AI Chat Emochi

AI Chat Emochi — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  LIVAC Synchronous Corpus

  LIVAC is an uncommon language corpus dynamically maintained since 1995. Different from other existing corpora, LIVAC has adopted a rigorous and regular "Windows" approach in processing and filtering massive media texts from representative Chinese speech communities such as Beijing, Hong Kong, Macau, Taipei, Singapore, Shanghai, as well as Guangzhou, and Shenzhen. The contents are thus deliberately repetitive in most cases, represented by textual samples drawn from editorials, local and international news, cross-Taiwan Strait news, as well as news on finance, sports and entertainment. By 2023, more than 3 billion characters of news media texts have been filtered, of which 700 million characters have been processed and analyzed and have yielded an expanding Pan-Chinese dictionary of 2.5 million words from the Pan-Chinese printed media. Through rigorous analysis based on computational linguistic methodology, LIVAC has at the same time accumulated a large amount of accurate and meaningful statistical data on the Chinese language and on their diverse speech communities in the Pan-Chinese context, and the results show considerable and important long standing as well as evolving variations. The "Windows" approach is the most innovative feature of LIVAC and has enabled Pan-Chinese media texts to be quantitatively analyzed according to various attributes such as locations, time and subject domains. Thus, various types of comparative studies and applications in information technology as well as development of often related innovative applications have been possible. Moreover, LIVAC has allowed longitudinal developments to be taken into account, facilitating Key Word in Context (KWIC) search and comprehensive study of target words and their underlying concepts as well as linguistic structures over the past 25 years, based on the above mentioned variables of location, time and subject. Results from the extensive and accumulative data analysis contained in LIVAC have enabled the cultivation of textual databases of proper names, place names, organization names, new words, and bi-weekly and annual rosters of media figures. Related applications have included the establishment of verb and adjective databases, the formulation of sentiment indices, and related opinion mining, to measure and compare the popularity of global media figures in the Chinese media (LIVAC Annual Pan-Chinese Celebrity Rosters, later renamed as the Pan-Chinese Newsmaker Rosters). Notable among these are the decades long periodic reviews of the 25 years of annual pan-Chinese rosters since 2000 and compilation of new word databases (LIVAC Annual Pan-Chinese New Word Rosters). On this basis, the analysis of the emergence, diffusion and transformation of new words, and the publication of dictionaries of neologisms have been made possible. A recent focus is on the relative balance between disyllabic words and growing trisyllabic words in the Chinese language, and the comparative study of light verbs in three Chinese speech communities. as well as the link between the language use and use of language as a reflection of epochal change in China. A new LIVAC version 3.1 was launched in February 2024. == Corpus data processing == Accessing media texts, manual input, etc. Text unification including conversion from simplified to traditional Chinese characters, stored as Big5 and Unicode versions Automatic word segmentation Automatic alignment of parallel texts Manual verification, part-of-speech tagging Extraction of words and addition to regional sub-corpora Combination of regional sub-corpora to update the LIVAC corpus, and master lexical database == Labeling for data curation == Categories used include general terms and proper names, such as: general names, surnames, semi titles; geographical, organizations and commercial entities, etc.; time, prepositions, locations, etc.; stack-words; loanwords; case-word; numerals, etc. Construction of databases of proper names, place names, and specific terms, etc. Generate rosters: "new word rosters", "celebrity or media personality rosters", "place name rosters", compound words and matched words Other parts of speech tagging for sub-database, such as common nouns, numerals, numeral classifiers, different types of verbs, and of adjectives, pronouns, adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, particles marking mood, onomatopoeia, interjection, etc. == Applications == Compilation of Pan-Chinese dictionaries or local dictionaries Information technology research, such as predictive Chinese text input for mobile phones, automatic speech to text conversion, opinion mining Comparative studies on linguistic and cultural developments in the Pan-Chinese regions, especially in a critical period of history in modern China. Language teaching and learning research, and speech-to-text conversion Customized service on linguistic research and lexical search for international corporations and government agencies The above applications are provided by the following functions: Word Segmentation Search Phrase Search Example Sentence Selection Multi-word Comparison Word Cloud

  Read more →
• 

  Orion's Arm

  The Orion's Arm Universe Project (OA) is a multi-authored online hard science fiction world-building project, first established in 2000 by M. Alan Kazlev, Donna Malcolm Hirsekorn, Bernd Helfert and Anders Sandberg and further co-authored by many people since. Anyone can contribute articles, stories, artwork, or music to the website. The first published Orion's Arm book, a collection of five novellas set within the OA universe, called Against a Diamond Sky, was released in September 2009. == Canon == The fictional setting of Orion's Arm takes place about 10,000 years in the future, where an interstellar civilization spread across thousands of light-years, with inhabited planets and space habitats. Its inhabitants range from humans to extensively modified human beings, including superhumans with advanced augmentations and internal AI systems, while most people exist as softwares. Engineered wormholes are used for interstellar travel and transport, although not for time travel. The setting also includes several alien civilizations and evidence of more advanced alien societies in the past. At its highest levels, directed human evolution has produced vast godlike beings linked across interstellar distances, capable of understanding and creating technologies beyond ordinary minds. == Reception == Orion's Arm has been reviewed in the role-playing magazine Knights of the Dinner Table, as well as on Boing Boing by transhumanist science fiction author Cory Doctorow. References to the Encyclopaedia Galactica have been made in a book on overcoming Librarian stereotypes. The Orion's Arm website has also been recommended in a children's teaching guide.

  Read more →
• 

  Megami Tensei

  Megami Tensei, marketed internationally as Shin Megami Tensei (formerly Revelations), is a Japanese media franchise created by Aya Nishitani, Kouji "Cozy" Okada, Ginichiro Suzuki, and Kazunari Suzuki. Primarily developed and published by Atlus, the franchise consists of multiple subseries and covers multiple role-playing video game genres including tactical role-playing, action role-playing, and massively multiplayer online role-playing. The first two titles in the series were published by Namco (now Bandai Namco Entertainment), but have been almost always published by Atlus in Japan and North America since the release of Shin Megami Tensei. For Europe, Atlus publishes the games through third-party companies. The series was originally based on Digital Devil Story, a science fiction novel series by Aya Nishitani. The series takes its name from the first book's subtitle. Most Megami Tensei titles are stand-alone entries with their own stories and characters. Recurring elements include plot themes, a story shaped by the player's choices, and the ability to fight using and often recruit creatures (demons, Personas) to aid the player in battle. Elements of philosophy, religion, occultism, and science fiction have all been incorporated into the series at different times. While not maintaining as high a profile as series such as Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest, it is highly popular in Japan and maintains a strong cult following in the West, finding critical and commercial success. The series has become well known for its artistic direction, challenging gameplay, and music, but raised controversy over its mature content, dark themes, and use of Christian religious imagery. Additional media include manga adaptations, anime films, and television series. In Japan, some games in the series do not use the "Megami Tensei" title, such as the Persona sub-series. Many of the early games in the series were not localized due to potentially controversial content including religious references, and later due to their age. English localizations have used the "Shin Megami Tensei" moniker since the release of Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne in 2004. == Titles == === Games === The first installment in the franchise, Digital Devil Story: Megami Tensei, was released on September 11, 1987. The following entries have nearly always been unrelated to each other except in carrying over thematic and gameplay elements. The Megami Tensei games, and the later Shin Megami Tensei titles form the core of the series, while other subseries such as Persona, Devil Children, and Devil Summoner are spin-offs marketed as part of the franchise. There are also stand-alone spin-off titles. ==== Main series ==== Two entries were released for the Famicom: Digital Devil Story: Megami Tensei in 1987, and Digital Devil Story: Megami Tensei II in 1990. The two titles are unrelated to each other in terms of story, and each introduced the basic gameplay and story mechanics that would come to define the series. Three entries were released for the Super Famicom: Shin Megami Tensei in 1992, followed byShin Megami Tensei II in 1994, and Shin Megami Tensei If..., released later in the same year. Shin Megami Tensei III: Nocturne was released in 2003 for the PlayStation 2. Its Maniax Edition director's cut was released in Japan and North America in 2004, and in Europe in 2005. The numeral was dropped for its North American release, and its title changed to Shin Megami Tensei: Lucifer's Call in Europe. Shin Megami Tensei IV for the Nintendo 3DS was released in 2013 in Japan and North America, and a year later in Europe as a digital-only release. Another game set in the same universe, Shin Megami Tensei IV: Apocalypse, was released for the 3DS in February 2016 in Japan. Shin Megami Tensei V was released on the Nintendo Switch in 2021. An enhanced version of the game titled Shin Megami Tensei V: Vengeance was released in June 2024 for Microsoft Windows, Nintendo Switch, PlayStation 4, PlayStation 5, Xbox One and Xbox Series X/S. In addition to the main series, there are also numerous spin-offs. Shin Megami Tensei: Nine, was released for the Xbox in 2002. Originally designed as a massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG), it was later split into a dual single-player and multiplayer package, and the single-player version released first. The online version was delayed and eventually cancelled as the developers could not manage the required online capacities using Xbox Live. Shin Megami Tensei: Imagine, a true MMOROG released for Microsoft Windows, was released in 2007 in Japan, 2008 in North America, and 2009 in Europe. Western service was terminated in 2014 when Marvelous USA, the game's then-handlers, shut down their PC Online game department. Shin Megami Tensei: Strange Journey was released for the Nintendo DS in 2009 in Japan and 2010 in North America. Its Japanese service ended in May 2016. A smartphone game, Shin Megami Tensei: Liberation Dx2, was released in 2018. ==== Persona ==== The Persona series is the largest and most popular spin-off from the Megami Tensei series. The first entry in the series, Megami Ibunroku Persona (originally released overseas as Revelations: Persona), was released in 1996 in Japan and North America. The first Persona 2 title, Innocent Sin, was released in 1999 in Japan. The second game, Eternal Punishment, was released in 2000 in Japan and North America. Persona 3 was released in 2006 in Japan, 2007 in North America, and 2008 in Europe. Its sequel, Persona 4, was released in 2008 in Japan and North America, and in 2009 in Europe. A sixth entry in the series, Persona 5, was released in Japan on September 15, 2016, and was released in North America and Europe on April 4, 2017, to critical acclaim. The series also features spin-offs, including Persona Q: Shadow of the Labyrinth and Persona Q2: New Cinema Labyrinth, two fighting games Persona 4 Arena and its sequel Arena Ultimax as well as the crossover fighting game BlazBlue: Cross Tag Battle, tactical role-playing game Persona 5 Tactica, action role-playing game Persona 5 Strikers and rhythm games Persona 4: Dancing All Night, Persona 3: Dancing in Moonlight, and Persona 5: Dancing in Starlight. While Persona 3 and 4 used the Shin Megami Tensei moniker in the West, it was dropped for the Persona 4 Arena duology and Persona 4 Golden as it would have made the titles too long to be practical. ==== Devil Summoner ==== The Devil Summoner subseries began in 1995 with the release of Shin Megami Tensei: Devil Summoner. It was followed by Devil Summoner: Soul Hackers in 1997, then followed by Soul Hackers 2, released in 2022. Two action role-playing prequels set in 1920s Tokyo were also developed, which revolve around demon summoner Raidou Kuzunoha: Raidou Kuzunoha vs. the Soulless Army was released in 2006, and Raidou Kuzunoha vs. King Abaddon was released in 2008. ==== Other spin-offs ==== Aside from Persona and Devil Summoner, there are other spin-off series covering multiple genres. After the release of Shin Megami Tensei II, Atlus began focusing work on building spin-offs and subseries that would form part of the Megami Tensei franchise. Shortly after Nocturne's release, a duology titled Digital Devil Saga (Digital Devil Saga: Avatar Tuner in Japan) was created based around similar systems to Nocturne, and was also intended as a more accessible gaming experience. Two tactical role-playing games have been developed by Atlus for the DS under the Devil Survivor moniker: the original Devil Survivor and Devil Survivor 2. Both have received expanded ports for the 3DS. Other subseries include Last Bible, a series aimed at a younger audience and using a pure fantasy setting; Devil Children, which was inspired by the popular Pokémon series; and Majin Tensei, a series of strategy games. Two notable stand-alone spin-offs are action spin-off Jack Bros. and Tokyo Mirage Sessions ♯FE, a crossover with Intelligent Systems' Fire Emblem series. === Related media === Several titles in the franchise have received anime and manga adaptations. Persona 3 received both a four-part theatrical adaptation (#1 Spring of Birth, #2 Midsummer Knight's Dream, #3 Falling Down, #4 Winter of Rebirth), and a spin-off series titled Persona: Trinity Soul. Persona 4 received two adaptations: Persona 4: The Animation, based on the original game, and Persona 4: The Golden Animation, based on its expanded PlayStation Vita port. A live-action television series based on the original Devil Summoner was broadcast between 1997 and 1998. Devil Survivor 2 also received an anime adaptation of the same name, and the Devil Children series received two anime adaptations. Multiple Shin Megami Tensei and Persona titles have received manga and CD drama adaptations. Action figures and merchandise related to Persona have also been produced. == Common elements == Despite most games in the series taking place in different continuities, they do share certain elements

