AI Avatar Arbitrage

AI Avatar Arbitrage — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Cooperative storage cloud

A cooperative storage cloud is a decentralized model of networked online storage where data is stored on multiple computers (nodes), hosted by the participants cooperating in the cloud. For the cooperative scheme to be viable, the total storage contributed in aggregate must be at least equal to the amount of storage needed by end users. However, some nodes may contribute less storage and some may contribute more. There may be reward models to compensate the nodes contributing more. Unlike a traditional storage cloud, a cooperative does not directly employ dedicated servers for the actual storage of the data, thereby eliminating the need for a significant dedicated hardware investment. Each node in the cooperative runs specialized software which communicates with a centralized control and orchestration server, thereby allowing the node to both consume and contribute storage space to the cloud. The centralized control and orchestration server requires several orders of magnitude less resources (storage, computing power, and bandwidth) to operate, relative to the overall capacity of the cooperative. == Data security == Files hosted in the cloud are fragmented and encrypted before leaving the local machine. They are then distributed randomly using a load balancing and geo-distribution algorithm to other nodes in the cooperative. Users can add an additional layer of security and reduce storage space by compressing and encrypting files before they are copied to the cloud. == Data redundancy == In order to maintain data integrity and high availability across a relatively unreliable set of computers over a wide area network like the Internet, the source node will add some level of redundancy to each data block. This allows the system to recreate the entire block even if some nodes are temporarily unavailable (due to loss of network connectivity, the machine being powered off or a hardware failure). The most storage and bandwidth efficient forms of redundancy use erasure coding techniques like Reed–Solomon. A simple, less CPU intensive but more expensive form of redundancy is duplicate copies. == Flexible contribution == Due to bandwidth or hardware constraints some nodes may not be able to contribute as much space as they consume in the cloud. On the other hand, nodes with large storage space and limited or no bandwidth constraints may contribute more than they consume, thereby the cooperative can stay in balance.
Read more →
Statistical machine translation

