AI Chat List

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

Commitment ordering

Commitment ordering (CO) is a class of interoperable serializability techniques in concurrency control of databases, transaction processing, and related applications. It allows optimistic (non-blocking) implementations. With the proliferation of multi-core processors, CO has also been increasingly utilized in concurrent programming, transactional memory, and software transactional memory (STM) to achieve serializability optimistically. CO is also the name of the resulting transaction schedule (history) property, defined in 1988 with the name dynamic atomicity. In a CO compliant schedule, the chronological order of commitment events of transactions is compatible with the precedence order of the respective transactions. CO is a broad special case of conflict serializability and effective means (reliable, high-performance, distributed, and scalable) to achieve global serializability (modular serializability) across any collection of database systems that possibly use different concurrency control mechanisms (CO also makes each system serializability compliant, if not already). Each not-CO-compliant database system is augmented with a CO component (the commitment order coordinator—COCO) which orders the commitment events for CO compliance, with neither data-access nor any other transaction operation interference. As such, CO provides a low overhead, general solution for global serializability (and distributed serializability), instrumental for global concurrency control (and distributed concurrency control) of multi-database systems and other transactional objects, possibly highly distributed (e.g., within cloud computing, grid computing, and networks of smartphones). An atomic commitment protocol (ACP; of any type) is a fundamental part of the solution, utilized to break global cycles in the conflict (precedence, serializability) graph. CO is the most general property (a necessary condition) that guarantees global serializability, if the database systems involved do not share concurrency control information beyond atomic commitment protocol (unmodified) messages and have no knowledge of whether transactions are global or local (the database systems are autonomous). Thus CO (with its variants) is the only general technique that does not require the typically costly distribution of local concurrency control information (e.g., local precedence relations, locks, timestamps, or tickets). It generalizes the popular strong strict two-phase locking (SS2PL) property, which in conjunction with the two-phase commit protocol (2PC), is the de facto standard to achieve global serializability across (SS2PL based) database systems. As a result, CO compliant database systems (with any different concurrency control types) can transparently join such SS2PL based solutions for global serializability. In addition, locking based global deadlocks are resolved automatically in a CO based multi-database environment, a vital side-benefit (including the special case of a completely SS2PL based environment; a previously unnoticed fact for SS2PL). Furthermore, strict commitment ordering (SCO; Raz 1991c), the intersection of Strictness and CO, provides better performance (shorter average transaction completion time and resulting in better transaction throughput) than SS2PL whenever read-write conflicts are present (identical blocking behavior for write-read and write-write conflicts; comparable locking overhead). The advantage of SCO is especially during lock contention. Strictness allows both SS2PL and SCO to use the same effective database recovery mechanisms. Two major generalizing variants of CO exist, extended CO (ECO; Raz 1993a) and multi-version CO (MVCO; Raz 1993b). They also provide global serializability without local concurrency control information distribution, can be combined with any relevant concurrency control, and allow optimistic (non-blocking) implementations. Both use additional information for relaxing CO constraints and achieving better concurrency and performance. Vote ordering (VO or Generalized CO (GCO); Raz 2009) is a container schedule set (property) and technique for CO and all its variants. Local VO is necessary for guaranteeing global serializability if the atomic commitment protocol (ACP) participants do not share concurrency control information (have the generalized autonomy property). CO and its variants inter-operate transparently, guaranteeing global serializability and automatic global deadlock resolution together in a mixed, heterogeneous environment with different variants. == Overview == The Commitment ordering (CO; Raz 1990, 1992, 1994, 2009) schedule property has been referred to also as Dynamic atomicity (since 1988), commit ordering, commit order serializability, and strong recoverability (since 1991). The latter is a misleading name since CO is incomparable with recoverability, and the term "strong" implies a special case. This means that a substantial recoverability property does not necessarily have the CO property and vice versa. In 2009 CO has been characterized as a major concurrency control method, together with the previously known (since the 1980s) three major methods: Locking, Time-stamp ordering, and Serialization graph testing, and as an enabler for the interoperability of systems using different concurrency control mechanisms. In a federated database system or any other more loosely defined multidatabase system, which are typically distributed in a communication network, transactions span multiple and possibly Distributed databases. Enforcing global serializability in such system is problematic. Even if every local schedule of a single database is still serializable, the global schedule of a whole system is not necessarily serializable. The massive communication exchanges of conflict information needed between databases to reach conflict serializability would lead to unacceptable performance, primarily due to computer and communication latency. The problem of achieving global serializability effectively had been characterized as open until the public disclosure of CO in 1991 by its inventor Yoav Raz (Raz 1991a; see also Global serializability). Enforcing CO is an effective way to enforce conflict serializability globally in a distributed system since enforcing CO locally in each database (or other transactional objects) also enforces it globally. Each database may use any, possibly different, type of concurrency control mechanism. With a local mechanism that already provides conflict serializability, enforcing CO locally does not cause any other aborts, since enforcing CO locally does not affect the data access scheduling strategy of the mechanism (this scheduling determines the serializability related aborts; such a mechanism typically does not consider the commitment events or their order). The CO solution requires no communication overhead since it uses (unmodified) atomic commitment protocol messages only, already needed by each distributed transaction to reach atomicity. An atomic commitment protocol plays a central role in the distributed CO algorithm, which enforces CO globally by breaking global cycles (cycles that span two or more databases) in the global conflict graph. CO, its special cases, and its generalizations are interoperable and achieve global serializability while transparently being utilized together in a single heterogeneous distributed environment comprising objects with possibly different concurrency control mechanisms. As such, Commitment ordering, including its special cases, and together with its generalizations (see CO variants below), provides a general, high performance, fully distributed solution (no central processing component or central data structure are needed) for guaranteeing global serializability in heterogeneous environments of multidatabase systems and other multiple transactional objects (objects with states accessed and modified only by transactions; e.g., in the framework of transactional processes, and within Cloud computing and Grid computing). The CO solution scales up with network size and the number of databases without any negative impact on performance (assuming the statistics of a single distributed transaction, e.g., the average number of databases involved with a single transaction, are unchanged). With the proliferation of Multi-core processors, Optimistic CO (OCO) has also been increasingly utilized to achieve serializability in software transactional memory, and numerous STM articles and patents utilizing "commit order" have already been published (e.g., Zhang et al. 2006). == The commitment ordering solution for global serializability == === General characterization of CO === Commitment ordering (CO) is a special case of conflict serializability. CO can be enforced with non-blocking mechanisms (each transaction can complete its task without having its data-access blocked, which allows optimistic concurrency control; however, commitment could be blo
Read more →
Markov partition

