AI Avatar Arbitrage

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

• 

  Digistar

  Digistar is the first computer graphics-based planetarium projection and content system. It was designed by Evans & Sutherland and released in 1983. The technology originally focused on accurate and high quality display of stars, including for the first time showing stars from points of view other than Earth's surface, travelling through the stars, and accurately showing celestial bodies from different times in the past and future. Beginning with the Digistar 3 the system now projects full-dome video. == Projector == Unlike modern full-dome systems, which use LCD, DLP, SXRD, or laser projection technology, the Digistar projection system was designed for projecting bright pinpoints of light representing stars. This was accomplished using a calligraphic display, a form of vector graphics, rather than raster graphics. The heart of the Digistar projector is a large cathode-ray tube (CRT). A phosphor plate is mounted atop the tube, and light is then dispersed by a large lens with a 160 degree field of view to cover the planetarium dome. The original lens bore the inscription: "August 1979 mfg. by Lincoln Optical Corp., L.A., CA for Evans and Sutherland Computer Corp., SLC, UT, Digital planetarium CRT projection lens, 43mm, f2.8, 160 degree field of view". The coordinates of the stars and wire-frame models to be displayed by the projector were stored in computer RAM in a display list. The display would read each set of coordinates in turn and drive the CRT's electron beam directly to those coordinates. If the electron beam was enabled while being moved a line would be painted on the phosphor plate. Otherwise, the electron beam would be enabled once at its destination and a star would be painted. Once all coordinates in the display list had been processed, the display would repeat from the top of the display list. Thus, the shorter the display list the more frequently the electron beam would refresh the charge on a given point on the phosphor plate, making the projection of the points brighter. In this way, the stars projected by Digistar were substantially brighter than could be achieved using a raster display, which has to touch every point on the phosphor plate before repeating. Likewise, the calligraphic technology allowed Digistar to have a darker black-level than full-dome projectors, since the portions of the phosphor plate representing dark sky were never hit by the electron beam. As it is only one tube, with no pixelated color filter screen, the Digistar projector is monochromatic. The Digistar projects a bright, phosphorescent green, though many (including both visitors and planetarians) report they cannot distinguish between this green and white. Additionally, unlike a raster display, the calligraphic display is not discretized into pixels, so the displayed stars were a more realistic single spot of light, without the blocky or ropy artifacts that are hard to avoid with raster graphics. Due to the use of vector graphics, as opposed to raster imaging, the Digistar does not have the resolution issues that many full-dome systems have. Thanks to this, and the brightness of the CRT, only one projector is needed to project on the entire dome, whereas most full-dome systems require up to six raster projectors, depending on dome size. The projector in the original Digistar was housed in a square pyramid-shaped sheathing. When powered on, the four sides at the tip of the pyramid would recede into the housing, exposing the lens and appearing as a cut-off pyramid. As Digistar II was being developed, many planetaria were sold Digistar LEA projectors. The LEA, called Digistar 1.5 by many users, was effectively a prototype of the D2 projector, compatible with Digistar and upgradable to Digistar II. There are no significant differences in performance between the LEA and the true D2. == History == Digistar was the brainchild of Stephen McAllister and Brent Watson, both of whom were long-time amateur astronomers and computer graphics engineers. In 1977, E&S had been consulting with Johnson Space Center regarding training simulators for astronauts. McAllister had been writing proof-of-concept software for this consultation and in summer 1977 entered the data for 400 bright stars and wrote the software to display them. Steve and Brent both originally saw the system's purpose as celestial navigation training. Brent, who had until recently worked at Hansen planetarium, asked his planetarium coworkers what they thought of a potential digital planetarium system, and then Steve and Brent both targeted the system toward planetaria. The primary goal of the planetarium system was to use computer graphics to overcome the limitation of traditional star ball technology that only allowed display of star fields from the point of view of Earth's surface. By using computer graphics the stars could be displayed from viewpoints in space, including simulating the appearance of space flight. Likewise, planets and moons within the Solar System could be displayed accurately for any time in history, from any point of view. The system used the location of real stars from the Yale Bright Star Catalogue, as well as random stars. A laboratory prototype of Digistar was used to generate the star fields and tactical displays in the 1982 science fiction film Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Filming was done directly from the Digistar display in the lab. ILM projected the effort would take two weeks, but in fact it took from late November 1981 until mid-February 1982. The last shot recorded was what became the first entirely computer generated feature film sequence. It was the opening scene of the film, a rotating forward translation through a star field that lasted 3.5 minutes. It was recorded in one take, at a rate of one frame every 3.5 seconds, taking four hours for the shoot. The Digistar team members are credited in the film. After prototyping in labs at Evans and Sutherland the team repeatedly used Salt Lake City's Hansen planetarium to beta test the system at the planetarium at night. The Digistar team performed one week of shows at the planetarium as a fund raiser to benefit the planetarium. The company also later gave the planetarium an improved prototype Digistar to replace "Jake", the planetarium's aging Spitz planetarium projector. The first customer installation was to the newly constructed Universe Planetarium at the Science Museum of Virginia in 1983, the largest planetarium dome in the world at the time, for $595,000. By September 1986 there were four installed Digistars. Even at this point the long-term success of the product was very much in doubt, but as of 2019 Digistar has an installed base of over 550 planetaria. === Versions === Digistar (1983) Digistar II (1995) Digistar 3 (2002) Digistar 4 (2010?) Digistar 5 (2012) Digistar 6 (2016) Digistar 7 (2021) == Hardware == Digistar was driven by a VAX-11/780 minicomputer, with custom graphics hardware related to the E&S Picture System 2. Later versions of Digistar 1 used a DEC MicroVAX 2, driving a custom version of a PS/300. The original Digistar and Digistar 2 had a physical control panel that was used for running the star shows. This control panel was approximately 3' x 4' and contained a keyboard, a 6 DOF joystick, and a large array of back-lit buttons. One button that was used for moving the viewpoint forward in space was labeled "Boldly Go". Later iterations of Digistar replaced the physical control panel with a common graphical user interface. Digistar 3 was the first Digistar system to offer full-dome video in 2002, using six projectors. Digistar 4 was able to cover the dome using only two projectors. == System limitations == Though technologically advanced in its day, and the closest system to true full-dome video at the time of its release, the original Digistar and Digistar 2 are limited to only projecting dots and lines—meaning only wireframe models can be projected. To compensate for this, the projector is capable of defocusing specific models, blurring lines and dots together. An example of this is in the Digistar 2's built-in Milky Way model. The model is a circle of parallel lines that, when defocused, appear as the continuous band of the Milky Way across the sky. On more complex models, especially three-dimensional ones, brightness and details may be lost in this process, so it is not useful in all situations. The Digistar and Digistar 2 also suffer focus limitations. Because they use a single lens to cover the entire dome, it is difficult to gain perfect focus across the dome. Coupled with this, stars greater than a certain brightness are "multihit" points, meaning the projector draws two dots at the given position to accommodate the brightness of the star. Errors in the projector can lead the second dot to be slightly out-of-place with the first one. These two issues together, along with other issues that can occur within the projector's focus system, give the stars a blobby look. Some p

  Read more →
• 

  NewSQL

  NewSQL is a class of relational database management systems that seek to provide the scalability of NoSQL systems for online transaction processing (OLTP) workloads while maintaining the ACID guarantees of a traditional database system. Many enterprise systems that handle high-profile data (e.g., financial and order processing systems) are too large for conventional relational databases, but have transactional and consistency requirements that are not practical for NoSQL systems. The only options previously available for these organizations were to either purchase more powerful computers or to develop custom middleware that distributes requests over conventional DBMS. Both approaches feature high infrastructure costs and/or development costs. NewSQL systems attempt to reconcile the conflicts. == History == The term was first used by 451 Group analyst Matthew Aslett in a 2011 research paper discussing the rise of a new generation of database management systems. One of the first NewSQL systems was the H-Store parallel database system. == Applications == Typical applications are characterized by heavy OLTP transaction volumes. OLTP transactions; are short-lived (i.e., no user stalls) touch small amounts of data per transaction use indexed lookups (no table scans) have a small number of forms (a small number of queries with different arguments). However, some support hybrid transactional/analytical processing (HTAP) applications. Such systems improve performance and scalability by omitting heavyweight recovery or concurrency control. == List of NewSQL-databases == Apache Trafodion Clustrix CockroachDB Couchbase CrateDB Google Spanner MySQL Cluster NuoDB OceanBase Pivotal GemFire XD SequoiaDB SingleStore was formerly known as MemSQL. TIBCO Active Spaces TiDB TokuDB TransLattice Elastic Database VoltDB YDB YugabyteDB == Features == The two common distinguishing features of NewSQL database solutions are that they support online scalability of NoSQL databases and the relational data model (including ACID consistency) using SQL as their primary interface. NewSQL systems can be loosely grouped into three categories: === New architectures === NewSQL systems adopt various internal architectures. Some systems employ a cluster of shared-nothing nodes, in which each node manages a subset of the data. They include components such as distributed concurrency control, flow control, and distributed query processing. === SQL engines === The second category are optimized storage engines for SQL. These systems provide the same programming interface as SQL, but scale better than built-in engines. === Transparent sharding === These systems automatically split databases across multiple nodes using Raft or Paxos consensus algorithm.

