AI Chat Image

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

• 

  Comparison gallery of image scaling algorithms

  This gallery shows the results of numerous image scaling algorithms. == Scaling methods == An image size can be changed in several ways. Consider resizing a 160x160 pixel photo to the following 40x40 pixel thumbnail and then scaling the thumbnail to a 160x160 pixel image. Also consider doubling the size of the following image containing text. == Examples of enlarged images == Below are examples of various images enlarged 4x using each scaling algorithm.

  Read more →
• 

  Batch normalization

  In artificial neural networks, batch normalization (also known as batch norm) is a normalization technique used to make training faster and more stable by adjusting the inputs to each layer—re-centering them around zero and re-scaling them to a standard size. It was introduced by Sergey Ioffe and Christian Szegedy in 2015. Experts still debate why batch normalization works so well. It was initially thought to tackle internal covariate shift, a problem where parameter initialization and changes in the distribution of the inputs of each layer affect the learning rate of the network. However, newer research suggests it doesn’t fix this shift but instead smooths the objective function—a mathematical guide the network follows to improve—enhancing performance. In very deep networks, batch normalization can initially cause a severe gradient explosion—where updates to the network grow uncontrollably large—but this is managed with shortcuts called skip connections in residual networks. Another theory is that batch normalization adjusts data by handling its size and path separately, speeding up training. == Internal covariate shift == Each layer in a neural network has inputs that follow a specific distribution, which shifts during training due to two main factors: the random starting values of the network’s settings (parameter initialization) and the natural variation in the input data. This shifting pattern affecting the inputs to the network’s inner layers is called internal covariate shift. While a strict definition isn’t fully agreed upon, experiments show that it involves changes in the means and variances of these inputs during training. Batch normalization was first developed to address internal covariate shift. During training, as the parameters of preceding layers adjust, the distribution of inputs to the current layer changes accordingly, such that the current layer needs to constantly readjust to new distributions. This issue is particularly severe in deep networks, because small changes in shallower hidden layers will be amplified as they propagate within the network, resulting in significant shift in deeper hidden layers. Batch normalization was proposed to reduced these unwanted shifts to speed up training and produce more reliable models. Beyond possibly tackling internal covariate shift, batch normalization offers several additional advantages. It allows the network to use a higher learning rate—a setting that controls how quickly the network learns—without causing problems like vanishing or exploding gradients, where updates become too small or too large. It also appears to have a regularizing effect, improving the network’s ability to generalize to new data, reducing the need for dropout, a technique used to prevent overfitting (when a model learns the training data too well and fails on new data). Additionally, networks using batch normalization are less sensitive to the choice of starting settings or learning rates, making them more robust and adaptable. == Procedures == === Transformation === In a neural network, batch normalization is achieved through a normalization step that fixes the means and variances of each layer's inputs. Ideally, the normalization would be conducted over the entire training set, but to use this step jointly with stochastic optimization methods, it is impractical to use the global information. Thus, normalization is restrained to each mini-batch in the training process. Let us use B to denote a mini-batch of size m of the entire training set. The empirical mean and variance of B could thus be denoted as μ B = 1 m ∑ i = 1 m x i {\displaystyle \mu _{B}={\frac {1}{m}}\sum _{i=1}^{m}x_{i}} and σ B 2 = 1 m ∑ i = 1 m ( x i − μ B ) 2 {\displaystyle \sigma _{B}^{2}={\frac {1}{m}}\sum _{i=1}^{m}(x_{i}-\mu _{B})^{2}} . For a layer of the network with d-dimensional input, x = ( x ( 1 ) , . . . , x ( d ) ) {\displaystyle x=(x^{(1)},...,x^{(d)})} , each dimension of its input is then normalized (i.e. re-centered and re-scaled) separately, x ^ i ( k ) = x i ( k ) − μ B ( k ) ( σ B ( k ) ) 2 + ϵ {\displaystyle {\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}={\frac {x_{i}^{(k)}-\mu _{B}^{(k)}}{\sqrt {\left(\sigma _{B}^{(k)}\right)^{2}+\epsilon }}}} , where k ∈ [ 1 , d ] {\displaystyle k\in [1,d]} and i ∈ [ 1 , m ] {\displaystyle i\in [1,m]} ; μ B ( k ) {\displaystyle \mu _{B}^{(k)}} and σ B ( k ) {\displaystyle \sigma _{B}^{(k)}} are the per-dimension mean and standard deviation, respectively. ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } is added in the denominator for numerical stability and is an arbitrarily small positive constant. The resulting normalized activation x ^ ( k ) {\displaystyle {\hat {x}}^{(k)}} have zero mean and unit variance, if ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } is not taken into account. To restore the representation power of the network, a transformation step then follows as y i ( k ) = γ ( k ) x ^ i ( k ) + β ( k ) {\displaystyle y_{i}^{(k)}=\gamma ^{(k)}{\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}+\beta ^{(k)}} , where the parameters γ ( k ) {\displaystyle \gamma ^{(k)}} and β ( k ) {\displaystyle \beta ^{(k)}} are subsequently learned in the optimization process. Formally, the operation that implements batch normalization is a transform B N γ ( k ) , β ( k ) : x 1... m ( k ) → y 1... m ( k ) {\displaystyle BN_{\gamma ^{(k)},\beta ^{(k)}}:x_{1...m}^{(k)}\rightarrow y_{1...m}^{(k)}} called the Batch Normalizing transform. The output of the BN transform y ( k ) = B N γ ( k ) , β ( k ) ( x ( k ) ) {\displaystyle y^{(k)}=BN_{\gamma ^{(k)},\beta ^{(k)}}(x^{(k)})} is then passed to other network layers, while the normalized output x ^ i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}} remains internal to the current layer. === Backpropagation === The described BN transform is a differentiable operation, and the gradient of the loss l {\displaystyle l} with respect to the different parameters can be computed directly with the chain rule. Specifically, ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}} depends on the choice of activation function, and the gradient against other parameters could be expressed as a function of ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}} : ∂ l ∂ x ^ i ( k ) = ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) γ ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial {\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}}}={\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}\gamma ^{(k)}} , ∂ l ∂ γ ( k ) = ∑ i = 1 m ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) x ^ i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial \gamma ^{(k)}}}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}{\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}{\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}} , ∂ l ∂ β ( k ) = ∑ i = 1 m ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial \beta ^{(k)}}}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}{\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}} , ∂ l ∂ σ B ( k ) 2 = ∑ i = 1 m ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) ( x i ( k ) − μ B ( k ) ) ( − γ ( k ) 2 ( σ B ( k ) 2 + ϵ ) − 3 / 2 ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial \sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}}}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}{\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}(x_{i}^{(k)}-\mu _{B}^{(k)})\left(-{\frac {\gamma ^{(k)}}{2}}(\sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}+\epsilon )^{-3/2}\right)} , ∂ l ∂ μ B ( k ) = ∑ i = 1 m ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) − γ ( k ) σ B ( k ) 2 + ϵ + ∂ l ∂ σ B ( k ) 2 1 m ∑ i = 1 m ( − 2 ) ⋅ ( x i ( k ) − μ B ( k ) ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial \mu _{B}^{(k)}}}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}{\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}{\frac {-\gamma ^{(k)}}{\sqrt {\sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}+\epsilon }}}+{\frac {\partial l}{\partial \sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}}}{\frac {1}{m}}\sum _{i=1}^{m}(-2)\cdot (x_{i}^{(k)}-\mu _{B}^{(k)})} , and ∂ l ∂ x i ( k ) = ∂ l ∂ x ^ i ( k ) 1 σ B ( k ) 2 + ϵ + ∂ l ∂ σ B ( k ) 2 2 ( x i ( k ) − μ B ( k ) ) m + ∂ l ∂ μ B ( k ) 1 m {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial x_{i}^{(k)}}}={\frac {\partial l}{\partial {\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}}}{\frac {1}{\sqrt {\sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}+\epsilon }}}+{\frac {\partial l}{\partial \sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}}}{\frac {2(x_{i}^{(k)}-\mu _{B}^{(k)})}{m}}+{\frac {\partial l}{\partial \mu _{B}^{(k)}}}{\frac {1}{m}}} . === Inference === During the training stage, the normalization steps depend on the mini-batches to ensure efficient and reliable training. However, in the inference stage, this dependence is not useful any more. Instead, the normalization step in this stage is computed with the population statistics such that the output could depend on the input in a deterministic manner. The population mean, E [ x ( k ) ] {\displaystyle E[x^{(k)}]} , and variance, Var ⁡ [ x ( k ) ] {\displaystyle \operatorname {Var} [x^{(k)}]} , are computed as: E [ x ( k ) ] = E B [ μ B ( k ) ] {\displaystyle E[x^{(k)}]=E_{B}[\mu _{B}^{(k)}]} , and Var ⁡ [ x ( k ) ] = m m − 1 E B [ ( σ B ( k ) ) 2 ] {\displaystyle \operatorname {Var} [x^{(k)}]={\frac {m}{m-1}}E_{B}[\left(\sigma _{B}^{(k)}\right)^{2}]} . The population statistics thus is a complete representation of the mini-batches. The BN transform in the inference step thus becomes y ( k ) = B N γ ( k ) , β ( k ) inf ( x ( k ) ) = γ ( k ) x ( k ) − E [ x ( k ) ] Var ⁡ [ x ( k ) ] + ϵ + β