A Markov partition in mathematics is a tool used in dynamical systems theory, allowing the methods of symbolic dynamics to be applied to the study of hyperbolic dynamics. By using a Markov partition, the system can be made to resemble a discrete-time Markov process, with the long-term dynamical characteristics of the system represented as a Markov shift. The appellation 'Markov' is appropriate because the resulting dynamics of the system obeys the Markov property. The Markov partition thus allows standard techniques from symbolic dynamics to be applied, including the computation of expectation values, correlations, topological entropy, topological zeta functions, Fredholm determinants and the like. == Motivation == Let ( M , φ ) {\displaystyle (M,\varphi )} be a discrete dynamical system. A basic method of studying its dynamics is to find a symbolic representation: a faithful encoding of the points of M {\displaystyle M} by sequences of symbols such that the map φ {\displaystyle \varphi } becomes the shift map. Suppose that M {\displaystyle M} has been divided into a number of pieces E 1 , E 2 , … , E r {\displaystyle E_{1},E_{2},\ldots ,E_{r}} which are thought to be as small and localized, with virtually no overlaps. The behavior of a point x {\displaystyle x} under the iterates of φ {\displaystyle \varphi } can be tracked by recording, for each n {\displaystyle n} , the part E i {\displaystyle E_{i}} which contains φ n ( x ) {\displaystyle \varphi ^{n}(x)} . This results in an infinite sequence on the alphabet { 1 , 2 , … , r } {\displaystyle \{1,2,\ldots ,r\}} which encodes the point. In general, this encoding may be imprecise (the same sequence may represent many different points) and the set of sequences which arise in this way may be difficult to describe. Under certain conditions, which are made explicit in the rigorous definition of a Markov partition, the assignment of the sequence to a point of M {\displaystyle M} becomes an almost one-to-one map whose image is a symbolic dynamical system of a special kind called a shift of finite type. In this case, the symbolic representation is a powerful tool for investigating the properties of the dynamical system ( M , φ ) {\displaystyle (M,\varphi )} . == Formal definition == A Markov partition is a finite cover of the invariant set of the manifold by a set of curvilinear rectangles { E 1 , E 2 , … , E r } {\displaystyle \{E_{1},E_{2},\ldots ,E_{r}\}} such that For any pair of points x , y ∈ E i {\displaystyle x,y\in E_{i}} , that W s ( x ) ∩ W u ( y ) ∈ E i {\displaystyle W_{s}(x)\cap W_{u}(y)\in E_{i}} Int ⁡ E i ∩ Int ⁡ E j = ∅ {\displaystyle \operatorname {Int} E_{i}\cap \operatorname {Int} E_{j}=\emptyset } for i ≠ j {\displaystyle i\neq j} If x ∈ Int ⁡ E i {\displaystyle x\in \operatorname {Int} E_{i}} and φ ( x ) ∈ Int ⁡ E j {\displaystyle \varphi (x)\in \operatorname {Int} E_{j}} , then φ [ W u ( x ) ∩ E i ] ⊃ W u ( φ x ) ∩ E j {\displaystyle \varphi \left[W_{u}(x)\cap E_{i}\right]\supset W_{u}(\varphi x)\cap E_{j}} φ [ W s ( x ) ∩ E i ] ⊂ W s ( φ x ) ∩ E j {\displaystyle \varphi \left[W_{s}(x)\cap E_{i}\right]\subset W_{s}(\varphi x)\cap E_{j}} Here, W u ( x ) {\displaystyle W_{u}(x)} and W s ( x ) {\displaystyle W_{s}(x)} are the unstable and stable manifolds of x, respectively, and Int ⁡ E i {\displaystyle \operatorname {Int} E_{i}} simply denotes the interior of E i {\displaystyle E_{i}} . These last two conditions can be understood as a statement of the Markov property for the symbolic dynamics; that is, the movement of a trajectory from one open cover to the next is determined only by the most recent cover, and not the history of the system. It is this property of the covering that merits the 'Markov' appellation. The resulting dynamics is that of a Markov shift; that this is indeed the case is due to theorems by Yakov Sinai (1968) and Rufus Bowen (1975), thus putting symbolic dynamics on a firm footing. Variants of the definition are found, corresponding to conditions on the geometry of the pieces E i {\displaystyle E_{i}} . == Examples == Markov partitions have been constructed in several situations. Anosov diffeomorphisms of the torus. Dynamical billiards, in which case the covering is countable. Markov partitions make homoclinic and heteroclinic orbits particularly easy to describe. The system ( [ 0 , 1 ) , x ↦ 2 x m o d 1 ) {\displaystyle ([0,1),x\mapsto 2x\ mod\ 1)} has the Markov partition E 0 = ( 0 , 1 / 2 ) , E 1 = ( 1 / 2 , 1 ) {\displaystyle E_{0}=(0,1/2),E_{1}=(1/2,1)} , and in this case the symbolic representation of a real number in [ 0 , 1 ) {\displaystyle [0,1)} is its binary expansion. For example: x ∈ E 0 , T x ∈ E 1 , T 2 x ∈ E 1 , T 3 x ∈ E 1 , T 4 x ∈ E 0 ⇒ x = ( 0.01110... ) 2 {\displaystyle x\in E_{0},Tx\in E_{1},T^{2}x\in E_{1},T^{3}x\in E_{1},T^{4}x\in E_{0}\Rightarrow x=(0.01110...)_{2}} . The assignment of points of [ 0 , 1 ) {\displaystyle [0,1)} to their sequences in the Markov partition is well defined except on the dyadic rationals - morally speaking, this is because ( 0.01111 … ) 2 = ( 0.10000 … ) 2 {\displaystyle (0.01111\dots )_{2}=(0.10000\dots )_{2}} , in the same way as 1 = 0.999 … {\displaystyle 1=0.999\dots } in decimal expansions.
Read more →
Corpus manager

A corpus manager (corpus browser or corpus query system) is a tool for multilingual corpus analysis, which allows effective searching in corpora. A corpus manager usually represents a complex tool that allows one to perform searches for language forms or sequences. It may provide information about the context or allow the user to search by positional attributes, such as lemma, tag, etc. These are called concordances. Other features include the ability to search for collocations, frequency statistics as well as metadata information about the processed text. The narrower meaning of corpus manager refers only to the server side or the corpus query engine, whereas the client side is simply called the user interface. A corpus manager can be software installed on a personal computer or it might be provided as a web service. == List of corpus managers == BNCweb – a web-based interface for the British National Corpus CQPweb - a web-based interface for the study of a large variety of corpora including the Spoken BNC2014 BYU-BNC – a website that allows searches of the British National Corpora and others created at Brigham Young University Coma – a tool extension of the system EXMARaLDA for working with oral corpora on a computer NoSketch Engine – a free open-source corpus management system combining Manatee (back-end) and Bonito (web interface) KonText – an extended and modified web interface to NoSketch Engine (a Bonito replacement) Sketch Engine – text corpus management and analysis software with more than 500 corpora in 90+ languages Spoco WordSmith Tools – a software package primarily for linguists
Read more →
Ancient text corpora