  Read more →
• 

  NCSA Brown Dog

  NCSA Brown Dog is a research project to develop a method for easily accessing historic research data stored in order to maintain the long-term viability of large bodies of scientific research. It is supported by the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) that is funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF). == History == Brown Dog is part of the DataNet partners program funded by NSF in 2008. DataNet was conceived to address the increasingly digital and data-intensive nature of science, engineering and education. Brown Dog is part of a follow-on effort called Data Infrastructure Building Blocks (DIBBs), focused on building software to support DataNet. The project was proposed by researchers at NCSA and the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign as well as researchers from Boston University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. == Unstructured, uncurated, long tail data == Much scientific data is smaller, unstructured and uncurated and thus not easily shared. Such data is sometimes referred to as "long tail" data. This borrows a term from statistics and refers to the tail of the distribution of project sizes. The majority of smaller projects lack the resources to properly steward the data they produce. This so-called "long tail" data, both past and present, has the potential to inform future research in many study areas. Much of this data has become inaccessible due to obsolete software and file formats. The resulting impossibility of reviewing data from older research disrupts the overall scientific research project. == Approach == Brown Dog describes itself as the "super mutt" of software (thus the name "Brown Dog"), serving as a low-level data infrastructure to interface digital data content across the internet. Its approach is to use every possible source of automated help (i.e., software) in existence in a robust and provenance-preserving manner to create a service that can deal with as much of this data as possible. The project sees the broader impact of its work in its potential to serve the general public as a sort of "DNS for data", with the goal of making all data and all file formats as accessible as webpages are today. == Technology == Brown Dog seeks to address problems involving the use of uncurated and unstructured data collections through the development of two services: the Data Access Proxy (DAP) to aid in the conversion of file formats and the Data Tilling Services (DTS) for the automatic extraction of metadata from file contents. Once developed, researchers and general public users will be able to download browser plugins and other tools from the Brown Dog tool catalog. === Data Tilling Service === Data Tilling Service (DTS) will allow users to search data collections using an existing file to discover other similar files in a collection. A DTS search field will be appended to configured browsers where example files can be dropped. This tells DTS to search all the files under a given URL for files similar to the dropped file. For example, while browsing an online image collection, a user could drop an image of three people into the search field, and the DTS would return all images in the collection that also contain three people. If DTS encounters a foreign file format, it will utilize DAP to make the file accessible. DTS also indexes the data and extract and appends metadata to files and collections enabling users to gain some sense of the type of data they are encountering. This service runs on port 9443. === Data Access Proxy === Data Access Proxy (DAP) allows users to access data files that would otherwise be unreadable. Similar to an internet gateway or Domain Name Service, the DAP configuration would be entered into a user's machine and browser settings. Data requests over HTTP would first be examined by DAP to determine if the native file format is readable on the client device. If not, DAP converts the file into the best available format readable by the client machine. Alternatively, the user could specify the desired format themselves. This service runs on port 8184. == Use cases == Brown Dog targets three use cases proposed by groups within the EarthCube research communities. Developers and researchers from these communities will work together on use cases that span geoscience, engineering, biology and social science. === Long tail vegetation data in ecology and global change biology === This use case is led by Michael Dietze, Boston University Data on the abundance, species composition, and size structure of vegetation is critically important for a wide array of sub-disciplines in ecology, conservation, natural resource management, and global change biology. However, addressing many of the pressing questions in these disciplines will require that terrestrial biosphere and hydrologic models are able to assimilate the large amount of long-tail data that exists but is largely inaccessible. The Brown Dog team in cooperation with researches from Dietze's lab will facilitate the capture of a huge body of smaller research-oriented vegetation data sets collected over many decades and historical vegetation data embedded in Public Land Survey data dating back to 1785. This data will be used as initial conditions for models, to make sense of other large data sets and for model calibration and validation. === Designing green infrastructure considering storm water and human requirements === This use case is led by Barbara Minsker], University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign]; William Sullivan, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Arthur Schmidt, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. This case study involves developing novel green infrastructure design criteria and models that integrate requirements for storm water management and ecosystem and human health and well being. To address the scientific and social problems associated with the design of green spaces, data accessibility and availability is a major challenge. This study will focus on identified areas of the Green Healthy Neighborhood Planning region within the City of Chicago where existing local sewer performance is most deficient and where changes in impervious area through green infrastructure would be beneficial to under served neighborhoods. Brown Dog will be used to extract long-tail experimental data on human landscape preferences and health impacts. This data will be used to develop a human health impacts model that will then be linked together with a terrestrial biosphere model and a storm water model using Brown Dog technology. === Development and application for critical zone studies === This use case is led by Praveen Kumar, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Critical Zone (CZ) is the "skin" of the earth that extends from the treetops to the bedrock that is created by life processes working at scales from microbes to biomes. The Critical Zone supports all terrestrial living systems. Its upper part is the bio-mantle. This is where terrestrial biota live, reproduce, use and expend energy, and where their wastes and remains accumulate and decompose. It encompasses the soil, which acts as a geomembrane through which water and solutes, energy, gases, solids, and organisms interact with the atmosphere, biosphere, hydrosphere, and lithosphere. A variety of drivers affect this bio-dynamic zone, ranging from climate and deforestation to agriculture, grazing and human development. Understanding and predicting these effects is central to managing and sustaining vital ecosystem services such as soil fertility, water purification, and production of food resources, and, at larger scales, global carbon cycling and carbon sequestration. The CZ provides a unifying framework for integrating terrestrial surface and near-surface environments, and reflects an intricate web of biological and chemical processes and human impacts occurring at vastly different temporal and spatial scales. The nature of these data create significant challenges for inter-disciplinary studies of the CZ because integration of the variety and number of data products and models has been a barrier. On the other hand, CZ data provides an excellent opportunity for defining, testing and implementing Brown Dog technologies. In this context "unstructured" data is viewed broadly as consisting of a collection of heterogeneous data with formats that reflect temporal and disciplinary legacies, data from emerging low cost open hardware based sensors and embedded sensor networks that lack well defined metadata and sensor characteristics, as well as data that are available as maps, images and text. == NSF Award == CIF21 DIBBs: Brown Dog was awarded in the winter of 2013 with a start date of October 1, 2013. Estimated expiration date is September 30, 2018. The award amount was $10,519,716.00, the largest DIBB award. The principal investigator is Kenton McHenry of NCSA at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Coleaders are Jong Lee NCSA/UIU