  Read more →
• 

  ACM SIGEVO

  The ACM SIGEVO is a Special Interest Group of the Association of Computing Machinery for members of that organization who are practitioners, academics, students or others with interests in evolutionary computation and related algorithms. == History == ACM SIGEVO was founded in 2005 when the International Society for Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (ISGEC) became an ACM Special Interest Group under its present title. The ISGEC had been formed in 1999 by the merger of the Genetic Programming conference organization with the International Conference on Genetic Algorithms (ICGA) leading to the first Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO). == Membership == Members of this SIG pay a small fee in addition to the ACM membership fee. In return they have access to a quarterly online newsletter, but more importantly can obtain reduced registration rates at the two conferences organised by ACM SIGEVO: GECCO and the Foundations of Genetic Algorithms conference (FOGA). They can also access material on evolutionary computation and related topics in the ACM Digital Library. In addition they can subscribe to email mailing lists in order to keep informed about news over time. For students, ACM SIGEVO sponsors Travel Awards for attendance at the GECCO Conference and FOGA (the Foundations of Genetic Algorithms conference). ACM SIGEVO also sponsors a Graduate Student Workshop. ACM also sponsors Awards to be competed for by attendees at the conferences it organises. == Conferences == ACM SIGEVO organises two major conferences in the field of evolutionary computation. The Genetic and Evolutionary Conference (GECCO) is held annually, while the Foundations of Genetic Algorithms conference (FOGA) is held biennially. === GECCO === The first GECCO conference was held prior to the formation of ACM SIGEVO but since 2005 (see History above) it has been organised annually by ACM SIGEVO. The latest (2025) was held in Málaga, Spain. The next (2026) will be held in San José, Costa Rica. === FOGA === Foundations of Genetic Algorithms (FOGA) is a biennial peer-reviewed research conference focusing on the theoretical principles underlying genetic algorithms, other evolutionary algorithms and related heuristics. It is organized by ACM SIGEVO. Its relevance to the computer science research community has been reflected in an A-rating in the CORE computer science conference assessment system. The Foundations of Genetic Algorithms (FOGA) conference originated as a workshop in 1990 in order to create an opportunity for researchers on genetic algorithms and related areas of evolutionary computation to focus on the theoretical principles underlying their field. From the start its multi-day duration made it comparable to conferences in the field, and since 2015 its proceedings have used conference rather than workshop in their titles. In 2005 ACM SIGEVO the Association for Computing Machinery Special Interest Group on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation was formed and every FOGA conference since then has been supported by SIGEVO. The table below shows FOGA conferences by year, location, websites (where available) and publisher of proceedings. A citation follows the reference to the publisher giving the full details of each FOGA proceedings. Papers accepted at recent conferences have been presented as digital or print posters in poster sessions at the conference, before being published in written form in the conference proceedings. FOGA is comparable in its multi-day duration to other conferences on evolutionary computation such as CEC, GECCO and PPSN. The main difference is that FOGA focuses on the theoretical basis of evolutionary computation and related subjects. While the above conferences devote some time to theory they also cover a wide range of other topics including competitions and applications. This focus on theoretical computer science was reflected in the CORE computer science conference assessment exercise, where FOGA was given an A-ranking in the 2023 assessment. GECCO and PPSN also obtained A-rankings, but many other conferences in the field of evolutionary computation obtained lower rankings. This suggests that FOGA is a relevant conference in its field, comparable with others including the much larger CEC or GECCO. Keynote speakers at past conferences have been: == Awards == ACM SIGEVO sponsors a number of awards. === SIGEVO Outstanding Contribution Award === The SIGEVO Outstanding Contribution Award commenced in 2023, and these awards are designed to recognise distinctive contributions to the field of evolutionary computation when evaluated over a period of at least 15 years. As a result many recipients to date are notable academics or industrial practitioners, and include Anne Auger, Kalyanmoy Deb, Stephanie Forrest, Emma Hart and Hans-Paul Schwefel. === SIGEVO Dissertation Award === The SIGEVO Dissertation Award recognises thesis research in the field of evolutionary computation completed at least by the year prior to a GECCO conference. Theses are submitted and reviewed by a panel that selects one winner and a maximum of two honourable mentions. Awards will be made to the winner and any others at the next GECCO conference. === SIGEVO Chair Award === The SIGEVO Chair Award, established in 2016 is a lecture sponsored by ACM SIGEVO, to take place on the last day of the GECCO conference. It recognizes through the lectures that the lecturers are influential researchers in the field of evolutionary computation. The more recent lectures are available online. The 2024 Award winner was Una-May O'Reilly. === SIGEVO Impact Award === The SIGEVO Impact Award looks back to the GECCO conference ten years earlier and recognizes up to three papers a year which are considered by the current ACM SIGEVO Executive Committee to have had significant impact over the period since their first publication at the GECCO conference. An example (originally published in GECCO 2010) received this award in 2020. === GECCO Best Paper Award === The ACM SIGEVO sponsors awards for the best papers presented at the GECCO conference. Because GECCO conferences have very many parallel tracks there are multiple awards recognising presentations in the different tracks. At GECCO 2025 Best Paper Awards were presented across 12 tracks. === FOGA Best Paper Award === The ACM SIGEVO sponsors awards for the best papers presented at the FOGA conference. Because FOGA operates on a single track, it is easier to compare papers. Since 2019 this Award has been made (suggesting only four awards up to the latest conference in 2025). ACM SIGEVO records the 2019 award. === Humie Award === The Humies Awards are rewards for the best form of human-competitive results using evolutionary computation or related algorithms and published in the wider literature (they do not need to be published at a conference or in a journal sponsored by ACM SIGEVO or even the ACM.) They were established through a gift from John Koza and have been in operation from 2004 to the present. The link with ACM SIGEVO is that the winners of the competition (submissions are evaluated in advance) are presented with Humie Awards at GECCO conferences. The Humie Awards website provides full details for the rules and how to submit entries to the competition. == Journals == ACM SIGEVO sponsors the main journal covering evolutionary computation published by the ACM: ACM Transactions on Evolutionary Learning and Optimization. ACM SIGEVO refers to the preceding ISGEC organisation (see History above) as sponsoring two other important journals in the field: The Evolutionary Computation journal. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines. While these journals continue to be important in the field, the wording on the website of ACM SIGEVO suggests that ACM SIGEVO is not involved in their publication. == References and notes ==

