AI Builder Pricing

AI Builder Pricing — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Canva

  Canva Pty Ltd. is an Australian multinational proprietary software company launched in 2013 based in Sydney, Australia. The platform provides a graphic design platform to create visual content for presentations, websites, and other digital products. Its uses include templates for presentations, posters, and social media content, as well as photo and video editing functionality. The platform uses a drag-and-drop interface designed for users without professional design training or experience. Canva operates on a freemium model and has added features such as print services and video editing tools over time. == History == === 2013–2020 === Canva was founded in Perth, Australia, by Melanie Perkins, Cliff Obrecht and Cameron Adams on 1 January 2013. One of the company's early investors was Susan Wu, an American entrepreneur. In its first year, Canva had more than 750,000 users. In 2017, the company reached profitability and had 294,000 paying customers. In January 2018, Perkins announced that the company had raised A$40 million from Sequoia Capital, Blackbird Ventures, and Felicis Ventures, and the company was valued at A$1 billion. It raised A$70 million in May 2019, followed by A$85 million in October 2019 and the launch of Canva for Enterprise. In December 2019, Canva announced Canva for Education, a free product for schools and other educational institutions intended to facilitate collaboration between students and teachers. === 2021–2025 === In June 2020, Canva announced a partnership with FedEx Office and with Office Depot the following month. As of June 2020, Canva's valuation had risen to A$6 billion, rising to A$40 billion by September 2021. In September 2021, Canva raised US$200 million, with its value peaking that year at US$40 billion. By September 2022, the valuation of the company had leveled at US$26 billion. While Canva's value declined from its 2021 peak by mid-2022, it remained one of Australia's most prominent technology companies, alongside Atlassian. In March 2022, Canva had over 75 million monthly active users. In 2023, the pair were named in the Australian Financial Review's AFR Rich List as among the 10 most wealthy people in Australia. On 7 December 2022, Canva launched Magic Write, which is the platform's AI-powered copywriting assistant. On 22 March 2023, Canva announced its new Assistant tool, which makes recommendations on graphics and styles that match the user's existing design. On 11 January 2024, Canva launched its own GPT in OpenAI's GPT Store. The company has announced it intends to compete with Google and Microsoft in the office software category with website and whiteboard products. In May 2024, the company announced the launch of Canva Enterprise, a plan designed for large organisations, alongside new tools including Work Kits, Courses and AI capabilities. In 2024, it announced a co-funded solar energy project to enhance its sustainability efforts. On 10 April 2025, Canva released Visual Suite 2. The new interface combines Canva's design and productivity tools. New features include a spreadsheets application (Canva Sheets), a generative AI coding assistant (Canva Code), a chatbot, and an updated photo editor that can modify or remove background objects. In August 2025, Canva launched a stock sale to employees, valuing the company at US$42 billion. == Acquisitions == In 2018, the company acquired presentations startup Zeetings for an undisclosed amount, as part of its expansion into the presentations space. In May 2019, the company announced the acquisitions of Pixabay and Pexels, two free stock photography sites based in Germany, which enabled Canva users to access their photos for designs. In February 2021, Canva acquired Austrian startup Kaleido.ai and the Czech-based Smartmockups. In 2022, Canva acquired Flourish, a London-based data visualization startup. In March 2024, Canva acquired UK-based Serif, the developers of the Affinity suite of graphic design software, for approximately $380 million. In August 2024, Canva acquired the AI image generation platform and startup, Leonardo AI, for an undisclosed amount. In June 2025, it was announced that Canva had acquired Australian AI marketing startup MagicBrief for an undisclosed amount. In February 2026, Canva acquired two startups: Cavalry, which specializes in animation software, and MangoAI, which focuses on improving advertising performance. In April 2026, Canva acquired Simtheory, an AI Workflow Tool, and Ortto, a marketing automation tool. == Philanthropy == Canva's co-founders, Melanie Perkins and Cliff Obrecht, have publicly stated their intention to donate a significant portion of their personal wealth to charity. In 2021, Canva started a partnership with GiveDirectly, a nonprofit organization operating in low income areas that makes unconditional cash transfers to families living in extreme poverty. Since then, the company has donated $50 million to support GiveDirectly's work across Malawi. In 2025, Canva announced an additional $100 million commitment to expand its GiveDirectly partnership. == Controversies == === Data breach === In May 2019, Canva experienced a data breach in which the data of roughly 139 million users was exposed. The exposed data included real names of users, usernames, email addresses, geographical information, and password hashes for some users. In January 2020, approximately 4 million user passwords were decrypted and shared online. Canva responded by resetting the passwords of every user who had not changed their password since the initial breach. === Russian operations === In May 2022 Canva was criticized for continuing to provide free access to its services in Russia, even after suspending payment processing in the country. Activists from the Ukrainian diaspora in Australia and others said this could be viewed as indirectly supporting Russia’s war effort. They noted the company was the only one of several major Australian firms to receive the lowest “digging in” rating on a tracker run by the Yale School of Management for failing to pull out of Russia. Canva responded that it had suspended financial transactions in Russia from March 2022 and maintained the free version to allow the continued creation and sharing of “pro-peace and anti-war” content for its 1.4 million Russian users.