  Read more →
• 

  User-subjective approach

  The user-subjective approach is the first interaction design approach dedicated specifically to personal information management (PIM). The approach offers design principles with which PIM systems (e.g. operating systems, email applications and web browsers) can make systematic use of subjective (i.e. user-dependent) attributes. The approach evolved in three stages: (a) theoretical foundations first published in a Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology during 2003. The paper introduces the approach and its design principles (b) evidence and implementation was published in another JASIST paper in 2008. The paper gives empirical evidence in support of the approach as well as seven novel design schemes that derives from it. It has won the Best JASIST paper award in 2009.(c) specific design evaluation this stage has already begun with evaluation of the first user-subjective design prototype called GrayArea in a Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems paper published in 2009. == Theoretical foundations == The user-subjective approach takes advantage of the fact that in PIM the person who retrieves the information is the same person who had previously stored it. PIM can be seen as a communication between the person and him\her self at two different times: the time of storage and the time of retrieval. The PIM system design should help facilitate that unique communication by allowing the user use subjective (user-dependent) attributes in addition to the standard objective ones. PIM systems should capture these subjective attributes when the user interacts with the information item (either automatically or by using direct manipulation interface) in order to help the user retrieve the item later on. The user-subjective approach identifies three subjective attributes – the project which the item was classified to, its degree of importance to the user, and the context in which the item was used during the interaction with it. The approach also assigns a design principle for each. The principles (discussed below) are deliberately abstract to allow for a variety of different implementations. === The subjective project classification principle === The subjective project classification principle suggests that PIM systems design should allow all information items related to a project be classified under the same category regardless of whether they are files, emails, Web Favorites or of any other format. This stands in sharp contrast with the present PIM system design where there are distinct folder hierarchies for each of these formats. The current design forces the user to store information related to a single project in separate locations depending on their format causing the project fragmentation problem. === The subjective importance principle === The subjective importance principle suggests that the subjective importance of information should affect its degree of visual salience and accessibility: important information items should be highly visible and accessible as they are more likely to be retrieved (the promotion principle) and those of lower importance should be demoted (i.e. making them less visible) so as not to distract the user (the demotion principle). While the promotion principle is not new and has been widely applied in PIM system design, the demotion principle is novel and has been applied only sporadically in these systems. Currently these systems allow only two options: keeping information (where unneeded information items could clutter folders and obscure the target item) and deleting it (where there is a risk that the item will not be there when needed). Demotion suggests a third option where the item is less visible so it doesn’t distract the user but is kept within its original context in case the user would need it after all. === The subjective context principle === The subjective context principle suggests that PIM systems should allow users retrieve their information items in the same context that they had previously used in order to bridge the time gap between these two events. By "context" the approach refers to other information items that were used at the time of interaction with the item, thoughts that the users may have regarding the item, the phase the user got to in the interaction with the item and other people the user collaborates with regarding the information item. == Evidence and implementations == === Evidence === The user-subjective approach was evaluated in a multioperational designed study which used questionnaires, screen shots and in-depth interviews (N = 84). The research tested the use of subjective attributes in current PIM systems and its dependency on design. Results show that participants used subjective attributes whenever design allowed them to. When it didn't, they either used their own alternative ways to use these attributes or avoided using subjective attributes at all. Regarding the subjective project classification principle – many of the participants' recent files, emails and web pages related to the same projects (indicating that they were working on the same project using different formats), and they had saved files of different format in the same project folders. However, as design does not suggest storing emails and web favorites with files, users avoid doing so. Regarding the subjective importance principle – users tended to retrieve their important information from highly visible and accessible locations offered by current design (e.g. by using the desktop), however since current systems offers no way to demote files of low subjective importance participants tended to use their own walk around ways for doing so (e.g. by moving them to a folder called "old" inside their original folder). Regarding the subjective context principle – participants tended to talk spontaneously about the context of their information items during the interview. These evidence imply that current PIM systems could possibly be improved if it would allow users to make more use of subjective attributes of their personal information. === Implementations === Each of the user-subjective design principles can be implemented in various ways. Moreover, as the approach is generative it offers PIM designers to use these principles in order to create their own user subjective designs. Below are design schemes that demonstrate an implementation of each of the principles. A more complete set of implementation examples can be found in the user-subjective website Archived 2011-02-01 at the Wayback Machine. The single hierarchy solution – addresses the project fragmentation problem (the current situation where the users stores and retrieve their project-related files, emails and web favorites at different hierarchies) and implements the subjective classification principle by offering the user a single folder hierarchy for all information items. At the operation system level the users would navigate to a folder and find there all project related files, emails, web favorites, tasks, contacts and notes. This would allow them to retrieve all their project-related information items from a single location regardless of their formats. When looking at these folders at their mail box the users would see only their emails and only web favorites through their browser. The single hierarchy design scheme has not been evaluated yet. GrayArea – implements the demotion principle by allowing users to move subjectively unimportant files to a gray area at the bottom end of their folders. This clears the upper part of the folder from file that are unlikely to be retrieved while allowing the users to retrieve these unimportant file in their original context in case they are needed after all. GrayArea design scheme was positively evaluated (see next section). ItemHistory – is an implementation of the subjective context principle. It allows users to reach all information items that were previously retrieved while that information item was open. This design scheme has not been evaluated to date. == Specific design evaluation == The evaluation of specific designs is the third and final step of the approach development. It had begun with the assessment of GrayArea. === GrayArea evaluation === GrayArea was evaluated by using a prototype that simulated the participants' folders but included a gray area where they could drag & drop their subjectively unimportant files. In the study 96 participants were asked to clean up their folders from unimportant files once with GrayArea and once without it. Results show that the use of GrayArea reduced the clutter in folders, that it was easier for participants to demote files than to delete them and that they would use it if provided in their next operating system. These results encourage commercial implementation of GrayArea and the development and testing of other user-subjective designs. == Chronological development == The user-subjective approach was developed by

  Read more →
• 

  Bigram

  A bigram or digram is a sequence of two adjacent elements from a string of tokens, which are typically letters, syllables, or words. A bigram is an n-gram for n=2. The frequency distribution of every bigram in a string is commonly used for simple statistical analysis of text in many applications, including in computational linguistics, cryptography, and speech recognition. Gappy bigrams or skipping bigrams are word pairs which allow gaps (perhaps avoiding connecting words, or allowing some simulation of dependencies, as in a dependency grammar). == Applications == Bigrams, along with other n-grams, are used in most successful language models for speech recognition. Bigram frequency attacks can be used in cryptography to solve cryptograms. See frequency analysis. Bigram frequency is one approach to statistical language identification. Some activities in logology or recreational linguistics involve bigrams. These include attempts to find English words beginning with every possible bigram, or words containing a string of repeated bigrams, such as logogogue. == Bigram frequency in the English language == The frequency of the most common letter bigrams in a large English corpus is: th 3.56% of 1.17% io 0.83% he 3.07% ed 1.17% le 0.83% in 2.43% is 1.13% ve 0.83% er 2.05% it 1.12% co 0.79% an 1.99% al 1.09% me 0.79% re 1.85% ar 1.07% de 0.76% on 1.76% st 1.05% hi 0.76% at 1.49% to 1.05% ri 0.73% en 1.45% nt 1.04% ro 0.73% nd 1.35% ng 0.95% ic 0.70% ti 1.34% se 0.93% ne 0.69% es 1.34% ha 0.93% ea 0.69% or 1.28% as 0.87% ra 0.69% te 1.20% ou 0.87% ce 0.65%