Ancient text corpora are the entire collection of texts from the period of ancient history, defined in this article as the period from the beginning of writing up to 300 AD. These corpora are important for the study of literature, history, linguistics, and other fields, and are a fundamental component of the world's cultural heritage. Chinese, Latin, and Greek are examples of ancient languages with significant text corpora, although much of these corpora are known to us via transmission (frequently via medieval manuscript copies) rather than in their original form. These texts – both transmitted and original – provide valuable insights into the history and culture of different regions of the world, and have been studied for centuries by scholars and researchers. Other ancient texts – particularly stone inscriptions and papyrus scrolls – have been published following archaeological research, notably the cuneiform corpus of c.10 million words and the c.5 million words in ancient Egyptian. Through advances in technology and digitization, ancient text corpora are more accessible than ever before. Tools such as the Perseus Digital Library and the Digital Corpus of Sanskrit have made it easier for researchers to access and analyze these texts. == Quantifying the corpora == Two types of ancient texts are known to modern scholars – those that have only survived in younger manuscripts, but whose great age is undisputed (this applies to the bulk of the Chinese, Brahmi, Greek, Latin, Hebrew and Avestan tradition), and those known from original inscriptions, papyri and other manuscripts. Counting of the words in each corpus presents significant methodological challenges – in principle, every single occurrence of a word in the text is counted separately, but in the case of parallel transmission of literary texts, only a single transmission is taken into account. Just as the Book of the Dead and the coffin texts are only included once in the number given for the Egyptian, the Greek and Latin literary works should only be counted according to one manuscript. If, on the other hand, tombs, royal inscriptions or economic documents of certain ancient languages often show a more or less identical form, this is not evaluated as a purely "parallel tradition". Attached prepositions are counted as separate words, except in the case of the definite article in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek since it has no equivalent in most languages, so its frequency would significantly affect the comparability of numbers. === Languages with known size estimates === === South Asian === Sanskrit (Vedic Sanskrit and Classical Sanskrit) Indus script (3,800 items, c.20,000 characters) Brahmi script Old Tamil Early Indian epigraphy and Indian epic poetry Kharosthi Pali literature List of historic Indian texts === Mesoamerican === Olmec hieroglyphs Maya script === East Asian === Old Chinese Chinese classics The pre-Qin corpus: a collection of ancient Chinese texts written before the Qin dynasty (221 BCE). The corpus includes texts from Confucianism, Taoism, Legalism, and other schools of thought. The pre-Han corpus: a collection of ancient Chinese texts written before the Han dynasty (202 BCE). The corpus includes texts from Confucianism, Taoism, Legalism, and other schools of thought. See the Chinese Text Project Chinese bronze inscriptions, Oracle bone script, Seal script, Clerical script === Central Iranian languages === Prior to 300 AD, the Central Iranian languages are mainly in the form of Sassanid stone inscriptions in the two closely related idioms Middle Persian (Pahlavi scripts and Inscriptional Parthian), there are 5000 for the corpus of Middle Persian (mostly 3rd, but also 4th/5th centuries) and for the corpus of Parthian (3rd century) 3000 words. To what extent some of the Manichaean Middle Persian literary texts may date back to the 3rd century is difficult to estimate; Mani is said to have personally written the Shabuhragan totaling about 5000 words. In any case, if we combine Middle Persian and Parthian, we come to over 10,000 words. === Proto-Sinaitic === Proto-Sinaitic script has no more than about 400 letters (number of words is unknown since the script has not been fully interpreted). To a similar extent, there are probably approximately contemporaneous Proto-Canaanite inscriptions (ibid.). === Anatolian === Luwian cuneiform, approx. 3000 words the Palaic language few hundred words. Hieroglyphic Luwian the Lycian alphabet (the best attested Anatolian successor language written in alphabetic script) with about 5000 words The Lydian alphabet 109 inscriptions comprising about 1500 words The Phrygian alphabet the in-tomb inscriptions from the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD (approx. 1000 words) and in the so-called "old Phrygian" inscriptions less than 300 words The Carian alphabets whose texts, mainly from Egypt, contain around 600 words. === Old Italic === the Umbrian language attested essentially by the sacrificial instructions of the Iguvinian Tables with 5000 words the Oscan language (ibid.) with 2000 words the Messapic language with probably a good 1000 words (the estimate is difficult because most texts in this hardly understandable language do not use word separators) the Venetic language a few hundred words the Faliscan language a few hundred words Cisalpine Celtic inscriptions amount to approximately 2000 words, to which are added a number of glosses by classical authors === Iberia === Iberian scripts, more rarely written in Greek or Latin script, approx. 2500 words Celtiberian script, which refers to Celtic language testimonies in Iberian, but also in Latin script from Spain (approx. 1000 words) Southwest Paleohispanic script, 78 inscriptions, a few hundred words Lusitanian language, three monuments in Latin script, approx. 60 words === Germanic Northern Europe === Runic inscriptions dated before the 4th century amount to about 30 pieces, which contain no more than 50 words in total === Africa === Geʽez script: comparatively few inscriptions with a total of around 1,000 words before 300 AD. Following Christianization in the 4th century, more extensive texts are known. Libyco-Berber alphabet: over 1,000 inscriptions from the Maghreb, which are dated to Roman times. Most texts do not use a word separator; Peust estimates that the total number of words could be around 5,000 Meroitic script (Ancient Nubian): about 900 texts are known, which Peust estimates may contain approximately 10,000 words, albeit with uncertainty from the fact that the word separator is not used consistently in the Meroitic script. === Aegean === The Cretan Linear A inscriptions that have not yet been deciphered are available in about 2500 texts, which contain a total of around 20,000 characters. The total number of words can hardly be determined; Peust tentatively put it in the same order of magnitude as in Meroitic. In addition to the Linear A texts, there are also inscriptions Cretan hieroglyphs of a few hundred characters and texts written in the Greek alphabet, but not in Greek, with a few dozen words Cypriot syllabary in the first millennium BC, in which mostly Greek texts were recorded. The relevant texts comprise around 100 to 200 words. === Micro corpora === There are a significant number of ancient micro-corpus languages. Estimating the total number of attested ancient languages may be as difficult as estimating their corpus size. For example, Greek and Latin sources hand down an enormous amount of foreign-language glosses, the seriousness of which is not always certain. == Preservation and curation == Historic preservation and maintaining ancient text corpora presents several challenges, including issues with preservation, translation, and digitization. Many ancient texts have been lost over time, and those that survive may be damaged or fragmented. Translating ancient languages and scripts requires specialized expertise, and digitizing texts can be time-consuming and resource-intensive. == Corpus linguistics == The field of corpus linguistics studies language as expressed in text corpora. This includes the analysis of word frequency, collocations, grammar, and semantics. Ancient text corpora provide a valuable resource for corpus linguistics research, enabling scholars to explore the evolution of language and culture over time.
Read more →
Dropbox Paper