Statistical machine translation (SMT) is a machine translation approach where translations are generated on the basis of statistical models whose parameters are derived from the analysis of bilingual text corpora. The statistical approach contrasts with the rule-based approaches to machine translation as well as with example-based machine translation, that superseded the previous rule-based approach that required explicit description of each and every linguistic rule, which was costly, and which often did not generalize to other languages. The first ideas of statistical machine translation were introduced by Warren Weaver in 1949, including the ideas of applying Claude Shannon's information theory. Statistical machine translation was re-introduced in the late 1980s and early 1990s by researchers at IBM's Thomas J. Watson Research Center. Before the introduction of neural machine translation, it was by far the most widely studied machine translation method. == Basis == The idea behind statistical machine translation comes from information theory. A document is translated according to the probability distribution p ( e | f ) {\displaystyle p(e|f)} that a string e {\displaystyle e} in the target language (for example, English) is the translation of a string f {\displaystyle f} in the source language (for example, French). The problem of modeling the probability distribution p ( e | f ) {\displaystyle p(e|f)} has been approached in a number of ways. One approach which lends itself well to computer implementation is to apply Bayes' theorem, that is p ( e | f ) ∝ p ( f | e ) p ( e ) {\displaystyle p(e|f)\propto p(f|e)p(e)} , where the translation model p ( f | e ) {\displaystyle p(f|e)} is the probability that the source string is the translation of the target string, and the language model p ( e ) {\displaystyle p(e)} is the probability of seeing that target language string. This decomposition is attractive as it splits the problem into two subproblems. Finding the best translation e ~ {\displaystyle {\tilde {e}}} is done by picking up the one that gives the highest probability: e ~ = a r g max e ∈ e ∗ p ( e | f ) = a r g max e ∈ e ∗ p ( f | e ) p ( e ) {\displaystyle {\tilde {e}}=arg\max _{e\in e^{}}p(e|f)=arg\max _{e\in e^{}}p(f|e)p(e)} . For a rigorous implementation of this one would have to perform an exhaustive search by going through all strings e ∗ {\displaystyle e^{}} in the native language. Performing the search efficiently is the work of a machine translation decoder that uses the foreign string, heuristics and other methods to limit the search space and at the same time keeping acceptable quality. This trade-off between quality and time usage can also be found in speech recognition. As the translation systems are not able to store all native strings and their translations, a document is typically translated sentence by sentence. Language models are typically approximated by smoothed n-gram models, and similar approaches have been applied to translation models, but this introduces additional complexity due to different sentence lengths and word orders in the languages. Statistical translation models were initially word based (Models 1-5 from IBM Hidden Markov model from Stephan Vogel and Model 6 from Franz-Joseph Och), but significant advances were made with the introduction of phrase based models. Later work incorporated syntax or quasi-syntactic structures. == Benefits == The most frequently cited benefits of statistical machine translation (SMT) over rule-based approach are: More efficient use of human and data resources There are many parallel corpora in machine-readable format and even more monolingual data. Generally, SMT systems are not tailored to any specific pair of languages. More fluent translations owing to use of a language model == Shortcomings == Corpus creation can be costly. Specific errors are hard to predict and fix. Results may have superficial fluency that masks translation problems. Statistical machine translation usually works less well for language pairs with significantly different word order. The benefits obtained for translation between Western European languages are not representative of results for other language pairs, owing to smaller training corpora and greater grammatical differences. == Word-based translation == In word-based translation, the fundamental unit of translation is a word in some natural language. Typically, the number of words in translated sentences are different, because of compound words, morphology and idioms. The ratio of the lengths of sequences of translated words is called fertility, which tells how many foreign words each native word produces. Necessarily it is assumed by information theory that each covers the same concept. In practice this is not really true. For example, the English word corner can be translated in Spanish by either rincón or esquina, depending on whether it is to mean its internal or external angle. Simple word-based translation cannot translate between languages with different fertility. Word-based translation systems can relatively simply be made to cope with high fertility, such that they could map a single word to multiple words, but not the other way about. For example, if we were translating from English to French, each word in English could produce any number of French words— sometimes none at all. But there is no way to group two English words producing a single French word. An example of a word-based translation system is the freely available GIZA++ package (GPLed), which includes the training program for IBM models and HMM model and Model 6. The word-based translation is not widely used today; phrase-based systems are more common. Most phrase-based systems are still using GIZA++ to align the corpus. The alignments are used to extract phrases or deduce syntax rules. And matching words in bi-text is still a problem actively discussed in the community. Because of the predominance of GIZA++, there are now several distributed implementations of it online. == Phrase-based translation == In phrase-based translation, the aim is to reduce the restrictions of word-based translation by translating whole sequences of words, where the lengths may differ. The sequences of words are called blocks or phrases. These are typically not linguistic phrases, but phrasemes that were found using statistical methods from corpora. It has been shown that restricting the phrases to linguistic phrases (syntactically motivated groups of words, see syntactic categories) decreased the quality of translation. The chosen phrases are further mapped one-to-one based on a phrase translation table, and may be reordered. This table could be learnt based on word-alignment, or directly from a parallel corpus. The second model is trained using the expectation maximization algorithm, similarly to the word-based IBM model. == Syntax-based translation == Syntax-based translation is based on the idea of translating syntactic units, rather than single words or strings of words (as in phrase-based MT), i.e. (partial) parse trees of sentences/utterances. Until the 1990s, with advent of strong stochastic parsers, the statistical counterpart of the old idea of syntax-based translation did not take off. Examples of this approach include DOP-based MT and later synchronous context-free grammars. == Hierarchical phrase-based translation == Hierarchical phrase-based translation combines the phrase-based and syntax-based approaches to translation. It uses synchronous context-free grammar rules, but the grammars can be constructed by an extension of methods for phrase-based translation without reference to linguistically motivated syntactic constituents. This idea was first introduced in Chiang's Hiero system (2005). == Language models == A language model is an essential component of any statistical machine translation system, which aids in making the translation as fluent as possible. It is a function that takes a translated sentence and returns the probability of it being said by a native speaker. A good language model will for example assign a higher probability to the sentence "the house is small" than to "small the is house". Other than word order, language models may also help with word choice: if a foreign word has multiple possible translations, these functions may give better probabilities for certain translations in specific contexts in the target language. == Systems implementing statistical machine translation == Google Translate (started transition to neural machine translation in 2016) Microsoft Translator (started transition to neural machine translation in 2016) Yandex.Translate (switched to hybrid approach incorporating neural machine translation in 2017) == Challenges with statistical machine translation == Problems with statistical machine translation include: === Sentence alignment === Single sentences in one language can be found translated into several sentences in the o
Read more →
AI Avatar Generators: Free vs Paid (2026)

Comparing the best AI avatar generator? An AI avatar generator 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 avatar generator 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 →
Anil K. Jain (computer scientist, born 1948)

