AI Chatbot You Can Talk To

AI Chatbot You Can Talk To — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Glossary of computer graphics

  This is a glossary of terms relating to computer graphics. For more general computer hardware terms, see glossary of computer hardware terms. == 0–9 == 2D convolution Operation that applies linear filtering to image with a given two-dimensional kernel, able to achieve e.g. edge detection, blurring, etc. 2D image 2D texture map A texture map with two dimensions, typically indexed by UV coordinates. 2D vector A two-dimensional vector, a common data type in rasterization algorithms, 2D computer graphics, graphical user interface libraries. 2.5D Also pseudo 3D. Rendering whose result looks 3D while actually not being 3D or having great limitations, e.g. in camera degrees of freedom. 3D graphics pipeline A graphics pipeline taking 3D models and producing a 2D bitmap image result. 3D paint tool A 3D graphics application for digital painting of multiple texture map image channels directly onto a rotated 3D model, such as zbrush or mudbox, also sometimes able to modify vertex attributes. 3D scene A collection of 3D models and lightsources in world space, into which a camera may be placed, describing a scene for 3D rendering. 3D unit vector A unit vector in 3D space. 4D vector A common datatype in graphics code, holding homogeneous coordinates or RGBA data, or simply a 3D vector with unused W to benefit from alignment, naturally handled by machines with 4-element SIMD registers. 4×4 matrix A matrix commonly used as a transformation of homogeneous coordinates in 3D graphics pipelines. 7e3 format A packed pixel format supported by some graphics processing units (GPUs) where a single 32-bit word encodes three 10-bit floating-point color channels, each with seven bits of mantissa and three bits of exponent. == A == AABB Axis-aligned bounding box (sometimes called "axis oriented"), a bounding box stored in world coordinates; one of the simplest bounding volumes. Additive blending A compositing operation where d s t = d s t + s r c , {\displaystyle dst=dst+src,} without the use of an alpha channel, used for various effects. Also known as linear dodge in some applications. Affine texture mapping Linear interpolation of texture coordinates in screen space without taking perspective into account, causing texture distortion. Aliasing Unwanted effect arising when sampling high-frequency signals, in computer graphics appearing e.g. when downscaling images. Antialiasing methods can prevent it. Alpha channel An additional image channel (e.g. extending an RGB image) or standalone channel controlling alpha blending. Ambient lighting An approximation to the light entering a region from a wide range of directions, used to avoid needing an exact solution to the rendering equation. Ambient occlusion (AO) Effect approximating, in an inexpensive way, one aspect of global illumination by taking into account how much ambient light is blocked by nearby geometry, adding visual clues about the shape. Analytic model A mathematical model for a phenomenon to be simulated, e.g. some approximation to surface shading. Contrasts with Empirical models based purely on recorded data. Anisotropic filtering Advanced texture filtering improving on mipmapping, preventing aliasing while reducing blur in textured polygons at oblique angles to the camera. Anti-aliasing Methods for filtering and sampling to avoid visual artifacts associated with the uniform pixel grid in 3D rendering. Array texture A form of texture map containing an array of 2D texture slices selectable by a 3rd 'W' texture coordinate; used to reduce state changes in 3D rendering. Augmented reality Computer-rendered content inserted into the user's view of the real world. AZDO Approaching zero driver overhead, a set of techniques aimed at reducing the CPU overhead in preparing and submitting rendering commands in the OpenGL pipeline. A compromise between the traditional GL API and other high-performance low-level rendering APIs. == B == Back-face culling Culling (discarding) of polygons that are facing backwards from the camera. Baking Performing an expensive calculation offline, and caching the results in a texture map or vertex attributes. Typically used for generating lightmaps, normal maps, or low level of detail models. Barycentric coordinates Three-element coordinates of a point inside a triangle. Beam tracing Modification of ray tracing which instead of lines uses pyramid-shaped beams to address some of the shortcomings of traditional ray tracing, such as aliasing. Bicubic interpolation Extension of cubic interpolation to 2D, commonly used when scaling textures. Bilinear interpolation Linear interpolation extended to 2D, commonly used when scaling textures. Binding Selecting a resource (texture, buffer, etc.) to be referenced by future commands. Billboard A textured rectangle that keeps itself oriented towards the camera, typically used e.g. for vegetation or particle effects. Binary space partitioning (BSP) A data structure that can be used to accelerate visibility determination, used e.g. in Doom engine. Bit depth The number of bits per pixel, sample, or texel in a bitmap image (holding one or more image channels, typical values being 4, 8, 16, 24, 32) Bitmap Image stored by pixels. Bit plane A format for bitmap images storing 1 bit per pixel in a contiguous 2D array; Several such parallel arrays combine to produce the a higher-bit-depth image. Opposite of packed-pixel format. Blend operation A render state controlling alpha blending, describing a formula for combining source and destination pixels. Bone Coordinate systems used to control surface deformation (via Weight maps) during skeletal animation. Typically stored in a hierarchy, controlled by key frames, and other procedural constraints. Bounding box One of the simplest type of bounding volume, consisting of axis-aligned or object-aligned extents. Bounding volume A mathematically simple volume, such as a sphere or a box, containing 3D objects, used to simplify and accelerate spatial tests (e.g. for visibility or collisions). BRDF Bidirectional reflectance distribution functions (BRDFs), empirical models defining 4D functions for surface shading indexed by a view vector and light vector relative to a surface. Bump mapping Technique similar to normal mapping that instead of normal maps uses so called bump maps (height maps). BVH Bounding volume hierarchy is a tree structure on a set of geometric objects. == C == Camera A virtual camera from which rendering is performed, also sometimes referred to as 'eye'. Camera space A space with the camera at the origin, aligned with the viewer's direction, after the application of the world transformation and view transformation. Cel shading Cartoon-like shading effect. Clipping Limiting specific operations to a specific region, usually the view frustum. Clipping plane A plane used to clip rendering primitives in a graphics pipeline. These may define the view frustum or be used for other effects. Clip space Coordinate space in which clipping is performed. Clip window A rectangular region in screen space, used during clipping. A clip window may be used to enclose a region around a portal in portal rendering. CLUT A table of RGB color values to be indexed by a lower-bit-depth image (typically 4–8 bits), a form of vector quantization. Color bleeding Unwanted effect in texture mapping. A color from a border of unmapped region of the texture may appear (bleed) in the mapped result due to interpolation. Color channels The set of channels in a bitmap image representing the visible color components, i.e. distinct from the alpha channel or other information. Color resolution Command buffer A region of memory holding a set of instructions for a graphics processing unit for rendering a scene or portion of a scene. These may be generated manually in bare metal programming, or managed by low level rendering APIs, or handled internally by high level rendering APIs. Command list A group of rendering commands ready for submission to a graphics processing unit, see also Command buffer. Compute API An API for efficiently processing large amounts of data. Compute shader A compute kernel managed by a rendering API, with easy access to rendering resources. Cone tracing Modification of ray tracing which instead of lines uses cones as rays in order to achieve e.g. antialiasing or soft shadows. Connectivity information Indices defining [rendering primitive]s between vertices, possibly held in index buffers. describes geometry as a graph or hypergraph. CSG Constructive solid geometry, a method for generating complex solid models from boolean operations combining simpler modelling primitives. Cube mapping A form of environment reflection mapping in which the environment is captured on a surface of a cube (cube map). Culling Before rendering begins, culling removes objects that don't significantly contribute to the rendered result (e.g. being obscured or outside camera view). == D == Decal A "sticker" picture applied onto a surface (e.g. a