  Read more →
• 

  Belief–desire–intention software model

  The belief–desire–intention software model (BDI) is a software model developed for programming intelligent agents. Superficially characterized by the implementation of an agent's beliefs, desires and intentions, it actually uses these concepts to solve a particular problem in agent programming. In essence, it provides a mechanism for separating the activity of selecting a plan (from a plan library or an external planner application) from the execution of currently active plans. Consequently, BDI agents are able to balance the time spent on deliberating about plans (choosing what to do) and executing those plans (doing it). A third activity, creating the plans in the first place (planning), is not within the scope of the model, and is left to the system designer and programmer. == Overview == In order to achieve this separation, the BDI software model implements the principal aspects of Michael Bratman's theory of human practical reasoning (also referred to as Belief-Desire-Intention, or BDI). That is to say, it implements the notions of belief, desire and (in particular) intention, in a manner inspired by Bratman. For Bratman, desire and intention are both pro-attitudes (mental attitudes concerned with action). He identifies commitment as the distinguishing factor between desire and intention, noting that it leads to (1) temporal persistence in plans and (2) further plans being made on the basis of those to which it is already committed. The BDI software model partially addresses these issues. Temporal persistence, in the sense of explicit reference to time, is not explored. The hierarchical nature of plans is more easily implemented: a plan consists of a number of steps, some of which may invoke other plans. The hierarchical definition of plans itself implies a kind of temporal persistence, since the overarching plan remains in effect while subsidiary plans are being executed. An important aspect of the BDI software model (in terms of its research relevance) is the existence of logical models through which it is possible to define and reason about BDI agents. Research in this area has led, for example, to the axiomatization of some BDI implementations, as well as to formal logical descriptions such as Anand Rao and Michael Georgeff's BDICTL. The latter combines a multiple-modal logic (with modalities representing beliefs, desires and intentions) with the temporal logic CTL. More recently, Michael Wooldridge has extended BDICTL to define LORA (the Logic Of Rational Agents), by incorporating an action logic. In principle, LORA allows reasoning not only about individual agents, but also about communication and other interaction in a multi-agent system. The BDI software model is closely associated with intelligent agents, but does not, of itself, ensure all the characteristics associated with such agents. For example, it allows agents to have private beliefs, but does not force them to be private. It also has nothing to say about agent communication. Ultimately, the BDI software model is an attempt to solve a problem that has more to do with plans and planning (the choice and execution thereof) than it has to do with the programming of intelligent agents. This approach has recently been proposed by Steven Umbrello and Roman Yampolskiy as a means of designing autonomous vehicles for human values. == BDI agents == A BDI agent is a particular type of bounded rational software agent, imbued with particular mental attitudes, viz: Beliefs, Desires and Intentions (BDI). === Architecture === This section defines the idealized architectural components of a BDI system. Beliefs: Beliefs represent the informational state of the agent–its beliefs about the world (including itself and other agents). Beliefs can also include inference rules, allowing forward chaining to lead to new beliefs. Using the term belief rather than knowledge recognizes that what an agent believes may not necessarily be true (and in fact may change in the future). Beliefset: Beliefs are stored in database (sometimes called a belief base or a belief set), although that is an implementation decision. Desires: Desires represent the motivational state of the agent. They represent objectives or situations that the agent would like to accomplish or bring about. Examples of desires might be: find the best price, go to the party or become rich. Goals: A goal is a desire that has been adopted for active pursuit by the agent. Usage of the term goals adds the further restriction that the set of active desires must be consistent. For example, one should not have concurrent goals to go to a party and to stay at home – even though they could both be desirable. Intentions: Intentions represent the deliberative state of the agent – what the agent has chosen to do. Intentions are desires to which the agent has to some extent committed. In implemented systems, this means the agent has begun executing a plan. Plans: Plans are sequences of actions (recipes or knowledge areas) that an agent can perform to achieve one or more of its intentions. Plans may include other plans: my plan to go for a drive may include a plan to find my car keys. This reflects that in Bratman's model, plans are initially only partially conceived, with details being filled in as they progress. Events: These are triggers for reactive activity by the agent. An event may update beliefs, trigger plans or modify goals. Events may be generated externally and received by sensors or integrated systems. Additionally, events may be generated internally to trigger decoupled updates or plans of activity. BDI was also extended with an obligations component, giving rise to the BOID agent architecture to incorporate obligations, norms and commitments of agents that act within a social environment. === BDI interpreter === This section defines an idealized BDI interpreter that provides the basis of SRI's PRS lineage of BDI systems: initialize-state repeat options: option-generator (event-queue) selected-options: deliberate(options) update-intentions(selected-options) execute() get-new-external-events() drop-unsuccessful-attitudes() drop-impossible-attitudes() end repeat === Limitations and criticisms === The BDI software model is one example of a reasoning architecture for a single rational agent, and one concern in a broader multi-agent system. This section bounds the scope of concerns for the BDI software model, highlighting known limitations of the architecture. Learning: BDI agents lack any specific mechanisms within the architecture to learn from past behavior and adapt to new situations. Three attitudes: Classical decision theorists and planning research questions the necessity of having all three attitudes, distributed AI research questions whether the three attitudes are sufficient. Logics: The multi-modal logics that underlie BDI (that do not have complete axiomatizations and are not efficiently computable) have little relevance in practice. Multiple agents: In addition to not explicitly supporting learning, the framework may not be appropriate to learning behavior. Further, the BDI model does not explicitly describe mechanisms for interaction with other agents and integration into a multi-agent system. Explicit goals: Most BDI implementations do not have an explicit representation of goals. Lookahead: The architecture does not have (by design) any lookahead deliberation or forward planning. This may not be desirable because adopted plans may use up limited resources, actions may not be reversible, task execution may take longer than forward planning, and actions may have undesirable side effects if unsuccessful. == BDI agent implementations == === 'Pure' BDI === Procedural Reasoning System (PRS) IRMA (not implemented but can be considered as PRS with non-reconsideration) UM-PRS OpenPRS Distributed Multi-Agent Reasoning System (dMARS) AgentSpeak(L) – see Jason below AgentSpeak(RT) Agent Real-Time System (ARTS) (ARTS) JAM JACK Intelligent Agents JADEX (open source project) JaKtA JASON GORITE SPARK 3APL 2APL GOAL agent programming language CogniTAO (Think-As-One) Living Systems Process Suite PROFETA Gwendolen (Part of the Model Checking Agent Programming Languages Framework) === Extensions and hybrid systems === JACK Teams CogniTAO (Think-As-One) Living Systems Process Suite Brahms JaCaMo