Anil Kumar Jain (born 1948) is an Indian-American computer scientist and University Distinguished Professor in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at Michigan State University. He is one of the most highly cited researchers in computer science, and is internationally recognized for his foundational contributions to pattern recognition, computer vision, and biometric recognition, particularly in fingerprint recognition and face recognition. Jain is a member of the United States National Academy of Engineering, a Foreign Member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and a Foreign Fellow of the Indian National Academy of Engineering. He is a Fellow of the ACM, IEEE, AAAS, IAPR, and SPIE. His research has shaped the field of biometrics and has been applied in systems used worldwide for identity verification, law enforcement, and border security. In 2024, he was awarded the BBVA Foundation Frontiers of Knowledge Award in the category of Information and Communication Technologies. == Early life and education == Born in Basti, India, Jain received his Bachelor of Technology in electrical engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur in 1969. He then moved to the United States, where he earned his M.S. in 1970 and Ph.D. in 1973 from Ohio State University. His doctoral dissertation, titled Some Aspects of Dimensionality and Sample Size Problems in Statistical Pattern Recognition, was supervised by Robert B. McGhee and laid the groundwork for his subsequent research in pattern recognition. == Career == Jain began his academic career at Wayne State University, where he taught from 1972 to 1974. In 1974, he joined the faculty of Michigan State University, where he has remained for over five decades and currently holds the position of University Distinguished Professor. Throughout his career, Jain has conducted pioneering research in data clustering, fingerprint recognition, and face recognition. His work has been published in leading scientific journals including Scientific American, Nature, IEEE Spectrum, and MIT Technology Review. He served as Editor-in-Chief of the IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence from 1991 to 1994. Jain has also contributed to national security and policy through his service on several advisory bodies. He served as a member of the U.S. National Academies panels on Information Technology, Whither Biometrics, and Improvised Explosive Devices (IED). He has also served on the Defense Science Board, the Forensic Science Standards Board, and the AAAS Latent Fingerprint Working Group. In 2014, Jain was named Innovator of the Year at Michigan State University for transferring several technologies on face and fingerprint recognition to major players in the biometrics industry. He holds eight U.S. and Korean patents related to biometric technologies. == Research contributions == Jain's research spans pattern recognition, computer vision, machine learning, and biometric recognition. His contributions have been particularly influential in several areas: === Biometric recognition === Jain is considered one of the foremost authorities on biometric recognition systems. His research group at Michigan State University has developed algorithms and systems for fingerprint, face, and iris recognition that have been widely adopted in both academic research and commercial applications. His work on fingerprint matching algorithms has been instrumental in establishing standards for automated fingerprint identification systems (AFIS) used by law enforcement agencies worldwide. In recent years, Jain and his research team have made significant advances in child fingerprint recognition, demonstrating that digital scans of a young child's fingerprint can be correctly recognized one year later with over 99 percent accuracy for children as young as six months old. This research has important implications for child identification in developing countries, where it can be used to track immunization records and provide access to medical care. === Data clustering === Jain's survey article "Data clustering: a review" (1999), co-authored with M. N. Murty and P. J. Flynn, is one of the most highly cited papers in computer science. His 2010 paper "Data Clustering: 50 Years Beyond K-Means" provided a comprehensive overview of the evolution of clustering methods and remains an essential reference in the field. === Statistical pattern recognition === Jain's work on statistical pattern recognition, including his influential survey "Statistical pattern recognition: A review" (2000) with R. P. W. Duin and Jianchang Mao, has shaped the theoretical foundations of the field. == Citation metrics and academic impact == Jain is among the most highly cited researchers in computer science. Based on his Google Scholar profile, he had an h-index of 200 in 2020, which was the highest among computer scientists identified in a survey published by UCLA at the time. As of August 2023, his h-index on Google Scholar is 211. He has since been surpassed by Yoshua Bengio, a researcher of similar subjects (neural networks and deep learning for artificial intelligence), who had an h-index of 224 as of August 2023. Another source reported that as of December 2022, he had the highest discipline h-index (D-index) in computer science. == Honors and awards == Jain has received numerous awards and honors recognizing his contributions to computer science and engineering: === Academy memberships === Member, United States National Academy of Engineering (2016) — elected "for contributions to the engineering and practice of biometrics" Foreign Fellow, Indian National Academy of Engineering (2016) Foreign Member, Chinese Academy of Sciences (2019) Member, The World Academy of Sciences (2019) Fellow, National Academy of Inventors === Professional society fellowships === Fellow, ACM Fellow, IEEE (1988) — for contributions to image processing Fellow, AAAS Fellow, International Association for Pattern Recognition Fellow, SPIE === Major awards === BBVA Foundation Frontiers of Knowledge Award in Information and Communication Technologies (2024) IAPR King-Sun Fu Prize (2008) IEEE W. Wallace McDowell Award (2007) — the highest technical honor awarded by the IEEE Computer Society, for pioneering contributions to theory, technique, and practice of pattern recognition, computer vision, and biometric recognition systems IEEE Computer Society Technical Achievement Award (2003) IAPR Pierre Devijver Award (2002) Humboldt Research Award (2002) Guggenheim Fellowship (2001) Fulbright Fellowship (1998) IEEE ICDM Research Contribution Award (2008) === Best paper awards === IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks (1996) Pattern Recognition journal (1987, 1991, 2005) === Honorary doctorates === Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (2018) Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (2021) == Legacy and endowments == Two endowed funds have been established in Jain's honor at Michigan State University, recognizing his lasting impact on the field and the university. In 2015, a former visiting scholar from Jain's laboratory made an anonymous $400,000 gift to create the Anil K. Jain Endowed Graduate Fellowship, which supports doctoral-level research in pattern recognition, computer vision, and biometric recognition. In 2022, the Anil K. and Nandita K. Jain Endowed Professorship was established through $1 million in contributions from multiple donors, including a substantial gift from the Jain family, to support faculty recruitment and retention in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering. == Selected publications == === Books === 1988. Algorithms For Clustering Data. With Richard C. Dubes. Prentice Hall. 1993. Markov Random Fields: Theory and Applications. With Rama Chellappa eds. Academic Press. 1999. Biometrics: Personal Identification in Networked Society. With Ruud M. Bolle and Sharath Pankanti eds. Springer. 2003. Handbook of Fingerprint Recognition. (2nd edition 2009). With D. Maio, D. Maltoni, S. Prabhakar. Springer. 2005. Handbook of Face Recognition. (2nd edition 2011). With S. Z. Li ed. Springer. 2006. Handbook of Multibiometrics. With A. Ross and K. Nandakumar. Springer. 2007. Handbook of Biometrics. With P. Flynn and A. Ross eds. Springer. 2011. Introduction to Biometrics. With A. Ross and K. Nandakumar. Springer. 2015. Encyclopedia of Biometrics (Second Edition). With Stan Li. Springer. === Research articles === Cross, George R. and Anil K. Jain. "Markov random field texture models". IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (1983): 25–39. Jain, Anil K., and Farshid Farrokhnia. "Unsupervised texture segmentation using Gabor filters". Pattern Recognition 24.12 (1991): 1167–1186. Jain, Anil K., and Douglas Zongker. "Feature selection: Evaluation, application, and small sample performance". IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 19.2 (1997): 153–158. Jain, Anil K., L. Hong, S. Pankanti, R. Bolle. "An Identity-A
Read more →
Case-based reasoning

