AI Chatbots and Assistants

Explore the best AI Chatbots and Assistants — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step how-to guides, curated by Aizhi.

• 

  Comparison of machine learning software

  The following tables are a comparison of machine learning software such as software frameworks, libraries, and computer programs used for machine learning. == Machine learning software == == Other comparisons == == Machine learning helper libraries and platforms == Apache OpenNLP — natural language processing toolkit CUDA — GPU computing platform used to accelerate machine learning and deep learning workloads Horovod — distributed training framework for deep learning Hugging Face Transformers — library of pretrained transformer models built on other machine learning frameworks Kubeflow — machine learning platform for Kubernetes Mallet — toolkit for natural language processing and text analysis NumPy — numerical computing library used in machine learning OpenCV — computer vision library with machine learning functions ONNX — open format for representing machine learning models pandas — data analysis and data preparation library used in machine learning PlaidML — tensor compiler and backend for machine learning frameworks Polars — Dataframe library used for machine learning data preparation and analysis PyArrow — columnar data library used in machine learning data processing ROOT (TMVA) — data analysis framework with machine learning tools SciPy — scientific computing and optimization library used in machine learning == Online development environments for machine learning == Google Colab — hosted Jupyter Notebook environment commonly used for machine learning and deep learning JupyterLab — notebook-based development environment for machine learning and data science Jupyter Notebook — interactive notebook environment used for machine learning and data science Kaggle — online data science and machine learning platform

  Read more →
• 

  Spatial computing

  Spatial computing refers to 3D human–computer interaction techniques that are perceived by users as taking place in the real world, in and around their bodies and physical environments, instead of constrained to and perceptually behind computer screens or in purely virtual worlds. This concept inverts the long-standing practice of teaching people to interact with computers in digital environments, and instead teaches computers to better understand and interact with people more naturally in the human world. This concept overlaps with and encompasses others including extended reality, augmented reality, mixed reality, natural user interface, contextual computing, affective computing, and ubiquitous computing. The usage for labeling and discussing these adjacent technologies is imprecise. Spatial computing devices include sensors—such as RGB cameras, depth cameras, 3D trackers, inertial measurement units, or other tools—to sense and track nearby human bodies (including hands, arms, eyes, legs, mouths) during ordinary interactions with people and computers in a 3D space. They further use computer vision to attempt to understand real world scenes, such as rooms, streets or stores, to read labels, to recognize objects, create 3D maps, and more. Quite often they also use extended reality and mixed reality to superimpose virtual 3D graphics and virtual 3D audio onto the human visual and auditory system as a way of providing information more naturally and contextually than traditional 2D screens. Spatial computing often refers to personal computing devices like headsets and headphones, but other human-computer interactions that leverage real-time spatial positioning for displays, like projection mapping or cave automatic virtual environment displays, can also be considered spatial computing if they leverage human-computer input for the participants. == History == The term "spatial computing" apparently originated in the field of GIS around 1985 or earlier to describe computations on large-scale geospatial information. Early examples of spatial computing in GIS include ArcInfo and its iterations, initially released in 1981, a part of ArcGIS along with ArcEditor, which together provide mapping, analysis, editing, and geoprocessing for geodatabases. This is somewhat related to the modern use, but on the scale of continents, cities, and neighborhoods. Modern spatial computing is more centered on the human scale of interaction, around the size of a living room or smaller. But it is not limited to that scale in the aggregate. In the early 1990s, as field of virtual reality was beginning to be commercialized beyond academic and military labs, a startup called Worldesign in Seattle used the term Spatial Computing to describe the interaction between individual people and 3D spaces, operating more at the human end of the scale than previous GIS examples may have contemplated. The company built a CAVE-like environment it called the Virtual Environment Theater, whose 3D experience was of a virtual flyover of the Giza Plateau, circa 3000 BC. Robert Jacobson, CEO of Worldesign, attributes the origins of the term to experiments at the Human Interface Technology Lab, at the University of Washington, under the direction of Thomas A. Furness III. Jacobson was a co-founder of that lab before spinning off this early VR startup. In 1997, an academic publication by T. Caelli, Peng Lam, and H. Bunke called "Spatial Computing: Issues in Vision, Multimedia and Visualization Technologies" introduced the term more broadly for academic audiences, focusing on a variety of topics such as image processing, dead reckoning navigation, object recognition, and visualizing spatial data. The specific term "spatial computing" was later referenced again in 2003 by Simon Greenwold, as "human interaction with a machine in which the machine retains and manipulates referents to real objects and spaces". MIT Media Lab alumnus John Underkoffler gave a TED talk in 2010 giving a live demo of the multi-screen, multi-user spatial computing systems being developed by Oblong Industries, which sought to bring to life the futuristic interfaces conceptualized by Underkoffler in the films Minority Report and Iron Man. Google Earth, initially released by Keyhole Inc. in 2001 and re-released by Google in 2005 can be considered a capable GIS and includes advanced geospatial tools and capabilities. == Notable instances of the use of spatial computing == In 2019, Microsoft HoloLens released a video outlining Airbus' partnership with Microsoft Azure to utilize the latter's mixed reality services for streamlining and improving the aircraft design process, as well as reducing the error in development. Airbus utilized the HoloLens 2 to this end, and the executive vice president of engineering claimed that their design process' validation phases were "hugely accelerated by 80 percent", as well as "strongly believe[d]" that up to 30% improvements in their industrial tasks could be attained with the HoloLens 2. During the presentational video, Airbus cited the maturity of Microsoft Azure services as "key" for their usage of the HoloLens 2. Also in 2019, the U.S. army partnered with Microsoft to produce a HoloLens based Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS) to enhance infantry members by giving troops various abilities, including but not limited to using holographs to train, projecting 3D maps into their vision, and seeing through smoke and corners. Microsoft received tens of thousands of hours of feedback for their systems by 2021. Sergeant Marc Krugh at the time claimed that Microsoft's partnership has already caused the army to rethink some of its troops' operation strategy. == Products == === Apple Vision Pro === Apple announced Apple Vision Pro, a device it markets as a "spatial computer", on June 5, 2023. It includes several features such as Spatial Audio, two 4K micro-OLED displays, the Apple R1 chip and eye tracking, and released in the United States on February 2, 2024. In announcing the platform, Apple invoked its history of popularizing 2D graphical user interfaces that supplanted prior human-computer interface mechanisms such as the command line. Apple suggests the introduction of spatial computing as a new category of interactive device, on the same level of importance as the introduction of the 2D GUI. Apple Vision Pro runs on a new operating system called visionOS, which combines eye tracking, gesture recognition, and voice input to enable immersive interaction without physical controllers. The platform is aimed at productivity, entertainment, collaboration, and enterprise use cases. === Magic Leap === Magic Leap had also previously used the term “spatial computing” to describe its own devices. Its first headset, the Magic Leap 1, was released on August 8, 2018. Magic Leap’s technology enables the display of content into the real world using an optical see-through head-mounted display, which projects an overlay of a virtual world into the user’s field of view. This allows for an experience where the physical and digital worlds are perceived simultaneously. === Microsoft Hololens === On February 24, 2019, Microsoft released the HoloLens 2, which includes mixed reality tools and can generate interactable, manipulatable holograms in 3D space. The holograms in question can be related to a physical object or completely independent and free-floating. The Azure Spatial Anchors cloud service was released simultaneously, which gives the holograms capability to persist across time and many individuals' devices. === Meta Quest === The Meta Quest 3, a mixed reality gaming headset that includes spatial audio, two color cameras, and grants the ability to interact with virtual characters released on October 9, 2023, at a notably cheaper price than the Apple Vision Pro, but with reduced capabilities. === Snap Spectacles === Spectacles (product) are augmented reality glasses developed by Snap Inc.. The latest generation includes a 46-degree stereoscopic display, adjustable tint, and Snapdragon processors. Spectacles allow users to interact with a collection of augmented reality experiences designed for education, entertainment, and utility. Currently, the device is in the hands of selected developers and creators, as part of an experimental AR ecosystem focused on creativity, use case exploration and expression.