  Read more →
• 

  ELIZA

  ELIZA is an early natural language processing computer program developed from 1964 to 1967 at MIT by Joseph Weizenbaum. Created to explore communication between humans and machines, ELIZA simulated conversation by using a pattern matching and substitution methodology that gave users an illusion of understanding on the part of the program, but gave no response that could be considered really understanding what was being said by either party. Whereas the ELIZA program itself was written (originally) in MAD-SLIP, the pattern matching directives that contained most of its language capability were provided in separate "scripts", represented in a Lisp-like expression. The most famous script, DOCTOR, simulated a psychotherapist of the Rogerian school (in which the therapist often reflects back the patient's words to the patient), and used rules, dictated in the script, to respond with non-directional questions to user inputs. As such, ELIZA was one of the first chatbots (originally "chatterbots") and one of the first programs capable of attempting the Turing test. Weizenbaum intended the program as a method to explore communication between humans and machines. He was surprised that some people, including his secretary, attributed human-like feelings to the computer program, a phenomenon that came to be called the ELIZA effect. Many academics believed that the program would be able to positively influence the lives of many people, particularly those with psychological issues, and that it could aid doctors working on such patients' treatment. While ELIZA was capable of engaging in discourse, it could not converse with true understanding. However, many early users were convinced of ELIZA's intelligence and understanding, despite Weizenbaum's insistence to the contrary. The original ELIZA source code had been missing since its creation in the 1960s, as it was not common to publish articles that included source code at that time. However, more recently the MAD-SLIP source code was discovered in the MIT archives and published on various platforms, such as the Internet Archive. The source code is of high historical interest since it demonstrates not only the specificity of programming languages and techniques at that time, but also the beginning of software layering and abstraction as a means of achieving sophisticated software programming. == Overview == Joseph Weizenbaum's ELIZA, running the DOCTOR script, created a conversational interaction somewhat similar to what might take place in the office of "a [non-directive] psychotherapist in an initial psychiatric interview" and to "demonstrate that the communication between man and machine was superficial". While ELIZA is best known for acting in the manner of a psychotherapist, the speech patterns are due to the data and instructions supplied by the DOCTOR script. ELIZA itself examined the text for keywords, applied values to said keywords, and transformed the input into an output; the script that ELIZA ran determined the keywords, set the values of keywords, and set the rules of transformation for the output. Weizenbaum chose to make the DOCTOR script in the context of psychotherapy to "sidestep the problem of giving the program a data base of real-world knowledge", allowing it to reflect back the patient's statements to carry the conversation forward. The result was a somewhat intelligent-seeming response that reportedly deceived some early users of the program. Weizenbaum named his program ELIZA after Eliza Doolittle, a working-class character in George Bernard Shaw's Pygmalion (also appearing in the musical My Fair Lady, which was based on the play and was hugely popular at the time). According to Weizenbaum, ELIZA's ability to be "incrementally improved" by various users made it similar to Eliza Doolittle, since Eliza Doolittle was taught to speak with an upper-class accent in Shaw's play. However, unlike the human character in Shaw's play, ELIZA is incapable of learning new patterns of speech or new words through interaction alone. Edits must be made directly to ELIZA's active script in order to change the manner by which the program operates. Weizenbaum first implemented ELIZA in his own SLIP list-processing language, where, depending upon the initial entries by the user, the illusion of human intelligence could appear, or be dispelled through several interchanges. Some of ELIZA's responses were so convincing that Weizenbaum and several others have anecdotes of users becoming emotionally attached to the program, occasionally forgetting that they were conversing with a computer. Weizenbaum's own secretary reportedly asked Weizenbaum to leave the room so that she and ELIZA could have a real conversation. Weizenbaum was surprised by this, later writing: "I had not realized ... that extremely short exposures to a relatively simple computer program could induce powerful delusional thinking in quite normal people." In 1966, interactive computing (via a teletype) was new. It was 11 years before the personal computer became familiar to the general public, and three decades before most people encountered attempts at natural language processing in Internet services like Ask.com or PC help systems such as Microsoft Office Clippit. Although those programs included years of research and work, ELIZA remains a milestone because it was the first time a programmer had attempted such a human-machine interaction with the goal of creating the illusion (however brief) of human–human interaction. At the ICCC 1972, ELIZA was brought together with another early artificial-intelligence program named PARRY for a computer-only conversation. While ELIZA was built to speak as a doctor, PARRY was intended to simulate a patient with schizophrenia. == Design and implementation == Weizenbaum originally wrote ELIZA in MAD-SLIP for CTSS on an IBM 7094 as a program to make natural-language conversation possible with a computer. To accomplish this, Weizenbaum identified five "fundamental technical problems" for ELIZA to overcome: the identification of key words, the discovery of a minimal context, the choice of appropriate transformations, the generation of responses in the absence of key words, and the provision of an editing capability for ELIZA scripts. Weizenbaum solved these problems and made ELIZA such that it had no built-in contextual framework or universe of discourse. However, this required ELIZA to have a script of instructions on how to respond to inputs from users. ELIZA starts its process of responding to an input by a user by first examining the text input for a "keyword". A "keyword" is a word designated as important by the acting ELIZA script, which assigns to each keyword a precedence number, or a RANK, designed by the programmer. If such words are found, they are put into a "keystack", with the keyword of the highest RANK at the top. The input sentence is then manipulated and transformed as the rule associated with the keyword of the highest RANK directs. For example, when the DOCTOR script encounters words such as "alike" or "same", it would output a message pertaining to similarity, in this case "In what way?", as these words had high precedence number. This also demonstrates how certain words, as dictated by the script, can be manipulated regardless of contextual considerations, such as switching first-person pronouns and second-person pronouns and vice versa, as these too had high precedence numbers. Such words with high precedence numbers are deemed superior to conversational patterns and are treated independently of contextual patterns. Following the first examination, the next step of the process is to apply an appropriate transformation rule, which includes two parts: the "decomposition rule" and the "reassembly rule". First, the input is reviewed for syntactical patterns in order to establish the minimal context necessary to respond. Using the keywords and other nearby words from the input, different disassembly rules are tested until an appropriate pattern is found. Using the script's rules, the sentence is then "dismantled" and arranged into sections of the component parts as the "decomposition rule for the highest-ranking keyword" dictates. The example that Weizenbaum gives is the input "You are very helpful", which is transformed to "I are very helpful". This is then broken into (1) empty (2) "I" (3) "are" (4) "very helpful". The decomposition rule has broken the phrase into four small segments that contain both the keywords and the information in the sentence. The decomposition rule then designates a particular reassembly rule, or set of reassembly rules, to follow when reconstructing the sentence. The reassembly rule takes the fragments of the input that the decomposition rule had created, rearranges them, and adds in programmed words to create a response. Using Weizenbaum's example previously stated, such a reassembly rule would take the fragments and apply them to the phrase "What makes