  Read more →
• 

  Anna Ridler

  Anna Ridler (born 1985) is an artist who works with machine learning, handmade archives and moving image. She builds her own datasets to expose the labour and ideology embedded in the systems that organise knowledge. Her work is held in the permanent collections of the Whitney Museum of American Art, the Victoria and Albert Museum, M+ and ZKM Center for Art and Media Karlsruhe, and has been exhibited widely at cultural institutions including Tate Modern, Barbican Centre, Centre Pompidou, The Photographers' Gallery, Taipei Fine Arts Museum, MIT Museum, Kunsthaus Graz, ZKM Center for Art and Media Karlsruhe and Ars Electronica. == Biography == Born in London in 1985, Ridler spent her childhood raised between Atlanta, Georgia and the United Kingdom. She obtained a Bachelor of Arts in English Literature and Language from Oxford University in 2007 and a Master of Arts in Information Experience Design from the Royal College of Art in 2017. == Art practice == Ridler's practice uses technology, and in particular machine learning, to investigate how naming, classification and financial speculation determine what can be seen and what is erased. A core element of Ridler's work lies in the creation of handmade data sets through a laborious process of selecting and classifying images and text. By creating her own data sets, Ridler is able to uncover and expose underlying themes and concepts while also inverting the usual process of scraping pre-classified images found in large databases on the Internet. She began working with machine learning as an artistic material in 2017, at a moment when the technology required building every dataset by hand; that constraint became the foundation of the practice. Her interests are in drawing, machine learning, data collection, storytelling and technology. == Work == Some of Ridler's most notable works to date fall within her ‘tulip series’ which explores the hysteria around tulip mania and compares it to the speculation and bubbles surrounding cryptocurrencies. The series is expressed in three forms: a photographic dataset in Myriad (Tulips), 2018; two iterations of machine generated videos in Mosaic Virus (2018) and Mosaic Virus (2019); and a website with an accompanied functioning decentralized application in Bloemenveiling (2019). === Myriad (Tulips) (2018) === I wanted to draw together ideas around capitalism, value, and the tangible and intangible nature of speculation, and collapse from two very different yet surprisingly similar moments in history. Myriad (Tulips) (2018) is an installation of ten thousand hand-labeled photographs forming a dataset of unique tulips. The ten thousand, or myriad of, photographs were taken by Ridler over the course of three months, roughly the length of a tulip season, spent in Utrecht. Each photograph is carefully affixed one by one with magnets to a specially painted black wall in a laborious process to form a seemingly precise grid. Myriad (Tulips) (2018) has been exhibited in AI: More than Human, Barbican Centre, London, UK (May 16 - August 26, 2019); Error—The Art of Imperfection, Ars Electronica Export, Berlin, Germany (November 17, 2018 – March 3, 2019); Peer to Peer, Shanghai Centre of Photography, Shanghai, China (December 8 - February 9, 2020). The work was featured in Bloomberg, It’s Nice That, and Hyperallergic. For Myriad (Tulips), Ridler was nominated for a Beazley Design of the Year award for her presentation of an alternative perspective on how to engage with artificial intelligence; demonstrating a departure from ownership and control of major corporations to a more personalized process of constructing and conceptualizing from the ground-up. === Mosaic Virus (2018, 2019) === Mosaic Virus (2018) is a single screen video installation displaying a grid of continually evolving tulips in bloom. For Mosaic Virus (2019) Ridler used three screens. The appearance of the tulips is controlled by artificial intelligence using fluctuations in the price of bitcoin. The stripes on the tulips' petals reflect the value of the cryptocurrency. Ridler draws parallels with the tulip mania of the 17th century; representing the hysteria and speculation around crypto-currencies. The work takes its name from the mosaic virus which caused stripes in tulip petals, subsequently increasing their desirability and leading to speculative prices. Ridler trained a general adversarial network (GAN) on the set of ten thousand photographs of individual tulips from her work Myriad (Tulips). She used a technique called spectral normalization to improve the output. The work was exhibited in Error—The Art of Imperfection, Ars Electronica Export, Berlin, Germany (November 17, 2018 – March 3, 2019). === Bloemenveiling (2019) === Bloemenveiling (2019) is an auction of artificial-intelligence-generated tulips on the blockchain in the form of a functioning decentralized application: http://bloemenveiling.bid. Ridler collaborated with senior research scientist at DeepMind, David Pfau to investigate whether blockchain could be used as a means of finding poetic substance within it. The piece interrogates the way technology drives human desire and economic dynamics by creating artificial scarcity. In the work, short moving image pieces of tulips created by generative adversarial networks are sold at auction using smart contracts on the Ethereum network. Each time a tulip is sold, thousands of computers around the world all work to verify the transaction, checking each other's work against each other. While the artificial intelligence behind the moving image pieces has the potential to generate infinite flowers, the enormous distributed network is used, at great environmental cost, to introduce scarcity to an otherwise limitless resource. Bloemenveiling was exhibited in Entangled Realities, HEK Basel, Basel, Switzerland in 2019. == Solo exhibitions == Anna Ridler, Circadian Bloom, ZKM Center for Art and Media, Karlsruhe, (2023) Anna Ridler, Time Blooms, Buk Seoul Museum of Art, Seoul, (2025) Anna Ridler, Trace Remains, Galerie Nagel Draxler, Cologne, (2026) Anna Ridler, Laws of Ordered Form, The Photographers' Gallery, London (2020); The Abstraction of Nature, Aksioma, Ljubljana (2020) == Awards and recognition == European Union EMAP Fellow (2018) DARE Art Prize (2018–2019) Featured in Thames & Hudson, Digital Art (1960s–Now) Featured in British Art: The Last 15 Years ABS Digital Artist of the Year (2025)

  Read more →
• 

  80 Million Tiny Images

  80 Million Tiny Images is a dataset intended for training machine-learning systems constructed by Antonio Torralba, Rob Fergus, and William T. Freeman in a collaboration between MIT and New York University. It was published in 2008. The dataset has size 760 GB. It contains 79,302,017 32×32-pixel color images, scaled down from images scraped from the World Wide Web over 8 months. The images are classified into 75,062 classes. Each class is a non-abstract noun in WordNet. Images may appear in more than one class. The dataset was motivated by non-parametric models of neural activations in the visual cortex upon seeing images. The CIFAR-10 dataset uses a subset of the images in this dataset, but with independently generated labels, as the original labels were not reliable. The CIFAR-10 set has 6000 examples of each of 10 classes, and the CIFAR-100 set has 600 examples of each of 100 non-overlapping classes. == Construction == It was first reported in a technical report in April 2007, during the middle of the construction process, when there were only 73 million images. The full dataset was published in 2008. They began with all 75,846 non-abstract nouns in WordNet, and then for each of these nouns, they scraped 7 image search engines: Altavista, Ask.com, Flickr, Cydral, Google, Picsearch, and Webshots. After 8 months of scraping, they obtained 97,245,098 images. Since they did not have enough storage, they downsized the images to 32×32 as they were scraped. After gathering, they removed images with zero variance and intra-word duplicate images, resulting in the final dataset. Out of the 75,846 nouns, only 75,062 classes had any results, so the other nouns did not appear in the final dataset. The number of images per noun follows a Zipf-like distribution, with 1056 images per noun on average. To prevent a few nouns taking up too many images, they put an upper bound of at most 3000 images per noun. == Retirement == The 80 Million Tiny Images dataset was retired from use by its creators in 2020, after a paper by researchers Abeba Birhane and Vinay Prabhu found that some of the labeling of several publicly available image datasets, including 80 Million Tiny Images, contained racist and misogynistic slurs which were causing models trained on them to exhibit racial and sexual bias. The dataset also contained offensive images. Following the release of the paper, the dataset's creators removed the dataset from distribution, and requested that other researchers not use it for further research and to delete their copies of the dataset.

  Read more →
• 

  Clinical decision support system

  A clinical decision support system (CDSS) is a form of health information technology that provides clinicians, staff, patients, or other individuals with knowledge and person-specific information to enhance decision-making in clinical workflows. CDSS tools include alerts and reminders, clinical guidelines, condition-specific order sets, patient data summaries, diagnostic support, and context-aware reference information. They often leverage artificial intelligence to analyze clinical data and help improve care quality and safety. CDSSs constitute a major topic in artificial intelligence in medicine. == Characteristics == A clinical decision support system is an active knowledge system that uses variables of patient data to produce advice regarding health care. This implies that a CDSS is simply a decision support system focused on using knowledge management. === Purpose === The main purpose of modern CDSS is to assist clinicians at the point of care. This means that clinicians interact with a CDSS to help to analyze and reach a diagnosis based on patient data for different diseases. In the early days, CDSSs were conceived to make decisions for the clinician in a literal manner. The clinician would input the information and wait for the CDSS to output the "right" choice, and the clinician would simply act on that output. However, the modern methodology of using CDSSs to assist means that the clinician interacts with the CDSS, utilizing both their knowledge and the CDSS's, better to analyse the patient's data than either a human or a CDSS could do on their own. Typically, a CDSS makes suggestions for the clinician to review, and the clinician is expected to pick out useful information from the presented results and discount erroneous CDSS suggestions. The two main types of CDSS are knowledge-based systems and non-knowledge-based (machine learning–based) systems: An example of how a clinician might use a clinical decision support system is a diagnosis decision support system (DDSS). DDSS requests some of the patient's data and, in response, proposes a set of possible diagnoses. The physician then takes the output of the DDSS and determines which diagnoses are likely and which are not, and, if necessary, orders further tests to narrow down the diagnosis. Another example of a CDSS would be a case-based reasoning (CBR) system. A CBR system might use previous case data to help determine the appropriate amount of beams and the optimal beam angles for use in radiotherapy for brain cancer patients; medical physicists and oncologists would then review the recommended treatment plan to determine its viability. Another important classification of a CDSS is based on the timing of its use. Physicians use these systems at the point of care to help them as they are dealing with a patient, with the timing of use being either pre-diagnosis, during diagnosis, or post-diagnosis. Pre-diagnosis CDSS systems help the physician prepare the diagnoses. CDSSs help review and filter the physician's preliminary diagnostic choices to improve outcomes. Post-diagnosis CDSS systems are used to mine data to derive connections between patients and their past medical history and clinical research to predict future events. Early speculation that AI-based decision support would replace clinicians in common tasks has largely given way to a consensus around assistive models, in which AI augments rather than supplants clinical judgment. Contemporary deep learning-based systems, unlike earlier rule-based tools, can be trained directly on clinical data without manual rule authoring and integrated into electronic health record workflows at the point of care. Another approach, used by the National Health Service in England, is to use a CDSS to triage medical conditions out of hours by suggesting a suitable next step to the patient (e.g. call an ambulance, or see a general practitioner on the next working day). The suggestion, which may be disregarded by either the patient or the phone operative if common sense or caution suggests otherwise, is based on the known information and an implicit conclusion about what the worst-case diagnosis is likely to be; it is not always revealed to the patient because it might well be incorrect and is not based on a medically-trained person's opinion - it is only used for initial triage purposes. === Knowledge-based === Most CDSSs consist of three parts: the knowledge base, an inference engine, and a mechanism to communicate. The knowledge base contains the rules and associations of compiled data which most often take the form of IF-THEN rules. If this was a system for determining drug interactions, then a rule might be that IF drug X is taken AND drug Y is taken THEN alert the user. Using another interface, an advanced user could edit the knowledge base to keep it up to date with new drugs. The inference engine combines the rules from the knowledge base with the patient's data. The communication mechanism allows the system to show the results to the user as well as have input into the system. An expression language such as GELLO or CQL (Clinical Quality Language) is needed for expressing knowledge artefacts in a computable manner. For example: if a patient has diabetes mellitus, and if the last haemoglobin A1c test result was less than 7%, recommend re-testing if it has been over six months, but if the last test result was greater than or equal to 7%, then recommend re-testing if it has been over three months. The current focus of the HL7 CDS WG is to build on the Clinical Quality Language (CQL). The U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has announced that it plans to use CQL for the specification of Electronic Clinical Quality Measures (eCQMs). === Non-knowledge-based === CDSSs which do not use a knowledge base use a form of artificial intelligence called machine learning, which allow computers to learn from past experiences and/or find patterns in clinical data. This eliminates the need for writing rules and expert input. However, since systems based on machine learning cannot explain the reasons for their conclusions, most clinicians do not use them directly for diagnoses, reliability and accountability reasons. Nevertheless, they can be useful as post-diagnostic systems, for suggesting patterns for clinicians to look into in more depth. As of 2012, three types of non-knowledge-based systems are support-vector machines, artificial neural networks and genetic algorithms. Artificial neural networks use nodes and weighted connections between them to analyse the patterns found in patient data to derive associations between symptoms and a diagnosis. Genetic algorithms are based on simplified evolutionary processes using directed selection to achieve optimal CDSS results. The selection algorithms evaluate components of random sets of solutions to a problem. The solutions that come out on top are then recombined and mutated and run through the process again. This happens over and over until the proper solution is discovered. They are functionally similar to neural networks in that they are also "black boxes" that attempt to derive knowledge from patient data. Non-knowledge-based networks often focus on a narrow list of symptoms, such as symptoms for a single disease, as opposed to the knowledge-based approach, which covers the diagnosis of many diseases. An example of a non-knowledge-based CDSS is a web server developed using a support vector machine for the prediction of gestational diabetes in Ireland. == Regulations == === History, United States === The IOM had published a report in 1999, To Err is Human, which focused on the patient safety crisis in the United States, pointing to the incredibly high number of deaths. This statistic attracted great attention to the quality of patient care. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) promoted the usage of health information technology, including clinical decision support systems, to advance the quality of patient care. With the enactment of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), there was a push for widespread adoption of health information technology through the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH). Through these initiatives, more hospitals and clinics were integrating electronic medical records (EMRs) and computerized physician order entry (CPOE) within their health information processing and storage. Despite the absence of laws, the CDSS vendors would almost certainly be viewed as having a legal duty of care to both the patients who may adversely be affected due to CDSS usage and the clinicians who may use the technology for patient care. However, duties of care legal regulations are not explicitly defined yet. With the enactment of the HITECH Act included in the ARRA, encouraging the adoption of health IT, more detailed case laws for CDSS and EMRs were still being defined by the Office of National Coordinator for Health Informati