  Read more →
• 

  Randomized weighted majority algorithm

  The randomized weighted majority algorithm is an algorithm in machine learning theory for aggregating expert predictions to a series of decision problems. It is a simple and effective method based on weighted voting which improves on the mistake bound of the deterministic weighted majority algorithm. In fact, in the limit, its prediction rate can be arbitrarily close to that of the best-predicting expert. == Example == Imagine that every morning before the stock market opens, we get a prediction from each of our "experts" about whether the stock market will go up or down. Our goal is to somehow combine this set of predictions into a single prediction that we then use to make a buy or sell decision for the day. The principal challenge is that we do not know which experts will give better or worse predictions. The RWMA gives us a way to do this combination such that our prediction record will be nearly as good as that of the single expert which, in hindsight, gave the most accurate predictions. == Motivation == In machine learning, the weighted majority algorithm (WMA) is a deterministic meta-learning algorithm for aggregating expert predictions. In pseudocode, the WMA is as follows: initialize all experts to weight 1 for each round: add each expert's weight to the option they predicted predict the option with the largest weighted sum multiply the weights of all experts who predicted wrongly by 1 2 {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{2}}} Suppose there are n {\displaystyle n} experts and the best expert makes m {\displaystyle m} mistakes. Then, the weighted majority algorithm (WMA) makes at most 2.4 ( log 2 ⁡ n + m ) {\displaystyle 2.4(\log _{2}n+m)} mistakes. This bound is highly problematic in the case of highly error-prone experts. Suppose, for example, the best expert makes a mistake 20% of the time; that is, in N = 100 {\displaystyle N=100} rounds using n = 10 {\displaystyle n=10} experts, the best expert makes m = 20 {\displaystyle m=20} mistakes. Then, the weighted majority algorithm only guarantees an upper bound of 2.4 ( log 2 ⁡ 10 + 20 ) ≈ 56 {\displaystyle 2.4(\log _{2}10+20)\approx 56} mistakes. As this is a known limitation of the weighted majority algorithm, various strategies have been explored in order to improve the dependence on m {\displaystyle m} . In particular, we can do better by introducing randomization. Drawing inspiration from the Multiplicative Weights Update Method algorithm, we will probabilistically make predictions based on how the experts have performed in the past. Similarly to the WMA, every time an expert makes a wrong prediction, we will decrement their weight. Mirroring the MWUM, we will then use the weights to make a probability distribution over the actions and draw our action from this distribution (instead of deterministically picking the majority vote as the WMA does). == Randomized weighted majority algorithm (RWMA) == The randomized weighted majority algorithm is an attempt to improve the dependence of the mistake bound of the WMA on m {\displaystyle m} . Instead of predicting based on majority vote, the weights, are used as probabilities for choosing the experts in each round and are updated over time (hence the name randomized weighted majority). Precisely, if w i {\displaystyle w_{i}} is the weight of expert i {\displaystyle i} , let W = ∑ i w i {\displaystyle W=\sum _{i}w_{i}} . We will follow expert i {\displaystyle i} with probability w i W {\displaystyle {\frac {w_{i}}{W}}} . This results in the following algorithm: initialize all experts to weight 1. for each round: add all experts' weights together to obtain the total weight W {\displaystyle W} choose expert i {\displaystyle i} randomly with probability w i W {\displaystyle {\frac {w_{i}}{W}}} predict as the chosen expert predicts multiply the weights of all experts who predicted wrongly by β {\displaystyle \beta } The goal is to bound the worst-case expected number of mistakes, assuming that the adversary has to select one of the answers as correct before we make our coin toss. This is a reasonable assumption in, for instance, the stock market example provided above: the variance of a stock price should not depend on the opinions of experts that influence private buy or sell decisions, so we can treat the price change as if it was decided before the experts gave their recommendations for the day. The randomized algorithm is better in the worst case than the deterministic algorithm (weighted majority algorithm): in the latter, the worst case was when the weights were split 50/50. But in the randomized version, since the weights are used as probabilities, there would still be a 50/50 chance of getting it right. In addition, generalizing to multiplying the weights of the incorrect experts by β < 1 {\displaystyle \beta <1} instead of strictly 1 2 {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{2}}} allows us to trade off between dependence on m {\displaystyle m} and log 2 ⁡ n {\displaystyle \log _{2}n} . This trade-off will be quantified in the analysis section. == Analysis == Let W t {\displaystyle W_{t}} denote the total weight of all experts at round t {\displaystyle t} . Also let F t {\displaystyle F_{t}} denote the fraction of weight placed on experts which predict the wrong answer at round t {\displaystyle t} . Finally, let N {\displaystyle N} be the total number of rounds in the process. By definition, F t {\displaystyle F_{t}} is the probability that the algorithm makes a mistake on round t {\displaystyle t} . It follows from the linearity of expectation that if M {\displaystyle M} denotes the total number of mistakes made during the entire process, E [ M ] = ∑ t = 1 N F t {\displaystyle E[M]=\sum _{t=1}^{N}F_{t}} . After round t {\displaystyle t} , the total weight is decreased by ( 1 − β ) F t W t {\displaystyle \ (1-\beta )F_{t}W_{t}} , since all weights corresponding to a wrong answer are multiplied by β < 1 {\displaystyle \ \beta <1} . It then follows that W t + 1 = W t ( 1 − ( 1 − β ) F t ) {\displaystyle W_{t+1}=W_{t}(1-(1-\beta )F_{t})} . By telescoping, since W 1 = n {\displaystyle W_{1}=n} , it follows that the total weight after the process concludes is On the other hand, suppose that m {\displaystyle \ m} is the number of mistakes made by the best-performing expert. At the end, this expert has weight β m {\displaystyle \ \beta ^{m}} . It follows, then, that the total weight is at least this much; in other words, W ≥ β m {\displaystyle \ W\geq \beta ^{m}} . This inequality and the above result imply Taking the natural logarithm of both sides yields Now, the Taylor series of the natural logarithm is In particular, it follows that ln ⁡ ( 1 − ( 1 − β ) F t ) < − ( 1 − β ) F t {\displaystyle \ \ln(1-(1-\beta )F_{t})<-(1-\beta )F_{t}} . Thus, Recalling that E [ M ] = ∑ t = 1 N F t {\displaystyle E[M]=\sum _{t=1}^{N}F_{t}} and rearranging, it follows that Now, as β → 1 {\displaystyle \beta \to 1} from below, the first constant tends to 1 {\displaystyle 1} ; however, the second constant tends to + ∞ {\displaystyle +\infty } . To quantify this tradeoff, define ε = 1 − β {\displaystyle \varepsilon =1-\beta } to be the penalty associated with getting a prediction wrong. Then, again applying the Taylor series of the natural logarithm, It then follows that the mistake bound, for small ε {\displaystyle \varepsilon } , can be written in the form ( 1 + ϵ 2 + O ( ε 2 ) ) m + ϵ − 1 ln ⁡ ( n ) {\displaystyle \ \left(1+{\frac {\epsilon }{2}}+O(\varepsilon ^{2})\right)m+\epsilon ^{-1}\ln(n)} . In English, the less that we penalize experts for their mistakes, the more that additional experts will lead to initial mistakes but the closer we get to capturing the predictive accuracy of the best expert as time goes on. In particular, given a sufficiently low value of ε {\displaystyle \varepsilon } and enough rounds, the randomized weighted majority algorithm can get arbitrarily close to the correct prediction rate of the best expert. In particular, as long as m {\displaystyle m} is sufficiently large compared to ln ⁡ ( n ) {\displaystyle \ln(n)} (so that their ratio is sufficiently small), we can assign we can obtain an upper bound on the number of mistakes equal to This implies that the "regret bound" on the algorithm (that is, how much worse it performs than the best expert) is sublinear, at O ( m ln ⁡ ( n ) ) {\displaystyle O({\sqrt {m\ln(n)}})} . == Revisiting the motivation == Recall that the motivation for the randomized weighted majority algorithm was given by an example where the best expert makes a mistake 20% of the time. Precisely, in N = 100 {\displaystyle N=100} rounds, with n = 10 {\displaystyle n=10} experts, where the best expert makes m = 20 {\displaystyle m=20} mistakes, the deterministic weighted majority algorithm only guarantees an upper bound of 2.4 ( log 2 ⁡ 10 + 20 ) ≈ 56 {\displaystyle 2.4(\log _{2}10+20)\approx 56} . By the analysis above, it follows that minimizing the number of worst-case expected mistakes is equivalent to minimizing the fun