  Read more →
• 

  Course of Action Display and Evaluation Tool

  Course of Action Display and Evaluation Tool (CADET) was a research program, and the eponymous prototype software system, that applied knowledge-based techniques of Artificial Intelligence to the problem of battle planning. CADET was also known as Course of Action Display and Elaboration Tool. It was considered an early example of such systems and was funded by the United States Army and by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). CADET influenced a later DARPA program called RAID which in turn produced a technology adopted by the United States Army and the United States Marine Corps. == History == The development of Course of Action Display and Evaluation Tool (CADET) began in 1996, at the Carnegie Group, Inc., Pittsburgh PA, funded under the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program. The goal of the first phase SBIR project was to produce “...a live storyboard of [Course of Action] COA development, wargaming, animation, and assessment.” In 1997, the United States Army awarded the Carnegie Group Inc. $750K for SBIR Phase II. The intent was to develop “...a war-gaming modeling and analysis Decision Support System (DSS), … CADET will consist of a combination of Knowledge-Based and decision analytic tools and technologies to provide fast nimble COA war-gaming modeling, simulation, and animation under direct control of the commander and staff. ...Phase II will result in an operations prototype (OP) suitable for use and evaluation in field exercises.” In 2000, CADET was integrated and experimentally evaluated within the framework of the Integrated Course of Action Critiquing and Elaboration System (ICCES) experiment, conducted by the Battle Command Battle Laboratory – Leavenworth (BCBL-L) within the program Concept Experimentation Program (CEP) sponsored by TRADOC. In 2000-2002, DARPA applied CADET in the program titled Command Post of the Future (CPoF) as a tool to generate a course of action. Under the umbrella of the CPoF program, CADET was integrated with the FOX GA system to provide a detailed planner, coupled with COA generation capability. In the same period, Battle Command Battle Lab-Huachuca (BCBL-H) performed an integration CADET with the system called All Source Analysis System-Light (ASAS-L); here CADET was intended to generate plans for intelligence assets, and conduct wargames of different COAs, enemy versus friendly. From 1996 through 2002, work on CADET was performed by the Carnegie Group, Inc., and supported by funding from the US Army CECOM (CADET SBIR Phase I, CADET SBIR Phase II and CADET Enhancements); DARPA (Command Post of the Future); and TRADOC BCBL-H. == Operation == CADET was intended to be used by the staff of the United States Army Brigade, within the Military Decision Making Process (MDMP). In particular, CADET helped produce, automatically or semi-automatically, the products generated within the step of MDMP called Course of Action (COA) Development and the following step of MDMP called COA Analysis and Wargaming. CADET software resided on a laptop computer. Using the computer, the staff officers entered the input to CADET, or alternatively this input arrived at CADET from upstream computer systems. The input consisted of: Order of Battle, i.e., the units constituting the friendly brigade and the enemy units participating in the battle, and their various characteristics; primary activities of the Course of Action, where each activity is typically linked to one or more geographic areas or a route, and sometimes to a major unit executing the activity; digital map of the region where the battle was to take place, including the digital description of significant features such as locations of friendly and enemy units, roads, assembly areas, objectives, and axes of attacks. Taking this input, CADET automatically performed the following tasks (not sequentially): Planning and scheduling the low-level tasks necessary for a given COA Allocating tasks to various units and assets constituting the brigade Assigning suitable locations and routes Estimating the battle losses (attrition) of friendly and enemy forces, and consumption of resources (e.g., fuel and ammunition) Predicting enemy actions or reactions. CADET produced the following outputs: Synchronization matrix, directly editable and printable; synchronization matrix is a kind of Gantt chart that shows assignments of activities to units, to locations/routes and to time periods Map overlays in PPT or JPG formats Animation output XML formally-encoded plan Textual Operation Plan (OPLAN) draft E-mail messages with attachments: XML and text versions of OPLAN == Design == The core algorithm is a planning algorithm where CADET uses a knowledge-based approach of the hierarchical-task-network type. Each task class is associated with a model of more detailed subtasks that should be performed in order to accomplish the higher-level task. Algorithms selected (heuristically) a task and then decomposes it into subtasks. Although similar to hierarchical-task-network planning algorithm, CADET’s algorithm includes elements of adversarial reasoning. After adding a subtask, the algorithm uses rules to determine the enemy’s probable actions and reactions as well as friendly counteractions This approximated the action-reaction-counteraction technique of manual wargaming used by the United States Army. When a task involves movements of a unit, the algorithm performs routing, i.e., finds a route for the movement that minimizes the time required for the movement as well as exposure to the enemy attacks. Each added tasks (subtask) normally requires a unit which would execute the task, and a time period when the task would be executed. Therefore, when a certain number of subtasks is added by the planning process, the algorithm also performs the allocation of the newly added subtasks to units and to time periods (i.e., scheduling). allocation and scheduling of tasks relies on both domain-specific and constraint-guided heuristics. A tasks may also require expenditures of fuel and ammunition. If the tasks involves engagement with the enemy, the performing units will experience lossesof personnel and weapon systems (attrition). CADET’s algorithm includes estimates of consumption of different types of consumables, and also attrition. Depending on the degree of attrition and consumption, CADET adds tasks that are needed to refuel or reconstitute the units. The algorithm continually interleaves incremental steps of planning, routing, scheduling, and attrition and consumption estimates. == Evaluation == Two evaluation experiments are described in literature. The first experiment called ICCES took three days. The subjects were Army officers from combat arms branches, with 11 to 23 years of active service, in the ranks of majors and lieutenant colonels, a total of 8. Each officer was given 4 hours of training learning to operate CADET and related computer tools. Officers were divided into two groups and given a tactical scenario. One group (the control group) used the traditional, manual process; the other used the system called ICCES, the automated core of which was CADET. Each group produced three COA sketches and statements and one COA synchronization matrix. Then, the experiment was repeated with another scenario but the control group became the automated group and vice versa. The users were generally satisfied with the quality of the ICCES-generated products. The group using ICCES made only a few changes to the product that was automatically generated, indicating that they agreed with the majority of the plan that ICCES produced. The second experiment was reminiscent of Turing test. The experiment involved one user, nine judges (active-duty officers, mainly colonels and lieutenant colonels), and five scenarios obtained from several US Army exercises. For each scenario, experimenters obtained synchronization matrices that were produced in earlier exercises, typically by a team of four to five officers in three to four hours, spending approximately 16 person-hours in total. Using these scenarios and COAs, the user had CADET generate automatically detailed plans and express them as synchronization matrices. The user, a retired US Army officer, reviewed and slightly edited the matrices. The entire process took less than two minutes of computations by and approximately 20 minutes of review and post-editing, approximately 0.4 person-hour in total per product. The experimenters gave the resulting matrices the same visual style as those produced by humans. The judges, who did not know whether a planning product was a traditional product of humans, or with computerized aids, were asked to grade the products. The result was that the average grades for manual products and CADET-generated products were statistically indistinguishable, even though CADET-generated products required far less time to produce. == Legacy == CADET served as “...an example of how even relatively basic A

