AI Chat Emochi

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

• 

  Conversica

  Conversica is a US-based cloud software technology company, headquartered in San Mateo, California, that provides two-way AI-driven conversational software and a suite of Intelligent Virtual Assistants for businesses to engage customers via email, chat, and SMS. == History == 2007: The company was founded by Ben Brigham in Bellingham, Washington, originally as AutoFerret.com. The company's initial product was a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) targeted at automotive dealerships. This soon expanded to lead generation, and then lead validation and qualification. The AI Conversica uses currently was made to follow up on and filter out low-quality leads. The focus of the company shifted toward this automated lead engagement technology. 2010: The company started commercially selling AVA, the first Automated Virtual Assistant for sales, and the company name was changed to AVA.ai. Early customers for AVA were automotive dealerships. As the company moved away from generating leads themselves, and providing the CRM themselves, it became necessary to integrate with existing CRM and Marketing Automation platforms, such as DealerSocket, VinSolutions and Salesforce. 2013: The company raised $16m Series A funding, led by Kennet Partners, and named Mark Bradley as CEO. It also moved its headquarters from Bellingham, Washington to Foster City, California. 2014: The company changed its name from AVA.ai to Conversica. 2015: Alex Terry joined Conversica as its CEO. The business expanded to include customers in additional verticals, including technology, education, and financial services. 2016: The company raised $34m Series B funding, led by Providence Strategic Growth. 2017: Conversica expanded its intelligent automation platform and IVAs to support additional communication channels (e-mail and SMS text messaging) and communication languages. Conversica also opened a new technology center in Seattle, Washington to expand its AI and machine learning capabilities. 2018: The company raised $31m Series C funding, led by Providence Strategic Growth. Conversica also acquired Intelligens.ai, providing a regional presence in Latin America with an office in Las Condes, Santiago, Chile. The company launched an AI-powered Admissions Assistant for Higher Education industry. 2019: Conversica was selected by Fast Company magazine as one of the Top 10 Most Innovative AI Companies in the World, and was named Marketo's Technology Partner of the Year. The company officially expanded into the EMEA region with the opening of a London office. As of August 2019, Conversica has over 50 different integrations with third parties. In October Conversica won three awards at the fourth annual Global Annual Achievement Awards for Artificial Intelligence. Also that month, Alex Terry stepped down from his role as CEO and was replaced by Jim Kaskade. 2020: As part of Conversica's response to COVID-19, they optimized the business to become profitable in both 2Q20 and 3Q20, before reinvesting in 4Q20. The company transitioned both international operations in EMEA and LATAM to an indirect model with partners (LeadFabric and Nectia Cloud Solutions respectively), and moved a portion of its US-based employees to near-shore centers in Mexico and Brazil, effectively downsizing the company from 250 to 200. Conversica's reseller partner, Nectia, is a major Latin American affiliate and Chile's number one Salesforce partner, and, as part of the partnership, Nectia devoted capital to a brand new company segment, Predict-IA, dedicated to web-based artificial intelligent solutions. Predict-IA was able to immediately service all LATAM opportunities and clients with Conversica's AI Assistants with end-to-end services (marketing, sales, professional services, customer success, and technical support). Conversica's reseller partner, Leadfabric, has offices in Belgium, Amsterdam, Paris, UK, Taiwan, and Romania. == Technology == Conversica's Revenue Digital Assistants™ are AI assistants who engage with leads, prospects, customers, employees, and other persons of interest (Contacts) in a two-way human-like manner, via email, SMS text, and website chat, in English, French, German, Spanish, Portuguese, and Japanese. The RDAs are built on an Intelligent Automation platform that leverages natural language understanding, natural language processing, natural language generation, deep learning and machine learning. The Assistants are generally deployed alongside sales and marketing, customer success, account management, and higher education admissions teams, as part of an augmented workforce. The Intelligent Automation platform integrates with over 50 external systems, including CRM, Marketing Automation, and other systems of record. A partial list of integration partners includes: Salesforce, Marketo, Oracle, HubSpot, DealerSocket, Reynolds & Reynolds, CDK Global, VinSolutions and many more.