  Read more →
• 

  Kialo

  Kialo is an online structured debate platform with argument maps in the form of debate trees. It is a collaborative reasoning tool for thoughtful discussion, understanding different points of view, and collaborative decision-making, showing arguments for and against claims underneath user-submitted theses or questions. The deliberative discourse platform is designed to present hundreds of supporting or opposing arguments in a dynamic argument tree and is streamlined for rational civil debate on topics such as philosophical questions, policy deliberations, entertainment, ethics, science questions, and unsolved problems or subjects of disagreement in general. Argument-boxes are structured into hierarchical branches where the root is the main thesis (or theses) of the debate, enabling deliberation and navigable debates between opposing perspectives. A debate is divided into Pro (supporting) and Con (refuting or devaluing) columns where registered users can add arguments and rate the impact on the weight or validity of the parent claim. The arguments are sorted according to the rating average. Its argument tree structure enables detailed scrutiny of claims at all levels of the tree and allows users to for example quickly understand why a decision was made or which of the aggregated arguments swayed it this way. Newcomers can join a debate at any time and look back at the structured discussion history, and then weigh in at the right place with their new argument or their comment on a specific argument. The design presets a structure on debates "that allows participants to easily see, process, and ultimately assess the many facets of competing claims". The word Kialo is Esperanto for "reason". The platform is the world's largest argument mapping and structured debate site. == Overview == Users can comment on every Pro or Con, for example for requesting sources or expansions. Recent activities of a debate are shown in a panel on the right side of the respective debate. Debates can be found through the search or on the Explore page through their descriptions and topic-tags. Mere comments that do not make a constructive point (a self-contained argument backed by reasoning) are not allowed and are picked up by other users and moderators. "Civil language and sensible observations from opposing perspectives" can be seen also in debates about controversial topics. The site by-design incentivizes fair, rigorous, open-minded dialogue. Contributors making claims often also write counterpoints to their own contribution. Claims need to be shorter than 500 characters and can link to external sources. Debate trees can also start off with multiple theses – such as different policy options or hypotheses. Claims can link to related debates or include segments of them. In the discussion tab of each claim, users can make edit proposals (e.g. for accuracy, improving sources, or changing scope), decide if the argument should be moved or copied to another branch, call for archiving a claim, and ask for extra evidence or clarification. Debates can grow large and complex for which a sunburst diagram visualization of the topology of the debate and the search functionality can be useful. Each debate also has a chat-box. In cases where e.g. a "Con" is a point against multiple in the "Pros", users – through moderators – can link these arguments at the respective places to avoid duplication of content and allowing a clean chain for people to understand which points are arguments against each other. Contributions of users are tracked, enabling a board of thought-leaders for every debate. Other gamification elements include a feature to thank users for their contributions. The "Perspectives" feature allows users to see 'Impact' ratings of supporters and opposers of a thesis as well as of the debate's moderators and individual contributors. It thereby enables participants to see a debate from other participants' perspectives and to sort by them. In Kialo Edu, this feature lets teachers view votes for a whole class, individuals, or supporters/opponents of a specific thesis. Users in both versions of Kialo can vote on the overall debate topic as well as on individual claims to express their perspectives or conclusions, with the rationale (i.e. the main causal arguments) why they voted on the veracity of the thesis as they did not being captured. Voting can be done by any registered user while navigating through any debate that has voting enabled or via using the Guided Voting wizard user interface that automatically walks through branches. As of 2021, Kialo doesn't have a mobile app. == Contents == A 2018 report stated the collaborative argument platform hosts more than 10,000 debates in various languages. It also hosts private debates. The website claims that it has over 18,000 public debates as of July 2023, as well as over 1 million votes and over 720,000 claims. Debates can be found via the site's internal search and up to six tags per debate. Preprint studies have scraped public debates on over 1.4K issues with over 130K statements as of October 2019 and 1628 debates, related to over 1120 categories, with 124,312 unique claims as of June 26, 2020. == Kialo Inc. == The site is run by Kialo Inc. It was founded by German-born entrepreneur and London School of Economics and Political Science graduate Errikos Pitsos in August 2017 and is based in Brooklyn and Berlin. According to a 2018 report, the site does not show advertisements and does not sell user's data. The for-profit company was founded in 2011, Pitsos began to develop the concept in 2012 and described various specifics of the system in 2014. In 2018, he stated that they intend to make money by selling the platform to companies as a deliberation and decision-making tool. The site is free to use for the public and in education. According to the site, as of 2023 Kialo.com is a non-revenue generating site with no ads and no reselling of user data. == Applications and adoption == === Adopted applications === Applications of its content or the platform in society include: Teachers and professors, especially in high schools – including the universities Harvard and Princeton, are using Kialo for class discussions and exercises in critical thinking and reasoning, as consolidating understanding of materials covered in recent classes, more useful and engaging learning experiences, for remote/e-learning, for clearing up misconceptions, teaching logical fallacies and rational argumentation, for academic dialogue, teaching media literacy, and for teaching to sufficiently reflect or research before posting online. Like for debaters of the main site, access for schools and universities is free. Kialo Edu is the custom version of Kialo specifically designed for classroom use where debates are private and locked to invited students. Kialo allows teachers to provide feedback to students on their ideas, argument structure, and research quality while it is left to other students to rate the impacts of their peers' arguments. Students can be allowed to contribute anonymously which may be useful for controversial issues as well as for safeguarding privacy in education. Students are or can be encouraged to back up their claims with evidence which can foster digital literacy and research skills. Students and teachers can use it to arrange their thoughts when structuring an essay or project. The site's name was decided on internally using the software. === Prototypical and theoretical applications === Potential, theoretical, prototypical or little-used applications include: Education Improving critical thinking skills of society at large as well as facilitating deep or efficient thinking and deepening research and debates where e.g. discussions are less shallow and the well-known or many arguments have already been made and in many cases aren't unreasonably over- or underrated. Pitsos claimed that "we're training students to be very good test-takers instead of critical thinkers", suggesting teaching people to think things through may be more important or neglected compared to essay writing skills. Many young people and adults are "submerged into a sea of dispersed information", "[b]rowsing and engaging in superficial thinking activities". Kialo could counteract this issue and help people develop good sane reasoning. Academia, R&D and policy Three scholars from three prestigious U.S. universities outlined possible benefits in this domain, including applications beyond higher education such as for academic communication. They suggest the debate platform could be used for structuring the communication of open peer-review by helping those giving feedback to "hone in on[sic] core arguments and pieces of evidence in an even more direct way" than annotated commenting. It could be used to evaluate extracted argument structures and sequences from raw texts, as in a Semantic Web for arguments. Such "argument mining", to which Kialo is the lar