  Read more →
• 

  Model collapse

  Model collapse, also known by other names such as "AI inbreeding", "AI cannibalism", "Habsburg AI", and "model autophagy disorder" or "MAD" is a phenomenon noted in artificial intelligence studies, where machine learning models gradually degrade due to errors coming from uncurated synthetic data, or due to training on the outputs of another model such as prior versions of itself. It is unclear to what extent the phenomenon threatens the long-term development of such models, and some techniques have been proposed to mitigate the effect. == Characteristics == Shumailov et al. coined the term to describe two specific stages to the degradation of machine learning models: early model collapse and late model collapse: In early model collapse, the model begins losing information about the tails of the distribution – mostly affecting minority data. Later work highlighted that early model collapse is hard to notice, since overall performance may appear to improve, while the model loses performance on minority data. In late model collapse, the model loses a significant proportion of its performance, confusing concepts and losing most of its variance. == Mechanism == Using synthetic data as training data can lead to issues with the quality and reliability of the trained model. Model collapse occurs for three main reasons: functional approximation errors sampling errors learning errors Importantly, it happens in even the simplest of models, where not all of the error sources are present. In more complex models the errors often compound, leading to faster collapse. == Disagreement over real-world impact == Some researchers and commentators on model collapse warn that the phenomenon could fundamentally threaten future generative AI development: As AI-generated data is shared on the Internet, it will inevitably end up in future training datasets, which are often crawled from the Internet. If training on "slop" (large quantities of unlabeled synthetic data) inevitably leads to model collapse, this could therefore pose a difficult problem. However, recently, other researchers have disagreed with this argument, showing that if synthetic data accumulates alongside human-generated data, model collapse is avoided. The researchers argue that data accumulating over time is a more realistic description of reality than deleting all existing data every year, and that the real-world impact of model collapse may not be as catastrophic as feared. An alternative branch of the literature investigates the use of machine learning detectors and watermarking to identify model generated data and filter it out. == Mathematical models of the phenomenon == === 1D Gaussian model === In 2024, a first attempt has been made at illustrating collapse for the simplest possible model — a single dimensional normal distribution fit using unbiased estimators of mean and variance, computed on samples from the previous generation. To make this more precise, we say that original data follows a normal distribution X 0 ∼ N ( μ , σ 2 ) {\displaystyle X^{0}\sim {\mathcal {N}}(\mu ,\sigma ^{2})} , and we possess M 0 {\displaystyle M_{0}} samples X j 0 {\displaystyle X_{j}^{0}} for j ∈ { 1 , … , M 0 } {\displaystyle j\in {\{\,1,\dots ,M_{0}\,{}\}}} . Denoting a general sample X j i {\displaystyle X_{j}^{i}} as sample j ∈ { 1 , … , M i } {\displaystyle j\in {\{\,1,\dots ,M_{i}\,{}\}}} at generation i {\displaystyle i} , then the next generation model is estimated using the sample mean and variance: μ i + 1 = 1 M i ∑ j X j i ; σ i + 1 2 = 1 M i − 1 ∑ j ( X j i − μ i + 1 ) 2 . {\displaystyle \mu _{i+1}={\frac {1}{M_{i}}}\sum _{j}X_{j}^{i};\quad \sigma _{i+1}^{2}={\frac {1}{M_{i}-1}}\sum _{j}(X_{j}^{i}-\mu _{i+1})^{2}.} Leading to a conditionally normal next generation model X j i + 1 | μ i + 1 , σ i + 1 ∼ N ( μ i + 1 , σ i + 1 2 ) {\displaystyle X_{j}^{i+1}|\mu _{i+1},\;\sigma _{i+1}\sim {\mathcal {N}}(\mu _{i+1},\sigma _{i+1}^{2})} . In theory, this is enough to calculate the full distribution of X j i {\displaystyle X_{j}^{i}} . However, even after the first generation, the full distribution is no longer normal: It follows a variance-gamma distribution. To continue the analysis, instead of writing the probability density function at each generation, it is possible to explicitly construct them in terms of independent random variables using Cochran's theorem. To be precise, μ 1 {\displaystyle \mu _{1}} and σ 1 {\displaystyle \sigma _{1}} are independent, with μ 1 ∼ N ( μ , σ 2 M 0 ) {\displaystyle \mu _{1}\sim {\mathcal {N}}\left(\mu ,{\frac {\sigma ^{2}}{M_{0}}}\right)} and ( M 0 − 1 ) σ 1 2 ∼ σ 2 Γ ( M 0 − 1 2 , 1 2 ) {\displaystyle (M_{0}-1)\,\sigma _{1}^{2}\sim \sigma ^{2}\,\Gamma \left({\frac {M_{0}-1}{2}},{\frac {1}{2}}\right)} , following a Gamma distribution. Denoting with Z {\displaystyle Z} Gaussian random variables distributed according to N ( 0 , 1 ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {N}}(0,1)} and with S i {\displaystyle S^{i}} random variables distributed with 1 M i − 1 − 1 Γ ( M i − 1 − 1 2 , 1 2 ) {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{M_{i-1}-1}}\Gamma \left({\frac {M_{i-1}-1}{2}},{\frac {1}{2}}\right)} , it turns out to be possible to write samples at each generation as X j 0 = μ + σ Z j 0 , {\textstyle X_{j}^{0}=\mu +\sigma Z_{j}^{0},} X j 1 = μ + σ M 0 Z 1 + σ S 1 Z j 1 , {\textstyle X_{j}^{1}=\mu +{\frac {\sigma }{\sqrt {M_{0}}}}Z^{1}+\sigma {\sqrt {S^{1}}}Z_{j}^{1},} and more generally X j n = μ + σ M 0 Z 1 + σ M 1 S 1 Z 2 + ⋯ + σ M n − 1 S 1 × ⋯ × S n − 1 Z n + σ S 1 × ⋯ × S n Z j n . {\displaystyle X_{j}^{n}=\mu +{\frac {\sigma }{\sqrt {M_{0}}}}Z^{1}+{\frac {\sigma }{\sqrt {M_{1}}}}{\sqrt {S^{1}}}Z^{2}+\dots +{\frac {\sigma }{\sqrt {M_{n-1}}}}{\sqrt {S^{1}\times \dots \times S^{n-1}}}Z^{n}+\sigma {\sqrt {S^{1}\times \dots \times S^{n}}}Z_{j}^{n}.} Note, that these are not joint distributions, as Z n {\displaystyle Z^{n}} and S n {\displaystyle S^{n}} depend directly on Z j n − 1 {\displaystyle Z_{j}^{n-1}} , but when considering X j n {\displaystyle X_{j}^{n}} on its own the formula above provides all the information about the full distribution. To analyse the model collapse, we can first calculate variance and mean of samples at generation n {\displaystyle n} . This would tell us what kind of distributions we expect to arrive at after n {\displaystyle n} generations. It is possible to find its exact value in closed form, but the mean and variance of the square root of gamma distribution are expressed in terms of gamma functions, making the result quite clunky. Following, it is possible to expand all results to second order in each of 1 / M i {\displaystyle 1/M_{i}} , assuming each sample size to be large. It is then possible to show that 1 σ 2 Var ⁡ ( X j n ) = 1 M 0 + 1 M 1 + ⋯ + 1 M n − 1 + 1 + O ( M i − 2 ) . {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{\sigma ^{2}}}\operatorname {Var} (X_{j}^{n})={\frac {1}{M_{0}}}+{\frac {1}{M_{1}}}+\dots +{\frac {1}{M_{n-1}}}+1+{\mathcal {O}}\left(M_{i}^{-2}\right).} And if all sample sizes M i = M {\displaystyle M_{i}=M} are constant, this diverges linearly as n → ∞ {\displaystyle n\to \infty } : Var ⁡ ( X j n ) = σ 2 ( 1 + n M ) ; E ( X j n ) = μ . {\displaystyle \operatorname {Var} (X_{j}^{n})=\sigma ^{2}\left(1+{\frac {n}{M}}\right);\quad \mathbb {E} (X_{j}^{n})=\mu .} This is the same scaling as for a single dimensional Gaussian random walk. However, divergence of the variance of X j n {\displaystyle X_{j}^{n}} does not directly provide any information about the corresponding estimates of μ n + 1 {\displaystyle \mu _{n+1}} and σ n + 1 {\displaystyle \sigma _{n+1}} , particularly how different they are from the original μ {\displaystyle \mu } and σ {\displaystyle \sigma } . It turns out to be possible to calculate the distance between the true distribution and the approximated distribution at step n + 1 {\displaystyle n+1} , using the Wasserstein-2 distance (which is also sometimes referred to as risk): E [ W 2 2 ( N ( μ , σ 2 ) , N ( μ n + 1 , σ n + 1 2 ) ) ] = 3 2 σ 2 ( 1 M 0 + 1 M 1 + ⋯ + 1 M n ) + O ( M i − 2 ) , {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} \left[\mathbb {W} _{2}^{2}\left({\mathcal {N}}(\mu ,\sigma ^{2}),{\mathcal {N}}(\mu _{n+1},\sigma _{n+1}^{2})\right)\right]={\frac {3}{2}}\sigma ^{2}\left({\frac {1}{M_{0}}}+{\frac {1}{M_{1}}}+\dots +{\frac {1}{M_{n}}}\right)+{\mathcal {O}}\left(M_{i}^{-2}\right),} Var ⁡ [ W 2 2 ( N ( μ , σ 2 ) , N ( μ n + 1 , σ n + 1 2 ) ) ] = 1 2 σ 4 ( 3 M 0 2 + 3 M 1 2 + ⋯ + 3 M n 2 + ∑ i ≠ j 4 M i M j ) + O ( M i − 3 ) . {\displaystyle \operatorname {Var} \left[\mathbb {W} _{2}^{2}\left({\mathcal {N}}(\mu ,\sigma ^{2}),{\mathcal {N}}(\mu _{n+1},\sigma _{n+1}^{2})\right)\right]={\frac {1}{2}}\sigma ^{4}\left({\frac {3}{M_{0}^{2}}}+{\frac {3}{M_{1}^{2}}}+\dots +{\frac {3}{M_{n}^{2}}}+\sum _{i\neq j}{\frac {4}{M_{i}M_{j}}}\right)+{\mathcal {O}}\left(M_{i}^{-3}\right).} This directly shows why model collapse occurs in this simple model. Due to errors from re-sampling the approximated distribution, each generation ends up corresponding to a

  Read more →
• 

  Ensemble averaging (machine learning)

  In machine learning, ensemble averaging is the process of creating multiple models (typically artificial neural networks) and combining them to produce a desired output, as opposed to creating just one model. Ensembles of models often outperform individual models, as the various errors of the ensemble constituents "average out". == Overview == Ensemble averaging is one of the simplest types of committee machines. Along with boosting, it is one of the two major types of static committee machines. In contrast to standard neural network design, in which many networks are generated but only one is kept, ensemble averaging keeps the less satisfactory networks, but with less weight assigned to their outputs. The theory of ensemble averaging relies on two properties of artificial neural networks: In any network, the bias can be reduced at the cost of increased variance In a group of networks, the variance can be reduced at no cost to the bias. This is known as the bias–variance tradeoff. Ensemble averaging creates a group of networks, each with low bias and high variance, and combines them to form a new network which should theoretically exhibit low bias and low variance. Hence, this can be thought of as a resolution of the bias–variance tradeoff. The idea of combining experts can be traced back to Pierre-Simon Laplace. == Method == The theory mentioned above gives an obvious strategy: create a set of experts with low bias and high variance, and average them. Generally, what this means is to create a set of experts with varying parameters; frequently, these are the initial synaptic weights of a neural network, although other factors (such as learning rate, momentum, etc.) may also be varied. Some authors recommend against varying weight decay and early stopping. The steps are therefore: Generate N experts, each with their own initial parameters (these values are usually sampled randomly from a distribution) Train each expert separately Combine the experts and average their values. Alternatively, domain knowledge may be used to generate several classes of experts. An expert from each class is trained, and then combined. A more complex version of ensemble average views the final result not as a mere average of all the experts, but rather as a weighted sum. If each expert is y i {\displaystyle y_{i}} , then the overall result y ~ {\displaystyle {\tilde {y}}} can be defined as: y ~ ( x ; α ) = ∑ j = 1 p α j y j ( x ) {\displaystyle {\tilde {y}}(\mathbf {x} ;\mathbf {\alpha } )=\sum _{j=1}^{p}\alpha _{j}y_{j}(\mathbf {x} )} where α {\displaystyle \mathbf {\alpha } } is a set of weights. The optimization problem of finding alpha is readily solved through neural networks, hence a "meta-network" where each "neuron" is in fact an entire neural network can be trained, and the synaptic weights of the final network is the weight applied to each expert. This is known as a linear combination of experts. It can be seen that most forms of neural network are some subset of a linear combination: the standard neural net (where only one expert is used) is simply a linear combination with all α j = 0 {\displaystyle \alpha _{j}=0} and one α k = 1 {\displaystyle \alpha _{k}=1} . A raw average is where all α j {\displaystyle \alpha _{j}} are equal to some constant value, namely one over the total number of experts. A more recent ensemble averaging method is negative correlation learning, proposed by Y. Liu and X. Yao. This method has been widely used in evolutionary computing. == Benefits == The resulting committee is almost always less complex than a single network that would achieve the same level of performance The resulting committee can be trained more easily on smaller datasets The resulting committee often has improved performance over any single model The risk of overfitting is lessened, as there are fewer parameters (e.g. neural network weights) which need to be set.