  Read more →
• 

  Armin B. Cremers

  Armin Bernd Cremers (born June 7, 1946) is a German mathematician and computer scientist. He is a professor in the computer science institute at the University of Bonn, Germany. He is most notable for his contributions to several fields of discrete mathematics including formal languages and automata theory. In more recent years he has been recognized for his work in artificial intelligence, machine learning and robotics as well as in geoinformatics and deductive databases. == Life and work == Armin B. Cremers studied mathematics and physics at the University of Karlsruhe, Germany. After his graduate diploma (1971) and PhD (1972), both in mathematics, both summa cum laude, he received his academic lectureship qualification for computer science (1974), all from the University of Karlsruhe. Following an invitation by Seymour Ginsburg, he joined the University of Southern California (USC), Los Angeles, in 1973 where he worked until 1976 as an assistant professor of electrical engineering and computer science. With Ginsburg he initiated Grammar Forms, a new formalism for grammatical families. In 1976 A. B. Cremers returned to Germany and was appointed to full professor of computer science at the University of Dortmund, where he remained until 1990, holding the chair for information systems. During the same time he continued working as a visiting research professor at USC, where together with Thomas N. Hibbard he developed the concept of Data Spaces, a comprehensive computational model, in theory and applications. At the University of Dortmund A. B. Cremers served as chairman of the computer science department and, since early 1985, as vice president for Research and Junior Scientific Staff. In this position he was liaison for the development of the Technology Center Dortmund Archived 2021-05-09 at the Wayback Machine. He was the initiator and founding director of the Center for Expert Systems Dortmund (ZEDO) and the NRW State Research Collaborative in Artificial Intelligence (KI-NRW). From 1988 to 1996 he was also a member of the supervisory board of the German National Research Center for Mathematics and Data Processing (GMD). Since 1990 A. B. Cremers has been professor and director of computer science and head of the research group in artificial intelligence at the University of Bonn. From Bonn he has contributed fundamentally to artificial intelligence and robotics (with Wolfram Burgard, Dieter Fox, Sebastian Thrun among his students), and to the development of software engineering, particularly in civil engineering, and information systems, particularly in the geosciences. The paper "The Interactive Museum Tour-Guide Robot" won the AAAI Classic Paper award of 2016. Together with Matthias Jarke A. B. Cremers established the Bonn-Aachen International Center for Information Technology (B-IT) in 2001 and led this as Founding Scientific Director from the University of Bonn side until his retirement from teaching in 2014. From 2004 to 2008 Cremers was Dean of the School of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, and from April 2009 to July 2014 University Vice President for Planning and Finance. He is member of advisory boards, e.g., as well as Chairman of the University Council of the University of Koblenz-Landau.

  Read more →
• 

  Is an AI Video Editor Worth It in 2026?

  Shopping for the best AI video editor? An AI video editor is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI video editor slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.

  Read more →
• 

  Top 10 AI Website Builders Compared (2026)

  Curious about the best AI website builder? An AI website builder is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI website builder slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.

  Read more →
• 

  Software construction

  Software construction is the process of creating working software via coding and integration. The process includes unit and integration testing although does not include higher level testing such as system testing. Construction is an aspect of the software development lifecycle and is integrated in the various software development process models with varying focus on construction as an activity separate from other activities. In the waterfall model, a software development effort consists of sequential phases including requirements analysis, design, and planning which are prerequisites for starting construction. In an iterative model such as scrum, evolutionary prototyping, or extreme programming, construction as an activity that occurs concurrently or overlapping other activities. Construction planning may include defining the order in which components are created and integrated, the software quality management processes, and the allocation of tasks to teams and developers. To facilitate project management, numerous construction aspects can be measured; these include the amount of code developed, modified, reused, and destroyed, code complexity, code inspection statistics, faults-fixed and faults-found rates, and effort expended. These measurements can be useful for aspects such as ensuring quality and improving the process. == Activities == Construction includes many activities. === Coding === The following are a few of the key aspects of the coding activity: Naming Choice of name for each identifier. One study showed that the effort required to debug a program is minimized when variable names are between 10 and 16 characters. Logic Organization into statements and routines Highly cohesive routines proved to be less error prone than routines with lower cohesion. A study of 450 routines found that 50 percent of the highly cohesive routines were fault free compared to only 18 percent of routines with low cohesion. Another study of a different 450 routines found that routines with the highest coupling-to-cohesion ratios had 7 times as many errors as those with the lowest coupling-to-cohesion ratios and were 20 times as costly to fix. Although studies showed inconclusive results regarding the correlation between routine sizes and the rate of errors in them, but one study found that routines with fewer than 143 lines of code were 2.4 times less expensive to fix than larger routines. Another study showed that the code needed to be changed least when routines averaged 100 to 150 lines of code. Another study found that