  Read more →
• 

  Latent Dirichlet allocation

  In natural language processing, latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) is a generative statistical model that explains how a collection of text documents can be described by a set of unobserved "topics." For example, given a set of news articles, LDA might discover that one topic is characterized by words like "president", "government", and "election", while another is characterized by "team", "game", and "score". It is one of the most common topic models. The LDA model was first presented as a graphical model for population genetics by J. K. Pritchard, M. Stephens and P. Donnelly in 2000. The model was subsequently applied to machine learning by David Blei, Andrew Ng, and Michael I. Jordan in 2003. Although its most frequent application is in modeling text corpora, it has also been used for other problems, such as in clinical psychology, social science, and computational musicology. The core assumption of LDA is that documents are represented as a random mixture of latent topics, and each topic is characterized by a probability distribution over words. The model is a generalization of probabilistic latent semantic analysis (pLSA), differing primarily in that LDA treats the topic mixture as a Dirichlet prior, leading to more reasonable mixtures and less susceptibility to overfitting. Learning the latent topics and their associated probabilities from a corpus is typically done using Bayesian inference, often with methods like Gibbs sampling or variational Bayes. == History == In the context of population genetics, LDA was proposed by J. K. Pritchard, M. Stephens and P. Donnelly in 2000. LDA was applied in machine learning by David Blei, Andrew Ng and Michael I. Jordan in 2003. == Overview == === Population genetics === In population genetics, the model is used to detect the presence of structured genetic variation in a group of individuals. The model assumes that alleles carried by individuals under study have origin in various extant or past populations. The model and various inference algorithms allow scientists to estimate the allele frequencies in those source populations and the origin of alleles carried by individuals under study. The source populations can be interpreted ex-post in terms of various evolutionary scenarios. In association studies, detecting the presence of genetic structure is considered a necessary preliminary step to avoid confounding. === Clinical psychology, mental health, and social science === In clinical psychology research, LDA has been used to identify common themes of self-images experienced by young people in social situations. Other social scientists have used LDA to examine large sets of topical data from discussions on social media (e.g., tweets about prescription drugs). Additionally, supervised Latent Dirichlet Allocation with covariates (SLDAX) has been specifically developed to combine latent topics identified in texts with other manifest variables. This approach allows for the integration of text data as predictors in statistical regression analyses, improving the accuracy of mental health predictions. One of the main advantages of SLDAX over traditional two-stage approaches is its ability to avoid biased estimates and incorrect standard errors, allowing for a more accurate analysis of psychological texts. In the field of social sciences, LDA has proven to be useful for analyzing large datasets, such as social media discussions. For instance, researchers have used LDA to investigate tweets discussing socially relevant topics, like the use of prescription drugs and cultural differences in China. By analyzing these large text corpora, it is possible to uncover patterns and themes that might otherwise go unnoticed, offering valuable insights into public discourse and perception in real time. === Musicology === In the context of computational musicology, LDA has been used to discover tonal structures in different corpora. === Machine learning === One application of LDA in machine learning – specifically, topic discovery, a subproblem in natural language processing – is to discover topics in a collection of documents, and then automatically classify any individual document within the collection in terms of how "relevant" it is to each of the discovered topics. A topic is considered to be a set of terms (i.e., individual words or phrases) that, taken together, suggest a shared theme. For example, in a document collection related to pet animals, the terms dog, spaniel, beagle, golden retriever, puppy, bark, and woof would suggest a DOG_related theme, while the terms cat, siamese, Maine coon, tabby, manx, meow, purr, and kitten would suggest a CAT_related theme. There may be many more topics in the collection – e.g., related to diet, grooming, healthcare, behavior, etc. that we do not discuss for simplicity's sake. (Very common, so called stop words in a language – e.g., "the", "an", "that", "are", "is", etc., – would not discriminate between topics and are usually filtered out by pre-processing before LDA is performed. Pre-processing also converts terms to their "root" lexical forms – e.g., "barks", "barking", and "barked" would be converted to "bark".) If the document collection is sufficiently large, LDA will discover such sets of terms (i.e., topics) based upon the co-occurrence of individual terms, though the task of assigning a meaningful label to an individual topic (i.e., that all the terms are DOG_related) is up to the user, and often requires specialized knowledge (e.g., for collection of technical documents). The LDA approach assumes that: The semantic content of a document is composed by combining one or more terms from one or more topics. Certain terms are ambiguous, belonging to more than one topic, with different probability. (For example, the term training can apply to both dogs and cats, but are more likely to refer to dogs, which are used as work animals or participate in obedience or skill competitions.) However, in a document, the accompanying presence of specific neighboring terms (which belong to only one topic) will disambiguate their usage. Most documents will contain only a relatively small number of topics. In the collection, e.g., individual topics will occur with differing frequencies. That is, they have a probability distribution, so that a given document is more likely to contain some topics than others. Within a topic, certain terms will be used much more frequently than others. In other words, the terms within a topic will also have their own probability distribution. When LDA machine learning is employed, both sets of probabilities are computed during the training phase, using Bayesian methods and an expectation–maximization algorithm. LDA is a generalization of older approach of probabilistic latent semantic analysis (pLSA), The pLSA model is equivalent to LDA under a uniform Dirichlet prior distribution. pLSA relies on only the first two assumptions above and does not care about the remainder. While both methods are similar in principle and require the user to specify the number of topics to be discovered before the start of training (as with k-means clustering) LDA has the following advantages over pLSA: LDA yields better disambiguation of words and a more precise assignment of documents to topics. Computing probabilities allows a "generative" process by which a collection of new "synthetic documents" can be generated that would closely reflect the statistical characteristics of the original collection. Unlike LDA, pLSA is vulnerable to overfitting especially when the size of corpus increases. The LDA algorithm is more readily amenable to scaling up for large data sets using the MapReduce approach on a computing cluster. == Model == With plate notation, which is often used to represent probabilistic graphical models (PGMs), the dependencies among the many variables can be captured concisely. The boxes are "plates" representing replicates, which are repeated entities. The outer plate represents documents, while the inner plate represents the repeated word positions in a given document; each position is associated with a choice of topic and word. The variable names are defined as follows: M denotes the number of documents N is number of words in a given document (document i has N i {\displaystyle N_{i}} words) α is the parameter of the Dirichlet prior on the per-document topic distributions β is the parameter of the Dirichlet prior on the per-topic word distribution θ i {\displaystyle \theta _{i}} is the topic distribution for document i φ k {\displaystyle \varphi _{k}} is the word distribution for topic k z i j {\displaystyle z_{ij}} is the topic for the j-th word in document i w i j {\displaystyle w_{ij}} is the specific word. The fact that W is grayed out means that words w i j {\displaystyle w_{ij}} are the only observable variables, and the other variables are latent variables. As proposed in the original paper, a sparse Dirichlet prior can be used to model the to

  Read more →
• 

  Handwriting recognition

  Handwriting recognition (HWR), also known as handwritten text recognition (HTR), is the ability of a computer to receive and interpret intelligible handwritten input from sources such as paper documents, photographs, touch-screens and other devices. The image of the written text may be sensed "off line" from a piece of paper by optical scanning (optical character recognition) or intelligent word recognition. Alternatively, the movements of the pen tip may be sensed "on line", for example by a pen-based computer screen surface, a generally easier task as there are more clues available. A handwriting recognition system handles formatting, performs correct segmentation into characters, and finds the most possible words. == Offline recognition == Offline handwriting recognition involves the automatic conversion of text in an image into letter codes that are usable within computer and text-processing applications. The data obtained by this form is regarded as a static representation of handwriting. Offline handwriting recognition is comparatively difficult, as different people have different handwriting styles. And, as of today, OCR engines are primarily focused on machine printed text and ICR for hand "printed" (written in capital letters) text. === Traditional techniques === ==== Character extraction ==== Offline character recognition often involves scanning a form or document. This means the individual characters contained in the scanned image will need to be extracted. Tools exist that are capable of performing this step. However, there are several common imperfections in this step. The most common is when characters that are connected are returned as a single sub-image containing both characters. This causes a major problem in the recognition stage. Yet many algorithms are available that reduce the risk of connected characters. ==== Character recognition ==== After individual characters have been extracted, a recognition engine is used to identify the corresponding computer character. Several different recognition techniques are currently available. ===== Feature extraction ===== Feature extraction works in a similar fashion to neural network recognizers. However, programmers must manually determine the properties they feel are important. This approach gives the recognizer more control over the properties used in identification. Yet any system using this approach requires substantially more development time than a neural network because the properties are not learned automatically. === Modern techniques === Where traditional techniques focus on segmenting individual characters for recognition, modern techniques focus on recognizing all the characters in a segmented line of text. Particularly they focus on machine learning techniques that are able to learn visual features, avoiding the limiting feature engineering previously used. State-of-the-art methods use convolutional networks to extract visual features over several overlapping windows of a text line image which a recurrent neural network uses to produce character probabilities. == Online recognition == Online handwriting recognition involves the automatic conversion of text as it is written on a special digitizer or PDA, where a sensor picks up the pen-tip movements as well as pen-up/pen-down switching. This kind of data is known as digital ink and can be regarded as a digital representation of handwriting. The obtained signal is converted into letter codes that are usable within computer and text-processing applications. The elements of an online handwriting recognition interface typically include: a pen or stylus for the user to write with a touch sensitive surface, which may be integrated with, or adjacent to, an output display. a software application which interprets the movements of the stylus across the writing surface, translating the resulting strokes into digital text. The process of online handwriting recognition can be broken down into a few general steps: preprocessing, feature extraction and classification The purpose of preprocessing is to discard irrelevant information in the input data, that can negatively affect the recognition. This concerns speed and accuracy. Preprocessing usually consists of binarization, normalization, sampling, smoothing and denoising. The second step is feature extraction. Out of the two- or higher-dimensional vector field received from the preprocessing algorithms, higher-dimensional data is extracted. The purpose of this step is to highlight important information for the recognition model. This data may include information like pen pressure, velocity or the changes of writing direction. The last big step is classification. In this step, various models are used to map the extracted features to different classes and thus identifying the characters or words the features represent. === Hardware === Commercial products incorporating handwriting recognition as a replacement for keyboard input were introduced in the early 1980s. Examples include handwriting terminals such as the Pencept Penpad and the Inforite point-of-sale terminal. With the advent of the large consumer market for personal computers, several commercial products were introduced to replace the keyboard and mouse on a personal computer with a single pointing/handwriting system, such as those from Pencept, CIC and others. The first commercially available tablet-type portable computer was the Write-Top from Linus Technologies, released in July 1988. Its operating system was based on MS-DOS. In the early 1990s, hardware makers including NCR, IBM and EO released tablet computers running the PenPoint operating system developed by GO Corp. PenPoint used handwriting recognition and gestures throughout and provided the facilities to third-party software. IBM's tablet computer was the first to use the ThinkPad name and used IBM's handwriting recognition. This recognition system was later ported to Microsoft Windows for Pen Computing, and IBM's Pen for OS/2. None of these were commercially successful. Advancements in electronics allowed the computing power necessary for handwriting recognition to fit into a smaller form factor than tablet computers, and handwriting recognition is often used as an input method for hand-held PDAs. The first PDA to provide written input was the Apple Newton, which exposed the public to the advantage of a streamlined user interface. However, the device was not a commercial success, owing to the unreliability of the software, which tried to learn a user's writing patterns. By the time of the release of the Newton OS 2.0, wherein the handwriting recognition was greatly improved, including unique features still not found in current recognition systems such as modeless error correction, the largely negative first impression had been made. After discontinuation of Apple Newton, the feature was incorporated in Mac OS X 10.2 and later as Inkwell. Palm later launched a successful series of PDAs based on the Graffiti recognition system. Graffiti improved usability by defining a set of "unistrokes", or one-stroke forms, for each character. This narrowed the possibility for erroneous input, although memorization of the stroke patterns did increase the learning curve for the user. The Graffiti handwriting recognition was found to infringe on a patent held by Xerox, and Palm replaced Graffiti with a licensed version of the CIC handwriting recognition which, while also supporting unistroke forms, pre-dated the Xerox patent. The court finding of infringement was reversed on appeal, and then reversed again on a later appeal. The parties involved subsequently negotiated a settlement concerning this and other patents. A Tablet PC is a notebook computer with a digitizer tablet and a stylus, which allows a user to handwrite text on the unit's screen. The operating system recognizes the handwriting and converts it into text. Windows Vista and Windows 7 include personalization features that learn a user's writing patterns or vocabulary for English, Japanese, Chinese Traditional, Chinese Simplified and Korean. The features include a "personalization wizard" that prompts for samples of a user's handwriting and uses them to retrain the system for higher accuracy recognition. This system is distinct from the less advanced handwriting recognition system employed in its Windows Mobile OS for PDAs. Although handwriting recognition is an input form that the public has become accustomed to, it has not achieved widespread use in either desktop computers or laptops. It is still generally accepted that keyboard input is both faster and more reliable. As of 2006, many PDAs offer handwriting input, sometimes even accepting natural cursive handwriting, but accuracy is still a problem, and some people still find even a simple on-screen keyboard more efficient. === Software === Early software could understand print handwriting where the characters were separated; however, cursive handwriting