  Read more →
• 

  Smoothing

  In statistics and image processing, to smooth a data set is to create an approximating function that attempts to capture important patterns in the data, while leaving out noise or other fine-scale structures/rapid phenomena. In smoothing, the data points of a signal are modified so individual points higher than the adjacent points (presumably because of noise) are reduced, and points that are lower than the adjacent points are increased, leading to a smoother signal. Reducing noise by smoothing may aid in data analysis in two notable ways: Help uncover more meaningful information from the underlying data, such as trends. Provide analyses that are both flexible and robust. Many different algorithms are used in smoothing, most commonly binning, kernels, and local weighted regression. == Compared to curve fitting == Smoothing may be distinguished from the related and partially overlapping concept of curve fitting in the following ways: curve fitting often involves the use of an explicit function form for the result, whereas the immediate results from smoothing are the "smoothed" values with no later use made of a functional form if there is one; the aim of smoothing is to give a general idea of relatively slow changes of value with little attention paid to the close matching of data values, while curve fitting concentrates on achieving as close a match as possible. smoothing methods often have an associated tuning parameter which is used to control the extent of smoothing. Curve fitting will adjust any number of parameters of the function to obtain the 'best' fit. == Linear smoothers == In the case that the smoothed values can be written as a linear transformation of the observed values, the smoothing operation is known as a linear smoother; the matrix representing the transformation is known as a smoother matrix or hat matrix. The operation of applying such a matrix transformation is called convolution. Thus the matrix is also called convolution matrix or a convolution kernel. In the case of simple series of data points (rather than a multi-dimensional image), the convolution kernel is a one-dimensional vector. == Algorithms == One of the most common algorithms is the "moving average", often used to try to capture important trends in repeated statistical surveys. In image processing and computer vision, smoothing ideas are used in scale space representations. The simplest smoothing algorithm is the "rectangular" or "unweighted sliding-average smooth". This method replaces each point in the signal with the average of "m" adjacent points, where "m" is a positive integer called the "smooth width". Usually m is an odd number. The triangular smooth is like the rectangular smooth except that it implements a weighted smoothing function. Some specific smoothing and filter types, with their respective uses, pros and cons are:

  Read more →
• 

  Structure mapping engine

  In artificial intelligence and cognitive science, the structure mapping engine (SME) is an implementation in software of an algorithm for analogical matching based on the psychological theory of Dedre Gentner. The basis of Gentner's structure-mapping idea is that an analogy is a mapping of knowledge from one domain (the base) into another (the target). The structure-mapping engine is a computer simulation of the analogy and similarity comparisons. The theory is useful because it ignores surface features and finds matches between potentially very different things if they have the same representational structure. For example, SME could determine that a pen is like a sponge because both are involved in dispensing liquid, even though they do this very differently. == Structure mapping theory == Structure mapping theory is based on the systematicity principle, which states that connected knowledge is preferred over independent facts. Therefore, the structure mapping engine should ignore isolated source-target mappings unless they are part of a bigger structure. The SME, the theory goes, should map objects that are related to knowledge that has already been mapped. The theory also requires that mappings be done one-to-one, which means that no part of the source description can map to more than one item in the target and no part of the target description can be mapped to more than one part of the source. The theory also requires that if a match maps subject to target, the arguments of subject and target must also be mapped. If both these conditions are met, the mapping is said to be "structurally consistent." == Concepts in SME == SME maps knowledge from a source into a target. SME calls each description a dgroup. Dgroups contain a list of entities and predicates. Entities represent the objects or concepts in a description — such as an input gear or a switch. Predicates are one of three types and are a general way to express knowledge for SME. Relation predicates contain multiple arguments, which can be other predicates or entities. An example relation is: (transmit (what from to)). This relation has a functor transmit and takes three arguments: what, from, and to. Attribute predicates are the properties of an entity. An example of an attribute is (red gear) which means that gear has the attribute red. Function predicates map an entity into another entity or constant. An example of a function is (joules power source) which maps the entity power source onto the numerical quantity joules. Functions and attributes have different meanings, and consequently SME processes them differently. For example, in SME's true analogy rule set, attributes differ from functions because they cannot match unless there is a higher-order match between them. The difference between attributes and functions will be explained further in this section's examples. All predicates have four parameters. They have (1) a functor, which identifies it, and (2) a type, which is either relation, attribute, or function. The other two parameters (3 and 4) are for determining how to process the arguments in the SME algorithm. If the arguments have to be matched in order, commutative is false. If the predicate can take any number of arguments, N-ary is false. An example of a predicate definition is: (sme:defPredicate behavior-set (predicate) relation :n-ary? t :commutative? t) The predicate's functor is “behavior-set,” its type is “relation,” and its n-ary and commutative parameters are both set to true. The “(predicate)” part of the definition specifies that there will be one or more predicates inside an instantiation of behavior-set. == Algorithm details == The algorithm has several steps. The first step of the algorithm is to create a set of match hypotheses between source and target dgroups. A match hypothesis represents a possible mapping between any part of the source and the target. This mapping is controlled by a set of match rules. By changing the match rules, one can change the type of reasoning SME does. For example, one set of match rules may perform a kind of analogy called literal similarity, and another performs a kind of analogy called true-analogy. These rules are not the place where domain-dependent information is added, but rather where the analogy process is tweaked, depending on the type of cognitive function the user is trying to emulate. For a given match rule, there are two types of rules that further define how it will be applied: filter rules and intern rules. Intern rules use only the arguments of the expressions in the match hypotheses that the filter rules identify. This limitation makes the processing more efficient by constraining the number of match hypotheses that are generated. At the same time, it also helps to build the structural consistencies that are needed later on in the algorithm. An example of a filter rule from the true-analogy rule set creates match hypotheses between predicates that have the same functor. The true-analogy rule set has an intern rule that iterates over the arguments of any match hypothesis, creating more match hypotheses if the arguments are entities or functions, or if the arguments are attributes and have the same functor. In order to illustrate how the match rules produce match hypotheses consider these two predicates: transmit torque inputgear secondgear (p1) transmit signal switch div10 (p2) Here we use true analogy for the type of reasoning. The filter match rule generates a match between p1 and p2 because they share the same functor, transmit. The intern rules then produce three more match hypotheses: torque to signal, inputgear to switch, and secondgear to div10. The intern rules created these match hypotheses because all the arguments were entities. If the arguments were functions or attributes instead of entities, the predicates would be expressed as: transmit torque (inputgear gear) (secondgear gear) (p3) transmit signal (switch circuit) (div10 circuit) (p4) These additional predicates make inputgear, secondgear, switch, and div10 functions or attributes depending on the value defined in the language input file. The representation also contains additional entities for gear and circuit. Depending on what type inputgear, secondgear, switch, and div10 are, their meanings change. As attributes, each one is a property of the gear or circuit. For example, the gear has two attributes, inputgear and secondgear. The circuit has two attributes, switch and circuit. As functions inputgear, secondgear, switch, and div10 become quantities of the gear and circuit. In this example, the functions inputgear and secondgear now map to the numerical quantities “torque from inputgear” and “torque from secondgear,” For the circuit the quantities map to logical quantity “switch engaged” and the numerical quantity “current count on the divide by 10 counter.” SME processes these differently. It does not allow attributes to match unless they are part of a higher-order relation, but it does allow functions to match, even if they are not part of such a relation. It allows functions to match because they indirectly refer to entities and thus should be treated like relations that involve no entities. However, as next section shows, the intern rules assign lower weights to matches between functions than to matches between relations. The reason SME does not match attributes is because it is trying to create connected knowledge based on relationships and thus satisfy the systematicity principle. For example, if both a clock and a car have inputgear attributes, SME will not mark them as similar. If it did, it would be making a match between the clock and car based on their appearance — not on the relationships between them. When the additional predicates in p3 and p4 are functions, the results from matching p3 and p4 are similar to the results from p1 and p2 except there is an additional match between gear and circuit and the values for the match hypotheses between (inputgear gear) and (switch circuit), and (secondgear gear) and (div10 circuit), are lower. The next section describes the reason for this in more detail. If the inputgear, secondgear, switch, and div10 are attributes instead of entities, SME does not find matches between any of the attributes. It finds matches only between the transmit predicates and between torque and signal. Additionally, the structural-evaluation scores for the remaining two matches decrease. In order to get the two predicates to match, p3 would need to be replaced by p5, which is demonstrated below. transmit torque (inputgear gear) (div10 gear) (p5) Since the true-analogy rule set identifies that the div10 attributes are the same between p5 and p4 and because the div10 attributes are both part of the higher-relation match between torque and signal, SME makes a match between (div10 gear) and (div10 circuit) — which leads to a match between gear and circuit. Being part of a higher-order match is a requiremen

  Read more →
• 

  AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

  The AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence is a leading international academic conference in artificial intelligence held annually. It ranks 4th in terms of H5 Index in Google Scholar's list of top AI publications, after ICLR, NeurIPS, and ICML. It is supported by the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), after which it is named. Precise dates vary from year to year, but paper submissions are generally due at the end of August to beginning of September, and the conference is generally held during the following February. The first AAAI was held in 1980 at Stanford University, Stanford California. During AAAI-20 conference, AI pioneers and 2018 Turing Award winners (often referred to as the Nobel Prize of Computing) Yann LeCun and Yoshua Bengio, among eight other researchers, were honored as the AAAI 2020 Fellows. Along with other conferences such as NeurIPS and ICML, AAAI uses an artificial-intelligence algorithm to assign papers to reviewers. == Sponsors == Many leading technology companies, including Google, Microsoft, Amazon (company), IBM, Baidu, Bytedance, and Huawei, generously sponsor and participate in AAAI to publish and showcase their latest theoretical and applied research. Sponsoring companies also actively recruit AI talents at the conference. == Locations == AAAI-2026 Singapore Expo, Singapore AAAI-2025 Pennsylvania Convention Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States AAAI-2024 Vancouver Convention Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada AAAI-2023 Washington Convention Center, Washington, D.C., United States AAAI-2022 Virtual Conference AAAI-2021 Virtual Conference AAAI-2020 Hilton New York Midtown, New York, New York, United States AAAI-2019 Hilton Hawaiian Village, Honolulu, Hawaii, United States AAAI-2018 Hilton New Orleans Riverside, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States AAAI-2017 San Francisco, California, United States AAAI-2016 Phoenix, Arizona, United States AAAI-2015 Austin, Texas, United States AAAI-2014 Québec Convention Center, Québec City, Québec, Canada AAAI-2013 Bellevue, Washington, United States AAAI-2012 Toronto, Ontario, Canada AAAI-2011 San Francisco, California, United States AAAI-2010 Westin Peachtree Plaza, Atlanta, Georgia, United States AAAI-2008 Chicago, Illinois, United States AAAI-2007 Toronto, Ontario, Canada AAAI-2006 Boston, Massachusetts, United States AAAI-2005 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States AAAI-2004 San Jose, California, United States AAAI-2002 Shaw conference center in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada AAAI-2000 Austin, Texas, United States AAAI-1999 Orlando, Florida, United States AAAI-1998 Madison, Wisconsin, United States AAAI-1997 Providence, Rhode Island, United States AAAI-1996 Portland, Oregon, United States AAAI-1994 Seattle, Washington, United States AAAI-1993 Washington Convention Center, Washington, D.C., United States AAAI-1992 San Jose Convention Center, San Jose, California, United States AAAI-1991 Anaheim Convention Center, Anaheim, California, United States AAAI-1990 Boston, Massachusetts, United States AAAI-1988 Saint Paul, Minnesota, United States AAAI-1987 Seattle, Washington, United States AAAI-1986 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States AAAI-1984 University of Texas, Austin, Texas, United States AAAI-1983 Washington, D.C., United States AAAI-1982 Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States AAAI-1980 Stanford, California, United States

