant, Male Doctor, Female Doctor, Female Athlete, Executive Female, Male Athlete, Executive Male, Large Woman, Large Man, homeless, old man, old woman, dog, criminal, and a cat. Through these different characters researchers were able to understand how a wide variety of people will judge scenarios based on those involved. == Analysis == The Moral Machine collected 40 million moral decisions from 4 million participants in 233 countries, analysis of which revealed trends within individual countries and humanity as a whole. It tested for nine factors: preference for sparing humans versus pets, passengers versus pedestrians, men versus women, young versus elderly, fit versus overweight, higher versus lower social status, jaywalkers versus law abiders, larger versus smaller groups, and inaction (i.e. staying on course) versus swerving. Globally, participants favored human lives over lives of animals like dogs and cats. They preferred to spare more lives if possible, and younger lives as opposed to older. Babies were most often spared with cats being the least spared. In terms of gender variations, people tended to spare men over women for doctors and the elderly. All countries generally shared the preference to spare pedestrians over passengers and law-abiders over criminals. Participants from less wealthy countries showed a higher tendency of sparing pedestrians who crossed illegally compared to those from more wealthy and developed countries. This is most likely due to their experience living in a society where individuals are more likely to deviate from rules due to less stringent enforcement of laws. Countries of higher economic inequality overwhelmingly prefer to save wealthier individuals over poorer ones. === Cultural differences === Researchers subdivided 130 countries with similar results into three ‘cultural clusters’. North America and European countries with significant Christian populations had a higher preference for inaction on the part of the driver and thus had less of a preference for sparing pedestrians as compared to other clusters. East Asian and Islamic countries, together constituting the second cluster, did not have as much preference to spare younger humans compared to the other two clusters and had a higher preference for sparing law-abiding humans. Latin America and Francophone countries had a higher preference for sparing women, the young, the fit, and those of higher status, but a lower preference for sparing humans over pets or other animals. Individualistic cultures tended to spare larger groups, and collectivist cultures had a stronger preference for sparing the lives of older people. For instance, China ranked far below the world average for preference to spare the younger over elderly, while the average respondent from the US exhibited a much higher tendency to save younger lives and larger groups. == Applications of the data == The findings from the moral machine can help decision makers when designing self-driving automotive systems. Designers must make sure that these vehicles are able to solve problems on the road that aligns with the moral values of humans around it. This is a challenge because of the complex nature of humans who may all make different decisions based on their personal values. However, by collecting a large amount of decisions from humans all over the world, researchers can begin to understand patterns in the context of a particular culture, community, and people. == Other features == The Moral Machine was deployed in June 2016. In October 2016, a feature was added that offered users the option to fill a survey about their demographics, political views, and religious beliefs. Between November 2016 and March 2017, the website was progressively translated into nine languages in addition to English (Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish). Overall, the Moral Machine offers four different modes, with the focus being on the data-gathering feature of the website, called the Judge mode. This means that the Moral Machine, in addition to providing their own scenarios for users to judge, also invites users to create their own scenarios to be submitted and approved so that other people may also judge those scenarios. Data is also open sourced for anyone to explore via an interactive map that is featured on the Moral Machine website. == In the literature == Studies and research on the Moral Machine have taken a wide variety of approaches. However, theological examinations of the topic are still scarce where two bodies of work that examine such perspective currently exist in this regard: One is Buddhist while the other is Christian.
Read more →
Ari Holtzman

Ari Holtzman is a professor of Computer Science at the University of Chicago and an expert in the area of natural language processing and computational linguistics. Previously, Holtzman was a PhD student at the University of Washington where he was advised by Luke Zettlemoyer. In 2017, he was a member of the winning team for the inaugural Alexa Prize for developing a conversational AI system for the Amazon Alexa device. Holtzman has made multiple contributions in the area of text generation and language models such as the introduction of nucleus sampling in 2019, his work on AI safety and neural fake news detection, and the fine-tuning of quantized large language models.