  Read more →
• 

  Markov switching multifractal

  In financial econometrics (the application of statistical methods to economic data), the Markov-switching multifractal (MSM) is a model of asset returns developed by Laurent E. Calvet and Adlai J. Fisher that incorporates stochastic volatility components of heterogeneous durations. MSM captures the outliers, log-memory-like volatility persistence and power variation of financial returns. In currency and equity series, MSM compares favorably with standard volatility models such as GARCH(1,1) and FIGARCH both in- and out-of-sample. MSM is used by practitioners in the financial industry for different types of forecasts. == MSM specification == The MSM model can be specified in both discrete time and continuous time. === Discrete time === Let P t {\displaystyle P_{t}} denote the price of a financial asset, and let r t = ln ⁡ ( P t / P t − 1 ) {\displaystyle r_{t}=\ln(P_{t}/P_{t-1})} denote the return over two consecutive periods. In MSM, returns are specified as r t = μ + σ ¯ ( M 1 , t M 2 , t . . . M k ¯ , t ) 1 / 2 ϵ t , {\displaystyle r_{t}=\mu +{\bar {\sigma }}(M_{1,t}M_{2,t}...M_{{\bar {k}},t})^{1/2}\epsilon _{t},} where μ {\displaystyle \mu } and σ {\displaystyle \sigma } are constants and { ϵ t {\displaystyle \epsilon _{t}} } are independent standard Gaussians. Volatility is driven by the first-order latent Markov state vector: M t = ( M 1 , t M 2 , t … M k ¯ , t ) ∈ R + k ¯ . {\displaystyle M_{t}=(M_{1,t}M_{2,t}\dots M_{{\bar {k}},t})\in R_{+}^{\bar {k}}.} Given the volatility state M t {\displaystyle M_{t}} , the next-period multiplier M k , t + 1 {\displaystyle M_{k,t+1}} is drawn from a fixed distribution M with probability γ k {\displaystyle \gamma _{k}} , and is otherwise left unchanged. The transition probabilities are specified by γ k = 1 − ( 1 − γ 1 ) ( b k − 1 ) {\displaystyle \gamma _{k}=1-(1-\gamma _{1})^{(b^{k-1})}} . The sequence γ k {\displaystyle \gamma _{k}} is approximately geometric γ k ≈ γ 1 b k − 1 {\displaystyle \gamma _{k}\approx \gamma _{1}b^{k-1}} at low frequency. The marginal distribution M has a unit mean, has a positive support, and is independent of k. ==== Binomial MSM ==== In empirical applications, the distribution M is often a discrete distribution that can take the values m 0 {\displaystyle m_{0}} or 2 − m 0 {\displaystyle 2-m_{0}} with equal probability. The return process r t {\displaystyle r_{t}} is then specified by the parameters θ = ( m 0 , μ , σ ¯ , b , γ 1 ) {\displaystyle \theta =(m_{0},\mu ,{\bar {\sigma }},b,\gamma _{1})} . Note that the number of parameters is the same for all k ¯ > 1 {\displaystyle {\bar {k}}>1} . === Continuous time === MSM is similarly defined in continuous time. The price process follows the diffusion: d P t P t = μ d t + σ ( M t ) d W t , {\displaystyle {\frac {dP_{t}}{P_{t}}}=\mu dt+\sigma (M_{t})\,dW_{t},} where σ ( M t ) = σ ¯ ( M 1 , t … M k ¯ , t ) 1 / 2 {\displaystyle \sigma (M_{t})={\bar {\sigma }}(M_{1,t}\dots M_{{\bar {k}},t})^{1/2}} , W t {\displaystyle W_{t}} is a standard Brownian motion, and μ {\displaystyle \mu } and σ ¯ {\displaystyle {\bar {\sigma }}} are constants. Each component follows the dynamics: The intensities vary geometrically with k: γ k = γ 1 b k − 1 . {\displaystyle \gamma _{k}=\gamma _{1}b^{k-1}.} When the number of components k ¯ {\displaystyle {\bar {k}}} goes to infinity, continuous-time MSM converges to a multifractal diffusion, whose sample paths take a continuum of local Hölder exponents on any finite time interval. == Inference and closed-form likelihood == When M {\displaystyle M} has a discrete distribution, the Markov state vector M t {\displaystyle M_{t}} takes finitely many values m 1 , . . . , m d ∈ R + k ¯ {\displaystyle m^{1},...,m^{d}\in R_{+}^{\bar {k}}} . For instance, there are d = 2 k ¯ {\displaystyle d=2^{\bar {k}}} possible states in binomial MSM. The Markov dynamics are characterized by the transition matrix A = ( a i , j ) 1 ≤ i , j ≤ d {\displaystyle A=(a_{i,j})_{1\leq i,j\leq d}} with components a i , j = P ( M t + 1 = m j | M t = m i ) {\displaystyle a_{i,j}=P\left(M_{t+1}=m^{j}|M_{t}=m^{i}\right)} . Conditional on the volatility state, the return r t {\displaystyle r_{t}} has Gaussian density f ( r t | M t = m i ) = 1 2 π σ 2 ( m i ) exp ⁡ [ − ( r t − μ ) 2 2 σ 2 ( m i ) ] . {\displaystyle f(r_{t}|M_{t}=m^{i})={\frac {1}{\sqrt {2\pi \sigma ^{2}(m^{i})}}}\exp \left[-{\frac {(r_{t}-\mu )^{2}}{2\sigma ^{2}(m^{i})}}\right].} === Conditional distribution === === Closed-form Likelihood === The log likelihood function has the following analytical expression: ln ⁡ L ( r 1 , … , r T ; θ ) = ∑ t = 1 T ln ⁡ [ ω ( r t ) . ( Π t − 1 A ) ] . {\displaystyle \ln L(r_{1},\dots ,r_{T};\theta )=\sum _{t=1}^{T}\ln[\omega (r_{t}).(\Pi _{t-1}A)].} Maximum likelihood provides reasonably precise estimates in finite samples. === Other estimation methods === When M {\displaystyle M} has a continuous distribution, estimation can proceed by simulated method of moments, or simulated likelihood via a particle filter. == Forecasting == Given r 1 , … , r t {\displaystyle r_{1},\dots ,r_{t}} , the conditional distribution of the latent state vector at date t + n {\displaystyle t+n} is given by: Π ^ t , n = Π t A n . {\displaystyle {\hat {\Pi }}_{t,n}=\Pi _{t}A^{n}.\,} MSM often provides better volatility forecasts than some of the best traditional models both in and out of sample. Calvet and Fisher report considerable gains in exchange rate volatility forecasts at horizons of 10 to 50 days as compared with GARCH(1,1), Markov-Switching GARCH, and Fractionally Integrated GARCH. Lux obtains similar results using linear predictions. == Applications == === Multiple assets and value-at-risk === Extensions of MSM to multiple assets provide reliable estimates of the value-at-risk in a portfolio of securities. === Asset pricing === In financial economics, MSM has been used to analyze the pricing implications of multifrequency risk. The models have had some success in explaining the excess volatility of stock returns compared to fundamentals and the negative skewness of equity returns. They have also been used to generate multifractal jump-diffusions. == Related approaches == MSM is a stochastic volatility model with arbitrarily many frequencies. MSM builds on the convenience of regime-switching models, which were advanced in economics and finance by James D. Hamilton. MSM is closely related to the Multifractal Model of Asset Returns. MSM improves on the MMAR's combinatorial construction by randomizing arrival times, guaranteeing a strictly stationary process. MSM provides a pure regime-switching formulation of multifractal measures, which were pioneered by Benoit Mandelbrot.