  Read more →
• 

  Time Warp Edit Distance

  In the data analysis of time series, Time Warp Edit Distance (TWED) is a measure of similarity (or dissimilarity) between pairs of discrete time series, controlling the relative distortion of the time units of the two series using the physical notion of elasticity. In comparison to other distance measures, (e.g. DTW (dynamic time warping) or LCS (longest common subsequence problem)), TWED is a metric. Its computational time complexity is O ( n 2 ) {\displaystyle O(n^{2})} , but can be drastically reduced in some specific situations by using a corridor to reduce the search space. Its memory space complexity can be reduced to O ( n ) {\displaystyle O(n)} . It was first proposed in 2009 by P.-F. Marteau. == Definition == δ λ , ν ( A 1 p , B 1 q ) = M i n { δ λ , ν ( A 1 p − 1 , B 1 q ) + Γ ( a p ′ → Λ ) d e l e t e i n A δ λ , ν ( A 1 p − 1 , B 1 q − 1 ) + Γ ( a p ′ → b q ′ ) m a t c h o r s u b s t i t u t i o n δ λ , ν ( A 1 p , B 1 q − 1 ) + Γ ( Λ → b q ′ ) d e l e t e i n B {\displaystyle \delta _{\lambda ,\nu }(A_{1}^{p},B_{1}^{q})=Min{\begin{cases}\delta _{\lambda ,\nu }(A_{1}^{p-1},B_{1}^{q})+\Gamma (a_{p}^{'}\to \Lambda )&{\rm {delete\ in\ A}}\\\delta _{\lambda ,\nu }(A_{1}^{p-1},B_{1}^{q-1})+\Gamma (a_{p}^{'}\to b_{q}^{'})&{\rm {match\ or\ substitution}}\\\delta _{\lambda ,\nu }(A_{1}^{p},B_{1}^{q-1})+\Gamma (\Lambda \to b_{q}^{'})&{\rm {delete\ in\ B}}\end{cases}}} whereas Γ ( α p ′ → Λ ) = d L P ( a p ′ , a p − 1 ′ ) + ν ⋅ ( t a p − t a p − 1 ) + λ {\displaystyle \Gamma (\alpha _{p}^{'}\to \Lambda )=d_{LP}(a_{p}^{'},a_{p-1}^{'})+\nu \cdot (t_{a_{p}}-t_{a_{p-1}})+\lambda } Γ ( α p ′ → b q ′ ) = d L P ( a p ′ , b q ′ ) + d L P ( a p − 1 ′ , b q − 1 ′ ) + ν ⋅ ( | t a p − t b q | + | t a p − 1 − t b q − 1 | ) {\displaystyle \Gamma (\alpha _{p}^{'}\to b_{q}^{'})=d_{LP}(a_{p}^{'},b_{q}^{'})+d_{LP}(a_{p-1}^{'},b_{q-1}^{'})+\nu \cdot (|t_{a_{p}}-t_{b_{q}}|+|t_{a_{p-1}}-t_{b_{q-1}}|)} Γ ( Λ → b q ′ ) = d L P ( b p ′ , b p − 1 ′ ) + ν ⋅ ( t b q − t b q − 1 ) + λ {\displaystyle \Gamma (\Lambda \to b_{q}^{'})=d_{LP}(b_{p}^{'},b_{p-1}^{'})+\nu \cdot (t_{b_{q}}-t_{b_{q-1}})+\lambda } Whereas the recursion δ λ , ν {\displaystyle \delta _{\lambda ,\nu }} is initialized as: δ λ , ν ( A 1 0 , B 1 0 ) = 0 , {\displaystyle \delta _{\lambda ,\nu }(A_{1}^{0},B_{1}^{0})=0,} δ λ , ν ( A 1 0 , B 1 j ) = ∞ f o r j ≥ 1 {\displaystyle \delta _{\lambda ,\nu }(A_{1}^{0},B_{1}^{j})=\infty \ {\rm {{for\ }j\geq 1}}} δ λ , ν ( A 1 i , B 1 0 ) = ∞ f o r i ≥ 1 {\displaystyle \delta _{\lambda ,\nu }(A_{1}^{i},B_{1}^{0})=\infty \ {\rm {{for\ }i\geq 1}}} with a 0 ′ = b 0 ′ = 0 {\displaystyle a'_{0}=b'_{0}=0} === Implementations === An implementation of the TWED algorithm in C with a Python wrapper is available at TWED is also implemented into the Time Series Subsequence Search Python package (TSSEARCH for short) available at [1]. An R implementation of TWED has been integrated into the TraMineR, a R package for mining, describing and visualizing sequences of states or events, and more generally discrete sequence data. Additionally, cuTWED is a CUDA- accelerated implementation of TWED which uses an improved algorithm due to G. Wright (2020). This method is linear in memory and massively parallelized. cuTWED is written in CUDA C/C++, comes with Python bindings, and also includes Python bindings for Marteau's reference C implementation. ==== Python ==== Backtracking, to find the most cost-efficient path: ==== MATLAB ==== Backtracking, to find the most cost-efficient path:

  Read more →
• 

  Vinberg's algorithm

  In mathematics, Vinberg's algorithm is an algorithm, introduced by Ernest Borisovich Vinberg, for finding a fundamental domain of a hyperbolic reflection group. Conway (1983) used Vinberg's algorithm to describe the automorphism group of the 26-dimensional even unimodular Lorentzian lattice II25,1 in terms of the Leech lattice. == Description of the algorithm == Let Γ < I s o m ( H n ) {\displaystyle \Gamma <\mathrm {Isom} (\mathbb {H} ^{n})} be a hyperbolic reflection group. Choose any point v 0 ∈ H n {\displaystyle v_{0}\in \mathbb {H} ^{n}} ; we shall call it the basic (or initial) point. The fundamental domain P 0 {\displaystyle P_{0}} of its stabilizer Γ v 0 {\displaystyle \Gamma _{v_{0}}} is a polyhedral cone in H n {\displaystyle \mathbb {H} ^{n}} . Let H 1 , . . . , H m {\displaystyle H_{1},...,H_{m}} be the faces of this cone, and let a 1 , . . . , a m {\displaystyle a_{1},...,a_{m}} be outer normal vectors to it. Consider the half-spaces H k − = { x ∈ R n , 1 | ( x , a k ) ≤ 0 } . {\displaystyle H_{k}^{-}=\{x\in \mathbb {R} ^{n,1}|(x,a_{k})\leq 0\}.} There exists a unique fundamental polyhedron P {\displaystyle P} of Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } contained in P 0 {\displaystyle P_{0}} and containing the point v 0 {\displaystyle v_{0}} . Its faces containing v 0 {\displaystyle v_{0}} are formed by faces H 1 , . . . , H m {\displaystyle H_{1},...,H_{m}} of the cone P 0 {\displaystyle P_{0}} . The other faces H m + 1 , . . . {\displaystyle H_{m+1},...} and the corresponding outward normals a m + 1 , . . . {\displaystyle a_{m+1},...} are constructed by induction. Namely, for H j {\displaystyle H_{j}} we take a mirror such that the root a j {\displaystyle a_{j}} orthogonal to it satisfies the conditions (1) ( v 0 , a j ) < 0 {\displaystyle (v_{0},a_{j})<0} ; (2) ( a i , a j ) ≤ 0 {\displaystyle (a_{i},a_{j})\leq 0} for all i < j {\displaystyle i Read more →

• 

  DUAL table

  The DUAL table is a special one-row, one-column table present by default in Oracle and other database installations. In Oracle, the table has a single VARCHAR2(1) column called DUMMY that has a value of 'X'. It is suitable for use in selecting a pseudo column such as SYSDATE or USER. == Example use == Oracle's SQL syntax requires the FROM clause but some queries don't require any tables - DUAL can be used in these cases. == History == Charles Weiss explains why he created DUAL: I created the DUAL table as an underlying object in the Oracle Data Dictionary. It was never meant to be seen itself, but instead used inside a view that was expected to be queried. The idea was that you could do a JOIN to the DUAL table and create two rows in the result for every one row in your table. Then, by using GROUP BY, the resulting join could be summarized to show the amount of storage for the DATA extent and for the INDEX extent(s). The name, DUAL, seemed apt for the process of creating a pair of rows from just one. == Optimization == Beginning with 10g Release 1, Oracle no longer performs physical or logical I/O on the DUAL table, though the table still exists. DUAL is readily available for all authorized users in a SQL database. == In other database systems == Several other databases (including Microsoft SQL Server, MySQL, PostgreSQL, SQLite, and Teradata) enable one to omit the FROM clause entirely if no table is needed. This avoids the need for any dummy table. ClickHouse has a one-row system table system.one with a single column named "dummy" of type UInt8 and value 0. This table is implicitly used when no table is specified in the SELECT query. Firebird has a one-row system table RDB$DATABASE that is used in the same way as Oracle's DUAL, although it also has a meaning of its own. IBM Db2 has a view that resolves DUAL when using Oracle Compatibility. It also has a table called sysibm.sysdummy1 that has similar properties to the Oracle DUAL one. Informix: Informix version 11.50 and later has a table named sysmaster:"informix".sysdual with the same functionality but a more verbose name. You can use CREATE PUBLIC SYNONYM dual FOR sysmaster:"informix".sysdual to create a name dual in the current database with the same functionality. Microsoft Access: A table named DUAL may be created and the single-row constraint enforced via ADO (Table-less UNION query in MS Access) Microsoft SQL Server: SQL Server does not require a dummy table. Queries like 'select 1 + 1' can be run without a "from" clause/table name. MySQL allows DUAL to be specified as a table in queries that do not need data from any tables. It is suitable for use in selecting a result function such as SYSDATE() or USER(), although it is not essential. PostgreSQL: A DUAL-view can be added to ease porting from Oracle. Snowflake: DUAL is supported, but not explicitly documented. It appears in sample SQL for other operations in the documentation. SQLite: A VIEW named "dual" that works the same as the Oracle "dual" table can be created as follows: CREATE VIEW dual AS SELECT 'x' AS dummy; SAP HANA has a table called DUMMY that works the same as the Oracle "dual" table. Teradata database does not require a dummy table. Queries like 'select 1 + 1' can be run without a "from" clause/table name. Vertica has support for a DUAL table in their official documentation.