structural complexity and amount of data in a routine were correlated with errors regardless of its size. Interfaces between routines are some of the most error-prone areas of a program. One study showed that 39 percent of all errors were errors in communication between routines. Unused parameters are correlated with an increased error rate. In one study, only 17 to 29 percent of routines with more than one unreferenced variable had no errors, compared to 46 percent in routines with no unused variables. The number of parameters of a routine should be 7 at maximum as research has found that people generally cannot keep track of more than about seven chunks of information at once. One experiment showed that designs which access arrays sequentially, rather than randomly, result in fewer variables and fewer variable references. One experiment found that loops-with-exit are more comprehensible than other kinds of loops. Regarding the level of nesting in loops and conditionals, studies have shown that programmers have difficulty comprehending more than three levels of nesting. Control flow complexity has been shown to correlate with low reliability and frequent errors. Modularity Structuring and refactoring the code into classes, packages and other structures. When considering containment, the maximum number of data members in a class shouldn't exceed 7±2. Research has shown that this number is the number of discrete items a person can remember while performing other tasks. When considering inheritance, the number of levels in the inheritance tree should be limited. Deep inheritance trees have been found to be significantly associated with increased fault rates. When considering the number of routines in a class, it should be kept as small as possible. A study on C++ programs has found an association between the number of routines and the number of faults. A study by NASA showed that the putting the code into well-factored classes can double the code reusability compared to the code developed using functional design. Error handling Encoding logic to handle both planned and unplanned errors and exceptions. Resource management Managing computational resource use via exclusion mechanisms and discipline in accessing serially reusable resources, including threads or database locks. Security Prevention of code-level security breaches such as buffer overrun and array index overflow. Optimization Optimization while avoiding premature optimization. Documentation Both embedded in the code as comments and as external documents. === Integration === Integration is about combining separately constructed parts. Concerns include planning the sequence in which components will be integrated, creating scaffolding to support interim versions of the software, determining the degree of testing and quality work performed on components before they are integrated, and determining points in the project at which interim versions are tested. === Testing === Testing can reduce the time between when faulty logic is inserted in the code and when it is detected. In some cases, testing is performed after code has been written, but in test-first programming, test cases are created before code is written. Construction includes at least two forms of testing, often performed by the developer who wrote the code: unit testing and integration testing. === Reuse === Software reuse entails more than creating and using libraries. It requires formalizing the practice of reuse by integrating reuse processes and activities into the software life cycle. The tasks related to reuse in software construction during coding and testing may include: selection of the reusable code, evaluation of code or test re-usability, reporting reuse metrics. === Quality assurance === Techniques for ensuring quality as software is constructed include: Testing One study found that the average defect detection rates of Unit testing and integration testing are 30% and 35% respectively. Software inspection With respect to software inspection, one study found that the average defect detection rate of formal code inspections is 60%. Regarding the cost of finding defects, a study found that code reading detected 80% more faults per hour than testing. Another study shown that it costs six times more to detect design defects by using testing than by using inspections. A study by IBM showed that only 3.5 hours were needed to find a defect through code inspections versus 15–25 hours through testing. Microsoft has found that it takes 3 hours to find and fix a defect by using code inspections and 12 hours to find and fix a defect by using testing. In a 700 thousand lines program, it was reported that code reviews were several times as cost-effective as testing. Studies found that inspections result in 20% - 30% fewer defects per 1000 lines of code than less formal review practices and that they increase productivity by about 20%. Formal inspections will usually take 10% - 15% of the project budget and will reduce overall project cost. Researchers found that having more than 2 - 3 reviewers on a formal inspection doesn't increase the number of defects found, although the results seem to vary depending on the kind of material being inspected. Technical review With respect to technical review, one study found that the average defect detection rates of informal code reviews and desk checking are 25% and 40% respectively. Walkthroughs were found to have a defect detection rate of 20% - 40%, but were found also to be expensive especially when project pressures increase. Code reading was found by NASA to detect 3.3 defects per hour of effort versus 1.8 defects per hour for testing. It also finds 20% - 60% more errors over the life of the project than different kinds of testing. A study of 13 reviews about review meetings, found that 90% of the defects were found in preparation for the review meeting while only around 10% were found during the meeting. Static analysis With respect to Static analysis (IEEE1028), studies have shown that a combination of these techniques needs to be used to achieve a high defect detection rate. Other studies showed that different people tend to find different defects. One study found that the extreme programming practices of pair programming, desk checking, unit testing, integration testing, and regression testing can achieve a 90% defect detection rate. An experiment involving exper