  Read more →
• 

  Glottochronology

  Glottochronology (from Attic Greek γλῶττα 'tongue, language' and χρόνος 'time') is the part of lexicostatistics which involves comparative linguistics and deals with the chronological relationship between languages. The idea was developed by Morris Swadesh in the 1950s in his article on Salish internal relationships. He developed the idea under two assumptions: there indeed exists a relatively stable basic vocabulary (referred to as Swadesh lists) in all languages of the world; and, any replacements happen in a way analogous to radioactive decay in a constant percentage per time elapsed. Using mathematics and statistics, Swadesh developed an equation to determine when languages separated and give an approximate time of when the separation occurred. His methods aimed to aid linguistic anthropologists by giving them a definitive way to determine a separation date between two languages. The formula provides an approximate number of centuries since two languages were supposed to have separated from a singular common ancestor. His methods also purported to provide information on when ancient languages may have existed. Despite multiple studies and literature containing the information of glottochronology, it is not widely used today and is surrounded with controversy. Glottochronology tracks language separation from thousands of years ago but many linguists are skeptical of the concept because it is more of a 'probability' rather than a 'certainty.' On the other hand, some linguists may say that glottochronology is gaining traction because of its relatedness to archaeological dates. Glottochronology is not as accurate as archaeological data, but some linguists still believe that it can provide a solid estimate. Over time many different extensions of the Swadesh method evolved; however, Swadesh's original method is so well known that 'glottochronology' is usually associated with him. == Methodology == The original method of glottochronology presumed that the core vocabulary of a language is replaced at a constant (or constant average) rate across all languages and cultures and so can be used to measure the passage of time. The process makes use of a list of lexical terms and morphemes which are similar to multiple languages. Lists were compiled by Morris Swadesh and assumed to be resistant against borrowing (originally designed in 1952 as a list of 200 items, but the refined 100-word list in Swadesh (1955) is much more common among modern day linguists). The core vocabulary was designed to encompass concepts common to every human language such as personal pronouns, body parts, heavenly bodies and living beings, verbs of basic actions, numerals, basic adjectives, kin terms, and natural occurrences and events. Through a basic word list, one eliminates concepts that are specific to a particular culture or time period. It has been found through differentiating word lists that the ideal is really impossible and that the meaning set may need to be tailored to the languages being compared. Word lists are not homogenous throughout studies and they are often changed and designed to suit both languages being studied. Linguists find that it is difficult to find a word list where all words used are culturally unbiased. Many alternative word lists have been compiled by other linguists and often use fewer meaning slots. The percentage of cognates (words with a common origin) in the word lists is then measured. The larger the percentage of cognates, the more recently the two languages being compared are presumed to have separated. === Glottochronologic constant === Determining word lists rely on morpheme decay or change in vocabulary. Morpheme decay must stay at a constant rate for glottochronology to be applied to a language. This leads to a critique of the glottochronologic formula because some linguists argue that the morpheme decay rate is not guaranteed to stay the same throughout history. American Linguist Robert Lees obtained a value for the "glottochronological constant" (r) of words by considering the known changes in 13 pairs of languages using the 200 word list. He obtained a value of 0.8048 ± 0.0176 with 90% confidence. For his 100-word list Swadesh obtained a value of 0.86, the higher value reflecting the elimination of semantically unstable words. === Divergence time === The basic formula of glottochronology proposed by Morris Swadesh is: t = − ln ⁡ ( c ) 2 ln ⁡ ( r ) {\displaystyle t=-{\frac {\ln(c)}{2\ln(r)}}} t = a given period of time from one stage of the language to another (measured in millennia), c = proportion of wordlist items retained at the end of that period and r = rate of replacement for that word list. By testing historically verifiable cases in which t is known by nonlinguistic data (such as the approximate distance from Classical Latin to modern Romance languages), Swadesh arrived at the empirical value of approximately 0.14 for L, (c?) which means that the rate of replacement constitutes around 14 words from the 100-wordlist per millennium. This is represented in the table below. === Results === Glottochronology was applied to a range of language families, including Salishan, Indo-European, Japonic, Afro-Asiatic, Chinese and Mayan and other American languages. For Amerind, correlations have been obtained with radiocarbon dating and blood groups as well as archaeology. === Example Wordlist === Below is an example of a basic word list composed of basic Turkish words and their English translations. == Discussion == The concept of language change is old, and its history is reviewed in Hymes (1973) and Wells (1973). In some sense, glottochronology is a reconstruction of history and can often be closely related to archaeology. Many linguistic studies find the success of glottochronology to be found alongside archaeological data. Glottochronology itself dates back to the mid-20th century. An introduction to the subject is given in Embleton (1986) and in McMahon and McMahon (2005). Glottochronology has been controversial ever since, partly because of issues of accuracy but also because of the question of whether its basis is sound (for example, Bergsland 1958; Bergsland and Vogt 1962; Fodor 1961; Chrétien 1962; Guy 1980). The concerns have been addressed by Dobson et al. (1972), Dyen (1973) and Kruskal, Dyen and Black (1973). The assumption of a single-word replacement rate can distort the divergence-time estimate when borrowed words are included (Thomason and Kaufman 1988). The presentations vary from "Why linguists don't do dates" to the one by Starostin discussed below. Since its original inception, glottochronology has been rejected by many linguists, mostly Indo-Europeanists of the school of the traditional comparative method. Criticisms have been answered in particular around three points of discussion: Criticism levelled against the higher stability of lexemes in Swadesh lists alone (Haarmann 1990) misses the point because a certain amount of losses only enables the computations (Sankoff 1970). The non-homogeneity of word lists often leads to lack of understanding between linguists. Linguists also have difficulties finding a completely unbiased list of basic cultural words. it can take a long time for linguists to find a viable word list which can take several test lists to find a usable list. Traditional glottochronology presumes that language changes at a stable rate. Thus, in Bergsland & Vogt (1962), the authors make an impressive demonstration, on the basis of actual language data verifiable by extralinguistic sources, that the "rate of change" for Icelandic constituted around 4% per millennium, but for closely connected Riksmal (Literary Norwegian), it would amount to as much as 20% (Swadesh's proposed "constant rate" was supposed to be around 14% per millennium). That and several other similar examples effectively proved that Swadesh's formula would not work on all available material, which is a serious accusation since evidence that can be used to "calibrate" the meaning of L (language history recorded during prolonged periods of time) is not overwhelmingly large in the first place. It is highly likely that the chance of replacement is different for every word or feature ("each word has its own history", among hundreds of other sources:). That global assumption has been modified and downgraded to single words, even in single languages, in many newer attempts (see below). There is a lack of understanding of Swadesh's mathematical/statistical methods. Some linguists reject the methods in full because the statistics lead to 'probabilities' when linguists trust 'certainties' more. A serious argument is that language change arises from socio-historical events that are, of course, unforeseeable and, therefore, uncomputable. == Modifications == Somewhere in between the original concept of Swadesh and the rejection of glottochronology in its entirety lies the idea that glottochronology as a formal method of linguistic

  Read more →
• 

  Is an AI Humanizer Worth It in 2026?

  Shopping for the best AI humanizer? An AI humanizer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI humanizer 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 →
• 