Read more →
Adobe Presenter Video Express

Adobe Presenter Video Express is screencasting and video editing software developed by Adobe Systems. == Description == Adobe Presenter Video Express is primarily used as a software by video creators, to record and mix webcam and screen video feeds. It allows users to simultaneously record video from their webcam and the screen, and easily mix the 2 tracks with a simple user interface. Users can change the background in their recorded video without needing equipment like a green screen. This is unlike other video tools which rely on chroma keying technology, and only work with green or blue screens. They can also add annotations and quizzes to their content and publish the video to MP4 or HTML5 formats. == List of notable features == === Record and mix, screen and webcam === Support for simultaneous recording of screen and webcam video feeds, with a simple editing interface to mix the two video streams. This lets the author rapidly create screencasts, software demos, etc. === Make my background awesome === This feature allows authors to change the background of their webcam recording without needing a green screen, provided they use a solid-colored backdrop which contrasts well against them. Authors can select images, videos or even the screen recording as their background. === In-video quizzing === Authors can insert quizzes within their video content. On success/failure attempts, the author can decide what message to display, and can also configure the video to jump to a certain point and play. Quizzes are published as part of the interactive HTML 5 player, which cannot be hosted on YouTube and Vimeo. === LMS Reporting === Authors can publish to any SCORM compliant LMS (Learning Management System) for quiz reporting, or to Adobe Captivate Prime. === In-app assets and branding === Adobe Presenter Video Express ships with a large number of branding videos, backgrounds and video filters to help authors create studio quality videos. === MP4 and HTML5 Output === The tool publishes a single MP4 video file containing all the video content, within an HTML 5 wrapper that contains the interactive player. The interactive HTML 5 player can be hosted on any website. == Common uses == === Screencasting === Screencasting is the process of recording one's computer screen as a video, usually with an audio voice over, to create a software demonstration, tutorial, presentation, etc. Adobe Presenter Video Express supports simultaneous recording of full screen video and microphone audio for creating screencasts. === Product marketing and demos === The ability to record the webcam video in addition to everything that is visible on the screen in Adobe Presenter Video Express, allows the author to add their personality to their screencasts. Features like video mixing and 'make my background awesome' further enhance the presentation, allowing effortless creation of marketing and demo videos. === Education === Adobe Presenter Video Express supports in-video quizzes and LMS reporting, along with screencasting and webcam recording. These features make it a powerful tool for creating educational content. == Differences from Adobe Presenter and Adobe Captivate == Adobe Presenter is a Microsoft PowerPoint plug-in for converting PowerPoint slides into interactive eLearning content, available only on Windows. Starting with Adobe Presenter 8, the video creation tool Adobe Presenter Video Express was bundled with every purchase of Adobe Presenter. From September 2015, Adobe Presenter Video Express 11 was also made available as a stand-alone product on Windows and Mac. A subscription license for Adobe Presenter Video Express, valid on Windows and Mac, is available for $9.99/month. Adobe Presenter Video Express continues to be bundled with purchases of Adobe Presenter on Windows as well. Adobe Captivate is an authoring tool for creating numerous forms of interactive eLearning content. Unlike Adobe Presenter, it uses a proprietary editing interface instead of Microsoft PowerPoint. While it is possible to create screen captures with Adobe Captivate, you cannot record the webcam feed. Adobe Captivate does not bundle Adobe Presenter or Adobe Presenter Video Express.
Read more →
Leabra

Leabra stands for local, error-driven and associative, biologically realistic algorithm. It is a model of learning which is a balance between Hebbian and error-driven learning with other network-derived characteristics. This model is used to mathematically predict outcomes based on inputs and previous learning influences. Leabra is heavily influenced by and contributes to neural network designs and models, including emergent. == Background == It is the default algorithm in emergent (successor of PDP++) when making a new project, and is extensively used in various simulations. Hebbian learning is performed using conditional principal components analysis (CPCA) algorithm with correction factor for sparse expected activity levels. Error-driven learning is performed using GeneRec, which is a generalization of the recirculation algorithm, and approximates Almeida–Pineda recurrent backpropagation. The symmetric, midpoint version of GeneRec is used, which is equivalent to the contrastive Hebbian learning algorithm (CHL). See O'Reilly (1996; Neural Computation) for more details. The activation function is a point-neuron approximation with both discrete spiking and continuous rate-code output. Layer or unit-group level inhibition can be computed directly using a k-winners-take-all (KWTA) function, producing sparse distributed representations. A feedforward and feedback (FFFB) form of inhibition has