  Read more →
• 

  Tf–idf

  In information retrieval, tf–idf (term frequency–inverse document frequency, TFIDF, TFIDF, TF–IDF, or Tf–idf) is a measure of importance of a word to a document in a collection or corpus, adjusted for the fact that some words appear more frequently in general. Like the bag-of-words model, it models a document as a multiset of words, without word order. It is a refinement over the simple bag-of-words model, by allowing the weight of words to depend on the rest of the corpus. It was often used as a weighting factor in searches of information retrieval, text mining, and user modeling. A survey conducted in 2015 showed that 83% of text-based recommender systems in digital libraries used tf–idf. Variations of the tf–idf weighting scheme were often used by search engines as a central tool in scoring and ranking a document's relevance given a user query. One of the simplest ranking functions is computed by summing the tf–idf for each query term; many more sophisticated ranking functions are variants of this simple model. == Motivations == Karen Spärck Jones (1972) conceived a statistical interpretation of term-specificity called Inverse Document Frequency (idf), which became a cornerstone of term weighting: The specificity of a term can be quantified as an inverse function of the number of documents in which it occurs.For example, the df (document frequency) and idf for some words in Shakespeare's 37 plays might be represented as follows: We see that "Romeo", "Falstaff", and "salad" appears in very few plays, so seeing these words, one could get a good idea as to which play it might be. In contrast, "good" and "sweet" appears in every play and are completely uninformative as to which play it is. == Definition == The tf–idf is the product of two statistics, term frequency and inverse document frequency. There are various ways for determining the exact values of both statistics. A formula that aims to define the importance of a keyword or phrase within a document or a web page. === Term frequency === Term frequency, tf(t,d), is the relative frequency of term t within document d, t f ( t , d ) = f t , d ∑ t ′ ∈ d f t ′ , d {\displaystyle \mathrm {tf} (t,d)={\frac {f_{t,d}}{\sum _{t'\in d}{f_{t',d}}}}} , where ft,d is the raw count of a term in a document, i.e., the number of times that term t occurs in document d. Note the denominator is simply the total number of terms in document d (counting each occurrence of the same term separately). There are various other ways to define term frequency: the raw count itself: tf(t,d) = ft,d Boolean "frequencies": tf(t,d) = 1 if t occurs in d and 0 otherwise; logarithmically scaled frequency: tf(t,d) = log (1 + ft,d); augmented frequency, to prevent a bias towards longer documents, e.g. raw frequency divided by the raw frequency of the most frequently occurring term in the document: t f ( t , d ) = 0.5 + 0.5 ⋅ f t , d max { f t ′ , d : t ′ ∈ d } {\displaystyle \mathrm {tf} (t,d)=0.5+0.5\cdot {\frac {f_{t,d}}{\max\{f_{t',d}:t'\in d\}}}} === Inverse document frequency === The inverse document frequency is a measure of how much information the word provides, i.e., how common or rare it is across all documents. It is the logarithmically scaled inverse fraction of the documents that contain the word (obtained by dividing the total number of documents by the number of documents containing the term, and then taking the logarithm of that quotient): i d f ( t , D ) = log ⁡ N n t {\displaystyle \mathrm {idf} (t,D)=\log {\frac {N}{n_{t}}}} with D {\displaystyle D} : is the set of all documents in the corpus N = | D | {\displaystyle N={|D|}} : total number of documents in the corpus n t = | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle n_{t}=|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|} : number of documents where the term t {\displaystyle t} appears (i.e., t f ( t , d ) ≠ 0 {\displaystyle \mathrm {tf} (t,d)\neq 0} ). If the term is not in the corpus, this will lead to a division-by-zero. It is therefore common to adjust the numerator to 1 + N {\displaystyle 1+N} and the denominator to 1 + | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle 1+|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|} . === Term frequency–inverse document frequency === Then tf–idf is calculated as t f i d f ( t , d , D ) = t f ( t , d ) ⋅ i d f ( t , D ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {tfidf} (t,d,D)=\mathrm {tf} (t,d)\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t,D)} A high weight in tf–idf is reached by a high term frequency (in the given document) and a low document frequency of the term in the whole collection of documents; the weights hence tend to filter out common terms. Since the ratio inside the idf's log function is always greater than or equal to 1, the value of idf (and tf–idf) is greater than or equal to 0. As a term appears in more documents, the ratio inside the logarithm approaches 1, bringing the idf and tf–idf closer to 0. == Justification of idf == Idf was introduced as "term specificity" by Karen Spärck Jones in a 1972 paper. Although it has worked well as a heuristic, its theoretical foundations have been troublesome for at least three decades afterward, with many researchers trying to find information theoretic justifications for it. Spärck Jones's own explanation did not propose much theory, aside from a connection to Zipf's law. Attempts have been made to put idf on a probabilistic footing, by estimating the probability that a given document d contains a term t as the relative document frequency, P ( t | D ) = | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | N , {\displaystyle P(t|D)={\frac {|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}{N}},} so that we can define idf as i d f = − log ⁡ P ( t | D ) = log ⁡ 1 P ( t | D ) = log ⁡ N | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}\mathrm {idf} &=-\log P(t|D)\\&=\log {\frac {1}{P(t|D)}}\\&=\log {\frac {N}{|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}}\end{aligned}}} Namely, the inverse document frequency is the logarithm of "inverse" relative document frequency. This probabilistic interpretation in turn takes the same form as that of self-information. However, applying such information-theoretic notions to problems in information retrieval leads to problems when trying to define the appropriate event spaces for the required probability distributions: not only documents need to be taken into account, but also queries and terms. == Link with information theory == Both term frequency and inverse document frequency can be formulated in terms of information theory; it helps to understand why their product has a meaning in terms of joint informational content of a document. A characteristic assumption about the distribution p ( d , t ) {\displaystyle p(d,t)} is that: p ( d | t ) = 1 | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle p(d|t)={\frac {1}{|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}}} This assumption and its implications, according to Aizawa: "represent the heuristic that tf–idf employs." The conditional entropy of a "randomly chosen" document in the corpus D {\displaystyle D} , conditional to the fact it contains a specific term t {\displaystyle t} (and assuming that all documents have equal probability to be chosen) is: H ( D | T = t ) = − ∑ d p d | t log ⁡ p d | t = − log ⁡ 1 | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | = log ⁡ | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | | D | + log ⁡ | D | = − i d f ( t ) + log ⁡ | D | {\displaystyle H({\cal {D}}|{\cal {T}}=t)=-\sum _{d}p_{d|t}\log p_{d|t}=-\log {\frac {1}{|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}}=\log {\frac {|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}{|D|}}+\log |D|=-\mathrm {idf} (t)+\log |D|} In terms of notation, D {\displaystyle {\cal {D}}} and T {\displaystyle {\cal {T}}} are "random variables" corresponding to respectively draw a document or a term. The mutual information can be expressed as M ( T ; D ) = H ( D ) − H ( D | T ) = ∑ t p t ⋅ ( H ( D ) − H ( D | W = t ) ) = ∑ t p t ⋅ i d f ( t ) {\displaystyle M({\cal {T}};{\cal {D}})=H({\cal {D}})-H({\cal {D}}|{\cal {T}})=\sum _{t}p_{t}\cdot (H({\cal {D}})-H({\cal {D}}|W=t))=\sum _{t}p_{t}\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t)} The last step is to expand p t {\displaystyle p_{t}} , the unconditional probability to draw a term, with respect to the (random) choice of a document, to obtain: M ( T ; D ) = ∑ t , d p t | d ⋅ p d ⋅ i d f ( t ) = ∑ t , d t f ( t , d ) ⋅ 1 | D | ⋅ i d f ( t ) = 1 | D | ∑ t , d t f ( t , d ) ⋅ i d f ( t ) . {\displaystyle M({\cal {T}};{\cal {D}})=\sum _{t,d}p_{t|d}\cdot p_{d}\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t)=\sum _{t,d}\mathrm {tf} (t,d)\cdot {\frac {1}{|D|}}\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t)={\frac {1}{|D|}}\sum _{t,d}\mathrm {tf} (t,d)\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t).} This expression shows that summing the Tf–idf of all possible terms and documents recovers the mutual information between documents and term taking into account all the specificities of their joint distribution. Each Tf–idf hence carries the "bit of information" attached to a term x document pair. == Link with statistical theory == Tf–idf is closely related to the negative logarithmically transformed p-value from a one-tailed formulation of Fisher's exact test when the underlying corpus documents satisfy certain idealized assumptions. More recently, tf–idf variants were shown to arise as components in the test st