  Read more →
• 

  History of artificial life

  Humans have considered and tried to create non-biological life for at least 3,000 years. As seen in tales ranging from Pygmalion to Frankenstein, humanity has long been intrigued by the concept of artificial life. == Pre-computer == The earliest examples of artificial life involve sophisticated automata constructed using pneumatics, mechanics, and/or hydraulics. The first automata were conceived during the third and second centuries BC and these were demonstrated by the theorems of Hero of Alexandria, which included sophisticated mechanical and hydraulic solutions. Many of his notable works were included in the book Pneumatics, which was also used for constructing machines until early modern times. In 1490, Leonardo da Vinci also constructed an armored knight, which is considered the first humanoid robot in Western civilization. Other early famous examples include al-Jazari's humanoid robots. This Arabic inventor once constructed a band of automata, which can be commanded to play different pieces of music. There is also the case of Jacques de Vaucanson's artificial duck exhibited in 1735, which had thousands of moving parts and one of the first to mimic a biological system. The duck could reportedly eat and digest, drink, quack, and splash in a pool. It was exhibited all over Europe until it fell into disrepair. In the late 1600s, following René Descartes' claims that animals could be understood as purely physical machines, there was increasing interest in the question of whether a machine could be designed that, like an animal, could generate offspring (a self-replicating machine). However, it wasn't until the invention of cheap computing power that artificial life as a legitimate science began in earnest, steeped more in the theoretical and computational than the mechanical and mythological. == 1950s–1970s == One of the earliest thinkers of the modern age to postulate the potentials of artificial life, separate from artificial intelligence, was math and computer prodigy John von Neumann. At the Hixon Symposium, hosted by Linus Pauling in Pasadena, California in the late 1940s, von Neumann delivered a lecture titled "The General and Logical Theory of Automata." He defined an "automaton" as any machine whose behavior proceeded logically from step to step by combining information from the environment and its own programming, and said that natural organisms would in the end be found to follow similar simple rules. He also spoke about the idea of self-replicating machines. He postulated a made-up of a control computer, a construction arm, and a long series of instructions, floating in a lake of parts. By following the instructions that were part of its own body, it could create an identical machine. He followed this idea by creating (with Stanislaw Ulam) a purely logic-based automaton, not requiring a physical body but based on the changing states of the cells in an infinite grid – the first cellular automaton. It was extraordinarily complicated compared to later CAs, having hundreds of thousands of cells which could each exist in one of twenty-nine states, but von Neumann felt he needed the complexity in order for it to function not just as a self-replicating "machine", but also as a universal computer as defined by Alan Turing. This "universal constructor" read from a tape of instructions and wrote out a series of cells that could then be made active to leave a fully functional copy of the original machine and its tape. Von Neumann worked on his automata theory intensively right up to his death, and considered it his most important work. Homer Jacobson illustrated basic self-replication in the 1950s with a model train set – a seed "organism" consisting of a "head" and "tail" boxcar could use the simple rules of the system to consistently create new "organisms" identical to itself, so long as there was a random pool of new boxcars to draw from. Edward F. Moore proposed "Artificial Living Plants", which would be floating factories which could create copies of themselves. They could be programmed to perform some function (extracting fresh water, harvesting minerals from seawater) for an investment that would be relatively small compared to the huge returns from the exponentially growing numbers of factories. Freeman Dyson also studied the idea, envisioning self-replicating machines sent to explore and exploit other planets and moons, and a NASA group called the Self-Replicating Systems Concept Team performed a 1980 study on the feasibility of a self-building lunar factory. University of Cambridge professor John Horton Conway invented the most famous cellular automaton in the 1960s. He called it the Game of Life, and publicized it through Martin Gardner's column in Scientific American magazine. Norwegian-Italian mathematician Nils Aall Barricelli, who worked mainly at US institutions, was a pioneer in computer based simulation of biological processes such as symbiogenesis and evolution. == 1970s–1980s == Philosophy scholar Arthur Burks, who had worked with von Neumann (and indeed, organized his papers after Neumann's death), headed the Logic of Computers Group at the University of Michigan. He brought the overlooked views of 19th century American thinker Charles Sanders Peirce into the modern age. Peirce was a strong believer that all of nature's workings were based on logic (though not always deductive logic). The Michigan group was one of the few groups still interested in alife and CAs in the early 1970s; one of its students, Tommaso Toffoli argued in his PhD thesis that the field was important because its results explain the simple rules that underlay complex effects in nature. Toffoli later provided a key proof that CAs were reversible, just as the true universe is considered to be. Christopher Langton was an unconventional researcher, with an undistinguished academic career that led him to a job programming DEC mainframes for a hospital. He became enthralled by Conway's Game of Life, and began pursuing the idea that the computer could emulate living creatures. After years of study, he began attempting to actualize Von Neumann's CA and the work of Edgar F. Codd, who had simplified Von Neumann's original twenty-nine state monster to one with only eight states. He succeeded in creating the first self-replicating computer organism in October 1979, using only an Apple II desktop computer. He entered Burks' graduate program at the Logic of Computers Group in 1982, at the age of 33, and helped to found a new discipline. Langton's official conference announcement of Artificial Life I was the earliest description of a field which had previously barely existed: Artificial life is the study of artificial systems that exhibit behavior characteristic of natural living systems. It is the quest to explain life in any of its possible manifestations, without restriction to the particular examples that have evolved on earth. This includes biological and chemical experiments, computer simulations, and purely theoretical endeavors. Processes occurring on molecular, social, and evolutionary scales are subject to investigation. The ultimate goal is to extract the logical form of living systems. Microelectronic technology and genetic engineering will soon give us the capability to create new life forms in silico as well as in vitro. This capacity will present humanity with the most far-reaching technical, theoretical and ethical challenges it has ever confronted. The time seems appropriate for a gathering of those involved in attempts to simulate or synthesize aspects of living systems. Ed Fredkin founded the Information Mechanics Group at MIT, which united Toffoli, Norman Margolus, and Charles Bennett. This group created a computer especially designed to execute cellular automata, eventually reducing it to the size of a single circuit board. This "cellular automata machine" allowed an explosion of alife research among scientists who could not otherwise afford sophisticated computers. In 1982, computer scientist named Stephen Wolfram turned his attention to cellular automata. He explored and categorized the types of complexity displayed by one-dimensional CAs, and showed how they applied to natural phenomena such as the patterns of seashells and the nature of plant growth. Norman Packard, who worked with Wolfram at the Institute for Advanced Study, used CAs to simulate the growth of snowflakes, following very basic rules. Computer animator Craig Reynolds similarly used three simple rules to create recognizable flocking behaviour in a computer program in 1987 to animate groups of boids. With no top-down programming at all, the boids produced lifelike solutions to evading obstacles placed in their path. Computer animation has continued to be a key commercial driver of alife research as the creators of movies attempt to find more realistic and inexpensive ways to animate natural forms such as plant life, animal movement, hair growth, and complicated org

  Read more →
• 

  Direct Graphics Access

  Direct Graphics Access is a plug-in for the X display servers that allows client programs direct access to the frame buffer. Graphics hardware communicates via a chunk of memory called a frame buffer. This is an array of values that represent pixel color values on the screen. Writing the appropriate values into the frame buffer therefore allows a program to paint areas of the screen. However, as with any shared resource, problems occur when multiple programs attempt to access the same resource, as they tend to write over each other's work. In the X Window System, this is solved by having a central display server that mediates between programs that want to draw on the screen. The display server also used to perform a lot of the drawing work, allowing programs to say Draw me a circle of this radius filled with this pattern or draw this text in this font. The X server does all this work, freeing programmers from having to write their own drawing code. Another advantage of the X architecture is that it works over a network, allowing programs on one machine to display output on the screen of another. Direct Graphics Access allows direct access to the frame buffer and the X-server hands over control of the frame buffer to the client program and waits for the client to hand it back. This means that the client program has control of the whole screen, and so it is mostly used for full-screen video/games.

  Read more →
• 

  Degree of truth

  In classical logic, propositions are typically unambiguously considered as being true or false. For instance, the proposition one is both equal and not equal to itself is regarded as simply false, being contrary to the Law of Noncontradiction; while the proposition one is equal to one is regarded as simply true, by the Law of Identity. However, some mathematicians, computer scientists, and philosophers have been attracted to the idea that a proposition might be more or less true, rather than wholly true or wholly false. Consider this pizza is hot. In mathematics, this idea can be developed in terms of fuzzy logic. In computer science, it has found application in artificial intelligence. In philosophy, the idea has proved particularly appealing in the case of vagueness. Degrees of truth is an important concept in law. The term is an older concept than conditional probability. Instead of determining the objective probability, only a subjective assessment is defined. In adjudicative processes, 'substantive truth' is distinct from 'formal legal truth' which comes in four degrees: hearsay, balance of probabilities, proven beyond reasonable doubt and absolute truth (knowledge reserved unto God).