Case-based reasoning (CBR), broadly construed, is the process of solving new problems based on the solutions of similar past problems. In everyday life, an auto mechanic who fixes an engine by recalling another car that exhibited similar symptoms is using case-based reasoning. A lawyer who advocates a particular outcome in a trial based on legal precedents or a judge who creates case law is using case-based reasoning. So, too, an engineer copying working elements of nature (practicing biomimicry) is treating nature as a database of solutions to problems. Case-based reasoning is a prominent type of analogy solution making. It has been argued that case-based reasoning is not only a powerful method for computer reasoning, but also a pervasive behavior in everyday human problem solving; or, more radically, that all reasoning is based on past cases personally experienced. This view is related to prototype theory, which is most deeply explored in cognitive science. == Process == Case-based reasoning has been formalized for purposes of computer reasoning as a four-step process: Retrieve: Given a target problem, retrieve cases relevant to solving it from memory. A case consists of a problem, its solution, and, typically, annotations about how the solution was derived. For example, suppose Fred wants to prepare blueberry pancakes. Being a novice cook, the most relevant experience he can recall is one in which he successfully made plain pancakes. The procedure he followed for making the plain pancakes, together with justifications for decisions made along the way, constitutes Fred's retrieved case. Reuse: Map the solution from the previous case to the target problem. This may involve adapting the solution as needed to fit the new situation. In the pancake example, Fred must adapt his retrieved solution to include the addition of blueberries. Revise: Having mapped the previous solution to the target situation, test the new solution in the real world (or a simulation) and, if necessary, revise. Suppose Fred adapted his pancake solution by adding blueberries to the batter. After mixing, he discovers that the batter has turned blue – an undesired effect. This suggests the following revision: delay the addition of blueberries until after the batter has been ladled into the pan. Retain: After the solution has been successfully adapted to the target problem, store the resulting experience as a new case in memory. Fred, accordingly, records his new-found procedure for making blueberry pancakes, thereby enriching his set of stored experiences, and better preparing him for future pancake-making demands. == Comparison to other methods == At first glance, CBR may seem similar to the rule induction algorithms of machine learning. Like a rule-induction algorithm, CBR starts with a set of cases or training examples; it forms generalizations of these examples, albeit implicit ones, by identifying commonalities between a retrieved case and the target problem. If for instance a procedure for plain pancakes is mapped to blueberry pancakes, a decision is made to use the same basic batter and frying method, thus implicitly generalizing the set of situations under which the batter and frying method can be used. The key difference, however, between the implicit generalization in CBR and the generalization in rule induction lies in when the generalization is made. A rule-induction algorithm draws its generalizations from a set of training examples before the target problem is even known; that is, it performs eager generalization. For instance, if a rule-induction algorithm were given recipes for plain pancakes, Dutch apple pancakes, and banana pancakes as its training examples, it would have to derive, at training time, a set of general rules for making all types of pancakes. It would not be until testing time that it would be given, say, the task of cooking blueberry pancakes. The difficulty for the rule-induction algorithm is in anticipating the different directions in which it should attempt to generalize its training examples. This is in contrast to CBR, which delays (implicit) generalization of its cases until testing time – a strategy of lazy generalization. In the pancake example, CBR has already been given the target problem of cooking blueberry pancakes; thus it can generalize its cases exactly as needed to cover this situation. CBR therefore tends to be a good approach for rich, complex domains in which there are myriad ways to generalize a case. In law, there is often explicit delegation of CBR to courts, recognizing the limits of rule based reasons: limiting delay, limited knowledge of future context, limit of negotiated agreement, etc. While CBR in law and cognitively inspired CBR have long been associated, the former is more clearly an interpolation of rule based reasoning, and judgment, while the latter is more closely tied to recall and process adaptation. The difference is clear in their attitude toward error and appellate review. Another name for case-based reasoning in problem solving is symptomatic strategies. It does require à priori domain knowledge that is gleaned from past experience which established connections between symptoms and causes. This knowledge is referred to as shallow, compiled, evidential, history-based as well as case-based knowledge. This is the strategy most associated with diagnosis by experts. Diagnosis of a problem transpires as a rapid recognition process in which symptoms evoke appropriate situation categories. An expert knows the cause by virtue of having previously encountered similar cases. Case-based reasoning is the most powerful strategy, and that used most commonly. However, the strategy won't work independently with truly novel problems, or where deeper understanding of whatever is taking place is sought. An alternative approach to problem solving is the topographic strategy which falls into the category of deep reasoning. With deep reasoning, in-depth knowledge of a system is used. Topography in this context means a description or an analysis of a structured entity, showing the relations among its elements. Also known as reasoning from first principles, deep reasoning is applied to novel faults when experience-based approaches aren't viable. The topographic strategy is therefore linked to à priori domain knowledge that is developed from a more a fundamental understanding of a system, possibly using first-principles knowledge. Such knowledge is referred to as deep, causal or model-based knowledge. Hoc and Carlier noted that symptomatic approaches may need to be supported by topographic approaches because symptoms can be defined in diverse terms. The converse is also true – shallow reasoning can be used abductively to generate causal hypotheses, and deductively to evaluate those hypotheses, in a topographical search. == Criticism == Critics of CBR argue that it is an approach that accepts anecdotal evidence as its main operating principle. Without statistically relevant data for backing and implicit generalization, there is no guarantee that the generalization is correct. However, all inductive reasoning where data is too scarce for statistical relevance is inherently based on anecdotal evidence. == History == CBR traces its roots to the work of Roger Schank and his students at Yale University in the early 1980s. Schank's model of dynamic memory was the basis for the earliest CBR systems: Janet Kolodner's CYRUS and Michael Lebowitz's IPP. Other schools of CBR and closely allied fields emerged in the 1980s, which directed at topics such as legal reasoning, memory-based reasoning (a way of reasoning from examples on massively parallel machines), and combinations of CBR with other reasoning methods. In the 1990s, interest in CBR grew internationally, as evidenced by the establishment of an International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning in 1995, as well as European, German, British, Italian, and other CBR workshops. CBR technology has resulted in the deployment of a number of successful systems, the earliest being Lockheed's CLAVIER, a system for laying out composite parts to be baked in an industrial convection oven. CBR has been used extensively in applications such as the Compaq SMART system and has found a major application area in the health sciences, as well as in structural safety management. There is recent work that develops CBR within a statistical framework and formalizes case-based inference as a specific type of probabilistic inference. Thus, it becomes possible to produce case-based predictions equipped with a certain level of confidence. One description of the difference between CBR and induction from instances is that statistical inference aims to find what tends to make cases similar while CBR aims to encode what suffices to claim similarly.
Read more →
Thompson's construction