  Read more →
• 

  Documentation science

  Documentation science is the study of the recording and retrieval of information. It includes methods for storing, retrieving, and sharing of information captured on physical as well as digital documents. This field is closely linked to the fields of library science and information science but has its own theories and practices. The term documentation science was coined by Belgian lawyer and peace activist Paul Otlet. He is considered to be the forefather of information science. He along with Henri La Fontaine laid the foundations of documentation science as a field of study. Professionals in this field are called documentalists. Over the years, documentation science has grown to become a large and important field of study. Evolving from traditional practices like archiving and retrieval to modern theories about the nature of documents, novel methods for organizing digital information, and applications in libraries, research, healthcare, business, and technology and more. This field continues to evolve in the digital age. == Developments in documentation science == 1895: The International Institute of Bibliography (originally Institut International de Bibliographie, IIB) was established on 12 September 1895, in Brussels, Belgium by Paul Otlet and Henri La Fontaine. It aimed to catalog all recorded knowledge using a universal classification system now known as the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC). 1931: International Institute of Bibliography (originally Institut International de Bibliographie, IIB) was renamed The International Institute for Documentation, (Institut International de Documentation, IID). 1934: Paul Otlet envisioned a “radiated library,” a global network of interconnected documents accessible from anywhere via telecommunication. This early idea is now seen as a forerunner of the internet. 1937: American Documentation Institute was founded (1968 nameshift to American Society for Information Science). 1951: Suzanne Briet published Qu'est-ce que la documentation? where she proposed that “a document is evidence in support of a fact,” expanding the definition to include objects such as animals in zoos when they are part of a scientific study. This was a significant theoretical shift in defining documents. 1965-1990: Documentation departments were established, for example, large research libraries, online computer retrieval systems and more. The persons doing the searches were called documentalists. But with the appearance of first CD-ROM databases in the mid-1980s and later the internet in 1990s, these intermediary searches decreased and most such departments closed or merged with other departments. 1996: "Dokvit", Documentation Studies, was established in 1996 at the University of Tromsø in Norway. 2001: The Document Academy was established. It is an international network that celebrates documentation. It was conducted by The Program of Documentation Studies, University of Tromsø, Norway and The School of Information Management and Systems, UC Berkeley. 2003: The first Document Research Conference (DOCAM), a series of conferences made by the Document Academy. DOCAM '03 (2003) was held 13–15 August 2003 at The School of Information Management and Systems (SIMS) at the University of California, Berkeley. 2007: Michael Buckland, Ronald Day, and Birger Hjørland expanded the theoretical foundations of documentation science. They researched and explored documents to be social artifacts, the role of ideology in classification, and how documents influenced knowledge systems. 2010s: The concept of post-documentation or “documentality” began in the 2010s, which focused on how digital traces (e.g., tweets, logs) function as documents without traditional physical form. This led to new thinking in document theory. 2016–present: The Document Academy's DOCAM conferences have continued, offering ongoing developments in the theory and practice of documentation. Themes include affect, memory, activism, and born-digital records. 2017: The journal Information Research published special issues addressing “document theory,” including views on documentation in virtual environments and digital archives. 2020–present: The growth of research data management (RDM) and open science has made documentation practices central to data sharing, metadata standards, and reproducibility in scientific work. == Theoretical foundations == Documentation science has some deep theories that explain what a document is, how people use documents, and how they are organized. These concepts were introduced by scholars who have not only studied libraries, but also philosophy, language, and social sciences. Suzanne Briet described a document as “any material form of evidence” that is made to be used as proof or to share information. An antelope in a zoo, for example, can be a document because it is being studied, classified, and described. Documents are not just things or materials but are also shaped by society. Michael Buckland noted that documents have meaning only when people agree they are useful or valid as information. He explained a document becomes a document when someone decides to use it as evidence. Ronald Day wrote about how documentation is not neutral, it can be influenced by power, ideology, and politics. He claimed that classification systems, like how libraries organize books, are not just technical tools. They also show what kinds of knowledge are seen as more important than others. In recent years, new theories have been introduced, like “documentality” by Maurizio Ferraris. He proposed that a document does not have to be a paper or file, it can also be something digital like a tweet, a database entry, or a log file, as long as it leaves a trace that can be looked at later. This theory helps explain modern digital documents. == Methodologies and practice == Documentation science includes many methods that help people collect, organize, store, and find information. These practices are used in libraries, archives, research labs, companies, and now also in online systems. === Collecting and creating documents === In the past, documentation work included gathering books, articles, reports, and other printed materials. People created records of these materials manually, using catalog cards, indexes, or bibliographies. Paul Otlet’s work with the Universal Bibliographic Repertory is one example. He created millions of card entries to organize knowledge from around the world. Today, documents are not only created by humans. Computers and machines also generate documents, like log files, metadata, and sensor data. These need new tools and methods for collection and management. === Organizing information === Organizing documents has always been a foundational element of documentation science. Methods like classification (dividing things into groups) and indexing (making lists of topics or keywords) help individuals find what they need. A widely used system is the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) developed by Otlet and La Fontaine. Another is the Library of Congress Classification (LCC) used in the majority of U.S. libraries. Indexing can be performed by humans or by software programs that read the text and add tags to documents. Metadata is also used to describe documents. Metadata is “data about data” like the title, author, date, and subject of a document. Standards like Dublin Core are used in digital libraries to keep metadata consistent. === Retrieval and access === One of the main objectives of documentation is helping users find the right document. This is called information retrieval. In the past, this meant using catalog drawers or printed indexes. Today, people use search engines, databases, and digital libraries. Modern retrieval tools use Boolean logic, ranking algorithms, and sometimes machine learning to show the most useful results first. This is part of what is studied in both documentation science and information retrieval. === Preservation and archiving === Documents require long-term storage. This is called preservation of documents. Printed documents can be damaged by light, pests, or even time on the other hand digital documents can be deemed worthless if formats become outdated or storage facilities fail. Archivists use methods like migration, which includes moving files to new formats, and emulation, which replicates obsolete systems, to preserve materials. These methods and tools are ever changing as new technologies develop. But the main objective of documentation has remained the same, which is to keep information safe, organized, and easy to find. == Documentation in the digital age == With the expansion of the internet, computers, and cloud storage, documents are no longer just books, papers, or reports. They can now be emails, tweets, videos, websites, databases, or even log files created by machines. === Born-digital documents === Many documents today are created directly in digital form. These are called born-digit

  Read more →
• 

  Algorithmic logic

  Algorithmic logic is a calculus of programs that allows the expression of semantic properties of programs by appropriate logical formulas. It provides a framework that enables proving the formulas from the axioms of program constructs such as assignment, iteration and composition instructions and from the axioms of the data structures in question see Mirkowska & Salwicki (1987), Banachowski et al. (1977). The following diagram helps to locate algorithmic logic among other logics. [ P r o p o s i t i o n a l l o g i c o r S e n t e n t i a l c a l c u l u s ] ⊂ [ P r e d i c a t e c a l c u l u s o r F i r s t o r d e r l o g i c ] ⊂ [ C a l c u l u s o f p r o g r a m s o r Algorithmic logic ] {\displaystyle \qquad \left[{\begin{array}{l}\mathrm {Propositional\ logic} \\or\\\mathrm {Sentential\ calculus} \end{array}}\right]\subset \left[{\begin{array}{l}\mathrm {Predicate\ calculus} \\or\\\mathrm {First\ order\ logic} \end{array}}\right]\subset \left[{\begin{array}{l}\mathrm {Calculus\ of\ programs} \\or\\{\mbox{Algorithmic logic}}\end{array}}\right]} The formalized language of algorithmic logic (and of algorithmic theories of various data structures) contains three types of well formed expressions: Terms - i.e. expressions denoting operations on elements of data structures, formulas - i.e. expressions denoting the relations among elements of data structures, programs - i.e. algorithms - these expressions describe the computations. For semantics of terms and formulas consult pages on first-order logic and Tarski's semantics. The meaning of a program K {\displaystyle K} is the set of possible computations of the program. Algorithmic logic is one of many logics of programs. Another logic of programs is dynamic logic, see dynamic logic, Harel, Kozen & Tiuryn (2000).