Dropbox Paper, or simply Paper, is a collaborative document-editing service developed by Dropbox. Originating from the company's acquisition of document collaboration company Hackpad in April 2014, Dropbox Paper was officially announced in October 2015, and launched in January 2017. It offers a web application, as well as mobile apps for Android and iOS. Dropbox Paper was described in the official announcement post as "a flexible workspace that brings people and ideas together. With Paper, teams can create, review, revise, manage, and organize — all in shared documents". Reception of Dropbox Paper has been mixed. Critics praised collaboration functionality, including content available immediately, the ability to mention specific collaborators, assign tasks, write comments, as well as editing attribution, and revision history. It received particular praise for its support for rich media from a variety of sources, with one reviewer noting that the Paper's support for rich media exceeds the capabilities of most of its competitors. However, it was criticized for a lack of formatting options and editing features. While the user interface was liked for being minimal, reviewers cited the lack of a fixed formatting bar and missing features present in competitors' products as making Dropbox Paper seem like a "light" tool. == History == Dropbox acquired document collaboration company Hackpad in April 2014. A year later, Dropbox launched a Dropbox Notes note-taking product in beta testing phase. Dropbox Paper was officially announced on October 15, 2015, followed by an open beta and release of mobile Android and iOS apps in August 2016. Dropbox Paper was officially released on January 30, 2017. == Reception == In a comparison between Dropbox Paper and Evernote, PC World's Michael Ansaldo wrote that "With its emphasis on document creation, you might expect formatting to be front and center in Dropbox Paper. That's not the case." Ansaldo noted the lack of a "fixed formatting toolbar as you'd find in Evernote or a word processor like Google Docs or Microsoft Word. Instead, the text editor appears as a floating ribbon only when you highlight selected text." The only formatting options available for emphasis were bolding, strikethrough, bulleted and numbered lists, and H1 and H2 tags. Users can also add links, convert text to checklists, and add comments. Ansaldo wrote that "Both Evernote and Dropbox Paper make it easy to add images to a document", but also noted that "Dropbox Paper doesn't support any image editing". Paper supports rich media, and users can "add rich content to your document just by pasting a link to the file. In addition to Dropbox, Paper supports media from a variety of popular services including YouTube, Spotify, Vimeo, SoundCloud, Facebook, and Google's productivity suite. Once the file appears, you can delete the link for a cleaner display." To start working with other people, Paper "allows you to invite people via email from within a document", with sharing options for who can view the link (anyone with the link or just the invited person), and action permissions (edit or only comment). Regarding collaboration, Ansaldo wrote that "Creative collaboration is Paper’s marquee feature, and it provides a variety of ways to work effectively with others in real time". Users can "make any content immediately visible and accessible to a specific collaborator with "@mentions"", and "You can also use @mentions to create and assign task lists within a document." Paper also "boasts essential collaboration tools including comments, editing attribution, and revision history." Writing for TechRadar, John Brandon wrote that Dropbox Paper "might be a 'light' tool for now without the extensive templates of Microsoft Office or the integration with other apps in the Zoho suite, but it does work well with the Dropbox storage service that's so popular with office workers these days." Kyle Wiggers of Digital Trends wrote that Paper is "all about minimizing distractions. Its interface is quite literally a big, blank canvas on which you tap out your agenda. You can organize notes by title and create to-do lists, but even basic formatting tools are obscured from view", noting Paper's "floating box above words and phrases highlighted by your cursor". Wiggers stated that "Paper is not a to-do organizer", but that it's "well suited to the purpose thanks to a bevy of labor-saving conveniences", highlighting that Paper "supports more media than most of its to-do and note-taking counterparts". He praised the collaboration tools, writing that they "are as extensive as you'd hope, and then some", citing its invitation system with permission controls, lists of changes and revision history, comment and chat support, and "perhaps best of all", the ability to assign tasks with a "@" mention. Business Insider's Alex Heath praised that "Paper's interface is spotless and friendly to write in. You don't feel overwhelmed with formatting options", but criticized the available features, writing that "Google Docs is much more full-featured in the formatting department, so Paper has some catching up to do if it wants to be on par with the competition". Writing for The Verge, Casey Newton praised Paper's handling of rich media, complimenting it for being "great", and added that "I imagine that creative types who work on teams will appreciate having rich media embedded in the documents they're working on rather than in a series of infinite tabs".
Read more →
Michael I. Jordan