  Read more →
• 

  Best AI Website Builders in 2026

  Comparing the best AI website builder? An AI website builder is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI website builder slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.

  Read more →
• 

  Geoffrey J. Gordon

  Geoffrey J. Gordon is a professor at the Machine Learning Department at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh and director of research at the Microsoft Montréal lab. He is known for his research in statistical relational learning (a subdiscipline of artificial intelligence and machine learning) and on anytime dynamic variants of the A search algorithm. His research interests include multi-agent planning, reinforcement learning, decision-theoretic planning, statistical models of difficult data (e.g. maps, video, text), computational learning theory, and game theory. Gordon received a B.A. in computer science from Cornell University in 1991, and a PhD at Carnegie Mellon in 1999.

  Read more →
• 

  User-defined function

  A user-defined function (UDF) is a function provided by the user of a program or environment, in a context where the usual assumption is that functions are built into the program or environment. UDFs are usually written for the requirement of its creator. == BASIC language == In some old implementations of the BASIC programming language, user-defined functions are defined using the "DEF FN" syntax. More modern dialects of BASIC are influenced by the structured programming paradigm, where most or all of the code is written as user-defined functions or procedures, and the concept becomes practically redundant. == COBOL language == In the COBOL programming language, a user-defined function is an entity that is defined by the user by specifying a FUNCTION-ID paragraph. A user-defined function must return a value by specifying the RETURNING phrase of the procedure division header and they are invoked using the function-identifier syntax. See the ISO/IEC 1989:2014 Programming Language COBOL standard for details. As of May 2022, the IBM Enterprise COBOL for z/OS 6.4 (IBM COBOL) compiler contains support for user-defined functions. == Databases == In relational database management systems, a user-defined function provides a mechanism for extending the functionality of the database server by adding a function, that can be evaluated in standard query language (usually SQL) statements. The SQL standard distinguishes between scalar and table functions. A scalar function returns only a single value (or NULL), whereas a table function returns a (relational) table comprising zero or more rows, each row with one or more columns. User-defined functions in SQL are declared using the CREATE FUNCTION statement. For example, a user-defined function that converts Celsius to Fahrenheit (a temperature scale used in USA) might be declared like this: Once created, a user-defined function may be used in expressions in SQL statements. For example, it can be invoked where most other intrinsic functions are allowed. This also includes SELECT statements, where the function can be used against data stored in tables in the database. Conceptually, the function is evaluated once per row in such usage. For example, assume a table named Elements, with a row for each known chemical element. The table has a column named BoilingPoint for the boiling point of that element, in Celsius. The query would retrieve the name and the boiling point from each row. It invokes the CtoF user-defined function as declared above in order to convert the value in the column to a value in Fahrenheit. Each user-defined function carries certain properties or characteristics. The SQL standard defines the following properties: Language - defines the programming language in which the user-defined function is implemented; examples include SQL, C, C# and Java. Parameter style - defines the conventions that are used to pass the function parameters and results between the implementation of the function and the database system (only applicable if language is not SQL). Specific name - a name for the function that is unique within the database. Note that the function name does not have to be unique, considering overloaded functions. Some SQL implementations require that function names are unique within a database, and overloaded functions are not allowed. Determinism - specifies whether the function is deterministic or not. The determinism characteristic has an influence on the query optimizer when compiling a SQL statement. SQL-data access - tells the database management system whether the function contains no SQL statements (NO SQL), contains SQL statements but does not access any tables or views (CONTAINS SQL), reads data from tables or views (READS SQL DATA), or actually modifies data in the database (MODIFIES SQL DATA). User-defined functions should not be confused with stored procedures. Stored procedures allow the user to group a set of SQL commands. A procedure can accept parameters and execute its SQL statements depending on those parameters. A procedure is not an expression and, thus, cannot be used like user-defined functions. Some database management systems allow the creation of user defined functions in languages other than SQL. Microsoft SQL Server, for example, allows the user to use .NET languages including C# for this purpose. DB2 and Oracle support user-defined functions written in C or Java programming languages. === SQL Server 2000 === There are three types of UDF in Microsoft SQL Server 2000: scalar functions, inline table-valued functions, and multistatement table-valued functions. Scalar functions return a single data value (not a table) with RETURNS clause. Scalar functions can use all scalar data types, with exception of timestamp and user-defined data types. Inline table-valued functions return the result set of a single SELECT statement. Multistatement table-valued functions return a table, which was built with many TRANSACT-SQL statements. User-defined functions can be invoked from a query like built‑in functions such as OBJECT_ID, LEN, DATEDIFF, or can be executed through an EXECUTE statement like stored procedures. Performance Notes: User-defined functions are subroutines made of one or more Transact-SQL statements that can be used to encapsulate code for reuse. It takes zero or more arguments and evaluates a return value. Has both control-flow and DML statements in its body similar to stored procedures. Does not allow changes to any Global Session State, like modifications to database or external resource, such as a file or network. Does not support output parameter. DEFAULT keyword must be specified to pass the default value of parameter. Errors in UDF cause UDF to abort which, in turn, aborts the statement that invoked the UDF. === Apache Hive === Apache Hive defines, in addition to the regular user-defined functions (UDF), also user-defined aggregate functions (UDAF) and table-generating functions (UDTF). Hive enables developers to create their own custom functions with Java. === Apache Doris === Apache Doris, an open-source real-time analytical database, allows external users to contribute their own UDFs written in C++ to it.