  Read more →
• 

  Information audit

  The information audit (IA) extends the concept of auditing from a traditional scope of accounting and finance to the organisational information management system. Information is representative of a resource which requires effective management and this led to the development of interest in the use of an IA. Prior the 1990s and the methodologies of Orna, Henczel, Wood, Buchanan and Gibb, IA approaches and methodologies focused mainly upon an identification of formal information resources (IR). Later approaches included an organisational analysis and the mapping of the information flow. This gave context to analysis within an organisation's information systems and a holistic view of their IR and as such could contribute to the development of the information systems architecture (ISA). In recent years the IA has been overlooked in favour of the systems development process which can be less expensive than the IA, yet more heavily technically focused, project specific (not holistic) and does not favour the top-down analysis of the IA. == Definition == A definition for the Information Audit cannot be universally agreed-upon amongst scholars, however the definition offered by ASLIB received positive support from a few notable scholars including Henczel, Orna and Wood; “(the IA is a) systematic examination of information use, resources and flows, with a verification by reference to both people and existing documents, in order to establish the extent to which they are contributing to an organisation’s objectives” In summary, the term audit itself implies a counting, the IA being much the same yet it counts IR and analyses how they are used and how critical they are to the success of a given task. == Role and scope of an IA == In much the same way as the IA is difficult to define, it can be utilised in a range of contexts by the information professional, from complying with freedom of information legislation to identifying any existing gaps, duplications, bottlenecks or other inefficiencies in information flows and to understand how existing channels can be used for knowledge transfer In 2007 Buchanan and Gibb developed upon their 1998 examination of the IA process by outlining a summary of its main objectives: To identify an organisation’s information resource To identify an organisation’s information needs Furthermore, Buchanan and Gibb went on to state that the IA also had to meet the following additional objectives: To identify the cost/benefits of information resources To identify the opportunities to use the information resources for strategic competitive advantage To integrate IT investment with strategic business initiatives To identify information flow and processes To develop an integrated information strategy and/or policy To create an awareness of the importance of Information Resource Management (IRM) To monitor/evaluate conformance to information related standards, legislations, policy and guidelines. == Methodology evolution == === Overview === In 1976 Riley first published a definition of IA as a way of analysing IR based on a cost-benefit model. Since Riley, scholars have outlined further developed methodologies. Henderson took a cost-benefit approach hoping to draw focus from manpower-costing to information storage and acquisition which he felt was being overlooked. In 1985 Gillman focused upon identifying the relationships which existed between various components in order to map them to one another. Neither Henderson nor Gillman’s methods offered alternative approaches beyond the existing organisational frameworks. Quinn took a hybrid-approach combining Gillman and Henderson’s methods to identify the purpose of existing IR and to position them within the organisation, as did Worlock. The differentiator between Quinn and Worlock lay in Worlock’s consideration of solutions outside of the current organisational structure. These approaches had thus far had paid little attention to the needs of the user or in making structured recommendations for the development of a corporate information strategy. Therefore, here follows a brief outline and overall comparison of four published strategic approaches in order that one might understand the development of the IA methodology. === Burk and Horton === In 1988 Burk and Horton developed InfoMap, the first IA methodology developed for widespread use. It aimed to discover, map and evaluate the IR within an organisation using a 4-stage process: Survey staff using questionnaires/interviews Measure the IR against cost/value Analyse resources Synthesise the findings and map the strengths and weaknesses of the IR against the objectives of the organisation. Although the method inventoried all IR (and therefore met standard ISO 1779) this bottom-up approach revealed limited analysis of the organisation holistically and the steps were not explicit enough. === Orna === Orna produced a top-down methodology in contrast to Burk and Horton, placing emphasis upon the importance of organisational analysis and aimed to assist in the production of a corporate information policy. Initially the method had just 4-stages, this later revised to a 10-stage process which included pre and post-audit stages as below: Conduct a preliminary review to confirm operational/strategic direction Gain support/resource from management Gain commitment from the other stakeholders (staff) Planning including the project, team, tools and techniques Identify the IR, information flow and produce a cost/value assessment Interpret findings based upon current versus desired state Produce a report to present findings Implement recommendations Monitor effects of change Repeat the IA Orna’s method introduced the need for a cyclical IA to be put in place in order for the IR to be continually tracked and improvements made regularly. Again this method was criticised for lacking some practical application and in 2004 Orna revised the methodology once more to try to rectify this problem === Buchanan and Gibb === In 1998, similarly to Orna's earlier publication, Buchanan and Gibb took a top-down approach, drawing techniques from established management disciplines to provide a framework and a level of familiarity for information professionals. This set of techniques was a notable contribution to IA methodologies and understood the need to be flexible for each organisation. Theirs was a 5-stage process: Promote benefits of the IA through seminars/surveys/CEO letter for cooperation Identify the mission objectives of the organisation, define environment (PEST), map information flow and examine organisation culture. Analyse and formulate action plan for problem areas, flow diagrams and a report of findings and recommendations Account for cost of IR and related services using Activity Based Costing (ABC) and Output Based Specification (OBS). Synthesise the whole process in final audit report and provide an information strategy (strategic direction) in relation to the organisation’s mission statement. This was the introduction of a new approach to costing the IR and had an integrated strategic direction, yet the scholars admitted that this method may be impractical for smaller organisations. === Henczel === Henczel’s methodology drew upon the strengths of Orna and Buchanan and Gibb to produce a 7-stage process: Planning and submission of business case for approval to proceed Data collection and development of an IR database and population through survey techniques Structured data analysis Data evaluation, interpretation and formulation of recommendations Communication of recommendations through a report Implementing recommendations through a devised programme The IA as a continuum-establishment of a cyclical process Focus was made once more on the strategic direction of the organisation conducting the IA. Furthermore, Henczel made examination into the use of the IA as a first-step in the development of a knowledge audit or knowledge management strategy as discussed in the later section. == Case studies == Scholars and information professionals have since tested the above methodologies with varied results. An early case study produced by Soy and Bustelo in a Spanish financial institution in 1999 aimed to identify the use of information resources for qualitative and quantitative data analysis due to the rapid expansion of the organisation within a six-year period. Although the methodology was not explicitly credited to any of the above-mentioned scholars, it did follow a strategic (post 1990's) IA process including gaining support from management, the use of questionnaires for data collection, analysis and evaluation of the data, identification and mapping of the IR, cost-analysis and outlining recommendations to assist with the establishment of an Information policy. In addition the IA report suggested that the process would need to be continual (cyclical as Orna, Henczel and Buchanan and Gibb suggest). Conclusions of this case-study stated that th

  Read more →
• 

  Meta-Labeling

  Meta-labeling, also known as corrective AI, is a machine learning (ML) technique utilized in quantitative finance to enhance the performance of investment and trading strategies, developed in 2017 by Marcos López de Prado at Guggenheim Partners and Cornell University. The core idea is to separate the decision of trade direction (side) from the decision of trade sizing, addressing the inefficiencies of simultaneously learning both side and size predictions. The side decision involves forecasting market movements (long, short, neutral), while the size decision focuses on risk management and profitability. It serves as a secondary decision-making layer that evaluates the signals generated by a primary predictive model. By assessing the confidence and likely profitability of those signals, meta-labeling allows investors and algorithms to dynamically size positions and suppress false positives. == Motivation == Meta-labeling is designed to improve precision without sacrificing recall. As noted by López de Prado, attempting to model both the direction and the magnitude of a trade using a single algorithm can result in poor generalization. By separating these tasks, meta-labeling enables greater flexibility and robustness: Enhances control over capital allocation. Reduces overfitting by limiting model complexity. Allows the use of interpretability tools and tailored thresholds to manage risk. Enables dynamic trade suppression in unfavorable regimes. == Applications == Meta-labeling has been applied in a variety of financial ML contexts, including: Algorithmic trading: Filtering and sizing trades to reduce false positives. Portfolio optimization: Scaling exposure across multiple signals with differing confidence levels. Risk management: Dynamically disabling strategies in adverse market conditions. Model validation: Interpreting when and why a model may be underperforming due to regime shifts. == General architecture == Meta-labeling decouples two core components of systematic trading strategies: directional prediction and position sizing. The process involves training a primary model to generate trade signals (e.g., buy, sell, or hold) and then training a secondary model to determine whether each signal is likely to lead to a profitable trade. The second model outputs a probability that is interpreted as the confidence in the forecast, which can be used to adjust the position size or to filter out unreliable trades. Meta-labeling is typically implemented as a three-stage process: Primary model (M1): Predicts the direction or label of a financial outcome using features such as market prices, returns, or volatility indicators. A typical output is directional, e.g., Y ∈ {−1,0,1}, representing short, neutral, or long positions. Secondary model (M2): A binary classifier trained to predict whether the primary model's prediction will be profitable. The target variable is a binary meta-label F ∈ { 0 , 1 } {\displaystyle F\in \{0,1\}} . Inputs can include features used in the primary model, performance diagnostics, or market regime data. Position sizing algorithm (M3): Translates the output probability of the secondary model into a position size. Higher confidence scores result in larger allocations, while lower confidence leads to reduced or zero exposure. === Stage 1: Forecasting side === Primary model architecture Figure 1 Figure 1 presents the architecture of a primary model. It focuses on forecasting the side of the trade. Following the example, this model (M1) takes in input data – such as open-high-low-close data and determines the side of the position to take: a negative number is a short position, and positive number is a long position, the range is set between −1 and 1 (the closer it is to −1 or 1, the stronger the models conviction is). When training the model, the labels are −1 and 1, based on the direction of forward returns for some predefined investment horizon. The researcher may decide to apply a recall check (τ: "Tau") by setting a minimum threshold that the initial output needs to be to qualify of a short or long position (if the threshold is not met, no side forecast is predicted, leading to closing of any open positions), this leads to the primary model output which is one of three possible side forecasts: −1, 0, or 1. The primary model also generates evaluation data which can be used by the secondary model, to improve performance of size forecasts. Some examples of evaluation data include rolling accuracy, F1, recall, precision, and AUC scores. === Stage 2: Filtering out false positives === General meta-labeling architecture Figure 2 Next comes the phase of filtering out false positives, by applying a secondary machine learning model (M2), which is a binary classifier trained to determine if the trade will be profitable or not. The model takes as input four general groupings of data: General input data which is predictive of a false positive. For example the last 30 days rolling volatility of the underlying asset. Evaluation data. Market state and regime data, one may find that macro economic data or clustering the market into regimes may help as specific trading strategies are known to perform better in particular regimes. Example: momentum based strategies perform best in periods with low volatility and strong directional moves. Primary models initial input which is a value between −1 and 1. This highlights the strength of the primary models conviction. The output of the model is a value between −1 and 1 (if using a Tanh function) which will indicate the strength of the conviction that a short or long position is profitable, or it could simply be between 0 and 1 (using a sigmoid function) if one only wanted to know if it made money or not. This output allows filtering out trades that are likely to lead to losses. One could stop at this point or use the outputs of the secondary model as inputs to a position sizing algorithm (M3) which could further enhance strategy performance metrics by translating the output probability of the secondary model into a position size. Higher confidence scores result in larger allocations, while lower confidence leads to reduced or zero exposure. === Stage 3: Optimizing position sizes === ==== Position sizing methods (M3) ==== Various algorithms have been proposed for transforming predicted probabilities into trade sizes: All-or-nothing: Allocate 100% of capital if the probability exceeds a predefined threshold (e.g., 0.5); otherwise, do not trade. Model confidence: Use the probability score directly as the fraction of capital allocated. Linear scaling: Rescale the model's probabilities using min-max normalization based on the training data. Normal CDF (NCDF): Use a normal cumulative distribution function applied to a z-statistic derived from the predicted probability. Empirical CDF (ECDF): Rank probabilities based on their percentile in the training data to ensure relative allocation. Sigmoid Optimal Position Sizing (SOPS): Applies a smooth non-linear sigmoid transformation optimized to maximize risk-adjusted returns (Sharpe ratio). ==== Model calibration ==== Each machine learning algorithm used in meta-labeling tends to produce outputs with different characteristic distributions; for example, some are approximately normally distributed, whereas others exhibit a pronounced U-shape, concentrating probabilities near the extremes. Due to these varying distributions, simply summing the outputs of different models can inadvertently lead to uneven weighting of signals, biasing trade decisions. To address this, model calibration techniques are essential to adjust the predicted probabilities towards frequentist probabilities, ensuring that model outputs reflect true likelihoods more accurately. Two common calibration techniques are: Platt scaling (Sigmoid scaling): Suitable for correcting S-shaped calibration plots typically produced by models such as support vector machines (SVMs). Isotonic regression: Fits a non-decreasing step function to probabilities and is effective particularly with larger datasets, though it can sometimes lead to overfitting. Transforming predictions to frequentist probabilities is crucial as it provides probabilistic outputs that are directly interpretable as the actual likelihood of an event occurring. Such calibration significantly enhances the effectiveness of fixed position sizing methods, reducing maximum drawdowns and increasing risk-adjusted returns. However, calibration has less impact on position sizing methods that directly estimate parameters from the training data, such as ECDF and SOPS, suggesting that calibration is a critical step mainly for fixed methods that rely heavily on raw model outputs. =