In computer science, Thompson's construction algorithm, also called the McNaughton–Yamada–Thompson algorithm, is a method of transforming a regular expression into an equivalent nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA). This NFA can be used to match strings against the regular expression. This algorithm is credited to Ken Thompson. Regular expressions and nondeterministic finite automata are two representations of formal languages. For instance, text processing utilities use regular expressions to describe advanced search patterns, but NFAs are better suited for execution on a computer. Hence, this algorithm is of practical interest, since it can compile regular expressions into NFAs. From a theoretical point of view, this algorithm is a part of the proof that they both accept exactly the same languages, that is, the regular languages. An NFA can be made deterministic by the powerset construction and then be minimized to get an optimal automaton corresponding to the given regular expression. However, an NFA may also be interpreted directly. To decide whether two given regular expressions describe the same language, each can be converted into an equivalent minimal deterministic finite automaton via Thompson's construction, powerset construction, and DFA minimization. If, and only if, the resulting automata agree up to renaming of states, the regular expressions' languages agree. == The algorithm == The algorithm works recursively by splitting an expression into its constituent subexpressions, from which the NFA will be constructed using a set of rules. More precisely, from a regular expression E, the obtained automaton A with the transition function Δ respects the following properties: A has exactly one initial state q0, which is not accessible from any other state. That is, for any state q and any letter a, Δ ( q , a ) {\displaystyle \Delta (q,a)} does not contain q0. A has exactly one final state qf, which is not co-accessible from any other state. That is, for any letter a, Δ ( q f , a ) = ∅ {\displaystyle \Delta (q_{f},a)=\emptyset } . Let c be the number of concatenation of the regular expression E and let s be the number of symbols apart from parentheses — that is, |, , a and ε. Then, the number of states of A is 2s − c (linear in the size of E). The number of transitions leaving any state is at most two. Since an NFA of m states and at most e transitions from each state can match a string of length n in time O(emn), a Thompson NFA can do pattern matching in linear time, assuming a fixed-size alphabet. === Rules === The following rules are depicted according to Aho et al. (2007), p. 122. In what follows, N(s) and N(t) are the NFA of the subexpressions s and t, respectively. The empty-expression ε is converted to A symbol a of the input alphabet is converted to The union expression s|t is converted to State q goes via ε either to the initial state of N(s) or N(t). Their final states become intermediate states of the whole NFA and merge via two ε-transitions into the final state of the NFA. The concatenation expression st is converted to The initial state of N(s) is the initial state of the whole NFA. The final state of N(s) becomes the initial state of N(t). The final state of N(t) is the final state of the whole NFA. The Kleene star expression s is converted to An ε-transition connects initial and final state of the NFA with the sub-NFA N(s) in between. Another ε-transition from the inner final to the inner initial state of N(s) allows for repetition of expression s according to the star operator. The parenthesized expression (s) is converted to N(s) itself. With these rules, using the empty expression and symbol rules as base cases, it is possible to prove with structural induction that any regular expression may be converted into an equivalent NFA. == Example == Two examples are now given, a small informal one with the result, and a bigger with a step by step application of the algorithm. === Small Example === The picture below shows the result of Thompson's construction on (ε|ab). The purple oval corresponds to a, the teal oval corresponds to a, the green oval corresponds to b, the orange oval corresponds to ab, and the blue oval corresponds to ε. === Application of the algorithm === As an example, the picture shows the result of Thompson's construction algorithm on the regular expression (0|(1(01(00)0)1)) that denotes the set of binary numbers that are multiples of 3: { ε, "0", "00", "11", "000", "011", "110", "0000", "0011", "0110", "1001", "1100", "1111", "00000", ... }. The upper right part shows the logical structure (syntax tree) of the expression, with "." denoting concatenation (assumed to have variable arity); subexpressions are named a-q for reference purposes. The left part shows the nondeterministic finite automaton resulting from Thompson's algorithm, with the entry and exit state of each subexpression colored in magenta and cyan, respectively. An ε as transition label is omitted for clarity — unlabelled transitions are in fact ε transitions. The entry and exit state corresponding to the root expression q is the start and accept state of the automaton, respectively. The algorithm's steps are as follows: An equivalent minimal deterministic automaton is shown below. == Relation to other algorithms == Thompson's is one of several algorithms for constructing NFAs from regular expressions; an earlier algorithm was given by McNaughton and Yamada. Converse to Thompson's construction, Kleene's algorithm transforms a finite automaton into a regular expression. Glushkov's construction algorithm is similar to Thompson's construction, once the ε-transitions are removed. == Use in string pattern matching == Regular expressions are often used to specify patterns that software is then asked to match. Generating an NFA by Thompson's construction, and using an appropriate algorithm to simulate it, it is possible to create pattern-matching software with performance that is ⁠ O ( m n ) {\displaystyle O(mn)} ⁠, where m is the length of the regular expression and n is the length of the string being matched. This is much better than is achieved by many popular programming-language implementations; however, it is restricted to purely regular expressions and does not support patterns for non-regular languages like backreferences.
Read more →
Aslı Çelikyılmaz