  Read more →
• 

  Ann Copestake

  Ann Alicia Copestake is professor of computational linguistics and head of the Department of Computer Science and Technology at the University of Cambridge and a fellow of Wolfson College, Cambridge. == Education == Copestake was educated at the University of Cambridge where she was awarded a Bachelor of Arts degree in Natural Sciences. After two years working for Unilever Research she completed the Cambridge Diploma in Computer Science. She went on to study at the University of Sussex where she was awarded a PhD in 1992 for research on lexical semantics supervised by Gerald Gazdar. == Career and research == Copestake started doing research in Natural language processing and Computational Linguistics at the University of Cambridge in 1985. Since then she has been a visiting researcher at Xerox PARC (1993/4) and the University of Stuttgart (1994/5). From July 1994 to October 2000 she worked at the Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI) at Stanford University, as a Senior Researcher. Copestake was appointed a University Lecturer at Cambridge in October 2000. In the UK, her research has been funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) and Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC). According to Google Scholar and Scopus her most cited publications include papers on minimal recursion semantics, multiword expressions, polysemy, named-entity recognition and feature structure grammars.

  Read more →
• 

  Kaiming He

  Kaiming He (Chinese: 何恺明; pinyin: Hé Kǎimíng) is a Chinese computer scientist who primarily researches computer vision and deep learning. He is an associate professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and works part-time as a Distinguished Scientist at Google DeepMind. He is known as one of the creators of the residual neural network (ResNet) architecture. == Early life and education == He attended the public Guangzhou Zhixin High School in Guangzhou, Guangdong, China. He scored first place for the total scores in the 2003 Guangdong provincial undergraduate admissions exam. He went to Tsinghua University for undergraduate education and received a Bachelor of Science degree in 2007. In 2007 to 2011, he pursued doctoral studies in information engineering at the Chinese University of Hong Kong at its Multimedia Laboratory, receiving a PhD degree in 2011. His doctoral dissertation was titled Single image haze removal using dark channel prior (2011), and his doctoral adviser was Tang Xiao'ou. == Career == He worked at Microsoft Research Asia from 2011 to 2016 and at Facebook Artificial Intelligence Research from 2016 to 2024. In 2024, he became an associate professor at the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His 2016 paper Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition is the most cited research paper in 5 years according to Google Scholar's reports in 2020 and 2021. == Awards and recognitions == He won ICCV's best paper award (Marr Prize) in 2017 and CVPR's best paper award in 2009 and 2016. He was awarded the 2023 Future Science Prize along with 3 collaborators for "fundamental contribution to artificial intelligence by introducing deep residual learning".