  Read more →
• 

  Savepoint

  A savepoint is a way of implementing subtransactions (also known as nested transactions) within a relational database management system by indicating a point within a transaction that can be "rolled back to" without affecting any work done in the transaction before the savepoint was created. Multiple savepoints can exist within a single transaction. Savepoints are useful for implementing complex error recovery in database applications. If an error occurs in the midst of a multiple-statement transaction, the application may be able to recover from the error (by rolling back to a savepoint) without needing to abort the entire transaction. A savepoint can be declared by issuing a SAVEPOINT name statement. All changes made after a savepoint has been declared can be undone by issuing a ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT name command. Issuing RELEASE SAVEPOINT name will cause the named savepoint to be discarded, but will not otherwise affect anything. Issuing the commands ROLLBACK or COMMIT will also discard any savepoints created since the start of the main transaction. Savepoints are defined in the SQL standard and are supported by all established SQL relational databases, including PostgreSQL, Oracle Database, Microsoft SQL Server, MySQL, IBM Db2, SQLite (since 3.6.8), Firebird, H2 Database Engine, and Informix (since version 11.50xC3).

  Read more →
• 

  Jump-and-Walk algorithm

  Jump-and-Walk is an algorithm for point location in triangulations (though most of the theoretical analysis were performed in 2D and 3D random Delaunay triangulations). Surprisingly, the algorithm does not need any preprocessing or complex data structures except some simple representation of the triangulation itself. The predecessor of Jump-and-Walk was due to Lawson (1977) and Green and Sibson (1978), which picks a random starting point S and then walks from S toward the query point Q one triangle at a time. But no theoretical analysis was known for these predecessors until after mid-1990s. Jump-and-Walk picks a small group of sample points and starts the walk from the sample point which is the closest to Q until the simplex containing Q is found. The algorithm was a folklore in practice for some time, and the formal presentation of the algorithm and the analysis of its performance on 2D random Delaunay triangulation was done by Devroye, Mucke and Zhu in mid-1990s (the paper appeared in Algorithmica, 1998). The analysis on 3D random Delaunay triangulation was done by Mucke, Saias and Zhu (ACM Symposium of Computational Geometry, 1996). In both cases, a boundary condition was assumed, namely, Q must be slightly away from the boundary of the convex domain where the vertices of the random Delaunay triangulation are drawn. In 2004, Devroye, Lemaire and Moreau showed that in 2D the boundary condition can be withdrawn (the paper appeared in Computational Geometry: Theory and Applications, 2004). Jump-and-Walk has been used in many famous software packages, e.g., QHULL, Triangle and CGAL.