  Read more →
• 

  External memory algorithm

  In computing, external memory algorithms or out-of-core algorithms are algorithms that are designed to process data that are too large to fit into a computer's main memory at once. Such algorithms must be optimized to efficiently fetch and access data stored in slow bulk memory (auxiliary memory) such as hard drives or tape drives, or when memory is on a computer network. External memory algorithms are analyzed in the external memory model. == Model == External memory algorithms are analyzed in an idealized model of computation called the external memory model (or I/O model, or disk access model). The external memory model is an abstract machine similar to the RAM machine model, but with a cache in addition to main memory. The model captures the fact that read and write operations are much faster in a cache than in main memory, and that reading long contiguous blocks is faster than reading randomly using a disk read-and-write head. The running time of an algorithm in the external memory model is defined by the number of reads and writes to memory required. The model was introduced by Alok Aggarwal and Jeffrey Vitter in 1988. The external memory model is related to the cache-oblivious model, but algorithms in the external memory model may know both the block size and the cache size. For this reason, the model is sometimes referred to as the cache-aware model. The model consists of a processor with an internal memory or cache of size M, connected to an unbounded external memory. Both the internal and external memory are divided into blocks of size B. One input/output or memory transfer operation consists of moving a block of B contiguous elements from external to internal memory, and the running time of an algorithm is determined by the number of these input/output operations. == Algorithms == Algorithms in the external memory model take advantage of the fact that retrieving one object from external memory retrieves an entire block of size B. This property is sometimes referred to as locality. Searching for an element among N objects is possible in the external memory model using a B-tree with branching factor B. Using a B-tree, searching, insertion, and deletion can be achieved in O ( log B ⁡ N ) {\displaystyle O(\log _{B}N)} time (in Big O notation). Information theoretically, this is the minimum running time possible for these operations, so using a B-tree is asymptotically optimal. External sorting is sorting in an external memory setting. External sorting can be done via distribution sort, which is similar to quicksort, or via a M B {\displaystyle {\tfrac {M}{B}}} -way merge sort. Both variants achieve the asymptotically optimal runtime of O ( N B log M B ⁡ N B ) {\displaystyle O\left({\frac {N}{B}}\log _{\frac {M}{B}}{\frac {N}{B}}\right)} to sort N objects. This bound also applies to the fast Fourier transform in the external memory model. The permutation problem is to rearrange N elements into a specific permutation. This can either be done either by sorting, which requires the above sorting runtime, or inserting each element in order and ignoring the benefit of locality. Thus, permutation can be done in O ( min ( N , N B log M B ⁡ N B ) ) {\displaystyle O\left(\min \left(N,{\frac {N}{B}}\log _{\frac {M}{B}}{\frac {N}{B}}\right)\right)} time. == Applications == The external memory model captures the memory hierarchy, which is not modeled in other common models used in analyzing data structures, such as the random-access machine, and is useful for proving lower bounds for data structures. The model is also useful for analyzing algorithms that work on datasets too big to fit in internal memory. A typical example is geographic information systems, especially digital elevation models, where the full data set easily exceeds several gigabytes or even terabytes of data. This methodology extends beyond general purpose CPUs and also includes GPU computing as well as classical digital signal processing. In general-purpose computing on graphics processing units (GPGPU), powerful graphics cards (GPUs) with little memory (compared with the more familiar system memory, which is most often referred to simply as RAM) are utilized with relatively slow CPU-to-GPU memory transfer (when compared with computation bandwidth). == History == An early use of the term "out-of-core" as an adjective is in 1962 in reference to devices that are other than the core memory of an IBM 360. An early use of the term "out-of-core" with respect to algorithms appears in 1971.

  Read more →
• 

  DIKW pyramid

  The DIKW pyramid (also known as the knowledge pyramid or information hierarchy) is a model describing relationships between data, information, knowledge and wisdom sometimes also stylized as a chain, refer to models of possible structural and functional relationships between a set of components—often four, data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. The concept has roots predating the 1980s. In the latter years of that decade, interest in the models grew after explicit presentations and discussions, including from Milan Zeleny, Russell Ackoff, and Robert W. Lucky. Subsequent important discussions extended along theoretical and practical lines into the coming decades. While debate continues as to actual meaning of the component terms of DIKW-type models, and the actual nature of their relationships—including occasional doubt being cast over any simple, linear, unidirectional model—even so they have become very popular visual representations in use by business, the military, and others. Among the academic and popular, not all versions of the DIKW-type models include all four components (earlier ones excluding data, later ones excluding or downplaying wisdom, and several including additional components (for instance Ackoff inserting "understanding" before and Zeleny adding "enlightenment" after the wisdom component). In addition, DIKW-type models are no longer always presented as pyramids, instead also as a chart or framework (e.g., by Zeleny), as flow diagrams (e.g., by Liew, and by Chisholm et al.), and sometimes as a continuum (e.g., by Choo et al.). == Short description == As Rowley noted in 2007, the DIKW model "is often quoted, or used implicitly, in definitions of data, information and knowledge in the information management, information systems and knowledge management literatures, but [as of that date] there ha[d] been limited direct discussion of the hierarchy". Reviews of textbooks and a survey of scholars in relevant fields indicate that there was not a consensus as to definitions used in the model as of that date, and as reviewed by Liew in that year, even less "in the description of the processes that transform components lower in the hierarchy into those above them". Zins work, published in 2007—from studies in 2003-2005 that documented "130 definitions of data, information, and knowledge formulated by 45 scholars", published in 2007—to suggest that the data–information–knowledge components of DIKW refer to a class of no less than five models, as a function of whether data, information, and knowledge are each conceived of as subjective, objective (what Zins terms, "universal" or "collective") or both. In Zins' usage, subjective and objective "are not related to arbitrariness and truthfulness, which are usually attached to the concepts of subjective knowledge and objective knowledge". Information science, Zins argues, studies data and information, but not knowledge, as knowledge is an internal (subjective) rather than an external (universal–collective) phenomenon. == Representations == === Graphical representation === DIKW is a hierarchical model often depicted as a pyramid, sometimes as a chain, with data at its base and wisdom at its apex (or chain-beginning and -end). Both Zeleny and Ackoff have been credited with originating the pyramid representation, although neither used a pyramid to present their ideas. According to Wallace, Debons and colleagues may have been the first to "present the hierarchy graphically". Many variations of the DIKW-type pyramid have been produced. One, in use by knowledge managers in the United States Department of Defense, attempts to show the DIKW progression to enable effective decisions and consequent activities supporting shared understanding throughout defense organizations, as well as supporting management of risks associated with decisions. DIKW-type hierarchical information paradigms have also been represented as two-dimensional charts, and as flow diagrams, where relationships between the components may be presented less hierarchically, with defining aspects of the relationships, feedback loops, etc. === Computational representation === Intelligent decision support systems are trying to improve decision making by introducing new technologies and methods from the domain of modeling and simulation in general, and in particular from the domain of intelligent software agents in the contexts of agent-based modeling. The following example describes a military decision support system, but the architecture and underlying conceptual idea are transferable to other application domains: The value chain starts with data quality describing the information within the underlying command and control systems. Information quality tracks the completeness, correctness, currency, consistency and precision of the data items and information statements available. Knowledge quality deals with procedural knowledge and information embedded in the command and control system such as templates for adversary forces, assumptions about entities such as ranges and weapons, and doctrinal assumptions, often coded as rules. Awareness quality measures the degree of using the information and knowledge embedded within the command and control system. Awareness is explicitly placed in the cognitive domain. By the introduction of a common operational picture, data are put into context, which leads to information instead of data. The next step, which is enabled by service-oriented web-based infrastructures (but not yet operationally used), is the use of models and simulations for decision support. Simulation systems are the prototype for procedural knowledge, which is the basis for knowledge quality. Finally, using intelligent software agents to continually observe the battle sphere, apply models and simulations to analyze what is going on, to monitor the execution of a plan, and to do all the tasks necessary to make the decision maker aware of what is going on, command and control systems could even support situational awareness, the level in the value chain traditionally limited to pure cognitive methods. == History == Danny P. Wallace, a professor of library and information science, explained that the origin of the DIKW pyramid is uncertain: The presentation of the relationships among data, information, knowledge, and sometimes wisdom in a hierarchical arrangement has been part of the language of information science for many years. Although it is uncertain when and by whom those relationships were first presented, the ubiquity of the notion of a hierarchy is embedded in the use of the acronym DIKW as a shorthand representation for the data-to-information-to-knowledge-to-wisdom transformation.Many authors think that the idea of the DIKW relationship originated from two lines in the poem "Choruses", by T. S. Eliot, that appeared in the pageant play The Rock, in 1934: === Knowledge, intelligence, and wisdom === In 1927, Clarence W. Barron addressed his employees at Dow Jones & Company on the hierarchy: "Knowledge, Intelligence and Wisdom". === Data, information, knowledge === In 1955, English-American economist and educator Kenneth Boulding presented a variation on the hierarchy consisting of "signals, messages, information, and knowledge". However, "[t]he first author to distinguish among data, information, and knowledge and to also employ the term 'knowledge management' may have been American educator Nicholas L. Henry", in a 1974 journal article. === Data, information, knowledge, wisdom === Other early versions (prior to 1982) of the hierarchy that refer to a data tier include those of Chinese-American geographer Yi-Fu Tuan and sociologist-historian Daniel Bell.. In 1980, Irish-born engineer Mike Cooley invoked the same hierarchy in his critique of automation and computerization, in his book Architect or Bee?: The Human / Technology Relationship. Thereafter, in 1987, Czechoslovakia-born educator Milan Zeleny mapped the components of the hierarchy to knowledge forms: know-nothing, know-what, know-how, and know-why. Zeleny "has frequently been credited with proposing the [representation of DIKW as a pyramid ]... although he actually made no reference to any such graphical model." The hierarchy appears again in a 1988 address to the International Society for General Systems Research, by American organizational theorist Russell Ackoff, published in 1989. Subsequent authors and textbooks cite Ackoff's as the "original articulation" of the hierarchy or otherwise credit Ackoff with its proposal. Ackoff's version of the model includes an understanding tier (as Adler had, before him), interposed between knowledge and wisdom. Although Ackoff did not present the hierarchy graphically, he has also been credited with its representation as a pyramid. In 1989, Bell Labs veteran Robert W. Lucky wrote about the four-tier "information hierarchy" in the form of a pyramid in his book Silicon Dreams. In the same year as Ackoff presented his a