Aslı Çelikyılmaz is an engineer specializing in natural language processing, and particularly in natural language generation for software agents with advanced reasoning and real-world modeling capabilities. Educated in Turkey and Canada, she works in the US as senior research lead at Fundamentals AI Research, Meta. She also holds an affiliate faculty position in computer science at the University of Washington, and is co-editor-in-chief of the journal Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics. == Education and career == Çelikyılmaz is a 1997 graduate of Istanbul Technical University, where she studied industrial engineering. After a 2002 master's degree in computer and information science from Seneca Polytechnic in Toronto, and a second master's degree in information science from the University of Toronto in 2005, she completed a Ph.D. in information science at the University of Toronto in 2008. She worked as a postdoctoral researcher in California, at the University of California, Berkeley, from 2008 to 2010. In 2010 she joined Microsoft in Sunnyvale, California, where she became a senior scientist and later a senior principal researcher in Redmond, Washington. She added her affiliation with the University of Washington in 2018, and moved to Meta in Seattle in 2021. == Recognition == Çelikyılmaz was named to the 2026 class of IEEE Fellows, "for contributions to conversational systems and language generation".
Read more →
Chelsea Finn

Chelsea Finn (born October 8, 1992) is an American computer scientist and assistant professor at Stanford University. Her research investigates intelligence through the interactions of robots, with the hope to create robotic systems that can learn how to learn. She previously worked for Google and currently is a co-founder of the startup Physical Intelligence. == Early life and education == Finn was an undergraduate student in electrical engineering and computer science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. She then moved to the University of California, Berkeley, where she earned her Ph.D. in 2018 under Pieter Abbeel and Sergey Levine. Her work in the Berkeley Artificial Intelligence Lab (BAIR) focused on gradient based algorithms . Such algorithms allow machines to 'learn to learn', more akin to human learning than traditional machine learning systems. These “meta-learning” techniques train machines to quickly adapt, such that when they encounter new scenarios they can learn quickly. As a doctoral student she worked as an intern at Google Brain, where she worked on robot learning algorithms from deep predictive models. She delivered a massive open online course on deep reinforcement learning. She was the first woman to win the C.V. & Daulat Ramamoorthy Distinguished Research Award. == Research and career == Finn investigates the capabilities of robots to develop intelligence through learning and interaction. She has made use of deep learning algorithms to simultaneously learn visual perception and control robotic skills. She developed meta-learning approaches to train neural networks to take in student code and output useful feedback. She showed that the system could quickly adapt without too much input from the instructor. She trialled the programme on Code in Place, a 12,000 student course delivered by Stanford University every year. She found that 97.9% of the time the students agreed with the feedback being given. == Awards and honors == 2016 C.V. & Daulat Ramamoorthy Distinguished Research Award 2017 Electrical engineering and computer science rising star 2018 MIT Technology Review 35 Under 35 2018 ACM Doctoral Dissertation Award 2020 Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology AI Researcher of the Year 2020 Intel Rising Star Faculty Award 2021 Office of Naval Research Young Investigator Award 2022 IEEE Robotics and Automation Society Early Academic Career Award == Select publications == Finn, Chelsea; Abbeel, Pieter; Levine, Sergey (2017-07-17). "Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning for Fast Adaptation of Deep Networks". International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR: 1126–1135. arXiv:1703.03400. Sergey Levine; Chelsea Finn; Trevor Darrell; Pieter Abbeel (2016). "End-to-End Training of Deep Visuomotor Policies". Journal of Machine Learning Research. 17 (39): 1–40. arXiv:1504.00702. ISSN 1533-7928. Wikidata Q90313375. Chelsea Finn; Ian Goodfellow; Sergey Levine (2016). "Unsupervised Learning for Physical Interaction through Video Prediction" (PDF). Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 29. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. Wikidata Q46993574.
Read more →
Pixel aspect ratio