Michael Irwin Jordan (born February 25, 1956) is an American scientist, professor at the University of California, Berkeley, research scientist at the Inria Paris, and researcher in machine learning, statistics, and artificial intelligence. Jordan was elected a member of the National Academy of Engineering in 2010 for contributions to the foundations and applications of machine learning. He is one of the leading figures in machine learning, and in 2016 Science reported him as the world's most influential computer scientist. In 2022, Jordan won the inaugural World Laureates Association Prize in Computer Science or Mathematics, "for fundamental contributions to the foundations of machine learning and its application." == Education == Jordan received a Bachelor of Science magna cum laude in psychology from the Louisiana State University in 1978, a Master of Science in mathematics from Arizona State University in 1980, and a Doctor of Philosophy in cognitive science from the University of California, San Diego in 1985. At UC San Diego, Jordan was a student of David Rumelhart and a member of the Parallel Distributed Processing (PDP) Group in the 1980s. == Career and research == Jordan is the Pehong Chen Distinguished Professor at the University of California, Berkeley, where his appointment is split across EECS and Statistics. He was a professor at the Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences at MIT from 1988 to 1998. In the 1980s Jordan started developing recurrent neural networks as a cognitive model. In recent years, his work is less driven from a cognitive perspective and more from the background of traditional statistics. Jordan popularised Bayesian networks in the machine learning community and is known for pointing out links between machine learning and statistics. He was also prominent in the formalisation of variational methods for approximate inference and the popularisation of the expectation–maximization algorithm in machine learning. === Resignation from Machine Learning === In 2001, Jordan and others resigned from the editorial board of the journal Machine Learning. In a public letter, they argued for less restrictive access and pledged support for a new open access journal, the Journal of Machine Learning Research, which was created by Leslie Kaelbling to support the evolution of the field of machine learning. === Honors and awards === Jordan has received numerous awards, including a best student paper award (with X. Nguyen and M. Wainwright) at the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 2004), a best paper award (with R. Jacobs) at the American Control Conference (ACC 1991), the ACM-AAAI Allen Newell Award, the IEEE Neural Networks Pioneer Award, and an NSF Presidential Young Investigator Award. In 2002 he was named an AAAI Fellow "for significant contributions to reasoning under uncertainty, machine learning, and human motor control." In 2004 he was named an IMS Fellow "for contributions to graphical models and machine learning." In 2005 he was named an IEEE Fellow "for contributions to probabilistic graphical models and neural information processing systems." In 2007 he was named an ASA Fellow. In 2010 he was named a Cognitive Science Society Fellow and named an ACM Fellow "for contributions to the theory and application of machine learning." In 2012 he was named a SIAM Fellow "for contributions to machine learning, in particular variational approaches to statistical inference." In 2014 he was named an International Society for Bayesian Analysis Fellow "for his outstanding research contributions at the interface of statistics, computer sciences and probability, for his leading role in promoting Bayesian methods in machine learning, engineering and other fields, and for his extensive service to ISBA in many roles." Jordan is a member of the National Academy of Sciences, a member of the National Academy of Engineering and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He has been named a Neyman Lecturer and a Medallion Lecturer by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics. He received the David E. Rumelhart Prize in 2015 and the ACM/AAAI Allen Newell Award in 2009. He also won the 2020 IEEE John von Neumann Medal. In 2016, Jordan was identified as the "most influential computer scientist", based on an analysis of the published literature by the Semantic Scholar project. In 2019, Jordan argued that the artificial intelligence revolution hasn't happened yet and that the AI revolution required a blending of computer science with statistics. In 2022, Jordan was awarded the inaugural World Laureates Association Prize by non-governmental and non-profit international organization World Laureates Association, for fundamental contributions to the foundations of machine learning and its application. For 2024 he received the BBVA Foundation Frontiers of Knowledge Award in the category of "Information and Communication Technologies".
Read more →
Barbara Di Eugenio

Barbara Di Eugenio is an Italian-American computer scientist, the Collegiate Warren S. McCulloch Professor of Computer Science at the University of Illinois Chicago. Her research focuses on natural language processing and its applications to human–computer interaction, educational technology, and artificial intelligence in healthcare. == Education and career == Di Eugenio is originally from Turin. After an undergraduate education in Italy, she completed her Ph.D. in computer and information science in 1993 at the University of Pennsylvania. Her dissertation, Understanding Natural Language Instructions: A Computational Approach to Purpose Clauses, was supervised by Bonnie Webber. She became a faculty member at the University of Illinois Chicago in 1999, and at that time was the only woman faculty member in the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. == Recognition == In 2022, Di Eugenio received the Zenith Award of the Association for Women in Science. She was named as a Fellow of the Association for Computational Linguistics in 2023, "for outstanding contributions to natural language generation; intelligent tutoring systems; discourse; intercoder agreement; and applying multimodal interactive systems to health".
Read more →
Jerome H. Friedman

Jerome Harold Friedman (born December 29, 1939) is an American statistician, consultant and Professor of Statistics at Stanford University, known for his contributions in the field of statistics and data mining. == Biography == Friedman studied at Chico State College for two years before transferring to the University of California, Berkeley in 1959, where he received his AB in Physics in 1962, and his PhD in High Energy Particle Physics in 1967. In 1968 he started his academic career as research physicist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. In 1972 he started at Stanford University as leader of the Computation Research Group at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, where he would participate until 2003. In the year 1976–77 he was a visiting scientist at CERN in Geneva. From 1981 to 1984 he was visiting professor at the University of California, Berkeley. In 1982 he was appointed Professor of Statistics at Stanford University. In 1984 he was elected as a Fellow of the American Statistical Association. In 2002 he was awarded the SIGKDD Innovation Award by the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). In 2010 he was elected as a member of the National Academy of Sciences (Applied mathematical sciences). == Publications == Friedman has authored and co-authored many publications in the field of data-mining including "nearest neighbor classification, logistical regressions, and high dimensional data analysis. His primary research interest is in the area of machine learning." A selection: Friedman, Jerome H. & Tukey, John W. (1974). "A projection pursuit algorithm for exploratory data analysis". IEEE Transactions on Computers. 23 (9): 881–890. doi:10.1109/T-C.1974.224051. OSTI 1442925. S2CID 7997450. Friedman, Jerome H. & Stuetzle, Werner (1981). "Projection pursuit regression". Journal of the American Statistical Association. 76 (376): 817–823. doi:10.1080/01621459.1981.10477729. OSTI 1445517. Friedman, Jerome H. (1991). "Multivariate adaptive regression splines". Annals of Statistics. 19 (1): 1–67. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.382.970. doi:10.1214/aos/1176347963. JSTOR 2241837. Friedman, Jerome H. (2001). "Greedy function approximation: a gradient boosting machine". Annals of Statistics. 29 (5): 1189–1232. doi:10.1214/aos/1013203451. JSTOR 2699986.
Read more →
SurveyLab