  Read more →
• 

  Sequential minimal optimization

  Sequential minimal optimization (SMO) is an algorithm for solving the quadratic programming (QP) problem that arises during the training of support-vector machines (SVM). It was invented by John Platt in 1998 at Microsoft Research. SMO is widely used for training support vector machines and is implemented by the popular LIBSVM tool. The publication of the SMO algorithm in 1998 has generated a lot of excitement in the SVM community, as previously available methods for SVM training were much more complex and required expensive third-party QP solvers. == Optimization problem == Consider a binary classification problem with a dataset (x1, y1), ..., (xn, yn), where xi is an input vector and yi ∈ {-1, +1} is a binary label corresponding to it. A soft-margin support vector machine is trained by solving a quadratic programming problem, which is expressed in the dual form as follows: max α ∑ i = 1 n α i − 1 2 ∑ i = 1 n ∑ j = 1 n y i y j K ( x i , x j ) α i α j , {\displaystyle \max _{\alpha }\sum _{i=1}^{n}\alpha _{i}-{\frac {1}{2}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}\sum _{j=1}^{n}y_{i}y_{j}K(x_{i},x_{j})\alpha _{i}\alpha _{j},} subject to: 0 ≤ α i ≤ C , for i = 1 , 2 , … , n , {\displaystyle 0\leq \alpha _{i}\leq C,\quad {\mbox{ for }}i=1,2,\ldots ,n,} ∑ i = 1 n y i α i = 0 {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}y_{i}\alpha _{i}=0} where C is an SVM hyperparameter and K(xi, xj) is the kernel function, both supplied by the user; and the variables α i {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}} are Lagrange multipliers. == Algorithm == SMO is an iterative algorithm for solving the optimization problem described above. SMO breaks this problem into a series of smallest possible sub-problems, which are then solved analytically. Because of the linear equality constraint involving the Lagrange multipliers α i {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}} , the smallest possible problem involves two such multipliers. Then, for any two multipliers α 1 {\displaystyle \alpha _{1}} and α 2 {\displaystyle \alpha _{2}} , the constraints are reduced to: 0 ≤ α 1 , α 2 ≤ C , {\displaystyle 0\leq \alpha _{1},\alpha _{2}\leq C,} y 1 α 1 + y 2 α 2 = k , {\displaystyle y_{1}\alpha _{1}+y_{2}\alpha _{2}=k,} and this reduced problem can be solved analytically: one needs to find a minimum of a one-dimensional quadratic function. k {\displaystyle k} is the negative of the sum over the rest of terms in the equality constraint, which is fixed in each iteration. The algorithm proceeds as follows: Find a Lagrange multiplier α 1 {\displaystyle \alpha _{1}} that violates the Karush–Kuhn–Tucker (KKT) conditions for the optimization problem. Pick a second multiplier α 2 {\displaystyle \alpha _{2}} and optimize the pair ( α 1 , α 2 ) {\displaystyle (\alpha _{1},\alpha _{2})} . Repeat steps 1 and 2 until convergence. When all the Lagrange multipliers satisfy the KKT conditions (within a user-defined tolerance), the problem has been solved. Although this algorithm is guaranteed to converge, heuristics are used to choose the pair of multipliers so as to accelerate the rate of convergence. This is critical for large data sets since there are n ( n − 1 ) / 2 {\displaystyle n(n-1)/2} possible choices for α i {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}} and α j {\displaystyle \alpha _{j}} . == Related work == The first approach to splitting large SVM learning problems into a series of smaller optimization tasks was proposed by Bernhard Boser, Isabelle Guyon, and Vladimir Vapnik. It is known as the "chunking algorithm". The algorithm starts with a random subset of the data, solves this problem, and iteratively adds examples which violate the optimality conditions. One disadvantage of this algorithm is that it is necessary to solve QP-problems scaling with the number of SVs. On real world sparse data sets, SMO can be more than 1000 times faster than the chunking algorithm. In 1997, E. Osuna, R. Freund, and F. Girosi proved a theorem which suggests a whole new set of QP algorithms for SVMs. By the virtue of this theorem a large QP problem can be broken down into a series of smaller QP sub-problems. A sequence of QP sub-problems that always add at least one violator of the Karush–Kuhn–Tucker (KKT) conditions is guaranteed to converge. The chunking algorithm obeys the conditions of the theorem, and hence will converge. The SMO algorithm can be considered a special case of the Osuna algorithm, where the size of the optimization is two and both Lagrange multipliers are replaced at every step with new multipliers that are chosen via good heuristics. The SMO algorithm is closely related to a family of optimization algorithms called Bregman methods or row-action methods. These methods solve convex programming problems with linear constraints. They are iterative methods where each step projects the current primal point onto each constraint.

  Read more →
• 

  BeeSafe

  BeeSafe is a personal safety mobile app launched in 2015 as a Slovak startup. It is a location-based security service that notifies family members and friends in case the user of the app gets in danger. The app has received numerous awards. The app has more than 700 downloads and 250 active logins from more than 60 countries worldwide. == History == BeeSafe was founded on March 20, 2015 by Peter Stražovec and Michal Kačerík. The project was a winner of Žilina’s Startup Weekend 2013 and a StartupAwards.SK 2015 finalist. Later on, the app was released in the Android and iOS marketplace. The whole BeeSafe project was in The Spot booster and incubator in Bratislava for three months. BeeSafe entered into an agreement with the city of Piešťany in November 2015 to increase the security of its citizen by connecting the mobile app with the police platform. It is the first city that started using the BeeSafe platform. Further on, the application tries to help people in other Slovak cities. The cities can see the users only if they are in danger. == Awards == BeeSafe app received the Via Bona award, it is a winner of a Slovak startup and has other nominations too.