  Read more →
• 

  Fuzzy concept

  A fuzzy concept is an idea of which the boundaries of application can vary considerably according to context or conditions, instead of being fixed once and for all. That means the idea is somewhat vague or imprecise. Yet it is not unclear or meaningless. It has a definite meaning, which can often be made more exact with further elaboration and specification — including a closer definition of the context in which the concept is used. The inverse of a "fuzzy concept" is a "crisp concept" (i.e. a precise concept). Fuzzy concepts are often used to navigate imprecision in the real world, when precise information is not available and an approximate indication is sufficient to be helpful. Although the linguist George Philip Lakoff already defined the semantics of a fuzzy concept in 1973 (inspired by an unpublished 1971 paper by Eleanor Rosch,) the term "fuzzy concept" rarely received a standalone entry in dictionaries, handbooks and encyclopedias. Sometimes it was defined in encyclopedia articles on fuzzy logic, or it was simply equated with a mathematical “fuzzy set”. A fuzzy concept can be "fuzzy" for many different reasons in different contexts. This makes it harder to provide a precise definition that covers all cases. Paradoxically, the definition of fuzzy concepts may itself be somewhat "fuzzy". Lotfi A. Zadeh, known as "the father of fuzzy logic", claimed that "vagueness connotes insufficient specificity, whereas fuzziness connotes unsharpness of class boundaries". Not all scholars agree. With increasing academic literature on the subject, the term "fuzzy concept" is now more widely recognized as a philosophical, linguistic or scientific category, and the study of the characteristics of fuzzy concepts and fuzzy language is known as fuzzy semantics. “Fuzzy logic” has become a generic term for many different kinds of many-valued logics, and is applied in many different areas of research, computer programming and industrial design. For engineers, "Fuzziness is imprecision or vagueness of definition." For computer scientists, a fuzzy concept is an idea which is "to an extent applicable" in a situation. It means that the concept can have gradations of significance or unsharp (variable) boundaries of application — a "fuzzy statement" is a statement which is true "to some extent", and that extent can often be represented by a scaled value (a score). For mathematicians, a "fuzzy concept" is usually a fuzzy set or a combination of such sets (see fuzzy mathematics and fuzzy set theory). In cognitive linguistics, the things that belong to a "fuzzy category" exhibit gradations of family resemblance, and the borders of the category are not clearly defined. Through most of the 20th century, the idea of reasoning with fuzzy concepts faced considerable resistance from Western academic elites. They did not want to endorse the use of imprecise concepts in research or argumentation, and they often regarded fuzzy logic with suspicion, derision or even hostility. That may partly explain why the idea of a "fuzzy concept" did not get a separate entry in encyclopedias, handbooks and dictionaries. Yet although people might not be aware of it, the use of fuzzy concepts has risen gigantically in all walks of life from the 1970s onward. That is mainly due to advances in electronic engineering, fuzzy mathematics and digital computer programming. The new technology allows very complex inferences about "variations on a theme" to be anticipated and fixed in a program. The Perseverance Mars rover, a driverless NASA vehicle used to explore the Jezero crater on the planet Mars, features fuzzy logic programming that steers it through rough terrain. Similarly, to the North, the Chinese Mars rover Zhurong used fuzzy logic algorithms to calculate its travel route in Utopia Planitia from sensor data. New neuro-fuzzy computational methods make it possible for machines to identify, measure, adjust and respond to fine gradations of significance with great precision. It means that practically useful concepts can be coded, sharply defined, and applied to all kinds of tasks, even if ordinarily these concepts are never exactly defined. Nowadays engineers, statisticians and programmers often represent fuzzy concepts mathematically, using fuzzy logic, fuzzy values, fuzzy variables and fuzzy sets (see also fuzzy set theory). Fuzzy logic is not "woolly thinking", but a "precise logic of imprecision" which reasons with graded concepts and gradations of truth. Fuzzy concepts and fuzzy logic often play a significant role in artificial intelligence programming, for example because they can model human cognitive processes more easily than other methods. == Origins == Vagueness and fuzziness have probably always been a part of human experience. In the West, ancient texts show that philosophers and scientists were already thinking critically about this in classical antiquity. Most often, they regarded vagueness as a problem: as an obstacle to clear thinking, as a source of confusion, or as an evasive tactic. It got in the way of providing clear orientation, guidance, direction and leadership. Therefore, vagueness became associated with a hermeneutic of suspicion — it was considered as something to avoid, as something undesirable. By contrast, in the ancient Chinese tradition of Daoist thought of Laozi and Zhuang Zhou, "vagueness is not regarded with suspicion, but is simply an acknowledged characteristic of the world around us" — a subject for meditation and a source of insight. === Sorites paradox === The ancient Sorites paradox raised the logical problem, of how we could exactly define the threshold at which a change in quantitative gradation turns into a qualitative or categorical difference. With some physical processes, this threshold seems relatively easy to identify. For example, water turns into steam at 100 °C or 212 °F. Of course, the boiling point depends partly on atmospheric pressure, which decreases at higher altitudes; it is also affected by the level of humidity — in that sense, the boiling point is "somewhat fuzzy", because it can vary under different conditions. Nevertheless, for every altitude, level of air pressure and degree of humidity, we can predict accurately what the boiling point will be, if we know the relevant conditions. With many other processes and gradations, however, the point of change is much more difficult to locate, and remains somewhat vague. Thus, the boundaries between qualitatively different things may be unsharp: we know that there are boundaries, but we cannot define them exactly. For example, to identify "the oldest city in the world", we have to define what counts as a city, and at what point a growing human settlement becomes a city. === The continuum fallacy and Loki's wager === According to the modern idea of the continuum fallacy, the fact that a statement is to an extent vague, does not automatically mean that it has no validity. The question then arises, of how (by what method or approach) we could ascertain and define the validity that the fuzzy statement does have. The Nordic myth of Loki's wager suggested that concepts that lack precise meanings or lack precise boundaries of application cannot be operated with, because they evade any clear definition. However, the 20th-century idea of "fuzzy concepts" proposes that "somewhat vague terms" can be operated with, because we can explicate and define the variability of their application — by assigning numbers to gradations of applicability. This idea sounds simple enough, but it had large implications. === Precursors and pioneers === In Western civilization, the intellectual recognition of fuzzy concepts has been traced back to a diversity of famous and less well-known thinkers, including (among many others) Eubulides, Epicurus, Plato, Cicero, William Ockham and John Buridan, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Friedrich Nietzsche, William James, Hugh MacColl, Charles S. Peirce, Hans Reichenbach, Carl Gustav Hempel, Max Black, Arto Salomaa, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Jan Łukasiewicz, Emil Leon Post, Alfred Tarski, Georg Cantor, Nicolai A. Vasiliev, Kurt Gödel, Stanisław Jaśkowski, Willard Van Orman Quine, George J. Klir, Petr Hájek, Joseph Goguen, Ronald R. Yager, Enrique Héctor Ruspini, Jan Pavelka, Didier Dubois, Bernadette Bouchon-Meunier, and Donald Knuth. Across at least two and a half millennia, all of them had something to say about graded concepts with unsharp boundaries. This suggests at least that the awareness of the existence of concepts with "fuzzy" characteristics, in one form or another, has a very long history in human thought. Quite a few 20th century logicians, mathematicians and philosophers also tried to analyze the characteristics of fuzzy concepts as a recognized species, sometimes with the aid of some kind of many-valued logic or substructural logic. An early attempt in the post-WW2 era to create a mathematical theory of sets with gradations of

  Read more →
• 

  Niceaunties

  Niceaunties is the pseudonym of a Singapore-based artist and designer whose work incorporates generative artificial intelligence, video, and digital installation. Her practice centers around the figure of the "auntie", a common term for older women in Southeast Asian contexts, and explores themes such as aging, care, domesticity, and gender roles. Her work has been featured in exhibitions and media platforms including TED, Christie's Art + Tech, Expanded.Art, and publications such as The Guardian, The Straits Times. == Early life and career == Niceaunties was born in 1981 in Singapore. She attributes her inspiration for "auntie culture" to the matriarchal environment and older women of her household, including her grandmother, while growing up. She is also an architectural designer with Spark Architect. The Niceaunties project began in 2023 after she encountered AI-generated images in her work as an architect. It draws inspiration from women in the artist's family and broader Southeast Asian cultural dynamics. Her work often features AI-generated visuals created with tools such as DALL-E, Krea, RunwayML, and SORA. Her imagery and narratives center on the fictional "Auntieverse", which features older women in imagined settings involving community, ecology, and labor. Her notable works include 'Auntlantis', a five-part video series imagining older women engaged in ocean clean-up and collective ritual, and 'Goddess,' a video created with Sora, featuring a character who gradually forgets her divine identity through years of domestic labor. == Exhibitions == 2024 – Expanded.Art, Berlin – Auntiedote solo exhibition 2024 – TED (conference), Vancouver – Speaker and screening 2024 – Victoria and Albert Museum, London – Digital Art Weekend 2024 – Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, Denmark – Ocean exhibition 2025 – Christie's Augmented Intelligence Auction, New York == Reception == In 2024, Niceaunties gave a TED Talk titled The Weird and Wonderful Art of Niceaunties. Journalist Rebecca Ratcliffe, writing for The Guardian, described her work as combining AI with "the surreal and the political," noting her focus on older women as central characters. Her work has also received criticism for being reliant on generative AI, which many feel exploits and steals from traditional artists.