SurveyLab is an online system designed for creating and deploying surveys, questionnaires, web forms, tests, and quizzes. The platform functions as a web application, without the need for additional software installation. Founded in 2006, by the Polish company 7 Points, SurveyLab is used by businesses and professional users for market research, human resources assessments, customer feedback, and academic research. == History == SurveyLab was launched in 2006 under the name MySurveyLab, developed by the Warsaw-based company 7 Points. Early media coverage described the system as supporting online survey creation, real-time reporting, group collaboration and question logic, and noted that the platform was opened to custom feature development. MySurveyLab featured multi-user accounts, SSL-secured surveys, and support for right-to-left languages. Further 2010s updates improved reporting capabilities, expanded question types, and integration options. In 2020, the platform was rebranded to SurveyLab. By the early 2020s, the software supported integrations with external tools including Zapier, and offered additional analytics features. In 2025, 7 Points reported that SurveyLab had over 85,000 registered users and had processed over 7 million surveys. == Functionalities == SurveyLab is a web-based platform used for creating online surveys, questionnaires, and forms. Independent reviewers and software directories describe it as a tool used for market research, customer feedback management, and human resources-related assessments, including employee feedback surveys. According to the creators at 7 Points, SurveyLab supports customer satisfaction measurement, survey analysis, and 360-degree feedback evaluations. The platform allows users to create surveys with no limits on the number of questions or responses. Independent reviews describe SurveyLab as offering multiple-choice, matrix, rating-scale, and open-ended questions. According to 7 Points, the platform manages market-research workflows, including Net Promoter Score, Customer Satisfaction, and Customer Effort Score questions. The tool can also re-use previous answers in later questions, and create A/B survey variants. SurveyLab can integrate with external services and applications through APIs and third-party connectors. According to its developers, the platform can connect with customer service tools, as well as CRM, marketing automation, e-commerce, and data-storage tools An industry review cited workflow integrations with CINT, Slack, Salesforce, and Zendesk Other integrations included Aquera (SSO), Sona Systems (internet research), and Synerise (customer data management). == Data collection and aggregation == Independent descriptions note that SurveyLab can combine results from emails, SMS, website widgets and pop-ups, QR codes, and social media. Its surveys are also accessible through mobile apps on iOS and Android, used for online and offline data collection in the field. Developers state that the tool supports exporting data as CSV, Excel, and SPSS, with independent reviews also mentioning PDF and PowerPoint. SurveyLab can automate response collection through a multi-channel survey distribution and reporting. It includes data trends, offline responses, and reminders to non-respondents. According to its documentation, newer versions include AI-based tools that detect and analyze sentiment, and a survey builder generating questionnaires based on user prompts. === Data security and compliance === According to 7 Points, SurveyLab provides password-protected surveys, token-based access, IP-address filtering, and two-factor authentication for user accounts, and it complies with the General Data Protection Regulation. == Awards and accolades == In 2017, SurveyLab was listed in Capterra’s Top 20 Survey Software ranking, among 20 highest-scoring survey tools based on market presence and user base. In 2018, a software review platform FinancesOnline awarded SurveyLab the Rising Star Award and the Great User Experience Award, distinctions given to products that demonstrate positive user satisfaction and strong usability characteristics.
Read more →
Emma Brunskill

Emma Patricia Brunskill is an American computer scientist. Her research combines machine learning with human–computer interaction by studying the effects of AI systems in human-centered applications including educational software and healthcare, and the theory of reinforcement learning in situations where mistakes impose high risks or costs. She is an associate professor of computer science at Stanford University, where she also holds a courtesy appointment in the Stanford Graduate School of Education and is an affiliate of the King Center on Global Development. == Education and career == Brunskill grew up in Seattle and Edmonds, Washington, and entered the University of Washington at age 15. She graduated magna cum laude in 2000, with a bachelor's degree in computer engineering and physics. A Rhodes Scholarship took her to Magdalen College, Oxford in England, where she received a master's degree in neuroscience in 2002. After a summer working in Rwanda, she became a graduate student of computer science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where she completed her Ph.D. in 2009. Her doctoral dissertation, Compact parametric models for efficient sequential decision making in high-dimensional, uncertain domains, was supervised by Nicholas Roy. After working as an NSF Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the University of California, Berkeley, she joined Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) in 2011 as an assistant professor of computer science. She moved from CMU to Stanford University in 2017. == Recognition == Brunskill was a 2014 recipient of the National Science Foundation CAREER Award and a 2015 recipient of the Office of Naval Research Young Investigator Award. She was one of two alumni of the University of Washington's Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science and Engineering to be honored in 2020 by the school's Alumni Impact Awards. She was elected as a Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence in 2025, "for significant contributions to the field of reinforcement learning, and applications for societal benefit, in particular AI for education".
Read more →
Markov chain Monte Carlo