  Read more →
• 

  Artificial intelligence industry in Canada

  The artificial intelligence industry in Canada is a rapidly expanding sector. Although Canada held a pioneering role in the early development of artificial intelligence, transforming research excellence into broad commercial adoption has proven challenging. Despite globally recognized scientific achievements and a deep pool of skilled experts, by June 2024, Canada recorded the lowest rate of AI integration among OECD countries, with only 12% of firms implementing AI in their products or services. However, AI adoption has shown significant momentum—doubling from mid-2024 to mid-2025, rising from 6.1% to 12.2%. As of September 2025, Statistics Canada indicated that while about one-third of Canadian businesses had no plans to adopt artificial intelligence in the next year, 14.5% reported intentions to begin using AI for producing goods or delivering services. The primary reasons for not moving forward with AI were lack of relevance, insufficient knowledge, and privacy concerns. According to Public Works Canada (PwC), the pace of AI adoption in Canada is roughly three-quarters of the United States rate, highlighting a notable gap between the two countries in business integration of this technology. British-Canadian computer scientist Geoffrey Hinton stated in 2025 that Canadian companies are adopting artificial intelligence at a slower pace, which may result in the loss of the country's early advantages in the field. At the "All In AI" conference held in Montreal in September 2025, the Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation Evan Solomon, described "Building digital sovereignty" as the most pressing democratic issue of the time. He introduced a 26-person task force focused on updating Canada's AI strategy. In their 2024 report " "Learning Together for Responsible Artificial Intelligence" report, the Innovation, Science, and Economic Development Canada stressed that public awareness, trust, and AI literacy are essential for the responsible adoption and governance of AI in Canada. Montreal workshops in 2021 expanded the OECD's 2019 definition of AI as "the set of computer techniques that enable a machine (e.g., a computer or telephone) to perform tasks that typically require intelligence, such as reasoning or learning. It is also referred to as the automation of intelligent tasks. Scientific developments in AI, such as deep-learning techniques, have made it possible to design access to huge amounts of data and ever-increasing computing power. These new techniques have been rapidly deployed on a large scale in all areas of social life, in transport, education, culture and health." == Federal investments and policy == The 2025 federal budget allocates over $1 billion over the next five years to bolster Canada's artificial intelligence and quantum computing ecosystem. == Industry landscape or research hubs == AlexNet, an influential deep convolutional neural network developed at the University of Toronto by Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey Hinton, marked a pivotal turning point in modern artificial intelligence. In 2012, it achieved a dramatic reduction in error rates for the ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge (ILSVRC), showcasing the practical power of deep learning and GPU acceleration. The success of AlexNet helped cement Canada’s reputation for AI leadership and inspired rapid adoption of deep learning across the technology sector, with ongoing impact in both academic and commercial domains. In healthcare, AlexNet has been adapted for medical imaging to assist with analyzing radiographs, mammograms, and other scans, including identifying abnormalities and supporting clinical diagnosis. In 2015, the Ottawa-based start-up Advanced Symbolics Inc. (ASI) began developing Polly, an artificial intelligence system designed to analyze and anticipate how target audiences behave—enabling more effective communication strategies and advertising campaigns. Polly was named after its first assignment analyzing the politics of Brexit. The AI gained widespread attention in 2016 for accurately forecasting both the Brexit referendum and the 2016 U.S. presidential election won by Donald Trump. The company states that Polly is used by organizations in diverse sectors—including healthcare, politics, entertainment, and mental health research—to support decision-making based on predictive analytics. Chartwatch, an AI tool developed in Canada, has been shown to reduce unexpected hospital deaths by 26% according to a 2024 study. The system analyzes patient data to detect subtle signs of deterioration, supporting healthcare teams in providing timely interventions. === Notable figures in AI in Canada === Geoffrey Hinton's decades-long work eventually formed the foundation of artificial intelligence, which earned him the Nobel Prize for physics in 2024. Yoshua Bengio, who won the Turing Award in 2018 for his pioneering work in deep learning, founded what would become Mila in 1993. Mila, is currently a collaboration between four Montreal-based academic partners.—the Pan-Canadian Artificial Intelligence Strategy includes Alberta's Amii, Toronto's Vector Institute, and Mila. Fakhreddine Karray's work on operational AI has had tangible impact across several Canadian-relevant sectors, notably intelligent transportation systems, virtual healthcare, and driver safety. === AI in the oil and gas industry === According to a 2020 Ernst & Young report the oil and gas industry in Canada is using AI in automating routine, repetitive, and dangerous tasks with technologies like robotic process automation and machine learning; optimizing production and processing; enhancing transportation logistics; improving equipment operation and monitoring; and enabling preventative maintenance. AI is also deployed for data analysis to improve prediction and decision-making, and is expected to automate up to 50% of job competencies in upstream oil and gas by 2040. Oilsands giant Suncor Energy operates a large fleet of autonomous trucks and has started using AI in its dispatch system at the Mildred Lake mine. As of 2024, AI manages routine tasks such as allocating trucks to dump stations and sending them to refuelling locations. === Indigenous and Inuit Innovation in AI === Indigenous organizations have been working on the creation of new technologies for language revitalization in partnership with National Research Council of Canada since the mid-2010s. In 2025, Inuit researchers and technology partners launched an AI-powered initiative to support the revitalization and preservation of Inuktitut, demonstrating how artificial intelligence can be adapted for Indigenous language and cultural priorities. A 2025 CBC article notes that, while AI can help revitalize Inuktitut, Inuit leaders emphasize concerns about data sovereignty, information ownership, and the need for Indigenous leadership to ensure transparency, privacy, and accountability in AI development. == Regulation == Canada's Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (AIDA) was proposed in November 2022, as part of the Digital Charter Implementation Act (Bill C-27). As well voluntary codes, such as the September 2023 Code of Conduct for Generative AI, and landmark investments in advanced computing infrastructure and the Canadian Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute (CAISI) reflect Canada's commitment to both safety and global competitiveness. == AI infrastructure == Canada has undertaken efforts to expand its AI computing infrastructure at both provincial and federal levels. The federal government's Canadian Sovereign AI Compute Strategy, allocated up to C$2 billion in Budget 2024, aims to enhance computing capacity to support domestic AI industry growth and AI adoption across the economy, with up to C$700 million designated to mobilize private sector investment in new or expanded data centres. Alberta has introduced an AI Data Centres Strategy to position itself as a leading North American destination for data centre investment, targeting C$100 billion worth of AI data centres under development by 2030. One major project under Alberta's strategy is the Wonder Valley AI Data Centre Park near Grande Prairie, which was exempted from provincial environmental impact assessment in April 2026 but still requires permits demonstrating safe construction and operation. According to Statista, as of April 2026, Canada has 287 data centres.

  Read more →
• 

  Data-driven model

  Data-driven models are a class of computational models that primarily rely on historical data collected throughout a system's or process' lifetime to establish relationships between input, internal, and output variables. Commonly found in numerous articles and publications, data-driven models have evolved from earlier statistical models, overcoming limitations posed by strict assumptions about probability distributions. These models have gained prominence across various fields, particularly in the era of big data, artificial intelligence, and machine learning, where they offer valuable insights and predictions based on the available data. == Background == These models have evolved from earlier statistical models, which were based on certain assumptions about probability distributions that often proved to be overly restrictive. The emergence of data-driven models in the 1950s and 1960s coincided with the development of digital computers, advancements in artificial intelligence research, and the introduction of new approaches in non-behavioural modelling, such as pattern recognition and automatic classification. == Key Concepts == Data-driven models encompass a wide range of techniques and methodologies that aim to intelligently process and analyse large datasets. Examples include fuzzy logic, fuzzy and rough sets for handling uncertainty, neural networks for approximating functions, global optimization and evolutionary computing, statistical learning theory, and Bayesian methods. These models have found applications in various fields, including economics, customer relations management, financial services, medicine, and the military, among others. Machine learning, a subfield of artificial intelligence, is closely related to data-driven modelling as it also focuses on using historical data to create models that can make predictions and identify patterns. In fact, many data-driven models incorporate machine learning techniques, such as regression, classification, and clustering algorithms, to process and analyse data. In recent years, the concept of data-driven models has gained considerable attention in the field of water resources, with numerous applications, academic courses, and scientific publications using the term as a generalization for models that rely on data rather than physics. This classification has been featured in various publications and has even spurred the development of hybrid models in the past decade. Hybrid models attempt to quantify the degree of physically based information used in hydrological models and determine whether the process of building the model is primarily driven by physics or purely data-based. As a result, data-driven models have become an essential topic of discussion and exploration within water resources management and research. The term "data-driven modelling" (DDM) refers to the overarching paradigm of using historical data in conjunction with advanced computational techniques, including machine learning and artificial intelligence, to create models that can reveal underlying trends, patterns, and, in some cases, make predictions Data-driven models can be built with or without detailed knowledge of the underlying processes governing the system behavior, which makes them particularly useful when such knowledge is missing or fragmented.

  Read more →
• 

  Brian Deer Classification System

  The Brian Deer Classification System (BDC) is a library classification system used to organize materials in libraries with specialized Indigenous collections. The system was created in the mid-1970s by Canadian librarian A. Brian Deer, a Kahnawake Mohawk. It has been adapted for use in a British Columbia version, and also by a small number of First Nations libraries in Canada. == History and usage == Deer designed his classification system while working in the library of the National Indian Brotherhood (now the Assembly of First Nations) from 1974 to 1976. Instead of using a standard library classification scheme, such as that of the Library of Congress, he created a new system to organize the library's historic indigenous research materials and papers. He later worked at the library of the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs, where he developed a system for its holdings. He returned to Kahnawake, working at its Cultural Centre at Kahnawake and the Kahnawake Branch branch of the Mohawk Nation Office. His system was flexible, and he created new forms for their collections. The new systems Deer created were designed specifically for the materials in each collection according to the concerns of local Indigenous people at the time (for example, categories included land claims, treaty rights, resource management, and Elders' stories). Between 1978 and 1980, the system was adapted for use in British Columbia by Gene Joseph and Keltie McCall while they were working at the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs, becoming known as BDC-BC. Joseph later adapted it further for use in the Xwi7xwa Library at University of British Columbia, Vancouver. Though the Brian Deer Classification was not created as a universal classification solution for Indigenous resources, the system has provided a foundation for specialized libraries to create their own localized classification schemes. Variations of the Brian Deer Classification System are used in a small number of Canadian libraries. One prominent library using BDC is the X̱wi7x̱wa Library at the University of British Columbia, which uses a British Columbia-focused version of BDC along with First Nations House of Learning subject headings. The Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs Resource Centre issued a revised BDC-BC in 2014, with the goal of providing users with a more flexible and culturally appropriate approach to organizing their resources. The Aanischaaukamikw Cree Cultural Institute in Oujé-Bougoumou, Quebec, implemented a local adaptation of BDC when they opened in 2012. In 2020 the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council in Prince George, British Columbia, shifted from organizing its library with the Dewey Decimal Classification to using a version of the BDC. They added new subject heading categories for topics of local interest such as the crisis of Missing and murdered Indigenous women. Simon Fraser University Library began developing the Indigenous Curriculum Resource Centre (ICRC) in 2020, with the physical space opening in 2023. The ICRC is Call to Action 21 of SFU's Aboriginal Reconciliation Council's final report, Walk This Path With Us. Through its collection, the ICRC supports those interested in learning about how and why decolonizing pedagogy and teaching practices are important. The physical items in the collection are catalogued using a modified Brian Deer Classification system. In 2022 Kwantlen Polytechnic University’s χʷəχʷéy̓əm Indigenous Collection released a revised BDC-BC System. This BDC contains works exclusively with Indigenous authored materials and expands the cuttering systems of previous BDC, with the result that much of the collection reflects a spatial relationality. The implementation of this BDC was possible due to the tireless work at Xwi7xwa Library, Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs Resource Centre, and Simon Fraser University Library's Indigenous Curriculum Resource Centre. == Structure == The high-level organizational structure of BDC reflects a First Nations worldview, with an emphasis on relationships between and among people, animals, and the land. Subcategories demonstrate the relationships among First Nations by grouping them geographically as opposed to alphabetically; the latter is a practice frequently used for specific topics in the Library of Congress Classification. The top-level hierarchy of the X̱wi7x̱wa Library adaptation of BDC-BC demonstrates the emphasis on access to subjects prioritized by a First Nation collection: Reference Materials Local History History International Education Economic Development Housing and Community Development Criminal Justice System Constitution (Canada) and First Nations Self Government Rights and Title Natural Resources Community Resources Health World View Fine Arts Languages Literature The system is not designed to provide a comprehensive description of all topics of interest to North American Indigenous peoples; in addition, its use is limited in scope, being intended for small and specialized libraries. While English is used in the classification scheme as a common language among First Nations peoples and non-Indigenous library users, Indigenous spellings and terminology that local library users would expect to find are used to provide access. Short and easily remembered call numbers are used to facilitate use by both library workers and patrons, with the recognition that Indigenous libraries often have a small staff and limited resources to devote to cataloging. Beyond its simplicity, one potential drawback of the system is its shortage of clear guidelines for application, which provides flexibility but can also result in inconsistencies within and between library catalogs. Because few libraries use the BDC and there are limited examples for use as case studies, implementing the system and keeping it up-to-date can prove a challenge for libraries with limited resources. However, X̱wi7x̱wa Library head librarian Ann Doyle describes the system as "an important part of the body of Indigenous scholarship" that should be retained as a reflection of Indigenous worldviews, as well as for ease of access for Indigenous library users.