  NCAA transfer portal

  The NCAA transfer portal is a National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) application, database, and compliance tool that facilitates student athletes' transfers between member institutions. It is intended to bring greater transparency to the transfer process and to enable student athletes to publicize their desire to transfer. The transfer portal is an NCAA-wide database covering all three NCAA divisions, although most media coverage of the transfer portal involves its use in the top-level Division I (D-I). The portal launched on October 15, 2018. Regulations adopted in 2021 allowed student-athletes in D-I football, men's and women's basketball, men's ice hockey, and baseball to transfer schools using the portal once without sitting out a year. In 2024, the NCAA authorized athletes unlimited transfers. == Process == For Divisions I and II, once an athlete desiring to transfer informs their school; the school must enter the athlete's name in the database within two business days. Then coaches and staff from other universities may contact the athlete about potentially transferring. Before the January 2026 NCAA convention, Division III schools were allowed, but not required, to enter such a student into the portal. A proposal to require use of the portal in that division was approved at the convention. The timeline for D-III members to enter athletes into the portal differs from that of the other divisions. Athletes wishing to enter the portal must first complete an educational module. Once completed, the school has seven calendar days to enter the athlete's transfer request into the portal. == Transfer windows == On August 31, 2022, the D-I board adopted a series of changes to transfer rules, introducing the concept of transfer windows, similar to those used in professional soccer worldwide. Student-athletes who wish to take advantage of the one-time transfer rule must, under normal circumstances, enter the portal within a designated window for their sport. These windows are slightly different for each NCAA sport, but are broadly grouped by the NCAA's three athletic "seasons". At that time, the windows were as follows: Fall sports – A 45-day winter window opening the day after championship selections are made in that sport, and a spring window from May 1–15. According to the NCAA, "reasonable accommodations" would be made for participants in football's FBS and FCS championship games (respectively the College Football Playoff National Championship and Division I Football Championship Game), both of which take place in early January. Participants in those games had a 14-day window opening on the day after the championship game, as well as the spring window. Winter sports – A 60-day window opening the day after championship selections are made in that sport. Spring sports – A winter window from December 1–15, and a 45-day spring window opening the day after championship selections are made in that sport. For sports included in the NCAA Emerging Sports for Women program, transfer windows are the same as those for fully recognized NCAA sports. As with fully recognized NCAA sports, transfer windows linked to championship events open on the day after selections are made for the generally recognized championship events in emerging sports. Student-athletes whose athletic aid is reduced, canceled, or not renewed by their school, as well as those affected by a university's elimination of a sports team, may enter the transfer portal at any time without penalty. A slightly different exception applies to those undergoing a head coaching change; student-athletes so affected in sports other than Division I football can enter the portal within 30 days of the change, starting on the day after the coach's departure is announced. The coaching change window also applied to Division I football before October 2025. Less than a month after transfer windows were adopted, the Division I Council adopted a change that affected only graduate transfers. Student-athletes who are set to graduate with remaining athletic eligibility, and plan to continue competition as postgraduate students, were exempt from transfer windows. They could enter the portal at any time during the academic year, and were not subject to the standard deadlines of May 1 for fall and winter sports and July 1 for spring sports. In April 2024, graduate transfers became subject to the same deadlines as all other transfer students. This change did not affect windows for student-athletes affected by a head coaching change, a loss of athletic aid, or the discontinuation of a team. Because the Ivy League allows neither redshirting nor athletic participation by graduate students, athletes at its member schools who are set to complete four years of attendance but still have remaining athletic eligibility may enter the portal at any time during their fourth academic year of attendance. In October 2024, the Division I Council reduced transfer windows in football and basketball to a total of 30 days. For FBS and FCS football, the fall window opened for 20 days, starting on the Monday after FBS conference championship games. Participants in postseason play had a 5-day window that opened on the day after each team's final game. A 10-day spring window opened in mid-April. In men's and women's basketball, a single 30-day window opens on the day after the second round of each Division I tournament concludes. The existing exceptions regarding head coaching changes, a loss of athletic aid, or the discontinuation of a team remained in place. Almost exactly a year later, Division I adopted more significant changes to the football transfer portal for both FBS and FCS. The previous two windows were abolished and replaced by a single window that opens from January 2–16. Participants in the College Football Playoff National Championship—the only game in FBS or FCS played after the closure of the new window—receive a 5-day window that opens on the day after that game. The window for players undergoing a head coaching change was also reduced. A new window of 15 days opens five calendar days after the hiring or public announcement of a new head coach. Should a school fail to hire or publicly announce a new head coach within 30 days after the previous coach's departure, the window will open on the 31st day after departure, provided that the 31st day is no earlier than January 3. This particular window, also open for 15 days, may open at any time before June 30. No change was announced to the exceptions for those affected by a loss of athletic aid or the discontinuation of a team. == Impact on high school recruiting == Effective July 1, 2025, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors implemented new DI roster limits following the court-approved House settlement. Additionally, according to the NCAA, "NCAA rules for Division I programs will no longer include sport-specific scholarship limits." As a result, many top Division I programs, especially those in power conferences, are relying heavily on the transfer portal to bring in conference- and national-level student-athletes. This shift in recruiting focus has already been exemplified across Division I men's and women's track and field especially, beginning in the recruitment cycle for 2025 college entries. Track and field coaches formerly managing rosters of 120-plus (60-plus men and 60-plus women) are now limited to 45 per side for a total of 90 roster spots across men's and women's track and field, meaning they are recruiting fewer student-athletes out of high school and more immediately impactful scholarship-worthy student-athletes via the transfer portal. Roster limits for track and field teams are even more stringent in the Southeastern Conference (SEC): 35 men and 35 women. For high school track and field athletes seeking opportunities with top DI programs, they no longer need to display potential to be point-scorers, but demonstrate the ability to contribute immediately, often by competing at a level aligned with conference scoring standards.

  Read more →
• 

  Top 10 AI Avatar Generators Compared (2026)

  In search of the best AI avatar generator? An AI avatar generator 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 avatar generator 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 →
• 

  Best AI Background Removers in 2026

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

  Read more →
• 

  DFA minimization

  In automata theory (a branch of theoretical computer science), DFA minimization is the task of transforming a given deterministic finite automaton (DFA) into an equivalent DFA that has a minimum number of states. Here, two DFAs are called equivalent if they recognize the same regular language. Several different algorithms accomplishing this task are known and described in standard textbooks on automata theory. == Minimal DFA == For each regular language, there also exists a minimal automaton that accepts it, that is, a DFA with a minimum number of states and this DFA is unique (except that states can be given different names). The minimal DFA ensures minimal computational cost for tasks such as pattern matching. There are three classes of states that can be removed or merged from the original DFA without affecting the language it accepts. Unreachable states are the states that are not reachable from the initial state of the DFA, for any input string. These states can be removed. Dead states are the states from which no final state is reachable. These states can be removed unless the automaton is required to be complete. Nondistinguishable states are those that cannot be distinguished from one another for any input string. These states can be merged. DFA minimization is usually done in three steps: remove dead and unreachable states (this will accelerate the following step), merge nondistinguishable states, optionally, re-create a single dead state ("sink" state) if the resulting DFA is required to be complete. == Unreachable states == The state p {\displaystyle p} of a deterministic finite automaton M = ( Q , Σ , δ , q 0 , F ) {\displaystyle M=(Q,\Sigma ,\delta ,q_{0},F)} is unreachable if no string w {\displaystyle w} in Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} exists for which p = δ ∗ ( q 0 , w ) {\displaystyle p=\delta ^{}(q_{0},w)} . In this definition, Q {\displaystyle Q} is the set of states, Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is the set of input symbols, δ {\displaystyle \delta } is the transition function (mapping a state and an input symbol to a set of states), δ ∗ {\displaystyle \delta ^{}} is its extension to strings (also known as extended transition function), q 0 {\displaystyle q_{0}} is the initial state, and F {\displaystyle F} is the set of accepting (also known as final) states. Reachable states can be obtained with the following algorithm: Assuming an efficient implementation of the state sets (e.g. new_states) and operations on them (such as adding a state or checking whether it is present), this algorithm can be implemented with time complexity O ( n + m ) {\displaystyle O(n+m)} , where n {\displaystyle n} is the number of states and m {\displaystyle m} is the number of transitions of the input automaton. Unreachable states can be removed from the DFA without affecting the language that it accepts. == Nondistinguishable states == The following algorithms present various approaches to merging nondistinguishable states. === Hopcroft's algorithm === One algorithm for merging the nondistinguishable states of a DFA, due to Hopcroft (1971), is based on partition refinement, partitioning the DFA states into groups by their behavior. These groups represent equivalence classes of the Nerode congruence, whereby every two states are equivalent if they have the same behavior for every input sequence. That is, for every two states p1 and p2 that belong to the same block of the partition P, and every input word w, the transitions determined by w should always take states p1 and p2 to either states that both accept or states that both reject. It should not be possible for w to take p1 to an accepting state and p2 to a rejecting state or vice versa. The following pseudocode describes the form of the algorithm as given by Xu. Alternative forms have also been presented. The algorithm starts with a partition that is too coarse: every pair of states that are equivalent according to the Nerode congruence belong to the same set in the partition, but pairs that are inequivalent might also belong to the same set. It gradually refines the partition into a larger number of smaller sets, at each step splitting sets of states into pairs of subsets that are necessarily inequivalent. The initial partition is a separation of the states into two subsets of states that clearly do not have the same behavior as each other: the accepting states and the rejecting states. The algorithm then repeatedly chooses a set A from the current partition and an input symbol c, and splits each of the sets of the partition into two (possibly empty) subsets: the subset of states that lead to A on input symbol c, and the subset of states that do not lead to A. Since A is already known to have different behavior than the other sets of the partition, the subsets that lead to A also have different behavior than the subsets that do not lead to A. When no more splits of this type can be found, the algorithm terminates. Lemma. Given a fixed character c and an equivalence class Y that splits into equivalence classes B and C, only one of B or C is necessary to refine the whole partition. Example: Suppose we have an equivalence class Y that splits into equivalence classes B and C. Suppose we also have classes D, E, and F; D and E have states with transitions into B on character c, while F has transitions into C on character c. By the Lemma, we can choose either B or C as the distinguisher, let's say B. Then the states of D and E are split by their transitions into B. But F, which doesn't point into B, simply doesn't split during the current iteration of the algorithm; it will be refined by other distinguisher(s). Observation. All of B or C is necessary to split referring classes like D, E, and F correctly—subsets won't do. The purpose of the outermost if statement (if Y is in W) is to patch up W, the set of distinguishers. We see in the previous statement in the algorithm that Y has just been split. If Y is in W, it has just become obsolete as a means to split classes in future iterations. So Y must be replaced by both splits because of the Observation above. If Y is not in W, however, only one of the two splits, not both, needs to be added to W because of the Lemma above. Choosing the smaller of the two splits guarantees that the new addition to W is no more than half the size of Y; this is the core of the Hopcroft algorithm: how it gets its speed, as explained in the next paragraph. The worst case running time of this algorithm is O(ns log n), where n is the number of states and s is the size of the alphabet. This bound follows from the fact that, for each of the ns transitions of the automaton, the sets drawn from Q that contain the target state of the transition have sizes that decrease relative to each other by a factor of two or more, so each transition participates in O(log n) of the splitting steps in the algorithm. The partition refinement data structure allows each splitting step to be performed in time proportional to the number of transitions that participate in it. This remains the most efficient algorithm known for solving the problem, and for certain distributions of inputs its average-case complexity is even better, O(n log log n). Once Hopcroft's algorithm has been used to group the states of the input DFA into equivalence classes, the minimum DFA can be constructed by forming one state for each equivalence class. If S is a set of states in P, s is a state in S, and c is an input character, then the transition in the minimum DFA from the state for S, on input c, goes to the set containing the state that the input automaton would go to from state s on input c. The initial state of the minimum DFA is the one containing the initial state of the input DFA, and the accepting states of the minimum DFA are the ones whose members are accepting states of the input DFA. === Moore's algorithm === Moore's algorithm for DFA minimization is due to Edward F. Moore (1956). Like Hopcroft's algorithm, it maintains a partition that starts off separating the accepting from the rejecting states, and repeatedly refines the partition until no more refinements can be made. At each step, it replaces the current partition with the coarsest common refinement of s + 1 partitions, one of which is the current one and the rest of which are the preimages of the current partition under the transition functions for each of the input symbols. The algorithm terminates when this replacement does not change the current partition. Its worst-case time complexity is O(n2s): each step of the algorithm may be performed in time O(ns) using a variant of radix sort to reorder the states so that states in the same set of the new partition are consecutive in the ordering, and there are at most n steps since each one but the last increases the number of sets in the partition. The instances of the DFA minimization problem that cause the worst-case behavior are the same as for Hopcroft's algorithm. The number of steps th