  Read more →
• 

  Knowledge graph embedding

  In representation learning, knowledge graph embedding (KGE), also called knowledge representation learning (KRL), or multi-relation learning, is a machine learning task of learning a low-dimensional representation of a knowledge graph's entities and relations while preserving their semantic meaning. Leveraging their embedded representation, knowledge graphs can be used for various applications such as link prediction, triple classification, entity recognition, clustering, and relation extraction. == Definition == A knowledge graph G = { E , R , F } {\displaystyle {\mathcal {G}}=\{E,R,F\}} is a collection of entities E {\displaystyle E} , relations R {\displaystyle R} , and facts F {\displaystyle F} . A fact is a triple ( h , r , t ) ∈ F {\displaystyle (h,r,t)\in F} that denotes a link r ∈ R {\displaystyle r\in R} between the head h ∈ E {\displaystyle h\in E} and the tail t ∈ E {\displaystyle t\in E} of the triple. Another notation that is often used in the literature to represent a triple (or fact) is ⟨ head , relation , tail ⟩ {\displaystyle \langle {\text{head}},{\text{relation}},{\text{tail}}\rangle } . This notation is called the Resource Description Framework (RDF). A knowledge graph represents the knowledge related to a specific domain; leveraging this structured representation, it is possible to infer a piece of new knowledge from it after some refinement steps. However, nowadays, people have to deal with the sparsity of data and the computational inefficiency to use them in a real-world application. The embedding of a knowledge graph is a function that translates each entity and each relation into a vector of a given dimension d {\displaystyle d} , called embedding dimension. It is even possible to embed the entities and relations with different dimensions. The embedding vectors can then be used for other tasks. A knowledge graph embedding is characterized by four aspects: Representation space: The low-dimensional space in which the entities and relations are represented. Scoring function: A measure of the goodness of a triple-embedded representation. Encoding models: The modality in which the embedded representation of the entities and relations interact with each other. Additional information: Any additional information coming from the knowledge graph that can enrich the embedded representation. Usually, an ad hoc scoring function is integrated into the general scoring function for each additional piece of information. == Embedding procedure == All algorithms for creating a knowledge graph embedding follow the same approach. First, the embedding vectors are initialized to random values. Then, they are iteratively optimized using a training set of triples. In each iteration, a batch of size b {\displaystyle b} triples is sampled from the training set, and a triple from it is sampled and corrupted—i.e., a triple that does not represent a true fact in the knowledge graph. The corruption of a triple involves substituting the head or the tail (or both) of the triple with another entity that makes the fact false. The original triple and the corrupted triple are added in the training batch, and then the embeddings are updated, optimizing a scoring function. Iteration stops when a stop condition is reached. Usually, the stop condition depends on the overfitting of the training set. At the end, the learned embeddings should have extracted semantic meaning from the training triples and should correctly predict unseen true facts in the knowledge graph. === Pseudocode === The following is the pseudocode for the general embedding procedure. algorithm Compute entity and relation embeddings input: The training set S = { ( h , r , t ) } {\displaystyle S=\{(h,r,t)\}} , entity set E {\displaystyle E} , relation set R {\displaystyle R} , embedding dimension k {\displaystyle k} output: Entity and relation embeddings initialization: the entities e {\displaystyle e} and relations r {\displaystyle r} embeddings (vectors) are randomly initialized while stop condition do S b a t c h ← s a m p l e ( S , b ) {\displaystyle S_{batch}\leftarrow sample(S,b)} // Sample a batch from the training set for each ( h , r , t ) {\displaystyle (h,r,t)} in S b a t c h {\displaystyle S_{batch}} do ( h ′ , r , t ′ ) ← s a m p l e ( S ′ ) {\displaystyle (h',r,t')\leftarrow sample(S')} // Sample a corrupted fact T b a t c h ← T b a t c h ∪ { ( ( h , r , t ) , ( h ′ , r , t ′ ) ) } {\displaystyle T_{batch}\leftarrow T_{batch}\cup \{((h,r,t),(h',r,t'))\}} end for Update embeddings by minimizing the loss function end while == Performance indicators == These indexes are often used to measure the embedding quality of a model. The simplicity of the indexes makes them very suitable for evaluating the performance of an embedding algorithm even on a large scale. Given Q {\displaystyle {\ce {Q}}} as the set of all ranked predictions of a model, it is possible to define three different performance indexes: Hits@K, MR, and MRR. === Hits@K === Hits@K or in short, H@K, is a performance index that measures the probability to find the correct prediction in the first top K model predictions. Usually, it is used k = 10 {\displaystyle k=10} . Hits@K reflects the accuracy of an embedding model to predict the relation between two given triples correctly. Hits@K = | { q ∈ Q : q < k } | | Q | ∈ [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle ={\frac {|\{q\in Q:q Read more →

• 

  Homogeneity blockmodeling

  In mathematics applied to analysis of social structures, homogeneity blockmodeling is an approach in blockmodeling, which is best suited for a preliminary or main approach to valued networks, when a prior knowledge about these networks is not available. This is because homogeneity blockmodeling emphasizes the similarity of link (tie) strengths within the blocks over the pattern of links. In this approach, tie (link) values (or statistical data computed on them) are assumed to be equal (homogenous) within blocks. This approach to the generalized blockmodeling of valued networks was first proposed by Aleš Žiberna in 2007 with the basic idea, "that the inconsistency of an empirical block with its ideal block can be measured by within block variability of appropriate values". The newly–formed ideal blocks, which are appropriate for blockmodeling of valued networks, are then presented together with the definitions of their block inconsistencies. Similar approach to the homogeneity blockmodeling, dealing with direct approach for structural equivalence, was previously suggested by Stephen P. Borgatti and Martin G. Everett (1992).

  Read more →
• 

  Stress majorization

  Stress majorization is an optimization strategy used in multidimensional scaling (MDS) where, for a set of n {\displaystyle n} m {\displaystyle m} -dimensional data items, a configuration X {\displaystyle X} of n {\displaystyle n} points in r {\displaystyle r} ( ≪ m ) {\displaystyle (\ll m)} -dimensional space is sought that minimizes the so-called stress function σ ( X ) {\displaystyle \sigma (X)} . Usually r {\displaystyle r} is 2 {\displaystyle 2} or 3 {\displaystyle 3} , i.e. the ( n × r ) {\displaystyle (n\times r)} matrix X {\displaystyle X} lists points in 2 − {\displaystyle 2-} or 3 − {\displaystyle 3-} dimensional Euclidean space so that the result may be visualised (i.e. an MDS plot). The function σ {\displaystyle \sigma } is a cost or loss function that measures the squared differences between ideal ( m {\displaystyle m} -dimensional) distances and actual distances in r-dimensional space. It is defined as: σ ( X ) = ∑ i < j ≤ n w i j ( d i j ( X ) − δ i j ) 2 {\displaystyle \sigma (X)=\sum _{i Read more →

• 

  Generalized blockmodeling of binary networks

  Generalized blockmodeling of binary networks (also relational blockmodeling) is an approach of generalized blockmodeling, analysing the binary network(s). As most network analyses deal with binary networks, this approach is also considered as the fundamental approach of blockmodeling. This is especially noted, as the set of ideal blocks, when used for interpretation of blockmodels, have binary link patterns, which precludes them to be compared with valued empirical blocks. When analysing the binary networks, the criterion function is measuring block inconsistencies, while also reporting the possible errors. The ideal block in binary blockmodeling has only three types of conditions: "a certain cell must be (at least) 1, a certain cell must be 0 and the f {\displaystyle f} over each row (or column) must be at least 1". It is also used as a basis for developing the generalized blockmodeling of valued networks.