  Read more →
• 

  HAKMEM

  HAKMEM, alternatively known as AI Memo 239, is a February 1972 "memo" (technical report) of the MIT AI Lab containing a wide variety of hacks, including useful and clever algorithms for mathematical computation, some number theory and schematic diagrams for hardware – in Guy L. Steele's words, "a bizarre and eclectic potpourri of technical trivia". Contributors included about two dozen members and associates of the AI Lab. The title of the report is short for "hacks memo", abbreviated to six upper case characters that would fit in a single PDP-10 machine word (using a six-bit character set). == History == HAKMEM is notable as an early compendium of algorithmic technique, particularly for its practical bent, and as an illustration of the wide-ranging interests of AI Lab people of the time, which included almost anything other than AI research. HAKMEM contains original work in some fields, notably continued fractions. == Introduction == Compiled with the hope that a record of the random things people do around here can save some duplication of effort -- except for fun. Here is some little known data which may be of interest to computer hackers. The items and examples are so sketchy that to decipher them may require more sincerity and curiosity than a non-hacker can muster. Doubtless, little of this is new, but nowadays it's hard to tell. So we must be content to give you an insight, or save you some cycles, and to welcome further contributions of items, new or used.

  Read more →
• 

  Stereo cameras

  The stereo cameras approach is a method of distilling a noisy video signal into a coherent data set that a computer can begin to process into actionable symbolic objects, or abstractions. Stereo cameras is one of many approaches used in the broader fields of computer vision and machine vision. == Calculation == In this approach, two cameras with a known physical relationship (i.e. a common field of view the cameras can see, and how far apart their focal points sit in physical space) are correlated via software. By finding mappings of common pixel values, and calculating how far apart these common areas reside in pixel space, a rough depth map can be created. This is very similar to how the human brain uses stereoscopic information from the eyes to gain depth cue information, i.e. how far apart any given object in the scene is from the viewer. The camera attributes must be known, focal length and distance apart etc., and a calibration done. Once this is completed, the systems can be used to sense the distances of objects by triangulation. Finding the same singular physical point in the two left and right images is known as the correspondence problem. Correctly locating the point gives the computer the capability to calculate the distance that the robot or camera is from the object. On the BH2 Lunar Rover the cameras use five steps: a bayer array filter, photometric consistency dense matching algorithm, a Laplace of Gaussian (LoG) edge detection algorithm, a stereo matching algorithm and finally uniqueness constraint. == Uses == This type of stereoscopic image processing technique is used in applications such as 3D reconstruction, robotic control and sensing, crowd dynamics monitoring and off-planet terrestrial rovers; for example, in mobile robot navigation, tracking, gesture recognition, targeting, 3D surface visualization, immersive and interactive gaming. Although the Xbox Kinect sensor is also able to create a depth map of an image, it uses an infrared camera for this purpose, and does not use the dual-camera technique. Other approaches to stereoscopic sensing include time of flight sensors and ultrasound.