now replaced the KWTA form of inhibition. FFFB inhibition can be efficiently implemented by using the average excitatory input and activity levels in a given layer. The net input is computed as an average, not a sum, over connections, based on normalized, sigmoidally transformed weight values, which are subject to scaling on a connection-group level to alter relative contributions. Automatic scaling is performed to compensate for differences in expected activity level in the different projections. Documentation about this algorithm can be found in the book "Computational Explorations in Cognitive Neuroscience: Understanding the Mind by Simulating the Brain" published by MIT press. and in the Emergent Documentation Archived 2009-04-16 at the Wayback Machine == Overview of the leabra algorithm == The pseudocode for Leabra is given here, showing exactly how the pieces of the algorithm described in more detail in the subsequent sections fit together. Iterate over minus and plus phases of settling for each event. o At start of settling, for all units: - Initialize all state variables (activation, v_m, etc.). - Apply external patterns (clamp input in minus, input & output in plus). - Compute net input scaling terms (constants, computed here so network can be dynamically altered). - Optimization: compute net input once from all static activations (e.g., hard-clamped external inputs). o During each cycle of settling, for all non-clamped units: - Compute excitatory netinput (g_e(t), aka eta_j or net) -- sender-based optimization by ignoring inactives. - Compute kWTA inhibition for each layer, based on g_i^Q: Sort units into two groups based on g_i^Q: top k and remaining k+1 -> n. If basic, find k and k+1th highest If avg-based, compute avg of 1 -> k & k+1 -> n. Set inhibitory conductance g_i from g^Q_k and g^Q_k+1 - Compute point-neuron activation combining excitatory input and inhibition o After settling, for all units, record final settling activations as either minus or plus phase (y^-_j or y^+_j). After both phases update the weights (based on linear current weight values), for all connections: o Compute error-driven weight changes with CHL with soft weight bounding o Compute Hebbian weight changes with CPCA from plus-phase activations o Compute net weight change as weighted sum of error-driven and Hebbian o Increment the weights according to net weight change. == Implementations == Emergent Archived 2015-10-03 at the Wayback Machine is the original implementation of Leabra; its most recent implementation is written in Go. It was written chiefly by Dr. O'Reilly, but professional software engineers were recently hired to improve the existing codebase. This is the fastest implementation, suitable for constructing large networks. Although emergent has a graphical user interface, it is very complex and has a steep learning curve. If you want to understand the algorithm in detail, it will be easier to read non-optimized code. For this purpose, check out the MATLAB version. There is also an R version available, that can be easily installed via install.packages("leabRa") in R and has a short introduction to how the package is used. The MATLAB and R versions are not suited for constructing very large networks, but they can be installed quickly and (with some programming background) are easy to use. Furthermore, they can also be adapted easily. == Special algorithms == Temporal differences and general dopamine modulation. Temporal differences (TD) is widely used as a model of midbrain dopaminergic firing. Primary value learned value (PVLV). PVLV simulates behavioral and neural data on Pavlovian conditioning and the midbrain dopaminergic neurons that fire in proportion to unexpected rewards (an alternative to TD). Prefrontal cortex basal ganglia working memory (PBWM). PBWM uses PVLV to train prefrontal cortex working memory updating system, based on the biology of the prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia.
Read more →
Vivification

Vivification is an operation on a description logic knowledge base to improve performance of a semantic reasoner. Vivification replaces a disjunction of concepts C 1 ⊔ C 2 … ⊔ C n {\displaystyle C_{1}\sqcup C_{2}\ldots \sqcup C_{n}} by the least common subsumer of the concepts C 1 , C 2 , … C n {\displaystyle C_{1},C_{2},\ldots C_{n}} . The goal of this operation is to improve the performance of the reasoner by replacing a complex set of concepts with a single concept which subsumes the original concepts. For example, consider the example given in (Cohen 92): Suppose we have the concept PIANIST(Jill) ∨ ORGANIST(Jill) {\displaystyle {\textrm {PIANIST(Jill)}}\vee {\textrm {ORGANIST(Jill)}}} . This concept can be vivified into a simpler concept KEYBOARD-PLAYER(Jill) {\displaystyle {\textrm {KEYBOARD-PLAYER(Jill)}}} . This summarization leads to an approximation that may not be exactly equivalent to the original. == An approximation == Knowledge base vivification is not necessarily exact. If the reasoner is operating under the open world assumption we may get surprising results. In the previous example, if we replace the disjunction with the vivified concept, we will arrive at a surprising results. First, we find that the reasoner will no longer classify Jill as either a pianist or an organist. Even though ORGANIST {\displaystyle {\textrm {ORGANIST}}} and PIANIST {\displaystyle {\textrm {PIANIST}}} are the only two sub-classes, under the OWA we can no longer classify Jill as playing one or the other. The reason is that there may be another keyboard instrument (e.g. a harpsichord) that Jill plays but which does not have a specific subclass.
Read more →