  Read more →
• 

  Decision list

  Decision lists are a representation for Boolean functions which can be easily learned from examples. Single term decision lists are more expressive than disjunctions and conjunctions; however, 1-term decision lists are less expressive than the general disjunctive normal form and the conjunctive normal form. The language specified by a k-length decision list includes as a subset the language specified by a k-depth decision tree. Learning decision lists can be used for attribute efficient learning, a type of machine learning. == Definition == A decision list (DL) of length r is of the form: if f1 then output b1 else if f2 then output b2 ... else if fr then output br where fi is the ith formula and bi is the ith boolean for i ∈ { 1... r } {\displaystyle i\in \{1...r\}} . The last if-then-else is the default case, which means formula fr is always equal to true. A k-DL is a decision list where all of formulas have at most k terms. Sometimes "decision list" is used to refer to a 1-DL, where all of the formulas are either a variable or its negation.

  Read more →
• 

  Spiking neural network

  Spiking neural networks (SNNs) are artificial neural networks (ANN) that mimic natural neural networks. These models leverage timing of discrete spikes as the main information carrier. In addition to neuronal and synaptic state, SNNs incorporate the concept of time into their operating model. The idea is that neurons in the SNN do not transmit information at each propagation cycle (as it happens with typical multi-layer perceptron networks), but rather transmit information only when a membrane potential—an intrinsic quality of the neuron related to its membrane electrical charge—reaches a specific value, called the threshold. When the membrane potential reaches the threshold, the neuron fires, and generates a signal that travels to other neurons which, in turn, increase or decrease their potentials in response to this signal. A neuron model that fires at the moment of threshold crossing is also called a spiking neuron model. While spike rates can be considered the analogue of the variable output of a traditional ANN, neurobiology research indicated that high speed processing cannot be performed solely through a rate-based scheme. For example humans can perform an image recognition task requiring no more than 10ms of processing time per neuron through the successive layers (going from the retina to the temporal lobe). This time window is too short for rate-based encoding. The precise spike timings in a small set of spiking neurons also has a higher information coding capacity compared with a rate-based approach. The most prominent spiking neuron model is the leaky integrate-and-fire model. In that model, the momentary activation level (modeled as a differential equation) is normally considered to be the neuron's state, with incoming spikes pushing this value higher or lower, until the state eventually either decays or—if the firing threshold is reached—the neuron fires. After firing, the state variable is reset to a lower value. Various decoding methods exist for interpreting the outgoing spike train as a real-value number, relying on either the frequency of spikes (rate-code), the time-to-first-spike after stimulation, or the interval between spikes. == History == Many multi-layer artificial neural networks are fully connected, receiving input from every neuron in the previous layer and signalling every neuron in the subsequent layer. Although these networks have achieved breakthroughs, they do not match biological networks and do not mimic neurons. The biology-inspired Hodgkin–Huxley model of a spiking neuron was proposed in 1952. This model described how action potentials are initiated and propagated. Communication between neurons, which requires the exchange of chemical neurotransmitters in the synaptic gap, is described in models such as the integrate-and-fire model, FitzHugh–Nagumo model (1961–1962), and Hindmarsh–Rose model (1984). The leaky integrate-and-fire model (or a derivative) is commonly used as it is easier to compute than Hodgkin–Huxley. While the notion of an artificial spiking neural network became popular only in the twenty-first century, studies between 1980 and 1995 supported the concept. The first models of this type of ANN appeared to simulate non-algorithmic intelligent information processing systems. However, the notion of the spiking neural network as a mathematical model was first worked on in the early 1970s. As of 2019 SNNs lagged behind ANNs in accuracy, but the gap is decreasing, and has vanished on some tasks. == Underpinnings == Information in the brain is represented as action potentials (neuron spikes), which may group into spike trains or coordinated waves. A fundamental question of neuroscience is to determine whether neurons communicate by a rate or temporal code. Temporal coding implies that a single spiking neuron can replace hundreds of hidden units on a conventional neural net. SNNs define a neuron's current state as its potential (possibly modeled as a differential equation). An input pulse causes the potential to rise and then gradually decline. Encoding schemes can interpret these pulse sequences as a number, considering pulse frequency and pulse interval. Using the precise time of pulse occurrence, a neural network can consider more information and offer better computing properties. SNNs compute in the continuous domain. Such neurons test for activation only when their potentials reach a certain value. When a neuron is activated, it produces a signal that is passed to connected neurons, accordingly raising or lowering their potentials. The SNN approach produces a continuous output instead of the binary output of traditional ANNs. Pulse trains are not easily interpretable, hence the need for encoding schemes. However, a pulse train representation may be more suited for processing spatiotemporal data (or real-world sensory data classification). SNNs connect neurons only to nearby neurons so that they process input blocks separately (similar to CNN using filters). They consider time by encoding information as pulse trains so as not to lose information. This avoids the complexity of a recurrent neural network (RNN). Impulse neurons are more powerful computational units than traditional artificial neurons. SNNs are theoretically more powerful than so called "second-generation networks" defined as ANNs "based on computational units that apply activation function with a continuous set of possible output values to a weighted sum (or polynomial) of the inputs"; however, SNN training issues and hardware requirements limit their use. Although unsupervised biologically inspired learning methods are available such as Hebbian learning and STDP, no effective supervised training method is suitable for SNNs that can provide better performance than second-generation networks. Spike-based activation of SNNs is not differentiable, thus gradient descent-based backpropagation (BP) is not available. SNNs have much larger computational costs for simulating realistic neural models than traditional ANNs. Pulse-coupled neural networks (PCNN) are often confused with SNNs. A PCNN can be seen as a kind of SNN. Researchers are actively working on various topics. The first concerns differentiability. The expressions for both the forward- and backward-learning methods contain the derivative of the neural activation function which is not differentiable because a neuron's output is either 1 when it spikes, and 0 otherwise. This all-or-nothing behavior disrupts gradients and makes these neurons unsuitable for gradient-based optimization. Approaches to resolving it include: resorting to entirely biologically inspired local learning rules for the hidden units translating conventionally trained "rate-based" NNs to SNNs smoothing the network model to be continuously differentiable defining an SG (Surrogate Gradient) as a continuous relaxation of the real gradients The second concerns the optimization algorithm. Standard BP can be expensive in terms of computation, memory, and communication and may be poorly suited to the hardware that implements it (e.g., a computer, brain, or neuromorphic device). Incorporating additional neuron dynamics such as Spike Frequency Adaptation (SFA) is a notable advance, enhancing efficiency and computational power. These neurons sit between biological complexity and computational complexity. Originating from biological insights, SFA offers significant computational benefits by reducing power usage, especially in cases of repetitive or intense stimuli. This adaptation improves signal/noise clarity and introduces an elementary short-term memory at the neuron level, which in turn, improves accuracy and efficiency. This was mostly achieved using compartmental neuron models. The simpler versions are of neuron models with adaptive thresholds, are an indirect way of achieving SFA. It equips SNNs with improved learning capabilities, even with constrained synaptic plasticity, and elevates computational efficiency. This feature lessens the demand on network layers by decreasing the need for spike processing, thus lowering computational load and memory access time—essential aspects of neural computation. Moreover, SNNs utilizing neurons capable of SFA achieve levels of accuracy that rival those of conventional ANNs, while also requiring fewer neurons for comparable tasks. This efficiency streamlines the computational workflow and conserves space and energy, while maintaining technical integrity. High-performance deep spiking neural networks can operate with 0.3 spikes per neuron. == Applications == SNNs can in principle be applied to the same applications as traditional ANNs. In addition, SNNs can model the central nervous system of biological organisms, such as an insect seeking food without prior knowledge of the environment. Due to their relative realism, they can be used to study biological neural circuits. Starting with a hypothesis about the topology of a biological neuronal circuit and its functi

  Read more →
• 

  Common Voice

  Common Voice is a crowdsourcing project started by Mozilla to create a free and open speech corpus. The project is supported by volunteers who record sample sentences with a microphone and review recordings of other users. The transcribed sentences are collected in a voice database available under the public domain license CC0. This license ensures that developers can use the database for voice-to-text and text-to-voice applications without restrictions or costs. == Aims == Common Voice aims to provide diverse voice samples. According to Mozilla's Katharina Borchert, many existing projects took datasets from public radio or otherwise had datasets that underrepresented both women and people with pronounced accents. == Voice database == The first dataset was released in November 2017. More than 20,000 users worldwide had recorded 500 hours of English sentences. In February 2019, the first batch of languages was released for use. This included 18 languages such as English, French, German and Mandarin Chinese, but also less prevalent languages like Welsh and Kabyle. In total, this included almost 1,400 hours of recorded voice data from more than 42,000 contributors. By July 2020 the database had amassed 7,226 hours of voice recordings in 54 languages, 5,591 hours of which had been verified by volunteers. In May 2021, following the work to add Kinyarwanda, the project received a grant to add Kiswahili. At the beginning of 2022, Bengali.AI partnered with Common Voice to launch the "Bangla Speech Recognition" project that aims to make machines understand the Bangla language. 2000 hours of voice was collected. In September 2022, it was announced that the Twi language of Ghana was the 100th language to be added to the database. As of December 2025, Mozilla Common Voice collects voice data for over 250 languages, with the most hours having been collected in English, Catalan, Kinyarwanda, Belarusian and Esperanto.