  Read more →
• 

  Chris Callison-Burch

  Chris Callison-Burch is an American computer scientist and professor of computer and information science at the University of Pennsylvania (Penn), specializing in natural language processing (NLP), artificial intelligence (AI), and crowdsourcing. He is recognised for his contributions to machine translation, paraphrase generation, and the application of large language models (LLMs) to AI challenges, with over 200 publications cited more than 33,000 times. Callison-Burch has influenced public policy on AI and copyright, testifying before the U.S. Congress in 2023 on generative AI’s implications. He serves as the faculty director for Penn’s Online Master of Science in Engineering in AI program. == Education == Callison-Burch earned his PhD in Computer Science from the University of Edinburgh in 2008, focusing on machine translation and paraphrasing techniques. His doctoral research developed statistical methods for generating paraphrases in machine translation systems, laying the foundation for his later NLP work. Prior to his PhD, he studied at Stanford University, where he developed an interest in computational linguistics. == Career == After his PhD, Callison-Burch joined the Centre for Language and Speech Processing at Johns Hopkins University as a research faculty member from 2008 to 2013, working on NLP projects, including machine translation and crowdsourcing for creating training data. In 2013, he joined the University of Pennsylvania as an assistant professor in the Department of Computer and Information Science and was promoted to associate professor in 2017, and to full professor in 2024. At Penn, Callison-Burch teaches courses on AI and NLP, including CIS 5300 (Natural Language Processing) and CIS 5210 (Artificial Intelligence), which attract over 500 students annually. He directs Penn’s Online Master of Science in Engineering in AI program, launched in 2025. He teaches AI and NLP courses on Coursera, reaching thousands of global learners. Callison-Burch was a part-time visiting researcher at Google in 2019 and 2020, where he collaborated on applying Google's LLM to Dungeons & Dragons dialogues. In 2023, he took a sabbatical at the Allen Institute for AI (AI2), where he contributed to vision-language models. == Research == Callison-Burch’s research focuses on NLP, AI, and crowdsourcing, with significant contributions to machine translation, paraphrase generation, and LLMs for tasks like text simplification and bias detection. His early work developed crowdsourcing methods for machine translation, leveraging non-expert annotators for paraphrase-based evaluation, influencing platforms like Amazon Mechanical Turk. Recent projects have included several notable works. Molmo and PixMo (2025) are open-weight vision-language models developed with AI2, achieving state-of-the-art multimodal performance and earning a Best Paper Honourable Mention at CVPR 2025. Also in 2025, his work on Calibrating Large Language Models with Sample Consistency improves LLM reliability via sample-based calibration, presented at NAACL 2025. The Media Bias Detector (2025) is a real-time tool analysing selection and framing bias in news, using LLMs to detect persuasive language differences (e.g., Russian vs. English Wikipedia). Holodeck (2024) is a language-guided system for generating 3D embodied AI environments, presented at CVPR 2024. BORDIRLINES (2024) is a dataset for cross-lingual retrieval-augmented generation, focusing on culturally sensitive tasks. He has co-authored over 200 publications, featured at conferences like ACL, EMNLP, and CVPR. == Awards and recognition == Callison-Burch has received numerous awards: Best Paper Honourable Mention at CVPR 2025 for "Molmo and PixMo". Best Paper Award at the Workshop on Cognitive Modelling and Computational Linguistics (CMCL) 2024 for "Evaluating Vision-Language Models on Bistable Images". Best Paper Award at STARSEM 2016 for "So-Called Non-Subsective Adjectives". Best Paper Award at the Workshop on Sense, Concept and Entity Representations 2017 for "Word Sense Filtering Improves Embedding-Based Lexical Substitution". Honourable Mention Award at CHI 2018 for "A Data-Driven Analysis of Workers’ Earnings on Amazon Mechanical Turk". Google Faculty Research Award (2013) for crowdsourcing in NLP. Sloan Research Fellowship (2014). He has received research funding from Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, Roblox, DARPA, IARPA, and NSF. His h-index is 72, with over 33,000 citations. He served as General Chair of ACL 2017 and as the Program Co-Chair EMNLP 2015. == Public policy and testimony == On May 17, 2023, Callison-Burch testified before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet on AI and copyright law. His testimony emphasised generative AI’s role in creative industries and the need for balanced copyright frameworks. He has appeared on Fox News to discuss AI’s societal impact, and discussed its impact with other print news sources. He contributes to AI ethics discussions, including workshops on AI’s effects on writing and creative professions.

  Read more →
• 

  Svetlana Lazebnik

  Svetlana Lazebnik (born 1979) is a Ukrainian-American researcher in computer vision who works as a professor of computer science and Willett Faculty Scholar at the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign. Her research involves interactions between image understanding and natural language processing, including the automated captioning of images, and the development of a benchmark database of textually grounded images. == Education and career == Lazebnik was born in Kyiv in 1979 to a family of Ukrainian Jews, and emigrated with her family to the US as a teenager. She majored in computer science at DePaul University, minoring in mathematics and graduating with the highest honors in 2000. She completed her Ph.D. in 2006 at the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, with the dissertation Local, Semi-Local and Global Models for Texture, Object and Scene Recognition supervised by Jean Ponce. After postdoctoral research at the University of Illinois, she became an assistant professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 2007. She returned to the University of Illinois as a faculty member in 2012. She is a co-editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Computer Vision. == Recognition == Lazebnik was named an IEEE Fellow in 2021, "for contributions to computer vision". With Cordelia Schmid and Jean Ponce, she won the Longuet-Higgins Prize in 2016 for the best work in computer vision from ten years earlier, for their work on spatial pyramid matching.

  Read more →