  Read more →
• 

  Pixel shift

  Pixel shift is a method in digital cameras for producing a super-resolution image. The method works by taking several images, after each such capture moving ("shifting") the sensor to a new position. In digital colour cameras that employ pixel shift, this avoids a major limitation inherent in using Bayer pattern for obtaining colour, and instead produces an image with increased colour resolution and, assuming a static subject or additional computational steps, an image free of colour moiré. Taking this idea further, sub-pixel shifting may increase the resolution of the final image beyond that suggested by the specified resolution of the image sensor. Additionally, assuming that the various individual captures are taken at the same sensitivity, the final combined image will have less image noise than a single capture. This can be thought of as an averaging effect (for instance, in a pixel shift image composed of four individual frames with a classic Bayer pattern, every pixel in the final colour image is based on two measurements of the green channel). == List of cameras implementing pixel shift == All of the following cameras are fabricated with one imaging sensor, thus any kind of pixel shift requires a movement of the whole sensor. === Canon === Canon R5: Contains a 45 Mpixel sensor. The High-Resolution Mode shifts the sensor by one pixel to obtain a sequence of nine images that are merged into a 400 Mpixel image. === Fujifilm === Fujifilm GFX50S II: contains a 51 Mpixel sensor. The Pixel Shift Multi-Shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of 16 images that are subsequently merged into a 200 Mpixel image. Fujifilm GFX100, Fujifilm GFX100 II: contains a 102 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 16 pixel shifted images are merged into a 400 Mpixel image. Fujifilm GFX100S, Fujifilm GFX100S II: contains a 102 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 16 pixel shifted images are merged into a 400 Mpixel image Fujifilm GFX100IR: contains a 102 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 16 pixel shifted images are merged into a 400 Mpixel image Fujifilm X-H2: contains a 40 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 20 shifted images are merged into a 160 Mpixel image. Fujifilm X-T5: contains a 40 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 20 shifted images are merged into a 160 Mpixel image. === Nikon === Nikon Z8: contains a 47.5 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of up to 32 images that can be merged in Nikon's NX studio software. Nikon Zf: contains a 24 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of up to 32 images that can be merged in Nikon's NX studio software. === Olympus === Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II: contains a 20.4 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode produces a 50 Mpixel image. Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II: contains a 16 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of 8 images that are subsequently merged into a 40 Mpixel image. Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III: contains a 20.4 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of 8 images that are subsequently merged into a 50 Mpixel image. Olympus OM-D E-M1X: contains a 20.4 Mpixel sensor. The camera sports two pixel shift mode: (a) the 80Mp Tripod mode produces an 80 Mpixel image, (b) the Handheld High Res shot mode produces a 50 Mpixel image. Olympus PEN-F: contains a 20.4 Mpixel sensor. The High Res Shot mode takes multiple images, continually shifting the position of the sensor in sub-pixel increments. Combining these images results in either a 50MP JPEG or an 80MP Raw file. ==== OM System ==== OM System OM-1: contains a 20MPix sensor. The High Res Shot mode takes multiple images, and it can be used handheld or on a tripod. Handheld it will internally produce 50 Mpix files and 80 Mpix when mounted on a tripod. OM System OM-5: contains a 20MPix sensor. The High Res Shot mode takes multiple images, and it can be used handheld or on a tripod. Handheld it will internally produce 50 Mpix files and 80 Mpix when mounted on a tripod. === Panasonic === Panasonic Lumix DC-G9: contains a 20.3 Mpixel sensor. The High Resolution Mode takes a sequence of 8 shots in quick succession between which the sensor is shifted by 0.5 pixel for each image. These are subsequently merged into an 80 Mpixel image. Panasonic Lumix DC-S1: contains a 24.2 Mpixel sensor. The High Resolution Mode takes a sequence of shots in quick succession between which the sensor is shifted by a small amount. These are subsequently merged into a 96 Mpixel image. Panasonic Lumix DC-S1R: contains a 47.3 Mpixel sensor. The High Resolution Mode shifts the imaging sensor by a small increments to obtain a sequence of 8 images that are subsequently merged into a 187 Mpixel image. Panasonic Lumix DC-S1H Panasonic Lumix DC-S5 === Pentax === Pentax K-70: contains a 24.3 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'all color data in each pixel to deliver super-high-resolution images'. Pentax KP: contains a 24.3 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'high-resolution images with more accurate colours and much finer details'. Pentax K-3 II: contains a 24.3 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'super-high-resolution images with far more truthful color reproduction and much finer details'. Pentax K-3 III: contains a 25.7 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'a cancelling out of the Bayer pattern and removal of the need for sharpness-sapping demosaicing'. Pentax K-1: contains a 36.4 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'improved detail and colour resolution'. Pentax K-1 II: contains a 36.4 Mpixel sensor. The camera sports two pixel shift mode: (a) a series of 4 tripod-stabilised images shifted by 1 pixel each are subsequently combined into a 47.3 Mpixel image, (b) a series of images taken in handheld mode are combined into a 47.3 Mpixel image that is, within limits, able to cope even with moving subjects. === Sony === Sony a6600: contains a 24.3 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'all color data in each pixel to deliver super-high-resolution images'. Sony α7R III: contains a 42.4 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 42.4 Mpixel image with improved tonal resolution. Sony α7R IV: contains a 61 Mpixel sensor. The camera has two pixel shift modes, (a) the first takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 61 Mpixel image with improved tonal resolution, (b) the other takes a sequence of 16 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 0.5 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 240 Mpixel image with both enhanced detail and improved tonal resolution. Sony α1: contains a 50 Mpixel sensor. The camera has two pixel shift modes, (a) the first takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 50 Mpixel image with improved tonal resolution, (b) the other takes a sequence of 16 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 0.5 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 200 Mpixel image with both enhanced detail and improved tonal resolution. === Hasselblad === Hasselblad H3DII: the model H3DII-39 sports a 39 Mpixel sensor, the model H3DII-50 a 50 Mpixel sensor. Both enable a pixel shift mode which takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a single image. Hasselblad H4D series: the model H4D-200MS contains a 50 Mpixel sensor. The sensor sports 3 different pixel shift modes which take (a) a sequence of 6 shots taken at slight offsets, (b) a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel, (c) a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 0.5 pixels. Images obtained by all three modes are subsequently merged into 200 Mpixel images. Hasselblad H5D series: both models H5D-50c MS and H5D-200c MS contain a 50 Mpixel sensor. This sensor sports 2 different pixel shift modes which take (a) a sequence of 6 shots with full and half pixel moveme