  Read more →
• 

  Algorithmic learning theory

  Algorithmic learning theory is a mathematical framework for analyzing machine learning problems and algorithms. Synonyms include formal learning theory and algorithmic inductive inference. Algorithmic learning theory is different from statistical learning theory in that it does not make use of statistical assumptions and analysis. Both algorithmic and statistical learning theory are concerned with machine learning and can thus be viewed as branches of computational learning theory. == Distinguishing characteristics == Unlike statistical learning theory and most statistical theory in general, algorithmic learning theory does not assume that data are random samples, that is, that data points are independent of each other. This makes the theory suitable for domains where observations are (relatively) noise-free but not random, such as language learning and automated scientific discovery. The fundamental concept of algorithmic learning theory is learning in the limit: as the number of data points increases, a learning algorithm should converge to a correct hypothesis on every possible data sequence consistent with the problem space. This is a non-probabilistic version of statistical consistency, which also requires convergence to a correct model in the limit, but allows a learner to fail on data sequences with probability measure 0 . Algorithmic learning theory investigates the learning power of Turing machines. Other frameworks consider a much more restricted class of learning algorithms than Turing machines, for example, learners that compute hypotheses more quickly, for instance in polynomial time. An example of such a framework is probably approximately correct learning . == Learning in the limit == The concept was introduced in E. Mark Gold's seminal paper "Language identification in the limit". The objective of language identification is for a machine running one program to be capable of developing another program by which any given sentence can be tested to determine whether it is "grammatical" or "ungrammatical". The language being learned need not be English or any other natural language - in fact the definition of "grammatical" can be absolutely anything known to the tester. In Gold's learning model, the tester gives the learner an example sentence at each step, and the learner responds with a hypothesis, which is a suggested program to determine grammatical correctness. It is required of the tester that every possible sentence (grammatical or not) appears in the list eventually, but no particular order is required. It is required of the learner that at each step the hypothesis must be correct for all the sentences so far. A particular learner is said to be able to "learn a language in the limit" if there is a certain number of steps beyond which its hypothesis no longer changes. At this point it has indeed learned the language, because every possible sentence appears somewhere in the sequence of inputs (past or future), and the hypothesis is correct for all inputs (past or future), so the hypothesis is correct for every sentence. The learner is not required to be able to tell when it has reached a correct hypothesis, all that is required is that it be true. Gold showed that any language which is defined by a Turing machine program can be learned in the limit by another Turing-complete machine using enumeration. This is done by the learner testing all possible Turing machine programs in turn until one is found which is correct so far - this forms the hypothesis for the current step. Eventually, the correct program will be reached, after which the hypothesis will never change again (but note that the learner does not know that it won't need to change). Gold also showed that if the learner is given only positive examples (that is, only grammatical sentences appear in the input, not ungrammatical sentences), then the language can only be guaranteed to be learned in the limit if there are only a finite number of possible sentences in the language (this is possible if, for example, sentences are known to be of limited length). Language identification in the limit is a highly abstract model. It does not allow for limits of runtime or computer memory which can occur in practice, and the enumeration method may fail if there are errors in the input. However the framework is very powerful, because if these strict conditions are maintained, it allows the learning of any program known to be computable. This is because a Turing machine program can be written to mimic any program in any conventional programming language. See Church-Turing thesis. == Other identification criteria == Learning theorists have investigated other learning criteria, such as the following. Efficiency: minimizing the number of data points required before convergence to a correct hypothesis. Mind Changes: minimizing the number of hypothesis changes that occur before convergence. Mind change bounds are closely related to mistake bounds that are studied in statistical learning theory. Kevin Kelly has suggested that minimizing mind changes is closely related to choosing maximally simple hypotheses in the sense of Occam’s Razor. == Annual conference == Since 1990, there is an International Conference on Algorithmic Learning Theory (ALT), called Workshop in its first years (1990–1997). Between 1992 and 2016, proceedings were published in the LNCS series. Starting from 2017, they are published by the Proceedings of Machine Learning Research. The 34th conference will be held in Singapore in Feb 2023. The topics of the conference cover all of theoretical machine learning, including statistical and computational learning theory, online learning, active learning, reinforcement learning, and deep learning.