  Read more →
• 

  Coronavirus breathalyzer

  A coronavirus breathalyzer is a diagnostic medical device enabling the user to test with 90% or greater accuracy the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in an exhaled breath. As of the first half of 2020, the idea of a practical coronavirus breathalyzer was concomitantly developed by unrelated research groups in Australia, Canada, Finland, Germany, Indonesia, Israel, Netherlands, Poland, Singapore, United Kingdom and the USA. == Australia == In Australia, GreyScan CEO Samantha Ollerton and Prof. Michael Breadmore of the University of Tasmania are basing a coronavirus breathalyzer on existing technology that is used around the world to detect explosives. Another invention published from ABC News; produced by Colin Hickey and Examin Holdings, have released information on a new breathalyzer called the "Queensland Breath test" claiming its function has 98% efficiency, equipped with a replaceable plastic nozzle for reusability (February 2022). a statement in claim by Bruce Thompson, a professor at Swinburne University of Technology, Although this products is reliable, due to insufficient funding, the product is inaccessible. == Canada == Canary Health Technologies, headquartered in Toronto with offices in Cleveland, Ohio, is developing a breathalyzer with disposable nanosensors using AI-powered cloud-based analysis. According to a press release, clinical trials began in India during November 2020. The stated goal is to develop an accurate, reasonably priced screening tool that can be used anywhere and deliver a result in less than a minute. The company postulates that analyzing volatile organic compounds in human breath could potentially detect diseases before the on-set of symptoms, earlier than currently available methods. Moreover, the cloud-based technology is designed to be used as a disease surveillance apparatus. == Finland == By the end of June 2020, Forum Virium Helsinki, in collaboration with Finnish software firm Deep Sensing Algorithms, funded by the Helsinki-Uusimaa Regional Council, announced that testing of their device had begun with a control group in Kazakhstan, with plans to expand to the Netherlands, the United States, South Africa, Brazil and Finland throughout the summer. The efficacy of the Forum Virium Helsinki / Deep Sensing Algorithms device hinges on its AI component. "We are engaged in innovative cooperation with corporations to solve the coronavirus crisis, and we will help firms to use the city as a development platform. We are utilizing artificial intelligence and digitalization," said Forum Virium Helsinki CEO Mika Malin. == Germany == In March 2020, the Singaporean company RAM Global conducted research in Germany in hopes of developing a one-minute breathalyzer test for SARS-CoV-2 based on terahertz time-domain spectroscopy. The company attempted to develop a disposable test kit for direct detection of COVID-19 virion particles in breath, saliva and swab samples. On 31 March, RAM Global completed an initial clinical study on live patients at University Hospital Saarland. In April, the company pursued a small unknown sample study in which hospital doctors provided unknown samples in order to test accuracy in differentiating positive and negative samples. == Indonesia == Since April 2020, a team of researchers from Gadjah Mada University (UGM) has been developing an electronic nose called GeNose C19. The GeNose C19 can be used as a rapid, non-invasive screening tool in less than two minutes. A profiling test was carried out at the Bhayangkara Hospital and the Covid Bambanglipuro Special Field Hospital in Yogyakarta. GeNose C19 consists of gas sensors and an artificial intelligence-based pattern recognition system. The diagnostic test was carried out with the cooperation of nine multi-center hospitals. In the end of December 2020, GeNose C19 received a distribution permit from Indonesia's Health Ministry. Initially, 100 units will be released and each device will be able to perform 120 tests per day. The test is estimated to cost 15,000–25,000 Indonesian rupiah ($1–$1.8) and would take three minutes for the test and another two minutes to yield a result. Researchers hope to manufacture up to 1,000 GeNose C19 units, increasing the country's testing capabilities by 120 thousand subjects per day. Moreover, they aim to manufacture 10,000 units by February 2021. == Israel == In Israel, it is at the photonics lab of Gabby Sarusi, professor at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, that research is underway as of midsummer 2020. Separately from Sarusi's project, in July 2020, it was reported that Israeli start-up Nanoscent in cooperation with Sheba Medical Center had devised a breathalyzer that Magen David Adom (MDA) is seeking to incorporate into existing drive-thru testing stations located throughout the country. Questionable intellectual property of Gabby Sarusi regarding this project is now under discussion in the court in Israel. == The Netherlands == A breath test with the SpiroNose device, made by the Dutch company Breathomix, has been developed and tested in collaboration with the Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Franciscus Gasthuis & Vlietland and the GGD Amsterdam. The breath test has been validated as a pre-screening test for people who have no or mild symptoms of COVID-19. From April 2021, the device was operational in COVID-19 test drive-ins, conferences and events, i.e. Eurovision Song Contest 2021. Subjects must abstain from alcohol for eight hours prior to taking the breath test. The SpiroNose contains four sets of seven different sensors that can measure the mixture of volatile organic compounds (biomarkers) in the exhaled air. These VOCs provide a picture of a person's metabolism. This 'breath profile' is forwarded to an online analysis platform. Here the breath profile is compared with other breath profiles of people with and without a COVID-19 diagnosis and analysed by algorithms. Data-analysis involves advanced signal processing and statistics based on independent t-tests followed by linear discriminant and ROC analysis. The test result is known within minutes. The breath test has a sensitivity/specificity for SARS-CoV-2 infection of 100/78, >99/84, 98/82% in validation, replication and asymptomatic cohorts of patients. The breath test reliably detects who is not infected. Such a subject will receive a test result immediately. Other subjects must promptly conduct a subsequent test, for example a PCR test or LAMP test. The test results can be viewed by the client and are not automatically interfaced to other databases, i.e. for public health surveillance, source and contact tracing, vaccination programs. In July 2021, the ministry stopped the tests with the SpiroNose because, according to the GGD, the device gives unusable results in some cases. Breathomix indicates that this is the result of the way in which the SpiroNose is deployed. The SpiroNose is and remains a reliable instrument for lung diseases. The analysis platform is developed conform the requirements of the standard ISO 27001 (Information Security) and NEN 7510 (Information Security in Health Care). A CE marking has been requested. In the meantime, the Dutch minister has granted a CE marking exemption on 25 January 2021. The device may also be used to detect other diseases, e.g., asthma, COPD, lung cancer, interstitial lung diseases (ILD). == Poland == In February 2021, the President of Poland, Andrzej Duda, announced that ML System S. A., headquartered in Zaczernie, Poland, had successfully developed a means of analyzing a patient's breath to test for the presence of coronavirus. According to an anonymous press release, test subjects exhale into a device in order to determine the presence of the coronavirus. The procedure, similar to that of a police breathalyzer, is said to take less than ten seconds. Independent clinical trials were begun in April 2021. In the first half of May 2021, a brief text concerning partial results was published by ML System, stating that independent clinical trials were successful with specificity (97,15%) and accuracy/sensitivity (86,86%), for CT (Cycle Threshold) assumed at 25, which is in line with the guidelines set out by the World Health Organization. Moreover, ML System in partnership with Rzeszów–Jasionka Airport published a statement indicating their intention to test the device at the airport. Similar plans exist between the manufacturer and the Warsaw Chopin Airport. Two large networks of laboratories in Poland, "Diagnostyka" and "ALAB Laboratoria", have signed a letter of intent with ML System. In agreement with ALAB, the parties declared cooperation in the implementation of the product named "COVID DETECTOR" on the Polish, German and Ukrainian markets. In addition, the companies declared joint activities aimed at extending the diagnosis with the use of "COVID Detector" to include mutations of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, differentiate the stage of the disease and ot