  Read more →
• 

  The Best Free AI Art Generator for Beginners

  Trying to pick the best AI art generator? An AI art 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 art generator 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 →
• 

  Evaluation of machine translation

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

  Read more →
• 

  Bruno Zamborlin

  Bruno Zamborlin (born 1983 in Vicenza) is an AI researcher, entrepreneur and artist based in London, working in the field of human-computer interaction. His work focuses on converting physical objects into touch-sensitive, interactive surfaces using vibration sensors and artificial intelligence. In 2013, he founded Mogees Limited a start-up to transform everyday objects into musical instruments and games using a vibration sensor and a mobile phone. With HyperSurfaces, he converts physical surfaces of any material, shape and form into data-enabled-interactive surfaces using a vibration sensor and a coin-sized chipset. As an artist, he has created art installations around the world, with his most recent work comprising a unique series of "sound furnitures" that was showcased at the Italian Pavilion of the Venice Biennale 2023. He regularly performed with UK-based electronic music duo Plaid (Warp Records). He is also honorary visiting research fellow at Goldsmiths, University of London. == Early life and education == From 2008-2011, Zamborlin worked at the IRCAM (Institute for Research and Coordination Acoustic Musical) – Centre Pompidou as a member of the Sound Music Movement Interaction team. Under the supervision of Frederic Bevilacqua, he started experimenting with the use of artificial intelligence and human movements, and contributed to the creation of Gesture Follower, a software used to analyse body movements of performers and dancers through motion sensors in order to control sound and visual media in real-time, slowing down or speeding up their reproduction based on the speed the gestures are performed. He has lived in London since 2011, where he developed a joint PhD between Goldsmiths, University of London and IRCAM - Centre Pompidou/Pierre and Marie Curie University Paris in AI, focussing on the concept of Interactive Machine Learning applied to digital musical instruments and performing arts. == Career == Zamborlin founded Mogees Limited in 2013 in London, with IRCAM being amongst the early partners. Mogees transform physical objects into musical instruments and games using a vibration sensor and a series of apps for smartphones and desktop. After a campaign on Kickstarter in 2014, Mogees was used both by common users and artists such as Rodrigo y Gabriela, Jean-Michel Jarre and Plaid. The algorithms implemented in these apps employ a special version of physical modelling sound synthesis, where the vibration produced by users when interacting with the physical object are used as exciter for a digital resonator which runs in the app. The result is a hybrid, half acoustic and half digital sound which is a function of both software and acoustic properties of the physical object the users decide to play. In 2017, Zamborlin founded HyperSurfaces together with computational artist Parag K Mital. to merge "the physical and the digital worlds". HyperSurfaces technology converts any surface made of any material, shape and size into data-enabled interactive objects, employing a vibration sensor and proprietary AI algorithms running on a coin-sized chipset. The vibrations generated by people's interactions on the surface are converted into an electric signal by a piezoelectric sensor and analysed in realtime by AI algorithms that run on the chipset. Anytime the AI recognises in the vibration signal one of the events that have been predefined by the user beforehand, a corresponding notification message is generated in realtime and sent to some application. The technology can be applied to anything ranging from button-less human-computer interaction applications for automotive and smart home to the Internet of things. Because the AI algorithms employed by HyperSurfaces run locally on a chipset, without the need to access cloud-based services, they are considered to be part of the field of edge computing. Also, because the AI can be trained beforehand to recognise the events its users are interested in, HyperSurfaces algorithms belong to the field of supervised machine learning. == Selected awards == IRISA Prix Jeune Chercheur, 13 October 2012 NeMoDe, New Economic Models in the Digital Economy, 25 October 2012 == Patents and academic publications == United States pending US10817798B2, Bruno Zamborlin & Carmine Emanuele Cella, "Method to recognize a gesture and corresponding device", published 27 April 2016, assigned to Mogees Limited GB Pending WO/2019/086862, Bruno Zamborlin; Conor Barry & Alessandro Saccoia et al., "A user interface for vehicles", published 9 May 2019, assigned to Mogees Limited GB Pending WO/2019/086863, Bruno Zamborlin; Conor Barry & Alessandro Saccoia et al., "Trigger for game events", published 9 May 2019, assigned to Mogees Limited Bevilacqua, Frédéric; Zamborlin, Bruno; Sypniewski, Anthony; Schnell, Norbert; Guédy, Fabrice; Rasamimanana, Nicolas (2010). "Continuous Realtime Gesture Following and Recognition". Gesture in Embodied Communication and Human-Computer Interaction. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 5934. pp. 73–84. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-12553-9_7. ISBN 978-3-642-12552-2. S2CID 16251822. Retrieved 17 January 2021. Rasamimanana, Nicolas; Bevilacqua, Frédéric; Schnell, Norbert; Guédy, Fabrice; Flety, Emmanuel; Maestracci, Come; Zamborlin, Bruno (January 2010). "Modular musical objects towards embodied control of digital music". Proceedings of the fifth international conference on Tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction. Tei '11. pp. 9–12. doi:10.1145/1935701.1935704. ISBN 9781450304788. S2CID 10782645. Retrieved 17 January 2021. Bevilacqua, Frédéric; Schnell, Norbert; Rasamimanana, Nicolas; Zamborlin, Bruno; Guedy, Fabrice (2011). "Online Gesture Analysis and Control of Audio Processing". Musical Robots and Interactive Multimodal Systems. Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics. Vol. 74. pp. 127–142. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-22291-7_8. ISBN 978-3-642-22290-0. Retrieved 17 January 2021. Zamborlin, Bruno; Bevilacqua, Frédéric; Gillies, Marco; D'Inverno, Mark (15 January 2014). "Fluid gesture interaction design: Applications of continuous recognition for the design of modern gestural interfaces". ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems. 3 (4): 22:1–22:30. doi:10.1145/2543921. S2CID 7887245. Retrieved 17 January 2021. Leslie, Grace; Zamborlin, Bruno; Schnell, Norbert; Jodlowski, Pierre (15 June 2010). "A Collaborative, Interactive Sound Installation". Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference. Retrieved 17 January 2021. Kimura, Mari; Rasamimanana, Nicolas; Bevilacqua, Frédéric; Zamborlin, Bruno; Schnell, Bruno; Flety, Emmanuel (2012). "Extracting Human Expression For Interactive Composition with the Augmented Violin". International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression. Retrieved 17 January 2021. Ferretti, Stefano; Roccetti, Marco; Zamborlin, Bruno (13 January 2009). "On SPAWC: Discussion on a Musical Signal Parser and Well-Formed Composer". 2009 6th IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference. pp. 1–5. doi:10.1109/CCNC.2009.4784966. ISBN 978-1-4244-2308-8. S2CID 14213587. Zamborlin, Bruno; Partesana, Giorgio; Liuni, Marco (15 May 2011). "(LAND)MOVES". Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression, NIME: 537–538. Retrieved 17 January 2021.