  Read more →
• 

  Tensor operator

  In pure and applied mathematics, quantum mechanics and computer graphics, a tensor operator generalizes the notion of operators which are scalars and vectors. A special class of these are spherical tensor operators which apply the notion of the spherical basis and spherical harmonics. The spherical basis closely relates to the description of angular momentum in quantum mechanics and spherical harmonic functions. The coordinate-free generalization of a tensor operator is known as a representation operator. == The general notion of scalar, vector, and tensor operators == In quantum mechanics, physical observables that are scalars, vectors, and tensors, must be represented by scalar, vector, and tensor operators, respectively. Whether something is a scalar, vector, or tensor depends on how it is viewed by two observers whose coordinate frames are related to each other by a rotation. Alternatively, one may ask how, for a single observer, a physical quantity transforms if the state of the system is rotated. Consider, for example, a system consisting of a molecule of mass M {\displaystyle M} , traveling with a definite center of mass momentum, p z ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {z}} }} , in the z {\displaystyle z} direction. If we rotate the system by 90 ∘ {\displaystyle 90^{\circ }} about the y {\displaystyle y} axis, the momentum will change to p x ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {x}} }} , which is in the x {\displaystyle x} direction. The center-of-mass kinetic energy of the molecule will, however, be unchanged at p 2 / 2 M {\displaystyle p^{2}/2M} . The kinetic energy is a scalar and the momentum is a vector, and these two quantities must be represented by a scalar and a vector operator, respectively. By the latter in particular, we mean an operator whose expected values in the initial and the rotated states are p z ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {z}} }} and p x ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {x}} }} . The kinetic energy on the other hand must be represented by a scalar operator, whose expected value must be the same in the initial and the rotated states. In the same way, tensor quantities must be represented by tensor operators. An example of a tensor quantity (of rank two) is the electrical quadrupole moment of the above molecule. Likewise, the octupole and hexadecapole moments would be tensors of rank three and four, respectively. Other examples of scalar operators are the total energy operator (more commonly called the Hamiltonian), the potential energy, and the dipole-dipole interaction energy of two atoms. Examples of vector operators are the momentum, the position, the orbital angular momentum, L {\displaystyle {\mathbf {L} }} , and the spin angular momentum, S {\displaystyle {\mathbf {S} }} . (Fine print: Angular momentum is a vector as far as rotations are concerned, but unlike position or momentum it does not change sign under space inversion, and when one wishes to provide this information, it is said to be a pseudovector.) Scalar, vector and tensor operators can also be formed by products of operators. For example, the scalar product L ⋅ S {\displaystyle {\mathbf {L} }\cdot {\mathbf {S} }} of the two vector operators, L {\displaystyle {\mathbf {L} }} and S {\displaystyle {\mathbf {S} }} , is a scalar operator, which figures prominently in discussions of the spin–orbit interaction. Similarly, the quadrupole moment tensor of our example molecule has the nine components Q i j = ∑ α q α ( 3 r α , i r α , j − r α 2 δ i j ) . {\displaystyle Q_{ij}=\sum _{\alpha }q_{\alpha }\left(3r_{\alpha ,i}r_{\alpha ,j}-r_{\alpha }^{2}\delta _{ij}\right).} Here, the indices i {\displaystyle i} and j {\displaystyle j} can independently take on the values 1, 2, and 3 (or x {\displaystyle x} , y {\displaystyle y} , and z {\displaystyle z} ) corresponding to the three Cartesian axes, the index α {\displaystyle \alpha } runs over all particles (electrons and nuclei) in the molecule, q α {\displaystyle q_{\alpha }} is the charge on particle α {\displaystyle \alpha } , and r α , i {\displaystyle r_{\alpha ,i}} is the i {\displaystyle i} -th component of the position of this particle. Each term in the sum is a tensor operator. In particular, the nine products r α , i r α , j {\displaystyle r_{\alpha ,i}r_{\alpha ,j}} together form a second rank tensor, formed by taking the outer product of the vector operator r α {\displaystyle {\mathbf {r} }_{\alpha }} with itself. == Rotations of quantum states == === Quantum rotation operator === The rotation operator about the unit vector n (defining the axis of rotation) through angle θ is U [ R ( θ , n ^ ) ] = exp ⁡ ( − i θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J ) {\displaystyle U[R(\theta ,{\hat {\mathbf {n} }})]=\exp \left(-{\frac {i\theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} \right)} where J = (Jx, Jy, Jz) are the rotation generators (also the angular momentum matrices): J x = ℏ 2 ( 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 ) J y = ℏ 2 ( 0 i 0 − i 0 i 0 − i 0 ) J z = ℏ ( − 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ) {\displaystyle J_{x}={\frac {\hbar }{\sqrt {2}}}{\begin{pmatrix}0&1&0\\1&0&1\\0&1&0\end{pmatrix}}\,\quad J_{y}={\frac {\hbar }{\sqrt {2}}}{\begin{pmatrix}0&i&0\\-i&0&i\\0&-i&0\end{pmatrix}}\,\quad J_{z}=\hbar {\begin{pmatrix}-1&0&0\\0&0&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}} and let R ^ = R ^ ( θ , n ^ ) {\displaystyle {\widehat {R}}={\widehat {R}}(\theta ,{\hat {\mathbf {n} }})} be a rotation matrix. According to the Rodrigues' rotation formula, the rotation operator then amounts to U [ R ( θ , n ^ ) ] = 1 1 − i sin ⁡ θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J − 1 − cos ⁡ θ ℏ 2 ( n ^ ⋅ J ) 2 . {\displaystyle U[R(\theta ,{\hat {\mathbf {n} }})]=1\!\!1-{\frac {i\sin \theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} -{\frac {1-\cos \theta }{\hbar ^{2}}}({\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} )^{2}.} An operator Ω ^ {\displaystyle {\widehat {\Omega }}} is invariant under a unitary transformation U if Ω ^ = U † Ω ^ U ; {\displaystyle {\widehat {\Omega }}={U}^{\dagger }{\widehat {\Omega }}U;} in this case for the rotation U ^ ( R ) {\displaystyle {\widehat {U}}(R)} , Ω ^ = U ( R ) † Ω ^ U ( R ) = exp ⁡ ( i θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J ) Ω ^ exp ⁡ ( − i θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J ) . {\displaystyle {\widehat {\Omega }}={U(R)}^{\dagger }{\widehat {\Omega }}U(R)=\exp \left({\frac {i\theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} \right){\widehat {\Omega }}\exp \left(-{\frac {i\theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} \right).} === Angular momentum eigenkets === The orthonormal basis set for total angular momentum is | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |j,m\rangle } , where j is the total angular momentum quantum number and m is the magnetic angular momentum quantum number, which takes values −j, −j + 1, ..., j − 1, j. A general state within the j subspace | ψ ⟩ = ∑ m c j m | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |\psi \rangle =\sum _{m}c_{jm}|j,m\rangle } rotates to a new state by: | ψ ¯ ⟩ = U ( R ) | ψ ⟩ = ∑ m c j m U ( R ) | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =U(R)|\psi \rangle =\sum _{m}c_{jm}U(R)|j,m\rangle } Using the completeness condition: I = ∑ m ′ | j , m ′ ⟩ ⟨ j , m ′ | {\displaystyle I=\sum _{m'}|j,m'\rangle \langle j,m'|} we have | ψ ¯ ⟩ = I U ( R ) | ψ ⟩ = ∑ m m ′ c j m | j , m ′ ⟩ ⟨ j , m ′ | U ( R ) | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =IU(R)|\psi \rangle =\sum _{mm'}c_{jm}|j,m'\rangle \langle j,m'|U(R)|j,m\rangle } Introducing the Wigner D matrix elements: D ( R ) m ′ m ( j ) = ⟨ j , m ′ | U ( R ) | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle {D(R)}_{m'm}^{(j)}=\langle j,m'|U(R)|j,m\rangle } gives the matrix multiplication: | ψ ¯ ⟩ = ∑ m m ′ c j m D m ′ m ( j ) | j , m ′ ⟩ ⇒ | ψ ¯ ⟩ = D ( j ) | ψ ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =\sum _{mm'}c_{jm}D_{m'm}^{(j)}|j,m'\rangle \quad \Rightarrow \quad |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =D^{(j)}|\psi \rangle } For one basis ket: | j , m ¯ ⟩ = ∑ m ′ D ( R ) m ′ m ( j ) | j , m ′ ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\overline {j,m}}\rangle =\sum _{m'}{D(R)}_{m'm}^{(j)}|j,m'\rangle } For the case of orbital angular momentum, the eigenstates | ℓ , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |\ell ,m\rangle } of the orbital angular momentum operator L and solutions of Laplace's equation on a 3d sphere are spherical harmonics: Y ℓ m ( θ , ϕ ) = ⟨ θ , ϕ | ℓ , m ⟩ = ( 2 ℓ + 1 ) 4 π ( ℓ − m ) ! ( ℓ + m ) ! P ℓ m ( cos ⁡ θ ) e i m ϕ {\displaystyle Y_{\ell }^{m}(\theta ,\phi )=\langle \theta ,\phi |\ell ,m\rangle ={\sqrt {{(2\ell +1) \over 4\pi }{(\ell -m)! \over (\ell +m)!}}}\,P_{\ell }^{m}(\cos {\theta })\,e^{im\phi }} where Pℓm is an associated Legendre polynomial, ℓ is the orbital angular momentum quantum number, and m is the orbital magnetic quantum number which takes the values −ℓ, −ℓ + 1, ... ℓ − 1, ℓ The formalism of spherical harmonics have wide applications in applied mathematics, and are closely related to the formalism of spherical tensors, as shown below. Spherical harmonics are functions of the polar and azimuthal angles, ϕ and θ respectively, which can be conveniently collected into a unit vector n(θ, ϕ) pointing in the direction of those angles, in the Cartesian basis it is: n ^ ( θ , ϕ ) = cos ⁡ ϕ sin ⁡ θ e x + s