  Read more →
• 

  Language Server Protocol

  The Language Server Protocol (LSP) is an open, JSON-RPC-based protocol for use between source-code editors or integrated development environments (IDEs) and servers that provide "language intelligence tools": programming language-specific features like code completion, syntax highlighting and marking of warnings and errors, as well as refactoring routines. The goal of the protocol is to allow programming language support to be implemented and distributed independently of any given editor or IDE. In the early 2020s, LSP quickly became a "norm" for language intelligence tools providers. == History == LSP was originally developed for Microsoft Visual Studio Code and is now an open standard. On June 27, 2016, Microsoft announced a collaboration with Red Hat and Codenvy to standardize the protocol's specification. Its specification is hosted and developed on GitHub. == Background == Modern IDEs provide programmers with sophisticated features like code completion, refactoring, navigating to a symbol's definition, syntax highlighting, and error and warning markers. For example, in a text-based programming language, a programmer might want to rename a method read. The programmer could either manually edit the respective source code files and change the appropriate occurrences of the old method name into the new name, or instead use an IDE's refactoring capabilities to make all the necessary changes automatically. To be able to support this style of refactoring, an IDE needs a sophisticated understanding of the programming language that the program's source is written in. A programming tool without such an understanding—for example, one that performs a naive search-and-replace instead—could introduce errors. When renaming a read method, for example, the tool should not replace the partial match in a variable that might be called readyState, nor should it replace the portion of a code comment containing the word "already". Neither should renaming a local variable read, for example, end up altering identically-named variables in other scopes. Conventional compilers or interpreters for a specific programming language are typically unable to provide these language services, because they are written with the goal of either transforming the source code into object code or immediately executing the code. Additionally, language services must be able to handle source code that is not well-formed, e.g. because the programmer is in the middle of editing and has not yet finished typing a statement, procedure, or other construct. Additionally, small changes to a source code file which are done during typing usually change the semantics of the program. In order to provide instant feedback to the user, the editing tool must be able to very quickly evaluate the syntactical and semantical consequences of a specific modification. Compilers and interpreters therefore provide a poor candidate for producing the information needed for an editing tool to consume. Prior to the design and implementation of the Language Server Protocol for the development of Visual Studio Code, most language services were generally tied to a given IDE or other editor. In the absence of the Language Server Protocol, language services are typically implemented by using a tool-specific extension API. Providing the same language service to another editing tool requires effort to adapt the existing code so that the service may target the second editor's extension interfaces. The Language Server Protocol allows for decoupling language services from the editor so that the services may be contained within a general-purpose language server. Any editor can inherit sophisticated support for many different languages by making use of existing language servers. Similarly, a programmer involved with the development of a new programming language can make services for that language available to existing editing tools. Making use of language servers via the Language Server Protocol thus also reduces the burden on vendors of editing tools, because vendors do not need to develop language services of their own for the languages the vendor intends to support, as long as the language servers have already been implemented. The Language Server Protocol also enables the distribution and development of servers contributed by an interested third party, such as end users, without additional involvement by either the vendor of the compiler for the programming language in use or the vendor of the editor to which the language support is being added. LSP is not restricted to programming languages. It can be used for any kind of text-based language, like specifications or domain-specific languages (DSL). == Technical overview == When a user edits one or more source code files using a language server protocol-enabled tool, the tool acts as a client that consumes the language services provided by a language server. The tool may be a text editor or IDE and the language services could be refactoring, code completion, etc. The client informs the server about what the user is doing, e.g., opening a file or inserting a character at a specific text position. The client can also request the server to perform a language service, e.g. to format a specified range in the text document. The server answers a client's request with an appropriate response. For example, the formatting request is answered either by a response that transfers the formatted text to the client or by an error response containing details about the error. The Language Server Protocol defines the messages to be exchanged between client and language server. They are JSON-RPC preceded by headers similar to HTTP. Messages may originate from the server or client. The protocol does not make any provisions about how requests, responses and notifications are transferred between client and server. For example, client and server could be components within the same process exchanging JSON strings via method calls. They could also be different processes on the same or on different machines communicating via network sockets. == Registry == There are lists of LSP-compatible implementations, maintained by the community-driven Langserver.org or Microsoft.

  Read more →
• 

  List of artificial intelligence artists

  Many notable artificial intelligence artists have created a wide variety of artificial intelligence art from the 1960s to today. These include: == 20th century == Harold Cohen, active from 1960s to 2010s. Cohen's work is primarily with AARON, a series of computer programs that autonomously create original images. Eric Millikin, active from 1980s to present. Millikin's work includes AI-generated virtual reality, video art, poetry, music, and performance art, on topics such as animal rights, climate change, anti-racism, witchcraft, and the occult. Karl Sims, active from 1980s to present. Sims is best known for using particle systems and artificial life in computer animation. == 21st century == Refik Anadol, active from 2010s to present. Anadol's work includes video installations based on generative algorithms with artificial intelligence. Sougwen Chung, active from 2010s to present. Chung's work includes performances with a robotic arm that uses AI to attempt to draw in a manner similar to Chung. Stephanie Dinkins, active from 2010s to present. Dinkins' work includes recordings of conversations with an artificially intelligent robot that resembles a black woman, discussing topics such as race and the nature of being. Jake Elwes, active from 2010s to present. Their practice is the exploration of artificial intelligence, queer theory and technical biases. Libby Heaney, active from 2010s to present. Heaney's practice includes work with chatbots. Mario Klingemann, active from 2010s to present. Klingemann's works examine creativity, culture, and perception through machine learning and artificial intelligence. Mauro Martino, active from 2010s to present. Martino's work includes design, data visualization and infographics. Trevor Paglen, active from 2000s to present. Paglen's practice includes work in photography and geography, on topics like mass surveillance and data collection. Anna Ridler, active from 2010s to present. Ridler works with collections of information, including self-generated data sets, often working with floral photography.

  Read more →
• 

  Nature Manifesto

  Nature Manifesto is an Immersive sound piece and multimedia installation by Icelandic artist Björk and artist and curator Aleph Molinari, created in collaboration with the French Institute for Research and Coordination in Acoustics/Music (IRCAM). The installation was showcased at the Centre Pompidou in Paris, France from November 20, 2024 to December 9, 2024, as part of the museum's "Biodiversity: Which Culture for Which Future?" forum. It combines natural soundscapes, calls of extinct animals reconstructed through artificial intelligence, and Björk's narration to address damages to biodiversity and the collapse of ecosystems. == Background == Björk's work intricately weaves themes of nature and technology, reflecting her deep engagement with both realms. In 2008, she co-founded the Náttúra campaign to protest the construction of foreign-backed aluminum factories in Iceland, aiming to protect the country's natural landscapes. She released the single "Náttúra" featuring Thom Yorke, with all proceeds supporting this environmental initiative. Her 2011 album Biophilia further exemplifies this synthesis, exploring the relationships between music, nature, and technology through a multimedia project that included interactive apps, custom-made instruments, and educational workshops. Björk's Cornucopia tour (2019-2023) seamlessly integrates themes of nature preservation and environmental activism, and featured a recorded message by Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg. The tour's fusion of music, technology, and natural imagery reflects Björk's vision of a harmonious coexistence between humanity and nature, advocating for sustainable futures. Björk has previously used artificial intelligence in her works. In 2020, she collaborated with Microsoft to create Kórsafn, a sound installation for the Sister City Hotel lobby in New York City which used an AI-powered model that elaborated choral recordings from her discography through a sensor on the rooftop of the building that would generate music according to data like the weather and the seasons. For her charity single "Oral", featuring Spanish singer Rosalía, she released a music video directed by photographer and visual artist Carlota Guerrero, who used AI-generated deepfake versions of the artists. == Concept == Nature Manifesto is a three-minute and forty-second immersive sound piece. The composition merges Björk's voice, as she articulates a manifesto on biodiversity and the climate crisis, with cries of extinct and endangered animals, harmonizing them with natural soundscapes. The installation was curated by Chloé Siganos and Aleph Molinari, with associate curator Delphine Le Gatt. The primary goal of Nature Manifesto is to foster a deeper understanding of humanity's impact on the natural world. Conceived as a "post-optimistic" manifesto, Aleph Molinari stated that the project's purpose was to "offer a voice to nature". He stated that "the modern concept of nature itself is problematic [...] because it’s a concept born in the Romantic period and, with the rise of the industrial era, became an antithesis to human civilisation and everything urban. Nature came to define what was outside, the savage Other... But nature is everything that we’re part of." The soundscape features recreated calls of extinct and endangered species, developed in collaboration with the French sound research institute IRCAM. Artificial intelligence was employed to simulate the vocalizations of animals that no longer exist in the wild. To save energy and lessen the ecological impact of the use of AI, the research institute developed a "frugal AI" model capable of generating audio in real-time on local servers without a graphics processing unit. The sounds were then produced and edited by Björk in collaboration with Robin Meier Wiratunga and Bergur Þórisson. The installation was located within the Centre Pompidou's escalator, known as the "caterpillar". The installation was further supported by videos created by visual artist Sam Balfus (also known as Balfua) by using artificial intelligence, and edited by Santiago Molinari. == Activism == To sustain and broaden the themes presented in Nature Manifesto, Björk publicly urged French President Emmanuel Macron to prohibit bottom trawling within France's marine protected areas (MPA). She criticized the French government's claim of protecting 30% of its marine territories, highlighting that over 90% of these MPAs exist only on paper, allowing destructive practices like bottom trawling to continue unchecked. She collaborated with non-governmental organizations Sustainable Ocean Alliance, Ungir umhverfissinnar and Bloom, to advocate for genuine ocean conservation. Björk promoted the cause through her social media profiles by sharing petitions. In November 2024, Björk lent her Instagram account to French environmental activists to directly address Macron. The activists used the platform to call for stronger protection of the ocean, urging Macron to impose stricter restrictions on harmful fishing practices, particularly bottom trawling. == Reception == Nature Manifesto received mixed to positive reviews from critics. Some critiques focused on the installation's setting, suggesting that the movement inherent to the escalator space diminished the immersive potential of the soundscape. The choice of using artificial intelligence was also questioned. Björk and Molinari defended this, as both see AI as a tool that can be used creatively and sustainably, with Björk focusing on the importance of human input to give AI a "soul", and Molinari stressing the need for sustainable technological practices in the broader context of digital life. After the exhibition ended, Björk further opinionated: "this is how we will work in the future. [...] if there is no soul in tomorrow's music made by AI it is because [no one] put it there and we have to speak out and guard this as listeners", further stating that there is already "soulless muzak" [sic] on Spotify, "mass manufactured without the attention of creativity".

  Read more →