  Read more →
• 

  Kernel density estimation

  In statistics, kernel density estimation (KDE) is the application of kernel smoothing for probability density estimation, i.e., a non-parametric method to estimate the probability density function of a random variable based on kernels as weights. KDE answers a fundamental data smoothing problem where inferences about the population are made based on a finite data sample. In some fields such as signal processing and econometrics it is also termed the Parzen–Rosenblatt window method, after Emanuel Parzen and Murray Rosenblatt, who are usually credited with independently creating it in its current form. One of the famous applications of kernel density estimation is in estimating the class-conditional marginal densities of data when using a naive Bayes classifier, which can improve its prediction accuracy. == Definition == Let x = ( x 1 , x 2 , x 3 , . . . ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} =\left(x_{1},x_{2},x_{3},...\right)} be independent and identically distributed samples drawn from some univariate distribution with an unknown density f at any given point x. We are interested in estimating the shape of this function f. Its kernel density estimator is f ^ h ( x ) = 1 n ∑ i = 1 n K h ( x − x i ) = 1 n h ∑ i = 1 n K ( x − x i h ) , {\displaystyle {\hat {f}}_{h}(x)={\frac {1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}K_{h}(x-x_{i})={\frac {1}{nh}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}K{\left({\frac {x-x_{i}}{h}}\right)},} where K is the kernel — a non-negative function — and h > 0 is a smoothing parameter called the bandwidth or simply width. A kernel with subscript h is called the scaled kernel and defined as Kh(x) = ⁠1/h⁠ K(⁠x/h⁠). Intuitively one wants to choose h as small as the data will allow; however, there is always a trade-off between the bias of the estimator and its variance. The choice of bandwidth is discussed in more detail below. A range of kernel functions are commonly used: uniform, triangular, biweight, triweight, Epanechnikov (parabolic), normal, and others. The Epanechnikov kernel is optimal in a mean square error sense, though the loss of efficiency is small for the kernels listed previously. Due to its convenient mathematical properties, the normal kernel is often used, which means K(x) = ϕ(x), where ϕ is the standard normal density function. The kernel density estimator then becomes f ^ h ( x ) = 1 n ∑ i = 1 n 1 h 2 π exp ⁡ ( − ( x − x i ) 2 2 h 2 ) , {\displaystyle {\hat {f}}_{h}(x)={\frac {1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}{\frac {1}{h{\sqrt {2\pi }}}}\exp \left({\frac {-(x-x_{i})^{2}}{2h^{2}}}\right),} where h {\displaystyle h} is the standard deviation of the sample x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } . The construction of a kernel density estimate finds interpretations in fields outside of density estimation. For example, in thermodynamics, this is equivalent to the amount of heat generated when heat kernels (the fundamental solution to the heat equation) are placed at each data point locations xi. Similar methods are used to construct discrete Laplace operators on point clouds for manifold learning (e.g. diffusion map). == Example == Kernel density estimates are closely related to histograms, but can be endowed with properties such as smoothness or continuity by using a suitable kernel. The diagram below based on these 6 data points illustrates this relationship: For the histogram, first, the horizontal axis is divided into sub-intervals or bins which cover the range of the data: In this case, six bins each of width 2. Whenever a data point falls inside this interval, a box of height 1/12 is placed there. If more than one data point falls inside the same bin, the boxes are stacked on top of each other. For the kernel density estimate, normal kernels with a standard deviation of 1.5 (indicated by the red dashed lines) are placed on each of the data points xi. The kernels are summed to make the kernel density estimate (solid blue curve). The smoothness of the kernel density estimate (compared to the discreteness of the histogram) illustrates how kernel density estimates converge faster to the true underlying density for continuous random variables. == Bandwidth selection == The bandwidth of the kernel is a free parameter which exhibits a strong influence on the resulting estimate. To illustrate its effect, we take a simulated random sample from the standard normal distribution (plotted at the blue spikes in the rug plot on the horizontal axis). The grey curve is the true density (a normal density with mean 0 and variance 1). In comparison, the red curve is undersmoothed since it contains too many spurious data artifacts arising from using a bandwidth h = 0.05, which is too small. The green curve is oversmoothed since using the bandwidth h = 2 obscures much of the underlying structure. The black curve with a bandwidth of h = 0.337 is considered to be optimally smoothed since its density estimate is close to the true density. An extreme situation is encountered in the limit h → 0 {\displaystyle h\to 0} (no smoothing), where the estimate is a sum of n delta functions centered at the coordinates of analyzed samples. In the other extreme limit h → ∞ {\displaystyle h\to \infty } the estimate retains the shape of the used kernel, centered on the mean of the samples (completely smooth). The most common optimality criterion used to select this parameter is the expected L2 risk function, also termed the mean integrated squared error: MISE ⁡ ( h ) = E [ ∫ ( f ^ h ( x ) − f ( x ) ) 2 d x ] {\displaystyle \operatorname {MISE} (h)=\operatorname {E} \!\left[\int \!{\left({\hat {f}}\!_{h}(x)-f(x)\right)}^{2}dx\right]} Under weak assumptions on f and K, (f is the, generally unknown, real density function), MISE ⁡ ( h ) = AMISE ⁡ ( h ) + o ( ( n h ) − 1 + h 4 ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {MISE} (h)=\operatorname {AMISE} (h)+{\mathcal {o}}{\left((nh)^{-1}+h^{4}\right)}} where o is the little o notation, and n the sample size (as above). The AMISE is the asymptotic MISE, i. e. the two leading terms, AMISE ⁡ ( h ) = R ( K ) n h + 1 4 m 2 ( K ) 2 h 4 R ( f ″ ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {AMISE} (h)={\frac {R(K)}{nh}}+{\frac {1}{4}}m_{2}(K)^{2}h^{4}R(f'')} where R ( g ) = ∫ g ( x ) 2 d x {\textstyle R(g)=\int g(x)^{2}\,dx} for a function g, m 2 ( K ) = ∫ x 2 K ( x ) d x {\textstyle m_{2}(K)=\int x^{2}K(x)\,dx} and f ″ {\displaystyle f''} is the second derivative of f {\displaystyle f} and K {\displaystyle K} is the kernel. The minimum of this AMISE is the solution to this differential equation ∂ ∂ h AMISE ⁡ ( h ) = − R ( K ) n h 2 + m 2 ( K ) 2 h 3 R ( f ″ ) = 0 {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial }{\partial h}}\operatorname {AMISE} (h)=-{\frac {R(K)}{nh^{2}}}+m_{2}(K)^{2}h^{3}R(f'')=0} or h AMISE = R ( K ) 1 / 5 m 2 ( K ) 2 / 5 R ( f ″ ) 1 / 5 n − 1 / 5 = C n − 1 / 5 {\displaystyle h_{\operatorname {AMISE} }={\frac {R(K)^{1/5}}{m_{2}(K)^{2/5}R(f'')^{1/5}}}n^{-1/5}=Cn^{-1/5}} Neither the AMISE nor the hAMISE formulas can be used directly since they involve the unknown density function f {\displaystyle f} or its second derivative f ″ {\displaystyle f''} . To overcome that difficulty, a variety of automatic, data-based methods have been developed to select the bandwidth. Several review studies have been undertaken to compare their efficacies, with the general consensus that the plug-in selectors and cross validation selectors are the most useful over a wide range of data sets. Substituting any bandwidth h which has the same asymptotic order n−1/5 as hAMISE into the AMISE gives that AMISE(h) = O(n−4/5), where O is the big O notation. It can be shown that, under weak assumptions, there cannot exist a non-parametric estimator that converges at a faster rate than the kernel estimator. Note that the n−4/5 rate is slower than the typical n−1 convergence rate of parametric methods. If the bandwidth is not held fixed, but is varied depending upon the location of either the estimate (balloon estimator) or the samples (pointwise estimator), this produces a particularly powerful method termed adaptive or variable bandwidth kernel density estimation. Bandwidth selection for kernel density estimation of heavy-tailed distributions is relatively difficult. === A rule-of-thumb bandwidth estimator === If Gaussian basis functions are used to approximate univariate data, and the underlying density being estimated is Gaussian, the optimal choice for h (that is, the bandwidth that minimises the mean integrated squared error) is: h = ( 4 σ ^ 5 3 n ) 1 / 5 ≈ 1.06 σ ^ n − 1 / 5 , {\displaystyle h={\left({\frac {4{\hat {\sigma }}^{5}}{3n}}\right)}^{1/5}\approx 1.06\,{\hat {\sigma }}\,n^{-1/5},} An h {\displaystyle h} value is considered more robust when it improves the fit for long-tailed and skewed distributions or for bimodal mixture distributions. This is often done empirically by replacing the standard deviation σ ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {\sigma }}} by the parameter A {\displaystyle A} below: A = min ( σ ^ , I Q R 1.34 ) {\displaystyle A=\min \left({\hat {\sigma }},{\frac {\mathrm {IQR} }{1.34}}\right)} where IQR is the