  Read more →
• 

  You Only Look Once

  You Only Look Once (YOLO) is a series of real-time object detection systems based on convolutional neural networks. First introduced by Joseph Redmon et al. in 2015, YOLO has undergone several iterations and improvements, becoming one of the most popular object detection frameworks. The name "You Only Look Once" refers to the fact that the algorithm requires only one forward propagation pass through the neural network to make predictions, unlike previous region proposal-based techniques like R-CNN that require thousands for a single image. == Overview == Compared to previous methods like R-CNN and OverFeat, instead of applying the model to an image at multiple locations and scales, YOLO applies a single neural network to the full image. This network divides the image into regions and predicts bounding boxes and probabilities for each region. These bounding boxes are weighted by the predicted probabilities. === OverFeat === OverFeat was an early influential model for simultaneous object classification and localization. Its architecture is as follows: Train a neural network for image classification only ("classification-trained network"). This could be one like the AlexNet. The last layer of the trained network is removed, and for every possible object class, initialize a network module at the last layer ("regression network"). The base network has its parameters frozen. The regression network is trained to predict the ( x , y ) {\displaystyle (x,y)} coordinates of two corners of the object's bounding box. During inference time, the classification-trained network is run over the same image over many different zoom levels and croppings. For each, it outputs a class label and a probability for that class label. Each output is then processed by the regression network of the corresponding class. This results in thousands of bounding boxes with class labels and probability. These boxes are merged until only one single box with a single class label remains. == Versions == There are two parts to the YOLO series. The original part contained YOLOv1, v2, and v3, all released on a website maintained by Joseph Redmon. === YOLOv1 === The original YOLO algorithm, introduced in 2015, divides the image into an S × S {\displaystyle S\times S} grid of cells. If the center of an object's bounding box falls into a grid cell, that cell is said to "contain" that object. Each grid cell predicts B bounding boxes and confidence scores for those boxes. These confidence scores reflect how confident the model is that the box contains an object and how accurate it thinks the box is that it predicts. In more detail, the network performs the same convolutional operation over each of the S 2 {\displaystyle S^{2}} patches. The output of the network on each patch is a tuple as follows: ( p 1 , … , p C , c 1 , x 1 , y 1 , w 1 , h 1 , … , c B , x B , y B , w B , h B ) {\displaystyle (p_{1},\dots ,p_{C},c_{1},x_{1},y_{1},w_{1},h_{1},\dots ,c_{B},x_{B},y_{B},w_{B},h_{B})} where p i {\displaystyle p_{i}} is the conditional probability that the cell contains an object of class i {\displaystyle i} , conditional on the cell containing at least one object. x j , y j , w j , h j {\displaystyle x_{j},y_{j},w_{j},h_{j}} are the center coordinates, width, and height of the j {\displaystyle j} -th predicted bounding box that is centered in the cell. Multiple bounding boxes are predicted to allow each prediction to specialize in one kind of bounding box. For example, slender objects might be predicted by j = 2 {\displaystyle j=2} while stout objects might be predicted by j = 1 {\displaystyle j=1} . c j {\displaystyle c_{j}} is the predicted intersection over union (IoU) of each bounding box with its corresponding ground truth. The network architecture has 24 convolutional layers followed by 2 fully connected layers. During training, for each cell, if it contains a ground truth bounding box, then only the predicted bounding boxes with the highest IoU with the ground truth bounding boxes is used for gradient descent. Concretely, let j {\displaystyle j} be that predicted bounding box, and let i {\displaystyle i} be the ground truth class label, then x j , y j , w j , h j {\displaystyle x_{j},y_{j},w_{j},h_{j}} are trained by gradient descent to approach the ground truth, p i {\displaystyle p_{i}} is trained towards 1 {\displaystyle 1} , other p i ′ {\displaystyle p_{i'}} are trained towards zero. If a cell contains no ground truth, then only c 1 , c 2 , … , c B {\displaystyle c_{1},c_{2},\dots ,c_{B}} are trained by gradient descent to approach zero. === YOLOv2 === Released in 2016, YOLOv2 (also known as YOLO9000) improved upon the original model by incorporating batch normalization, a higher resolution classifier, and using anchor boxes to predict bounding boxes. It could detect over 9000 object categories. It was also released on GitHub under the Apache 2.0 license. === YOLOv3 === YOLOv3, introduced in 2018, contained only "incremental" improvements, including the use of a more complex backbone network, multiple scales for detection, and a more sophisticated loss function. === YOLOv4 and beyond === Subsequent versions of YOLO (v4, v5, etc.) have been developed by different researchers, further improving performance and introducing new features. These versions are not officially associated with the original YOLO authors but build upon their work. As of 2026, versions up to YOLO26 have been released..

  Read more →
• 

  Shyster (expert system)

  SHYSTER is a legal expert system developed at the Australian National University in Canberra in 1993. It was written as the doctoral dissertation of James Popple under the supervision of Robin Stanton, Roger Clarke, Peter Drahos, and Malcolm Newey. A full technical report of the expert system, and a book further detailing its development and testing have also been published. SHYSTER emphasises its pragmatic approach, and posits that a legal expert system need not be based upon a complex model of legal reasoning in order to produce useful advice. Although SHYSTER attempts to model the way in which lawyers argue with cases, it does not attempt to model the way in which lawyers decide which cases to use in those arguments. SHYSTER is of a general design, permitting its operation in different legal domains. It was designed to provide advice in areas of case law that have been specified by a legal expert using a bespoke specification language. Its knowledge of the law is acquired, and represented, as information about cases. It produces its advice by examining, and arguing about, the similarities and differences between cases. It derives its name from Shyster: a slang word for someone who acts in a disreputable, unethical, or unscrupulous way, especially in the practice of law and politics. == Methods == SHYSTER is a specific example of a general category of legal expert systems, broadly defined as systems that make use of artificial intelligence (AI) techniques to solve legal problems. Legal AI systems can be divided into two categories: legal retrieval systems and legal analysis systems. SHYSTER belongs to the latter category of legal analysis systems. Legal analysis systems can be further subdivided into two categories: judgment machines and legal expert systems. SHYSTER again belongs to the latter category of legal expert systems. A legal expert system, as Popple uses the term, is a system capable of performing at a level expected of a lawyer: "AI systems which merely assist a lawyer in coming to legal conclusions or preparing legal arguments are not here considered to be legal expert systems; a legal expert system must exhibit some legal expertise itself." Designed to operate in more than one legal domain, and be of specific use to the common law of Australia, SHYSTER accounts for statute law, case law, and the doctrine of precedent in areas of private law. Whilst it accommodates statute law, it is primarily a case-based system, in contradistinction to rule-based systems like MYCIN. More specifically, it was designed in a manner enabling it to be linked with a rule-based system to form a hybrid system. Although case-based reasoning possesses an advantage over rule-based systems by the elimination of complex semantic networks, it suffers from intractable theoretical obstacles: without some further theory it cannot be predicted what features of a case will turn out to be relevant. Users of SHYSTER therefore require some legal expertise. Richard Susskind argues that "jurisprudence can and ought to supply the models of law and legal reasoning that are required for computerized [sic] implementation in the process of building all expert systems in law". Popple, however, believes jurisprudence is of limited value to developers of legal expert systems. He posits that a lawyer must have a model of the law (maybe unarticulated) which includes assumptions about the nature of law and legal reasoning, but that model need not rest on basic philosophical foundations. It may be a pragmatic model, developed through experience within the legal system. Many lawyers perform their work with little or no jurisprudential knowledge, and there is no evidence to suggest that they are worse, or better, at their jobs than lawyers well-versed in jurisprudence. The fact that many lawyers have mastered the process of legal reasoning, without having been immersed in jurisprudence, suggests that it may indeed be possible to develop legal expert systems of good quality without jurisprudential insight. As a pragmatic legal expert system SHYSTER is the embodiment of this belief. A further example of SHYSTER’s pragmatism is its simple knowledge representation structure. This structure was designed to facilitate specification of different areas of case law using a specification language. Areas of case law are specified in terms of the cases and attributes of importance in those areas. SHYSTER weights its attributes and checks for dependence between them. In order to choose cases upon which to construct its opinions, SHYSTER calculates distances between cases and uses these distances to determine which of the leading cases are nearest to the instant case. To this end SHYSTER can be seen to adopt and expand upon nearest neighbor search methods used in pattern recognition. These nearest cases are used to produce an argument (based on similarities and differences between the cases) about the likely outcome in the instant case. This argument relies on the doctrine of precedent; it assumes that the instant case will be decided the same way as was the nearest case. SHYSTER then uses information about these nearest cases to construct a report. The report that SHYSTER generates makes a prediction and justifies that prediction by reference only to cases and their similarities and differences: the calculations that SHYSTER performs in coming to its opinion do not appear in that opinion. Safeguards are employed to warn users if SHYSTER doubts the veracity of its advice. == Results == SHYSTER was tested in four different and disparate areas of case law. Four specifications were written, each representing an area of Australian law: an aspect of the law of trover; the meaning of "authorization [sic]" in copyright law of Australia; the categorisation of employment contracts; and the implication of natural justice in administrative decision-making. SHYSTER was evaluated under five headings: its usefulness, its generality, the quality of its advice, its limitations, and possible enhancements that could be made to it. Despite its simple knowledge representation structure, it has shown itself capable of producing good advice, and its simple structure has facilitated the specification of different areas of law. Appreciating the difficulties encountered by legal expert systems developers in adequately representing legal knowledge can assist in appreciating the shortcomings of digital rights management technologies. Some academics believe future digital rights management systems may become sophisticated enough to permit exceptions to copyright law. To this end SHYSTER's attempt to model "authorization [sic]" in the Copyright Act can be viewed as pioneering work in this field. The term "authorization [sic]" is undefined in the Copyright Act. Consequently, a number of cases have been before the courts seeking answers as to what conduct amounts to authorisation. The main contexts in which the issue has arisen are analogous to permitted exceptions to copyright currently prevented by most digital rights management technologies: "home taping of recorded materials, photocopying in educational institutions and performing works in public". When applied to one case concerning compact cassettes, SHYSTER successfully agreed that Amstrad did not authorise the infringement. 'shyster-myci'n Popple highlighted the most obvious avenue of future research using SHYSTER as the development of a rule-based system, and the linking together of that rule-based system with the existing case-based system to form a hybrid system. This intention was eventually realised by Thomas O’Callaghan, the creator of SHYSTER-MYCIN: a hybrid legal expert system first presented at ICAIL '03, 24–28 June 2003 in Edinburgh, Scotland. MYCIN is an existing medical expert system, which was adapted for use with SHYSTER. MYCIN’s controversial "certainty factor" is not used in SHYSTER-MYCIN. The reason for this is the difficulty in scientifically establishing how certain a fact is in a legal domain. The rule-based approach of the MYCIN part is used to reason with the provisions of an Act of Parliament only. This hybrid system enables the case-based system (SHYSTER) to determine open textured concepts when required by the rule-based system (MYCIN). The ultimate conclusion of this joint endeavour is that a hybrid approach is preferred in the creation of legal expert systems where "it is appropriate to use rule-based reasoning when dealing with statutes, and…case-based reasoning when dealing with cases".