  Read more →
• 

  Policy gradient method

  Policy gradient methods are a class of reinforcement learning algorithms and a sub-class of policy optimization methods. Unlike value-based methods which learn a value function to derive a policy, policy optimization methods directly learn a policy function π {\displaystyle \pi } that selects actions without consulting a value function. For policy gradient to apply, the policy function π θ {\displaystyle \pi _{\theta }} is parameterized by a differentiable parameter θ {\displaystyle \theta } . == Overview == In policy-based RL, the actor is a parameterized policy function π θ {\displaystyle \pi _{\theta }} , where θ {\displaystyle \theta } are the parameters of the actor. The actor takes as argument the state of the environment s {\displaystyle s} and produces a probability distribution π θ ( ⋅ ∣ s ) {\displaystyle \pi _{\theta }(\cdot \mid s)} . If the action space is discrete, then ∑ a π θ ( a ∣ s ) = 1 {\displaystyle \sum _{a}\pi _{\theta }(a\mid s)=1} . If the action space is continuous, then ∫ a π θ ( a ∣ s ) d a = 1 {\displaystyle \int _{a}\pi _{\theta }(a\mid s)\mathrm {d} a=1} . The goal of policy optimization is to find some θ {\displaystyle \theta } that maximizes the expected episodic reward J ( θ ) {\displaystyle J(\theta )} : J ( θ ) = E π θ [ ∑ t = 0 T γ t R t | S 0 = s 0 ] {\displaystyle J(\theta )=\mathbb {E} _{\pi _{\theta }}\left[\sum _{t=0}^{T}\gamma ^{t}R_{t}{\Big |}S_{0}=s_{0}\right]} where γ {\displaystyle \gamma } is the discount factor, R t {\displaystyle R_{t}} is the reward at step t {\displaystyle t} , s 0 {\displaystyle s_{0}} is the starting state, and T {\displaystyle T} is the time-horizon (which can be infinite). The policy gradient is defined as ∇ θ J ( θ ) {\displaystyle \nabla _{\theta }J(\theta )} . Different policy gradient methods stochastically estimate the policy gradient in different ways. The goal of any policy gradient method is to iteratively maximize J ( θ ) {\displaystyle J(\theta )} by gradient ascent. Since the key part of any policy gradient method is the stochastic estimation of the policy gradient, they are also studied under the title of "Monte Carlo gradient estimation". == REINFORCE == === Policy gradient === The REINFORCE algorithm, introduced by Ronald J. Williams in 1992, was the first policy gradient method. It is based on the identity for the policy gradient ∇ θ J ( θ ) = E π θ [ ∑ t = 0 T ∇ θ ln ⁡ π θ ( A t ∣ S t ) ∑ t = 0 T ( γ t R t ) | S 0 = s 0 ] {\displaystyle \nabla _{\theta }J(\theta )=\mathbb {E} _{\pi _{\theta }}\left[\sum _{t=0}^{T}\nabla _{\theta }\ln \pi _{\theta }(A_{t}\mid S_{t})\;\sum _{t=0}^{T}(\gamma ^{t}R_{t}){\Big |}S_{0}=s_{0}\right]} which can be improved via the "causality trick" ∇ θ J ( θ ) = E π θ [ ∑ t = 0 T ∇ θ ln ⁡ π θ ( A t ∣ S t ) ∑ τ = t T ( γ τ R τ ) | S 0 = s 0 ] {\displaystyle \nabla _{\theta }J(\theta )=\mathbb {E} _{\pi _{\theta }}\left[\sum _{t=0}^{T}\nabla _{\theta }\ln \pi _{\theta }(A_{t}\mid S_{t})\sum _{\tau =t}^{T}(\gamma ^{\tau }R_{\tau }){\Big |}S_{0}=s_{0}\right]} Thus, we have an unbiased estimator of the policy gradient: ∇ θ J ( θ ) ≈ 1 N ∑ n = 1 N [ ∑ t = 0 T ∇ θ ln ⁡ π θ ( A t , n ∣ S t , n ) ∑ τ = t T ( γ τ − t R τ , n ) ] {\displaystyle \nabla _{\theta }J(\theta )\approx {\frac {1}{N}}\sum _{n=1}^{N}\left[\sum _{t=0}^{T}\nabla _{\theta }\ln \pi _{\theta }(A_{t,n}\mid S_{t,n})\sum _{\tau =t}^{T}(\gamma ^{\tau -t}R_{\tau ,n})\right]} where the index n {\displaystyle n} ranges over N {\displaystyle N} rollout trajectories using the policy π θ {\displaystyle \pi _{\theta }} . The score function ∇ θ ln ⁡ π θ ( A t ∣ S t ) {\displaystyle \nabla _{\theta }\ln \pi _{\theta }(A_{t}\mid S_{t})} can be interpreted as the direction in the parameter space that increases the probability of taking action A t {\displaystyle A_{t}} in state S t {\displaystyle S_{t}} . The policy gradient, then, is a weighted average of all possible directions to increase the probability of taking any action in any state, but weighted by reward signals, so that if taking a certain action in a certain state is associated with high reward, then that direction would be highly reinforced, and vice versa. === Algorithm === The REINFORCE algorithm is a loop: Rollout N {\displaystyle N} trajectories in the environment, using π θ t {\displaystyle \pi _{\theta _{t}}} as the policy function. Compute the policy gradient estimation: g i ← 1 N ∑ n = 1 N [ ∑ t = 0 T ∇ θ t ln ⁡ π θ ( A t , n ∣ S t , n ) ∑ τ = t T ( γ τ R τ , n ) ] {\displaystyle g_{i}\leftarrow {\frac {1}{N}}\sum _{n=1}^{N}\left[\sum _{t=0}^{T}\nabla _{\theta _{t}}\ln \pi _{\theta }(A_{t,n}\mid S_{t,n})\sum _{\tau =t}^{T}(\gamma ^{\tau }R_{\tau ,n})\right]} Update the policy by gradient ascent: θ i + 1 ← θ i + α i g i {\displaystyle \theta _{i+1}\leftarrow \theta _{i}+\alpha _{i}g_{i}} Here, α i {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}} is the learning rate at update step i {\displaystyle i} . == Variance reduction == REINFORCE is an on-policy algorithm, meaning that the trajectories used for the update must be sampled from the current policy π θ {\displaystyle \pi _{\theta }} . This can lead to high variance in the updates, as the returns R ( τ ) {\displaystyle R(\tau )} can vary significantly between trajectories. Many variants of REINFORCE have been introduced, under the title of variance reduction. === REINFORCE with baseline === A common way for reducing variance is the REINFORCE with baseline algorithm, based on the following identity: ∇ θ J ( θ ) = E π θ [ ∑ t = 0 T ∇ θ ln ⁡ π θ ( A t | S t ) ( ∑ τ = t T ( γ τ R τ ) − b ( S t ) ) | S 0 = s 0 ] {\displaystyle \nabla _{\theta }J(\theta )=\mathbb {E} _{\pi _{\theta }}\left[\sum _{t=0}^{T}\nabla _{\theta }\ln \pi _{\theta }(A_{t}|S_{t})\left(\sum _{\tau =t}^{T}(\gamma ^{\tau }R_{\tau })-b(S_{t})\right){\Big |}S_{0}=s_{0}\right]} for any function b : States → R {\displaystyle b:{\text{States}}\to \mathbb {R} } . This can be proven by applying the previous lemma. The algorithm uses the modified gradient estimator g i ← 1 N ∑ n = 1 N [ ∑ t = 0 T ∇ θ t ln ⁡ π θ ( A t , n | S t , n ) ( ∑ τ = t T ( γ τ R τ , n ) − b i ( S t , n ) ) ] {\displaystyle g_{i}\leftarrow {\frac {1}{N}}\sum _{n=1}^{N}\left[\sum _{t=0}^{T}\nabla _{\theta _{t}}\ln \pi _{\theta }(A_{t,n}|S_{t,n})\left(\sum _{\tau =t}^{T}(\gamma ^{\tau }R_{\tau ,n})-b_{i}(S_{t,n})\right)\right]} and the original REINFORCE algorithm is the special case where b i ≡ 0 {\displaystyle b_{i}\equiv 0} . === Actor-critic methods === If b i {\textstyle b_{i}} is chosen well, such that b i ( S t ) ≈ ∑ τ = t T ( γ τ R τ ) = γ t V π θ i ( S t ) {\textstyle b_{i}(S_{t})\approx \sum _{\tau =t}^{T}(\gamma ^{\tau }R_{\tau })=\gamma ^{t}V^{\pi _{\theta _{i}}}(S_{t})} , this could significantly decrease variance in the gradient estimation. That is, the baseline should be as close to the value function V π θ i ( S t ) {\displaystyle V^{\pi _{\theta _{i}}}(S_{t})} as possible, approaching the ideal of: ∇ θ J ( θ ) = E π θ [ ∑ t = 0 T ∇ θ ln ⁡ π θ ( A t | S t ) ( ∑ τ = t T ( γ τ R τ ) − γ t V π θ ( S t ) ) | S 0 = s 0 ] {\displaystyle \nabla _{\theta }J(\theta )=\mathbb {E} _{\pi _{\theta }}\left[\sum _{t=0}^{T}\nabla _{\theta }\ln \pi _{\theta }(A_{t}|S_{t})\left(\sum _{\tau =t}^{T}(\gamma ^{\tau }R_{\tau })-\gamma ^{t}V^{\pi _{\theta }}(S_{t})\right){\Big |}S_{0}=s_{0}\right]} Note that, as the policy π θ t {\displaystyle \pi _{\theta _{t}}} updates, the value function V π θ i ( S t ) {\displaystyle V^{\pi _{\theta _{i}}}(S_{t})} updates as well, so the baseline should also be updated. One common approach is to train a separate function that estimates the value function, and use that as the baseline. This is one of the actor-critic methods, where the policy function is the actor and the value function is the critic. The Q-function Q π {\displaystyle Q^{\pi }} can also be used as the critic, since ∇ θ J ( θ ) = E π θ [ ∑ 0 ≤ t ≤ T γ t ∇ θ ln ⁡ π θ ( A t | S t ) ⋅ Q π θ ( S t , A t ) | S 0 = s 0 ] {\displaystyle \nabla _{\theta }J(\theta )=E_{\pi _{\theta }}\left[\sum _{0\leq t\leq T}\gamma ^{t}\nabla _{\theta }\ln \pi _{\theta }(A_{t}|S_{t})\cdot Q^{\pi _{\theta }}(S_{t},A_{t}){\Big |}S_{0}=s_{0}\right]} by a similar argument using the tower law. Subtracting the value function as a baseline, we find that the advantage function A π ( S , A ) = Q π ( S , A ) − V π ( S ) {\displaystyle A^{\pi }(S,A)=Q^{\pi }(S,A)-V^{\pi }(S)} can be used as the critic as well: ∇ θ J ( θ ) = E π θ [ ∑ 0 ≤ t ≤ T γ t ∇ θ ln ⁡ π θ ( A t | S t ) ⋅ A π θ ( S t , A t ) | S 0 = s 0 ] {\displaystyle \nabla _{\theta }J(\theta )=E_{\pi _{\theta }}\left[\sum _{0\leq t\leq T}\gamma ^{t}\nabla _{\theta }\ln \pi _{\theta }(A_{t}|S_{t})\cdot A^{\pi _{\theta }}(S_{t},A_{t}){\Big |}S_{0}=s_{0}\right]} In summary, there are many unbiased estimators for ∇ θ J θ {\textstyle \nabla _{\theta }J_{\theta }} , all in the form of: ∇ θ J ( θ ) = E π θ [ ∑ 0 ≤ t ≤ T ∇ θ ln ⁡ π θ ( A t | S t ) ⋅ Ψ t | S 0 = s 0 ] {\displaystyle \nabla _{\theta }J(\theta )=E_{\pi _{\theta }}\left[\su

  Read more →
• 

  (1+ε)-approximate nearest neighbor search

  (1+ε)-approximate nearest neighbor search is a variant of the nearest neighbor search problem. A solution to the (1+ε)-approximate nearest neighbor search is a point or multiple points within distance (1+ε) R from a query point, where R is the distance between the query point and its true nearest neighbor. Reasons to approximate nearest neighbor search include the space and time costs of exact solutions in high-dimensional spaces (see curse of dimensionality) and that in some domains, finding an approximate nearest neighbor is an acceptable solution. Approaches for solving (1+ε)-approximate nearest neighbor search include k-d trees, locality-sensitive hashing and brute-force search.

  Read more →