A pixel aspect ratio (PAR) is a mathematical ratio that describes how the width of a pixel in a digital image compares to the height of that pixel. Most digital imaging systems display an image as a grid of tiny, square pixels. However, some imaging systems, especially those that must be compatible with standard-definition television motion pictures, display an image as a grid of rectangular pixels, in which the pixel width and height are different. Pixel aspect ratio describes this difference. Use of pixel aspect ratio mostly involves pictures pertaining to standard-definition television and some other exceptional cases. Most other imaging systems, including those that comply with SMPTE standards and practices, use square pixels. PAR is also known as sample aspect ratio and abbreviated SAR, though it can be confused with storage aspect ratio. == Introduction == The ratio of the width to the height of an image is known as the aspect ratio, or more precisely the display aspect ratio (DAR) – the aspect ratio of the image as displayed; for TV, DAR was traditionally 4:3 (a.k.a. fullscreen), with 16:9 (a.k.a. widescreen) now the standard for HDTV. In digital images, there is a distinction with the storage aspect ratio (SAR), which is the ratio of pixel dimensions. If an image is displayed with square pixels, then these ratios agree; if not, then non-square, "rectangular" pixels are used, and these ratios disagree. The aspect ratio of the pixels themselves is known as the pixel aspect ratio (PAR) – for square pixels this is 1:1 – and these are related by the identity: Rearranging (solving for PAR) yields: For example: A 640 × 480 VGA image has a SAR of 640/480 = 4:3, and if displayed on a 4:3 display (DAR = 4:3) has square pixels, hence a PAR of 1:1. By contrast, a 720 × 576 D-1 PAL image has a SAR of 720/576 = 5:4, but if displayed on a 4:3 display (DAR = 4:3) the PAR is 4/3 : 5/4 = 16:15 ≈ 1.066. This means that the pixels of the PAL picture must be "stretched" by this amount to fit in the 4:3 display. In analog images such as film there is no notion of pixel, nor notion of SAR or PAR, but in the digitization of analog images the resulting digital image has pixels, hence SAR (and accordingly PAR, if displayed at the same aspect ratio as the original). Non-square pixels arise often in early digital TV standards, related to digitalization of analog TV signals – whose vertical and "effective" horizontal resolutions differ and are thus best described by non-square pixels – and also in some digital video cameras and computer display modes, such as Color Graphics Adapter (CGA). Today they arise also in transcoding between resolutions with different SARs. Actual displays do not generally have non-square pixels, though digital sensors might; they are rather a mathematical abstraction used in resampling images to convert between resolutions. There are several complicating factors in understanding PAR, particularly as it pertains to digitization of analog video: First, analog video does not have pixels, but rather a raster scan, and thus has a well-defined vertical resolution (the lines of the raster), but not a well-defined horizontal resolution, since each line is an analog signal. However, by a standardized sampling rate, the effective horizontal resolution can be determined by the sampling theorem, as is done below. Second, due to overscan, some of the lines at the top and bottom of the raster are not visible, as are some of the possible image on the left and right – see Overscan: Analog to digital resolution issues. Also, the resolution may be rounded (DV NTSC uses 480 lines, rather than the 486 that are possible). Third, analog video signals are interlaced – each image (frame) is sent as two "fields", each with half the lines. Thus either the pixels are twice as tall as they would be without interlacing, or the image is deinterlaced. == Background == Video is presented as a sequential series of images called video frames. Historically, video frames were created and recorded in analog form. As digital display technology, digital broadcast technology, and digital video compression evolved separately, it resulted in video frame differences that must be addressed using pixel aspect ratio. Digital video frames are generally defined as a grid of pixels used to present each sequential image. The horizontal component is defined by pixels (or samples), and is known as a video line. The vertical component is defined by the number of lines, as in 480 lines. Standard-definition television standards and practices were developed as broadcast technologies and intended for terrestrial broadcasting, and were therefore not designed for digital video presentation. Such standards define an image as an array of well-defined horizontal "Lines", well-defined vertical "Line Duration" and a well-defined picture center. However, there is not a standard-definition television standard that properly defines image edges or explicitly demands a certain number of picture elements per line. Furthermore, analog video systems such as NTSC 480i and PAL 576i, instead of employing progressively displayed frames, employ fields or interlaced half-frames displayed in an interwoven manner to reduce flicker and double the image rate for smoother motion. === Analog-to-digital conversion === As a result of computers becoming powerful enough to serve as video editing tools, video digital-to-analog converters and analog-to-digital converters were made to overcome this incompatibility. To convert analog video lines into a series of square pixels, the industry adopted a default sampling rate at which luma values were extracted into pixels. The luma sampling rate for 480i pictures was 12+3⁄11 MHz and for 576i pictures was 14+3⁄4 MHz. The term pixel aspect ratio was first coined when ITU-R BT.601 (commonly known as Rec. 601) specified that standard-definition television pictures are made of lines of exactly 720 non-square pixels. ITU-R BT.601 did not define the exact pixel aspect ratio but did provide enough information to calculate the exact pixel aspect ratio based on industry practices: The standard luma sampling rate of precisely 13+1⁄2 MHz. Based on this information: The pixel aspect ratio for 480i would be 10:11 as: 12 3 11 ÷ 13 1 2 = 10 11 {\displaystyle 12{\tfrac {3}{11}}\div 13{\tfrac {1}{2}}={\tfrac {10}{11}}} The pixel aspect ratio for 576i would be 59:54 as: 14 3 4 ÷ 13 1 2 = 59 54 {\displaystyle 14{\tfrac {3}{4}}\div 13{\tfrac {1}{2}}={\tfrac {59}{54}}} SMPTE RP 187 further attempted to standardize the pixel aspect ratio values for 480i and 576i. It designated 177:160 for 480i or 1035:1132 for 576i. However, due to significant difference with practices in effect by industry and the computational load that they imposed upon the involved hardware, SMPTE RP 187 was simply ignored. SMPTE RP 187 information annex A.4 further suggested the use of 10:11 for 480i. As of this writing, ITU-R BT.601-6, which is the latest edition of ITU-R BT.601, still implies that the pixel aspect ratios mentioned above are correct. === Digital video processing === As stated above, ITU-R BT.601 specified that standard-definition television pictures are made of lines of 720 non-square pixels, sampled with a precisely specified sampling rate. A simple mathematical calculation reveals that a 704 pixel width would be enough to contain a 480i or 576i standard 4:3 picture: A 4:3 480-line picture, digitized with the Rec. 601-recommended sampling rate, would be 704 non-square pixels wide. x 480 × 10 11 = 4 3 ⇒ x = 480 × 11 × 4 10 × 3 = 704 {\displaystyle {\frac {x}{480}}\times {\frac {10}{11}}={\frac {4}{3}}\Rightarrow x={\frac {480\times 11\times 4}{10\times 3}}=704} A 4:3 576-line picture, digitized with the Rec. 601-recommended sampling rate, would be 702+54⁄59 non-square pixels wide. x 576 × 59 54 = 4 3 ⇒ x = 576 × 54 × 4 59 × 3 = 702 54 59 {\displaystyle {\frac {x}{576}}\times {\frac {59}{54}}={\frac {4}{3}}\Rightarrow x={\frac {576\times 54\times 4}{59\times 3}}=702{\tfrac {54}{59}}} Unfortunately, not all standard TV pictures are exactly 4:3: As mentioned earlier, in analog video, the center of a picture is well-defined but the edges of the picture are not standardized. As a result, some analog devices (mostly PAL devices but also some NTSC devices) generated motion pictures that were horizontally (slightly) wider. This also proportionately applies to anamorphic widescreen (16:9) pictures. Therefore, to maintain a safe margin of error, ITU-R BT.601 required sampling 16 more non-square pixels per line (8 more at each edge) to ensure saving all video data near the margins. This requirement, however, had implications for PAL motion pictures. PAL pixel aspect ratios for standard (4:3) and anamorphic wide screen (16:9), respectively 59:54 and 118:81, were awkward for digital image processing, especially for mixing PAL and NTSC video clips. Therefore, video editing products chose the almost equivalent value
Read more →
AI Subtitle Generators Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