In statistics, Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) is a class of algorithms used to draw samples from a probability distribution. Given a probability distribution, one can construct a Markov chain whose elements' distribution approximates it, i.e. the Markov chain's equilibrium distribution matches the target distribution. The more steps that are included, the more closely the distribution of the sample matches the actual desired distribution. Markov chain Monte Carlo methods are used to study probability distributions that are too complex or too high dimensional to study with analytic techniques alone. Various algorithms exist for constructing such Markov chains, including the Metropolis–Hastings algorithm. == General explanation == Markov chain Monte Carlo methods create samples from a continuous random variable, with probability density proportional to a known function. These samples can be used to evaluate an integral over that variable, as its expected value or variance. Practically, an ensemble of chains is generally developed, starting from a set of points arbitrarily chosen and sufficiently distant from each other. These chains are stochastic processes of "walkers" which move around randomly according to an algorithm that looks for places with a reasonably high contribution to the integral to move into next, assigning them higher probabilities. Random walk Monte Carlo methods are a kind of random simulation or Monte Carlo method. However, whereas the random samples of the integrand used in a conventional Monte Carlo integration are statistically independent, those used in MCMC are autocorrelated. Correlations of samples introduces the need to use the Markov chain central limit theorem when estimating the error of mean values. These algorithms create Markov chains such that they have an equilibrium distribution which is proportional to the function given. == History == The development of MCMC methods is deeply rooted in the early exploration of Monte Carlo (MC) techniques in the mid-20th century, particularly in physics. These developments were marked by the Metropolis algorithm proposed by Nicholas Metropolis, Arianna W. Rosenbluth, Marshall Rosenbluth, Augusta H. Teller, and Edward Teller in 1953, which was designed to tackle high-dimensional integration problems using early computers. Then in 1970, W. K. Hastings generalized this algorithm and inadvertently introduced the component-wise updating idea, later known as Gibbs sampling. Simultaneously, the theoretical foundations for Gibbs sampling were being developed, such as the Hammersley–Clifford theorem from Julian Besag's 1974 paper. Although the seeds of MCMC were sown earlier, including the formal naming of Gibbs sampling in image processing by Stuart Geman and Donald Geman (1984) and the data augmentation method by Martin A. Tanner and Wing Hung Wong (1987), its "revolution" in mainstream statistics largely followed demonstrations of the universality and ease of implementation of sampling methods (especially Gibbs sampling) for complex statistical (particularly Bayesian) problems, spurred by increasing computational power and software like BUGS. This transformation was accompanied by significant theoretical advancements, such as Luke Tierney's (1994) rigorous treatment of MCMC convergence, and Jun S. Liu, Wong, and Augustine Kong's (1994, 1995) analysis of Gibbs sampler structure. Subsequent developments further expanded the MCMC toolkit, including particle filters (Sequential Monte Carlo) for sequential problems, Perfect sampling aiming for exact simulation (Jim Propp and David B. Wilson, 1996), RJMCMC (Peter J. Green, 1995) for handling variable-dimension models, and deeper investigations into convergence diagnostics and the central limit theorem. Overall, the evolution of MCMC represents a paradigm shift in statistical computation, enabling the analysis of numerous previously intractable complex models and continually expanding the scope and impact of statistics. == Mathematical setting == Suppose (Xn) is a Markov Chain in the general state space X {\displaystyle {\mathcal {X}}} with specific properties. We are interested in the limiting behavior of the partial sums: S n ( h ) = 1 n ∑ i = 1 n h ( X i ) {\displaystyle S_{n}(h)={\dfrac {1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}h(X_{i})} as n goes to infinity. Particularly, we hope to establish the Law of Large Numbers and the Central Limit Theorem for MCMC. In the following, we state some definitions and theorems necessary for the important convergence results. In short, we need the existence of invariant measure and Harris recurrent to establish the Law of Large Numbers of MCMC (Ergodic Theorem). And we need aperiodicity, irreducibility and extra conditions such as reversibility to ensure the Central Limit Theorem holds in MCMC. === Irreducibility and aperiodicity === Recall that in the discrete setting, a Markov chain is said to be irreducible if it is possible to reach any state from any other state in a finite number of steps with positive probability. However, in the continuous setting, point-to-point transitions have zero probability. In this case, φ-irreducibility generalizes irreducibility by using a reference measure φ on the measurable space ( X , B ( X ) ) {\displaystyle ({\mathcal {X}},{\mathcal {B}}({\mathcal {X}}))} . Definition (φ-irreducibility) Given a measure φ {\displaystyle \varphi } defined on ( X , B ( X ) ) {\displaystyle ({\mathcal {X}},{\mathcal {B}}({\mathcal {X}}))} , the Markov chain ( X n ) {\displaystyle (X_{n})} with transition kernel K ( x , y ) {\displaystyle K(x,y)} is φ-irreducible if, for every A ∈ B ( X ) {\displaystyle A\in {\mathcal {B}}({\mathcal {X}})} with φ ( A ) > 0 {\displaystyle \varphi (A)>0} , there exists n {\displaystyle n} such that K n ( x , A ) > 0 {\displaystyle K^{n}(x,A)>0} for all x ∈ X {\displaystyle x\in {\mathcal {X}}} (Equivalently, P x ( τ A < ∞ ) > 0 {\displaystyle P_{x}(\tau _{A}<\infty )>0} , here τ A = inf { n ≥ 1 ; X n ∈ A } {\displaystyle \tau _{A}=\inf\{n\geq 1;X_{n}\in A\}} is the first n {\displaystyle n} for which the chain enters the set A {\displaystyle A} ). This is a more general definition for irreducibility of a Markov chain in non-discrete state space. In the discrete case, an irreducible Markov chain is said to be aperiodic if it has period 1. Formally, the period of a state ω ∈ X {\displaystyle \omega \in {\mathcal {X}}} is defined as: d ( ω ) := g c d { m ≥ 1 ; K m ( ω , ω ) > 0 } {\displaystyle d(\omega ):=\mathrm {gcd} \{m\geq 1\,;\,K^{m}(\omega ,\omega )>0\}} For the general (non-discrete) case, we define aperiodicity in terms of small sets: Definition (Cycle length and small sets) A φ-irreducible Markov chain ( X n ) {\displaystyle (X_{n})} has a cycle of length d if there exists a small set C {\displaystyle C} , an associated integer M {\displaystyle M} , and a probability distribution ν M {\displaystyle \nu _{M}} such that d is the greatest common divisor of: { m ≥ 1 ; ∃ δ m > 0 such that C is small for ν m ≥ δ m ν M } . {\displaystyle \{m\geq 1\,;\,\exists \,\delta _{m}>0{\text{ such that }}C{\text{ is small for }}\nu _{m}\geq \delta _{m}\nu _{M}\}.} A set C {\displaystyle C} is called small if there exists m ∈ N ∗ {\displaystyle m\in \mathbb {N} ^{}} and a nonzero measure ν m {\displaystyle \nu _{m}} such that: K m ( x , A ) ≥ ν m ( A ) , ∀ x ∈ C , ∀ A ∈ B ( X ) . {\displaystyle K^{m}(x,A)\geq \nu _{m}(A),\quad \forall x\in C,\,\forall A\in {\mathcal {B}}({\mathcal {X}}).} === Harris recurrent === Definition (Harris recurrence) A set A {\displaystyle A} is Harris recurrent if P x ( η A = ∞ ) = 1 {\displaystyle P_{x}(\eta _{A}=\infty )=1} for all x ∈ A {\displaystyle x\in A} , where η A = ∑ n = 1 ∞ I A ( X n ) {\displaystyle \eta _{A}=\sum _{n=1}^{\infty }\mathbb {I} _{A}(X_{n})} is the number of visits of the chain ( X n ) {\displaystyle (X_{n})} to the set A {\displaystyle A} . The chain ( X n ) {\displaystyle (X_{n})} is said to be Harris recurrent if there exists a measure ψ {\displaystyle \psi } such that the chain is ψ {\displaystyle \psi } -irreducible and every measurable set A {\displaystyle A} with ψ ( A ) > 0 {\displaystyle \psi (A)>0} is Harris recurrent. A useful criterion for verifying Harris recurrence is the following: Proposition If for every A ∈ B ( X ) {\displaystyle A\in {\mathcal {B}}({\mathcal {X}})} , we have P x ( τ A < ∞ ) = 1 {\displaystyle P_{x}(\tau _{A}<\infty )=1} for every x ∈ A {\displaystyle x\in A} , then P x ( η A = ∞ ) = 1 {\displaystyle P_{x}(\eta _{A}=\infty )=1} for all x ∈ X {\displaystyle x\in {\mathcal {X}}} , and the chain ( X n ) {\displaystyle (X_{n})} is Harris recurrent. This definition is only needed when the state space X {\displaystyle {\mathcal {X}}} is uncountable. In the countable case, recurrence corresponds to E x [ η x ] = ∞ {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} _{x}[\eta _{x}]=\infty } , which is equivalent to P x ( τ x < ∞ ) = 1 {\displaystyle P_{x}(\tau _{x}<\infty )=1} for all x ∈ X {\displaystyle x\i
Read more →
Claire Cardie

Claire Cardie is an American computer scientist specializing in natural language processing. Since 2006, she has been a professor of computer science and information science at Cornell University, and from 2010 to 2011 she was the first Charles and Barbara Weiss Chair of Information Science at Cornell. Her research interests include coreference resolution and sentiment analysis. == Education and career == Cardie is a 1982 graduate of Yale University, majoring in computer science. After working for several companies as a computer programmer, she returned to graduate study in the late 1980s and completed her Ph.D. at the University of Massachusetts Amherst in 1994. Her dissertation, Domain-Specific Knowledge Acquisition for Conceptual Sentence Analysis, was supervised by Wendy Lehnert. She has been on the Cornell University faculty since 1994, initially in computer science and since 2005 also in information science. She was an assistant professor (1994–2000) and associate professor (2000–06), before being promoted to a full professorship in 2006. In 2007 she founded a start-up company, Appinions, and she was its chief scientist until 2015. Her doctoral students at Cornell have included Amit Singhal and Kiri Wagstaff. == Recognition == Cardie became a Fellow of the Association for Computational Linguistics in 2016. She was elected as an ACM Fellow in 2019 "for contributions to natural language processing, including coreference resolution, information and opinion extraction". She was named to the 2021 class of Fellows of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Read more →
LumenVox