  Read more →
• 

  The Quantum Thief

  The Quantum Thief is the debut science fiction novel by Finnish writer Hannu Rajaniemi and the first novel in a trilogy featuring the character of Jean le Flambeur; the sequels are The Fractal Prince (2012) and The Causal Angel (2014). The novel was published in Britain by Gollancz in 2010, and by Tor in 2011 in the US. It is a heist story, set in a futuristic Solar System, that features a protagonist modeled on Arsène Lupin, the gentleman thief of Maurice Leblanc. The novel was nominated for the 2011 Locus Award for Best First Novel, and was second runner-up for the 2011 Campbell Memorial Award. == Setting == Several centuries after the technological singularity largely destroyed Earth, various posthuman factions compete for dominance in the Solar System. Though sentient superintelligent AGI has never been successfully developed, civilization has been greatly transformed by the proliferation of Hansonian brain emulations (termed "gogols" in reference to Nikolai Gogol, and in particular his novel Dead Souls). An alliance of powerful gogol copies rule the inner system from computronium megastructures housing trillions of virtual minds, laboring to resurrect the dead in religious devotion to the philosophy of Nikolai Fedorov. This alliance, the Sobornost, has been in conflict with a community of quantum entangled minds who adhere to the "no-cloning" principle of quantum information theory, and so do not see the Sobornost's ultimate goal as resurrection, but death. Most of this community, the Zoku, was devastated when Jupiter was destroyed with a weaponized gravitational singularity. Among the last remnants of near-baseline humanity exist on the mobile cities of Mars, where advanced cryptography and an obsessive privacy culture ensure that the Sobornost cannot upload their citizens' minds. The most notable of these cities is the Oubliette, where time is used as a currency. When a citizen's balance reaches zero their mind is transferred to a robotic body to serve the needs of the city for a set period, before being returned to their original body with a restored balance of time. == Plot summary == Countless gogols of the legendary gentleman thief Jean Le Flambeur are trapped in a virtual Sobornost prison in orbit around Neptune, playing an iterated prisoner's dilemma until his mind learns to cooperate. A warrior from the Oort Cloud, which has been settled by Finnish colonists, successfully retrieves one of the Le Flambeur gogols and uploads it into a real-space body. Acting on behalf of a competing Sobornost authority, this Oortian, Mieli, ferries the thief to the Martian city known as The Oubliette, where he has stored his memories for later recovery. The two intend to recover his memories so that he may return to an operating capacity sufficient to serve his Sobornost benefactor in a theft and repay his liberation. On the Oubliette, the young detective Isidore Beautrelet helps vigilantes catch Sobornost agents illicitly uploading human minds. These vigilantes are revealed to be in the service of a local colony of Zoku. Beautrelet is employed to investigate the arrival of Le Flambeur, and in the process becomes aware that the Oubliette's cryptographic security was always compromised. The memories of its citizens are fabrications, and the "King of Mars" long believed ousted in a revolution, still reigns behind the scenes. This King, who is another copy of Jean Le Flambeur, is defeated in the ensuing conflict. Le Flambeur fails to recover all of his memories, which he had locked with a quantum entangled revolver that required him to kill several of his old friends to open his stored memory. He and Mieli escape a liberated Mars having recovered only a mysterious "Schrödinger’s Box" from the Memory Palace. == Themes == Themes central to The Quantum Thief are the unreliability and malleability of memory and the effects of extreme longevity on an individual's perspective and personality. Prisons, surveillance and control in society are also major themes. In the book, the people living in the Oubliette society on Mars have two types of memory; in addition to a traditional, personal memory, there is the exomemory, which can be accessed by other people, from anywhere in the city. Memories about personal experiences can be stored in the exomemory and partitioned, with different levels of access granted to different people. These memories can be used, among other things, as an expedient form of communication. The Oubliette society has an economy where time is used as currency. When an individual's time is expended, their consciousness is uploaded into a "Quiet". The Quiet are mute machine servants who maintain and protect the city. Although the quiet seem to have little interest in the world outside their occupations, they do seem to retain some traces of their former personalities and memories. The conspiracy central to the plot involves the hidden rulers, called the "cryptarchs", manipulating and abusing the exomemory and through the citizens' transformations to quiet and back, the traditional memory as well. In the book, the Oubliette society is compared to a panopticon; a prison, where every action of the dwellers can be scrutinized. == History and influences == The first chapter of The Quantum Thief was presented by Rajaniemi's literary agent, John Jarrold, to Gollancz as the basis for the three-book deal that was eventually secured. Rajaniemi has stated that he had "come up with an outline that had every single idea I could cram into it, because I wanted to be worthy of what had happened." The outline eventually expanded into three parts, and the first part became The Quantum Thief. The novel's plot was inspired by one of Rajaniemi's favorite characters in fiction, Maurice Leblanc's gentleman thief Arsène Lupin, who operates on both sides of the law. What intrigued Rajaniemi were the cycles of redemption and relapse Lupin goes through as he tries to go straight, always falling short. Besides LeBlanc, Rajaniemi mentioned Roger Zelazny as a strong influence. Ian McDonald was the other science fiction author he mentioned as influential, plus Frances A.Yates's book The Art of Memory, for memory palaces. In an interview, Rajaniemi said he wasn't trying to write the novel as hard science fiction: "For me, the more important consequence of having a scientific background is a degree of speculative rigour: trying hard to work out the consequences of the assumptions one begins with." == Reception == The novel has received generally positive reviews. Gary K. Wolfe writes in his Locus review that Rajaniemi has "spectacularly delivered on the promise that this is likely the most important debut SF novel we'll see this year". James Lovegrove, reviewing the book in his Financial Times column, notes that "many an anglophone author would kill to turn out prose half as good as this, especially on their maiden effort." Eric Brown, reviewing for The Guardian, finds the novel to be "a brilliant debut", while alluding to the "apocryphal" (and incorrect) myth that "this novel sold on the strength of its first line." Sam Bandah, at SciFiNow, praises the novel for "its engaging narrative and characters backed by often almost intimidatingly good sci-fi concepts." Criticism for the novel has generally centred on Rajaniemi's sparse "show, don't tell" writing style. Brown notes that "the author makes no concessions to the lazy reader with info-dumps or convenient explanations." Niall Alexander, of the Speculative Scotsman, states that "had there been some sort of index, [he] would have gladly (and repeatedly) referred to it during the mind-boggling first third of The Quantum Thief", while proclaiming the novel to be "the sci-fi debut of 2010." == Awards == Nominee for the 2011 Locus Award for Best First Novel. Third place for the 2011 John W. Campbell Memorial Award for Best Science Fiction Novel

  Read more →