Trying to pick the best AI subtitle generator? An AI subtitle generator 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 subtitle generator 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 →
Best AI Writing Assistants in 2026

In search of the best AI writing assistant? An AI writing assistant is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI writing assistant slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.
Read more →
How to Choose an AI Logo Maker

Trying to pick the best AI logo maker? An AI logo maker 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 logo maker 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 →
Bandhan Tod

Bandhan Tod is a mobile app to stop child marriage in India's Bihar state through SOS button in the app. When the SOS on Bandhan Tod is activated, the nearest small NGO will attempt to resolve the issue. If the family resists, then the police gets notified. Till now so many child marriages has been cancelled through Bandhan Tod interventions. Bandhan Tod is an initiative of Gender Alliance managed by Prashanti Tiwari to support the state government's efforts to end child marriage and dowry.
Read more →
Top 10 AI Humanizers Compared (2026)

Looking for the best AI humanizer? An AI humanizer 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 humanizer 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 →
Ann Copestake

Ann Alicia Copestake is professor of computational linguistics and head of the Department of Computer Science and Technology at the University of Cambridge and a fellow of Wolfson College, Cambridge. == Education == Copestake was educated at the University of Cambridge where she was awarded a Bachelor of Arts degree in Natural Sciences. After two years working for Unilever Research she completed the Cambridge Diploma in Computer Science. She went on to study at the University of Sussex where she was awarded a PhD in 1992 for research on lexical semantics supervised by Gerald Gazdar. == Career and research == Copestake started doing research in Natural language processing and Computational Linguistics at the University of Cambridge in 1985. Since then she has been a visiting researcher at Xerox PARC (1993/4) and the University of Stuttgart (1994/5). From July 1994 to October 2000 she worked at the Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI) at Stanford University, as a Senior Researcher. Copestake was appointed a University Lecturer at Cambridge in October 2000. In the UK, her research has been funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) and Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC). According to Google Scholar and Scopus her most cited publications include papers on minimal recursion semantics, multiword expressions, polysemy, named-entity recognition and feature structure grammars.
Read more →