LumenVox is a privately held speech recognition software company based in San Diego, California. LumenVox has been described as one of the market leaders in the speech recognition software industry. == History == LumenVox was founded in 2001 as subsidiary of Progressive Computing. According to LumenVox CEO Edward Miller, when Progressive had initially looked to add speech recognition to its own phone system, it found the existing offerings too expensive and recognized a niche in the market for a more affordable speech recognition product. This led to the development of LumenVox with an aim to bring speech recognition to small-to-midsized businesses. LumenVox is one of the major providers of automatic speech recognition for telephone systems, and as of 2006, became the second largest provider of speech recognition software. == Products == The primary LumenVox product is the LumenVox Speech Engine. It is a speaker-independent automatic speech recognizer that uses the Speech Recognition Grammar Specification for building and defining grammars. It has been integrated with several of the major voice platforms, including Avaya Voice Portal/Interactive Response, Aculab, and BroadSoft's BroadWorks. The Speech Engine was originally derived from CMU Sphinx, but LumenVox has added considerable development effort to make it a commercial-ready product. LumenVox also offers a product called the Speech Tuner, which provides a graphical means of testing and troubleshooting speech recognition applications. == Open source support == LumenVox was recognized as one of the top VoIP companies in 2008 for its work in providing its offerings to the open source community, an effort by the company that began in 2006 when it partnered with Digium. At that time, Digium, maintainer of the open source Asterisk PBX, integrated the LumenVox Speech Engine into Asterisk. This made LumenVox the first commercially available speech recognition engine for Asterisk. As one of the earlier commercial software integrations with Asterisk, the LumenVox integration has been described as one of the applications that helped to mainstream Asterisk. In 2009, LumenVox also began offering access to the Speech Engine as a monthly subscription, bringing the cost of entry down even lower for open source users. LumenVox is also integrated with the open source UniMRCP project, which provides open source client and server libraries for the Media Resource Control Protocol.
Read more →
AI Video Generators: Free vs Paid (2026)

In search of the best AI video generator? An AI video generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI video generator 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 →
András Kornai

András Kornai (born 1957 in Budapest) is a mathematical linguist. == Education == Kornai is the son of economist János Kornai. He earned two PhDs with the first being in mathematics in 1983 from Eötvös Loránd University in Budapest, where his advisor was Miklós Ajtai. His second was in linguistics in 1991 from Stanford University, where his advisor was Paul Kiparsky. == Career == He is a professor in the Department of Algebra at the Budapest Institute of Technology, where he works on an open source Hungarian morphological analyzer. He was Chief Scientist at MetaCarta, where he worked on information extraction before the company was acquired by Nokia. Prior to MetaCarta, he was Chief Scientist at Northern Light. He is on the board of the journal Grammars and YourAmigo PLC. His research interests include all mathematical aspects of natural language processing, speech recognition, and OCR. As area editor he was responsible for the Mathematical Linguistics area of the Oxford International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, and his joint work with Geoffrey Pullum, "The X-bar Theory of Phrase Structure", formally reconstructed that then-popular linguistic theory. == Awards and honors == 2009: ACM Distinguished Member == Monographs == Semantics. Springer Nature, 2020. ISBN 978-3-319-65644-1 Mathematical Linguistics. Springer Verlag, in the series Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing, November 2007. ISBN 978-1-84628-985-9 Hardbound, approximately 300 pages. See description. Formal Phonology. In the series Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics, Garland Publishing, 1994, ISBN 0-8153-1730-1, hardbound, 240 pages Contents, Preface, Introduction (20 pages) On Hungarian Morphology. In the series Linguistica, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 1994, ISBN 963-8461-73-X, paperbound, 174 pages Contents, Preface, Introduction (10 pages) == Books edited == Oxford International Encyclopedia of Linguistics (Mathematical Linguistics Area Editor under Editor in Chief William Frawley). 4 volumes, Oxford University Press, 2003, ISBN 978-0-19-513977-8. Proceedings of the HLT-NAACL Workshop on the Analysis of Geographic References. Jointly with Beth Sundheim. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2003, ISBN 1-932432-04-3 (WS9), paperbound, vi+81 pages. See related material. Extended Finite State Models of Language (editor). In the series Studies in Natural Language Processing, Cambridge University Press, 1999, ISBN 0-521-63198-X, hardbound, x+278 pages Contents, Introduction (7 pages). == Selected papers == Digital Language Death. PLoS ONE 8(10): e77056, 2012. [1] Hunmorph: open source word analysis (Jointly with V. Tron, Gy. Gyepesi, P. Halacsy, L. Nemeth, and D. Varga). In Proc. ACL 2005 Software Workshop 77-85 [2] Leveraging the open source ispell codebase for minority language analysis (Jointly with P. Halacsy, L. Nemeth, A. Rung, I. Szakadat, and V. Tron). In J. Carson-Berndsen (ed): Proc. SALTMIL 2004 56-59 [3] Explicit Finitism, International Journal of Theoretical Physics 2003/2 301-307 [4] Mathematical Linguistics (Jointly with G.K. Pullum) In W. Frawley (ed): Oxford International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, Oxford University Press 2003, v3 17-20 [5] Optical Character Recognition, In W. Frawley (ed): Oxford International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, Oxford University Press 2003, v3 33-34 [6] How many words are there? Glottometrics 2002/4 61-86 [7] Zipf's law outside the middle range Proc. Sixth Meeting on Mathematics of Language University of Central Florida, 1999 347-356 [8] A Robust, Language-Independent OCR System. (Jointly with Z. Lu, I. Bazzi, J. Makhoul, P. Natarajan, and R. Schwartz) In: Robert J. Mericsko (ed): Proc. 27th AIPR Workshop: Advances in Computer-Assisted Recognition SPIE Proceedings 3584 1999 [9] Quantitative Comparison of Languages. Grammars 1998/2 155-165 [10] The generative power of feature geometry. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 8 1993 37-46 [11] The X-bar Theory of Phrase Structure. (Jointly with G.K. Pullum) Language 66 1990 24-50 [12]
Read more →