  Read more →
• 

  Upper ontology

  In information science, an upper ontology (also known as a top-level ontology, upper model, or foundation ontology) is an ontology (in the sense used in information science) that consists of very general terms (such as "object", "property", "relation") that are common across all domains. An important function of an upper ontology is to support broad semantic interoperability among a large number of domain-specific ontologies by providing a common starting point for the formulation of definitions. Terms in the domain ontology are ranked under the terms in the upper ontology, e.g., the upper ontology classes are superclasses or supersets of all the classes in the domain ontologies. A number of upper ontologies have been proposed, each with its own proponents. Library classification systems predate upper ontology systems. Though library classifications organize and categorize knowledge using general concepts that are the same across all knowledge domains, neither system is a replacement for the other. == Development == Any standard foundational ontology is likely to be contested among different groups, each with its own idea of "what exists". One factor exacerbating the failure to arrive at a common approach has been the lack of open-source applications that would permit the testing of different ontologies in the same computational environment. The differences have thus been debated largely on theoretical grounds, or are merely the result of personal preferences. Foundational ontologies can however be compared on the basis of adoption for the purposes of supporting interoperability across domain ontologies. No particular upper ontology has yet gained widespread acceptance as a de facto standard. Different organizations have attempted to define standards for specific domains. The 'Process Specification Language' (PSL) created by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is one example. Another important factor leading to the absence of wide adoption of any existing upper ontology is the complexity. Some upper ontologies—Cyc is often cited as an example in this regard—are very large, ranging up to thousands of elements (classes, relations), with complex interactions among them and with a complexity similar to that of a human natural language, and the learning process can be even longer than for a natural language because of the unfamiliar format and logical rules. The motivation to overcome this learning barrier is largely absent because of the paucity of publicly accessible examples of use. As a result, those building domain ontologies for local applications tend to create the simplest possible domain-specific ontology, not related to any upper ontology. Such domain ontologies may function adequately for the local purpose, but they are very time-consuming to relate accurately to other domain ontologies. To solve this problem, some genuinely top level ontologies have been developed, which are deliberately designed to have minimal overlap with any domain ontologies. Examples are Basic Formal Ontology and the DOLCE (see below). === Arguments for the infeasibility of an upper ontology === Historically, many attempts in many societies have been made to impose or define a single set of concepts as more primal, basic, foundational, authoritative, true or rational than all others. A common objection to such attempts points out that humans lack the sort of transcendent perspective — or God's eye view — that would be required to achieve this goal. Humans are bound by language or culture, and so lack the sort of objective perspective from which to observe the whole terrain of concepts and derive any one standard. Thomasson, under the headline "1.5 Skepticism about Category Systems", wrote: "category systems, at least as traditionally presented, seem to presuppose that there is a unique true answer to the question of what categories of entity there are – indeed the discovery of this answer is the goal of most such inquiries into ontological categories. [...] But actual category systems offered vary so much that even a short survey of past category systems like that above can undermine the belief that such a unique, true and complete system of categories may be found. Given such a diversity of answers to the question of what the ontological categories are, by what criteria could we possibly choose among them to determine which is uniquely correct?" Another objection is the problem of formulating definitions. Top level ontologies are designed to maximize support for interoperability across a large number of terms. Such ontologies must therefore consist of terms expressing very general concepts, but such concepts are so basic to our understanding that there is no way in which they can be defined, since the very process of definition implies that a less basic (and less well understood) concept is defined in terms of concepts that are more basic and so (ideally) more well understood. Very general concepts can often only be elucidated, for example by means of examples, or paraphrase. There is no self-evident way of dividing the world up into concepts, and certainly no non-controversial one There is no neutral ground that can serve as a means of translating between specialized (or "lower" or "application-specific") ontologies Human language itself is already an arbitrary approximation of just one among many possible conceptual maps. To draw any necessary correlation between English words and any number of intellectual concepts, that we might like to represent in our ontologies, is just asking for trouble. (WordNet, for instance, is successful and useful, precisely because it does not pretend to be a general-purpose upper ontology; rather, it is a tool for semantic / syntactic / linguistic disambiguation, which is richly embedded in the particulars and peculiarities of the English language.) Any hierarchical or topological representation of concepts must begin from some ontological, epistemological, linguistic, cultural, and ultimately pragmatic perspective. Such pragmatism does not allow for the exclusion of politics between persons or groups, indeed it requires they be considered as perhaps more basic primitives than any that are represented. Those who doubt the feasibility of general purpose ontologies are more inclined to ask "what specific purpose do we have in mind for this conceptual map of entities and what practical difference will this ontology make?" This pragmatic philosophical position surrenders all hope of devising the encoded ontology version of "The world is everything that is the case." (Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus). Finally, there are objections similar to those against artificial intelligence. Technically, the complex concept acquisition and the social / linguistic interactions of human beings suggest any axiomatic foundation of "most basic" concepts must be cognitive biological or otherwise difficult to characterize since we don't have axioms for such systems. Ethically, any general-purpose ontology could quickly become an actual tyranny by recruiting adherents into a political program designed to propagate it and its funding means, and possibly defend it by violence. Historically, inconsistent and irrational belief systems have proven capable of commanding obedience to the detriment or harm of persons both inside and outside a society that accepts them. How much more harmful would a consistent rational one be, were it to contain even one or two basic assumptions incompatible with human life? === Arguments for the feasibility of an upper ontology === Many of those who doubt the possibility of developing wide agreement on a common upper ontology fall into one of two traps: they assert that there is no possibility of universal agreement on any conceptual scheme; but they argue that a practical common ontology does not need to have universal agreement, it only needs a large enough user community (as is the case for human languages) to make it profitable for developers to use it as a means to general interoperability, and for third-party developer to develop utilities to make it easier to use; and they point out that developers of data schemes find different representations congenial for their local purposes; but they do not demonstrate that these different representations are in fact logically inconsistent. In fact, different representations of assertions about the real world (though not philosophical models), if they accurately reflect the world, must be logically consistent, even if they focus on different aspects of the same physical object or phenomenon. If any two assertions about the real world are logically inconsistent, one or both must be wrong, and that is a topic for experimental investigation, not for ontological representation. In practice, representations of the real world are created as and known to be approximations to the basic reality, and their use is circumscribed by the limits of e

  Read more →