  Read more →
• 

  Certifying algorithm

  In theoretical computer science, a certifying algorithm is an algorithm that outputs, together with a solution to the problem it solves, a proof that the solution is correct. A certifying algorithm is said to be efficient if the combined runtime of the algorithm and a proof checker is slower by at most a constant factor than the best known non-certifying algorithm for the same problem. The proof produced by a certifying algorithm should be in some sense simpler than the algorithm itself, for otherwise any algorithm could be considered certifying (with its output verified by running the same algorithm again). Sometimes this is formalized by requiring that a verification of the proof take less time than the original algorithm, while for other problems (in particular those for which the solution can be found in linear time) simplicity of the output proof is considered in a less formal sense. For instance, the validity of the output proof may be more apparent to human users than the correctness of the algorithm, or a checker for the proof may be more amenable to formal verification. Implementations of certifying algorithms that also include a checker for the proof generated by the algorithm may be considered to be more reliable than non-certifying algorithms. For, whenever the algorithm is run, one of three things happens: it produces a correct output (the desired case), it detects a bug in the algorithm or its implication (undesired, but generally preferable to continuing without detecting the bug), or both the algorithm and the checker are faulty in a way that masks the bug and prevents it from being detected (undesired, but unlikely as it depends on the existence of two independent bugs). == Examples == Many examples of problems with checkable algorithms come from graph theory. For instance, a classical algorithm for testing whether a graph is bipartite would simply output a Boolean value: true if the graph is bipartite, false otherwise. In contrast, a certifying algorithm might output a 2-coloring of the graph in the case that it is bipartite, or a cycle of odd length if it is not. Any graph is bipartite if and only if it can be 2-colored, and non-bipartite if and only if it contains an odd cycle. Both checking whether a 2-coloring is valid and checking whether a given odd-length sequence of vertices is a cycle may be performed more simply than testing bipartiteness. Analogously, it is possible to test whether a given directed graph is acyclic by a certifying algorithm that outputs either a topological order or a directed cycle. It is possible to test whether an undirected graph is a chordal graph by a certifying algorithm that outputs either an elimination ordering (an ordering of all vertices such that, for every vertex, the neighbors that are later in the ordering form a clique) or a chordless cycle. And it is possible to test whether a graph is planar by a certifying algorithm that outputs either a planar embedding or a Kuratowski subgraph. The extended Euclidean algorithm for the greatest common divisor of two integers x and y is certifying: it outputs three integers g (the divisor), a, and b, such that ax + by = g. This equation can only be true of multiples of the greatest common divisor, so testing that g is the greatest common divisor may be performed by checking that g divides both x and y and that this equation is correct.

  Read more →
• 

  Information and media literacy

  Information and media literacy (IML) is a combination of information literacy and media literacy. It enables people to show and make informed judgments as users of information and media, as well as to become skillful creators and producers of information and media messages. The transformative nature of IML includes creative works and creating new knowledge; to publish and collaborate responsibly requires ethical, cultural and social understanding. IML is also known as media and information literacy (MIL). UNESCO first adopted the term MIL in 2008 as a "composite concept" combining the competencies of information literacy and media literacy. UNESCO emphasizes the importance of global education in media and information literacy, and in 2013 defined Media and Information Literacy (MIL) as the ability to access, evaluate, use, and create information and media content in critical and ethical ways. Prior to the 1990s, the primary focus of information literacy was research skills. Media literacy, a study that emerged around the 1970s, traditionally focuses on the analysis and the delivery of information through various forms of media. Information literacy, as a skill proposed as early as 1974, centers on an individual's ability to recognize information needs and effectively locate, evaluate, and use information. These days, the study of information literacy has been extended to include the study of media literacy in many countries like the UK, Australia and New Zealand. It is also referred to as information and communication technologies (ICT) in the United States. Educators such as Gregory Ulmer have also defined the field as electracy.Media literacy is the ability to actively inquire into and think critically about information. It includes the ability to understand, evaluate, and create media content, and is an essential skill in today's information society. Livingstone, Van Couvering, and Thumim (2008) described the distinction between media literacy and information literacy: "Media literacy views media as lenses or windows for observing the world and expressing the self, whereas information literacy sees information as a tool for taking action in the world." == Integration of media and information literacy == Historically, the fields of information and media literacy have been separate, but over the course of the 21st century there have been calls to integrate both fields. Most definitions of information and media literacy include not only the abilities to locate, access, and analyze information but also the ability to create information. Only by integrating media literacy with information literacy can students better understand the sources of information and how it is used. Media education has primarily taken place in educational institutions, while information education has primarily occurred in libraries. Discussions surrounding the overlap of information literacy and media literacy came to fruition in the mid-to-late 2000s and 2010s as noted by Marcus Leaning. == In the digital age == The definition of literacy is "the ability to read and write". In practice many more skills are needed to locate, critically assess and make effective use of information. By extension, literacy now also includes the ability to manage and interact with digital information and media, in personal, shared and public domains. Historically, "information literacy" has largely been seen from the relatively top-down, organisational viewpoint of library and information sciences. However the same term is also used to describe a generic "information literacy" skill. The modern digital age has led to the proliferation of information spread across the Internet. Individuals must be able to recognize whether information is true or false and better yet know how to locate, evaluate, use, and communicate information in various formats; this is called information literacy. Towards the end of the 20th century, literacy was redefined to include "new literacies" relating to the new skills needed in everyday experience. "Multiliteracies" recognised the multiplicity of literacies, which were often used in combination. "21st century skills" frameworks link new literacies to wider life skills such as creativity, critical thinking, accountability. What these approaches have in common is a focus on the multiple skills needed by individuals to navigate changing personal, professional and public "information landscapes". As the conventional definition of literacy itself continues to evolve among practitioners, so too has the definition of information literacies. Noteworthy definitions include: Zurkowski defined information literacy as "the ability to find known or knowable content on any subject." CILIP, the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Practitioners, defines information literacy as "the ability to think critically and make balanced judgements about any information we find and use". In the United States, the definition proposed by the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) is the most widely recognized. It defines information literacy as "a set of abilities requiring individuals to recognize when information is needed and to locate, evaluate, and use the needed information effectively." JISC, the Joint Information Systems Committee, refers to information literacy as one of six "digital capabilities", seen as an interconnected group of elements centered on "ICT literacy". Mozilla groups digital and other literacies as "21st century skills", a "broad set of knowledge, skills, habits and traits that are important to succeed in today's world". UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, recognizing the necessity of teaching and learning both traditional and new types of information, the global importance of education was emphasized in 2008 through the "Teacher Media and Information Literacy (MIL) Curriculum". It defines MIL as a set of competencies that enable citizens to access, retrieve, understand, evaluate, use, create, and share information and media content in all formats through various tools in a critical, ethical, and effective manner, so as to participate in and carry out personal, professional, and social activities. Besides this, UNESCO also asserts information literacy as a "universal human right". == 21st-century students == In modern society, although the overall level of education has improved, the channels for knowledge production and dissemination have become increasingly diverse and commercialized, and traditional authoritative institutions no longer hold a monopoly over knowledge validation. While digital platforms have broadened access to information, they have also weakened trust mechanisms and evaluation standards, making epistemological skepticism a norm. Moreover, with the rise and spread of social media, misinformation and disinformation can be just as easily accessed in both densely and sparsely populated areas. These factors further underscore the importance of information literacy education. The IML learning capacities prepare students to be 21st century literate. According to Jeff Wilhelm (2000), "technology has everything to do with literacy. And being able to use the latest electronic technologies has everything to do with being literate." He supports his argument with J. David Bolter's statement that "if our students are not reading and composing with various electronic technologies, then they are illiterate. They are not just unprepared for the future; they are illiterate right now, in our current time and context". In a broader sense, developing this advanced competency of media and information literacy is essential, as it is crucial for students to exercise their freedom of expression in the 21st century. Wilhelm's statement is supported by the 2005 Wired World Phase II (YCWW II) survey conducted by the Media Awareness Network of Canada on 5000 Grade 4 – 11 students. The key findings of the survey were: 62% of Grade 4 students prefer the Internet. 38% of Grade 4 students prefer the library. 91% of Grade 11 students prefer the Internet. 9% of Grade 11 students prefer the library. Marc Prensky (2001) uses the term "digital native" to describe people who have been brought up in a digital world. The Internet has been a pervasive element of young people's home lives. 94% of kids reported that they had Internet access at home, and a significant majority (61%) had a high-speed connection. By the time kids reach Grade 11, half of them (51 percent) have their own Internet-connected computer, separate and apart from the family computer. The survey also showed that young Canadians are now among the most wired in the world. Contrary to the earlier stereotype of the isolated and awkward computer nerd, today's wired kid is a social kid. In general, many students are better networked through the use of technology than most teachers and parents, who may not understand the abilities of technology.