  Read more →
• 

  The Best Free AI Virtual Assistant for Beginners

  Comparing the best AI virtual assistant? An AI virtual assistant 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 virtual assistant 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 →
• 

  Jiaya Jia

  Jiaya Jia (Chinese: 贾佳亚) is a Chair Professor of the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST). He is an IEEE Fellow, the associate editor-in-chief of one of IEEE’s flagship and premier journals- Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (TPAMI), as well as on the editorial board of International Journal of Computer Vision (IJCV). == Early life and education == Jiaya Jia joined CUHK in 2004 as an assistant professor, and was promoted to full professor in 2015. He obtained his PhD degree in computer science jointly from Hong Kong University of Science and Technology and Microsoft Research in 2004. From March 2003 to August 2004, he was a visiting scholar at Microsoft. He conducted collaborative research at Adobe Research in 2007. == Career == Jiaya Jia is a distinguished scientist in the fields of computer vision and artificial intelligence. His research team at HKUST, DV Lab, is one of the largest vision AI research teams in the world and has been making significant contribution to advanced development of computer vision algorithms and technologies with focuses on image/video understanding, detection and segmentation, multi-modal AI, computational imaging, practical optimization, and advanced learning for visual content since 2000. Jiaya Jia has published 200+ top papers and was cited 80,000+ times on Google Scholar with H-Index 110+. 40+ PhDs and fellows from this group are now active in academia and industry, and have become prominent AI tech leaders as professors, directors in major research labs, and founders of several successful startups. Jiaya Jia assumes the position of associate editor-in-chief of IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (TPAMI) since 2021. He is also on the editorial board of International Journal of Computer Vision (IJCV). Jiaya Jia has served as the area chair of ICCV, CVPR, AAAI, ECCV, and several other premium international AI conferences for years. He was on program committees of major conferences in graphics and computational imaging, including ICCP, SIGGRAPH, and SIGGRAPH Asia. == Research == The research areas of Jiaya Jia are computer vision, large X models, and deep learning. Jiaya Jia has made outstanding contributions to computer vision technology, algorithms and engineering, and is among the world's leading experts in the field. His research partners include numerous renowned multinational technology companies, such as Microsoft, Qualcomm, Adobe, Intel, NVIDIA, Amazon, and Lenovo. Jia has cultivated a number of outstanding talents with Master's and PhDs who continue to engage in scientific research and development in computer vision. Many technologies in image analysis and processing developed by Jiaya Jia are still leading in the field worldwide. Wherein, his achievements in image deblurring, filtering, image sparse processing, multi-band image signal fusion and enhancement, large range motion estimation, texture and structure-based layering, etc. have been published in the industry's most influential conferences and publications, and implemented in the real-world applications. These achievements have demonstrated outstanding performance in established systems, and most of which are open source so as to enable wider applications across industries such as aviation, medical imaging, safety management, robotic design, meteorological analysis and many more. == Selected publications == In his over 20 years of research experience, Jiaya Jia has published 200+ top papers that have been cited more than 80,000 times. According to HKUST Website in August 2024, Jiaya Jia has accumulatively published over 200 scientific papers in books, journals and conferences, such as IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (TPAMI), International Journal of Computer Vision (IJCV) "Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)", and "International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)". Representative papers include: Jiaya Jia: Mathematical Models and Practical Solvers for Uniform Motion Deblurring (in Motion Deblurring: Algorithms and Systems), Cambridge University Press, ISBN 9781107044364, 2014; Jiaya Jia: “Matte Extraction” Book: Computer Vision - A Reference Guide, Springer, ISBN 9780387307718 Editor-in-chief: Ikeuchi, Katsushi; Jiaya Jia, Chi-Keung Tang：Image Stitching Using Structure Deformation，IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (TPAMI), Vol. 30, No. 4, 2008; Jiaya Jia, Jian Sun, Chi-Keung Tang, Heung-Yeung Shum：Drag-and-Drop Pasting，ACM Transactions on Graphics (also in SIGGRAPH 2006), Vol. 25, No. 3, 2006. Xiaojuan Qi, Zheng zhe Liu, Renjie Liao, Philip HS Torr, Raquel Urtasun, Jiaya Jia：GeoNet++: Iterative Geometric Neural Network with Edge-Aware Refinement for Joint Depth and Surface Normal Estimation，IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (TPAMI). Accepted. == Selected honors and awards == ACM Fellow. 1st Place of WAD Drivable Area Segmentation Challenge 2018; 1st Place of LSUN'17 Instance and Semantic Segmentation Challenges; 1st Place of COCO Instance Segmentation Challenge 2017; 2nd Place in COCO Detection Challenge 2017; 1st Place of ImageNet Scene Parsing Challenge 2016 with the paper PSPNet presented in CVPR 2017.

  Read more →