  Read more →
• 

  FAIR data

  FAIR data is data which meets the 2016 FAIR principles of findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability (FAIR). The FAIR principles emphasize machine-actionability (i.e., the capacity of computational systems to find, access, interoperate, and reuse data with none or minimal human intervention) because humans increasingly rely on computational support to deal with data as a result of the increase in the volume, complexity, and rate of production of data. The abbreviation FAIR/O data is sometimes used to indicate that the dataset or database in question complies with the FAIR principles and also carries an explicit data‑capable open license. == FAIR principles published by GO FAIR == Findable The first step in (re)using data is to find them. Metadata and data should be easy to find for both humans and computers. Machine-readable metadata are essential for automatic discovery of datasets and services, so this is an essential component of the FAIRification process. F1. (Meta)data are assigned a globally unique and persistent identifier F2. Data are described with rich metadata (defined by R1 below) F3. Metadata clearly and explicitly include the identifier of the data they describe F4. (Meta)data are registered or indexed in a searchable resource Accessible Once the user finds the required data, they need to know how they can be accessed, possibly including authentication and authorisation. A1. (Meta)data are retrievable by their identifier using a standardised communications protocol A1.1 The protocol is open, free, and universally implementable A1.2 The protocol allows for an authentication and authorisation procedure, where necessary A2. Metadata are accessible, even when the data are no longer available Interoperable The data usually need to be integrated with other data. In addition, the data need to interoperate with applications or workflows for analysis, storage, and processing. I1. (Meta)data use a formal, accessible, shared, and broadly applicable language for knowledge representation I2. (Meta)data use vocabularies that follow FAIR principles I3. (Meta)data include qualified references to other (meta)data Reusable The ultimate goal of FAIR is to optimise the reuse of data. To achieve this, metadata and data should be well-described so that they can be replicated and/or combined in different settings. R1. (Meta)data are richly described with a plurality of accurate and relevant attributes R1.1. (Meta)data are released with a clear and accessible data usage license R1.2. (Meta)data are associated with detailed provenance R1.3. (Meta)data meet domain-relevant community standards The principles refer to three types of entities: data (or any digital object), metadata (information about that digital object), and infrastructure. For instance, principle F4 defines that both metadata and data are registered or indexed in a searchable resource (the infrastructure component). === Acceptance and implementation === Before FAIR, a 2007 OECD report was the most influential paper discussing similar ideas related to data accessibility. In January 2014, the Lorentz Centre at Leiden University hosted a workshop entitled "Jointly designing a data FAIRPORT" where the participants first formulated the FAIR principles. After further discussions, they were published in the March 2016 issue of Scientific Data. At the 2016 G20 Hangzhou summit, the G20 leaders issued a statement endorsing the application of FAIR principles to research. Also in 2016, a group of Australian organisations developed a Statement on FAIR Access to Australia's Research Outputs, which aimed to extend the principles to research outputs more generally. In 2017, Germany, Netherlands and France agreed to establish an international office to support the FAIR initiative, the GO FAIR International Support and Coordination Office. Other international organisations active in the research data ecosystem, such as CODATA or Research Data Alliance (RDA) also support FAIR implementations by their communities. FAIR principles implementation assessment is being explored by FAIR Data Maturity Model Working Group of RDA, CODATA's strategic Decadal Programme "Data for Planet: Making data work for cross-domain challenges" mentions FAIR data principles as a fundamental enabler of data driven science. The Association of European Research Libraries recommends the use of FAIR principles. A 2017 paper by advocates of FAIR data reported that awareness of the FAIR concept was increasing among various researchers and institutes, but also, understanding of the concept was becoming confused as different people apply their own differing perspectives to it. Guides on implementing FAIR data practices state that the cost of a data management plan in compliance with FAIR data practices should be 5% of the total research budget. In 2019 the Global Indigenous Data Alliance (GIDA) released the CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance as a complementary guide. The CARE principles extend principles outlined in FAIR data to include Collective benefit, Authority to control, Responsibility, and Ethics to ensure data guidelines address historical contexts and power differentials. The CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance were drafted at the International Data Week and Research Data Alliance Plenary co-hosted event, "Indigenous Data Sovereignty Principles for the Governance of Indigenous Data Workshop", held 8 November 2018, in Gaborone, Botswana. The lack of information on how to implement the guidelines have led to inconsistent interpretations of them. In January 2020, representatives of nine groups of universities around the world produced the Sorbonne declaration on research data rights, which included a commitment to FAIR data, and called on governments to provide support to enable it. In 2021, researchers identified the FAIR principles as a conceptual component of data catalog software tools, with the other components being metadata management, business context and data responsibility roles. In April 2022, Matthias Scheffler and colleagues argued in Nature that FAIR principles are "a must" so that data mining and artificial intelligence can extract useful scientific information from the data. There have been moves in the geosciences to establish FAIR data by use of decimal georeferencing However, making data (and research outcomes) FAIR is a challenging task, and it is challenging to assess the FAIRness. In 2020, the FAIR Data Maturity Model Working Group published a set of guidelines for assessing "FAIRness".

  Read more →
• 

  Auralization

  Auralization is a procedure designed to model and simulate the experience of acoustic phenomena rendered as a soundfield in a virtualized space. This is useful in configuring the soundscape of architectural structures, concert venues, and public spaces, as well as in making coherent sound environments within virtual immersion systems. == History == The English term auralization was used for the first time by Kleiner et al. in an article in the journal of the AES en 1991. The increase of computational power allowed the development of the first acoustic simulation software towards the end of the 1960s. == Principles == Auralizations are experienced through systems rendering virtual acoustic models made by convolving or mixing acoustic events recorded 'dry' (or in an anechoic chamber) projected within a virtual model of an acoustic space, the characteristics of which are determined by means of sampling its impulse response (IR). Once this h ( t ) {\displaystyle h(t)} has been determined, the simulation of the resulting soundfield s ( t ) {\displaystyle s(t)} in the target environment is obtained by convolution: r ( t ) = h ( t ) ∗ s ( t ) {\displaystyle r(t)=h(t)s(t)} The resulting sound r ( t ) {\displaystyle r(t)} is heard as it would if emitted in that acoustic space. == Binaurality == For auralizations to be perceived as realistic, it is critical to emulate the human hearing in terms of position and orientation of the listener's head with respect to the sources of sound. For IR data to be convolved convincingly, the acoustic events are captured using a dummy head where two microphones are positioned on each side of the head to record an emulation of sound arriving at the locations of human ears, or using an ambisonics microphone array and mixed down for binaurality. Head-related transfer functions (HRTF) datasets can be used to simplify the process insofar as a monaural IR can be measured or simulated, then audio content is convolved with its target acoustic space. In rendering the experience, the transfer function corresponding to the orientation of the head is applied to simulate the corresponding spatial emanation of sound.

  Read more →
• 

  Semantic heterogeneity

  Semantic heterogeneity is when database schema or datasets for the same domain are developed by independent parties, resulting in differences in meaning and interpretation of data values. Beyond structured data, the problem of semantic heterogeneity is compounded due to the flexibility of semi-structured data and various tagging methods applied to documents or unstructured data. Semantic heterogeneity is one of the more important sources of differences in heterogeneous datasets. Yet, for multiple data sources to interoperate with one another, it is essential to reconcile these semantic differences. Decomposing the various sources of semantic heterogeneities provides a basis for understanding how to map and transform data to overcome these differences. == Classification == One of the first known classification schemes applied to data semantics is from William Kent in the late 80s. Kent's approach dealt more with structural mapping issues than differences in meaning, which he pointed to data dictionaries as potentially solving. One of the most comprehensive classifications is from Pluempitiwiriyawej and Hammer, "Classification Scheme for Semantic and Schematic Heterogeneities in XML Data Sources". They classify heterogeneities into three broad classes: Structural conflicts arise when the schema of the sources representing related or overlapping data exhibit discrepancies. Structural conflicts can be detected when comparing the underlying schema. The class of structural conflicts includes generalization conflicts, aggregation conflicts, internal path discrepancy, missing items, element ordering, constraint and type mismatch, and naming conflicts between the element types and attribute names. Domain conflicts arise when the semantics of the data sources that will be integrated exhibit discrepancies. Domain conflicts can be detected by looking at the information contained in the schema and using knowledge about the underlying data domains. The class of domain conflicts includes schematic discrepancy, scale or unit, precision, and data representation conflicts. Data conflicts refer to discrepancies among similar or related data values across multiple sources. Data conflicts can only be detected by comparing the underlying sources. The class of data conflicts includes ID-value, missing data, incorrect spelling, and naming conflicts between the element contents and the attribute values. Moreover, mismatches or conflicts can occur between set elements (a "population" mismatch) or attributes (a "description" mismatch). Michael Bergman expanded upon this schema by adding a fourth major explicit category of language, and also added some examples of each kind of semantic heterogeneity, resulting in about 40 distinct potential categories . This table shows the combined 40 possible sources of semantic heterogeneities across sources: A different approach toward classifying semantics and integration approaches is taken by Sheth et al. Under their concept, they split semantics into three forms: implicit, formal and powerful. Implicit semantics are what is either largely present or can easily be extracted; formal languages, though relatively scarce, occur in the form of ontologies or other description logics; and powerful (soft) semantics are fuzzy and not limited to rigid set-based assignments. Sheth et al.'s main point is that first-order logic (FOL) or description logic is inadequate alone to properly capture the needed semantics. == Relevant applications == Besides data interoperability, relevant areas in information technology that depend on reconciling semantic heterogeneities include data mapping, semantic integration, and enterprise information integration, among many others. From the conceptual to actual data, there are differences in perspective, vocabularies, measures and conventions once any two data sources are brought together. Explicit attention to these semantic heterogeneities is one means to get the information to integrate or interoperate. A mere twenty years ago, information technology systems expressed and stored data in a multitude of formats and systems. The Internet and Web protocols have done much to overcome these sources of differences. While there is a large number of categories of semantic heterogeneity, these categories are also patterned and can be anticipated and corrected. These patterned sources inform what kind of work must be done to overcome semantic differences where they still reside.

  Read more →
• 

  Authoritative Legal Entity Identifier

  An Authoritative Legal Entity Identifier (ALEI) is the identifier assigned by a government jurisdiction authorized by statute or decree to create a legal entity and to maintain the authoritative registries of legal entities. ALEIs are used within supply chain data, ERP applications and master data management systems to support accurate and consistent identification of entities in digital records, supply chains, and government databases. ALEIs are described in the international standard ISO 8000-116, which outlines a structured format that makes the locally unique identifier into a globally unique one and ensures global interoperability and data quality. == Structure == An ALEI is composed of three main components: a prefix that identifies the jurisdiction and register, a subdomain element (optional), and the local registration number of the entity. For example, the identifier "US-DE.BER:3031657" refers to an entity registered in the Delaware Business Entity Register in the United States. The standardization of this structure is governed by ISO 8000-116, which is designed to ensure each ALEI is globally unique and resolvable. == Comparison with other identifiers == ALEIs differ from proxy identifiers such as the DUNS number, NCAGE code, or the Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) managed by GLEIF. While proxy identifiers can be issued by institutions that do not create legal entities, ALEIs are created and maintained by public bodies with the authority to form and register legal entities. This authoritative origin makes ALEIs particularly suitable for applications involving legal traceability, government regulation, and international transparency efforts. == Usage == ALEIs are increasingly utilized to identify legal entities in public and private datasets. The identifiers support supply chain accuracy, regulatory compliance, and the unification of master data. The first practical implementation of an ALEI was the International Business Registration Number (IBRN), developed to provide globally unique identifiers for registered business entities. IBRNs are issued by authorized government jurisdictions and are used to verify entities across borders, particularly in the context of trade facilitation and data exchange systems. For instance, business directories and registration systems in U.S. states like Connecticut provide structured registration documents that can be used to verify the ALEIs they issue. The use of ALEIs has been recommended by international organizations such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) and Open ownership to improve beneficial ownership registries. == Policy and regulation == ALEIs have been referenced in policy consultations such as those related to the U.S. Financial Data Transparency Act. Federal institutions including the Federal Reserve and FDIC have examined the potential for ALEIs to unify entity identification across regulatory databases.

  Read more →