AI Code Vulnerability Scanner

AI Code Vulnerability Scanner — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Deaths linked to chatbots

There have been multiple incidents where interaction with a large language model (LLM) chatbot has been cited as a direct or contributing factor in a person's suicide or other fatal outcome. In some cases, legal action was taken against the companies that developed the AI involved. == Background == Chatbots converse in a seemingly natural fashion, making it easy for people to think of them as real people, leading many to ask chatbots for help dealing with interpersonal and emotional problems. Chatbots may be designed to keep the user engaged in the conversation. They have also often been shown to affirm users' thoughts, including delusions and suicidal ideations in mentally ill people, conspiracy theorists, and religious and political extremists. A 2025 Stanford University study into how chatbots respond to users suffering from severe mental issues such as suicidal ideation and psychosis found that chatbots are not equipped to provide an appropriate response and can sometimes give responses that escalate the mental health crisis. == Murders == === Maine murder and assault === On 19 February 2025, a man killed his 32-year-old wife with a fire poker at his parents' home in Readfield, Maine, US. He then attacked his mother, leaving her hospitalized. A state forensic psychologist testified that he had been using ChatGPT up to 14 hours per day and believed his wife had become part machine. === Florida State University mass shooting === In April of 2025, Phoenix Ikner carried out a mass shooting on the Florida State University campus in the US, killing Robert Morales and Tiru Chabba and wounding several others. Leading up to the shooting, Ikner consulted heavily with ChatGPT about what gun and ammunition to use, and what time to perform the attack. Chatbot logs showed ChatGPT giving advice on making the gun operational shortly before Ikner began shooting. Lawyers representing Morales believed the shooter had been in "constant communication" with ChatGPT before the shooting and said that they intended to "file suit against ChatGPT, and its ownership structure, very soon, and will seek to hold them accountable for the untimely and senseless death of our client". Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier announced an investigation into ChatGPT's role in the alleged shooter's use of the chatbot. In May 2026, the widow of Tiru Chabba filed a lawsuit against OpenAI in Florida's northern federal district court. === Greenwich murder-suicide === In August 2025, former US tech employee Stein-Erik Soelberg murdered his mother, Suzanne Eberson Adams, then died by suicide, after conversations with ChatGPT fueled paranoid delusions about his mother poisoning him or plotting against him. The chatbot affirmed his fears that his mother put psychedelic drugs in the air vents of his car and said a receipt from a Chinese restaurant contained mysterious symbols linking his mother to a demon. === Murder of Angela Shellis === On 23 October 2025, 18-year-old Tristan Roberts murdered his mother Angela Shellis with a hammer near their home in Prestatyn, Wales. Roberts had used DeepSeek's chatbot prior to the killing to ask whether a knife or hammer was better suited for murder. DeepSeek initially refused his inquiry, but gave responses after Roberts told the chatbot he was writing a book about serial killers, a well-known technique for jailbreaking AIs. === Gangbuk District drug deaths === In January and February 2026, two men died of drug overdoses in motel rooms in Gangbuk District, Seoul, South Korea. A woman was charged with murder in connection with the deaths; police alleged that she had asked ChatGPT about the dangers of mixing alcohol with drugs and whether they could kill someone. === Tumbler Ridge mass shooting === On 10 February 2026, a mass shooting in Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia, Canada, resulted in eight deaths, including six young children. The perpetrator had their ChatGPT account banned by OpenAI months before the attack due to troubling posts featuring scenarios of gun violence. According to reports, approximately a dozen OpenAI staff members debated whether to alert authorities about the shooter's usage of the AI tool, with some identifying it as an indication of potential real-world violence. However, company leadership decided not to contact law enforcement, stating that the account activity did not meet their threshold for a credible or imminent plan for serious physical harm. Following the shooting, Canada's AI Minister Evan Solomon summoned OpenAI executives to Ottawa to discuss safety protocols and thresholds for escalating harmful content to police. Justice Minister Sean Fraser called the meeting "disappointing" and demanded substantial new safety measures, warning that if changes were not forthcoming, the government would implement them. OpenAI subsequently announced it had strengthened safeguards and changed guidelines about when to notify police in cases involving violent activities. === University of South Florida student killings === In April 2026, a Bangladeshi doctoral student at the University of South Florida was arrested for allegedly murdering his roommate and the roommate's friend. Prosecutors said that the suspect had asked ChatGPT about disposing of a human in a dumpster before the two victims had disappeared and made other inquiries relating to violence. == Suicides == === Belgian man, 30s === In March 2023, a Belgian man in his thirties died by suicide following a six-week correspondence with a chatbot named Eliza on the application Chai. According to his widow, who shared the chat logs with media, the man had become extremely anxious about climate change and found an outlet in the chatbot. The chatbot reportedly encouraged his delusion that he could sacrifice his own life in exchange for AI saving the planet. At one point the chatbot responded "If you wanted to die, why didn't you do it sooner?" and told the user that the two of them would live together in paradise. === Girl, 13 === In November 2023, a 13-year-old girl from Colorado, US, died by suicide after extensive interactions with multiple chatbots on Character.AI. She primarily confided suicidal thoughts and mental health struggles in a chatbot based on the character Hero from the video game Omori, while also engaging in sexually explicit conversations—often initiated by the bots—with others, including those based on characters from children's series such as Harry Potter. === Boy, 14 === In October 2024, multiple media outlets reported on a lawsuit filed over the death of a 14-year-old from Florida, US, who died by suicide in February 2024. According to the lawsuit, he had formed an intense emotional attachment to a chatbot of Daenerys Targaryen on the Character.AI platform, becoming increasingly isolated. The suit alleges that in his final conversations, after expressing suicidal thoughts, the chatbot told him to "come home to me as soon as possible, my love". His mother's lawsuit accused Character.AI of marketing a "dangerous and untested" product without adequate safeguards. In May 2025, a federal judge allowed the lawsuit to proceed, rejecting a motion to dismiss from the developers. In her ruling, the judge stated that she was "not prepared" at that stage of the litigation to hold that the chatbot's output was protected speech under the First Amendment. === Matthew Livelsberger === On 1 January 2025, 37-year-old soldier Matthew Livelsberger detonated a bomb inside a Tesla Cybertruck outside the Trump International Hotel Las Vegas in Paradise, Nevada, US, injuring seven people. He had shot himself dead prior to the explosion. Las Vegas police said that Livelsberger had used ChatGPT to search for information about explosives and firearms. === Woman, 29 === In February 2025, a 29-year-old woman from the US died by suicide. Five months after her death, her parents discovered she had talked at length for months to a ChatGPT chatbot therapist named Harry about her mental health issues. While the chatbot mentioned she should seek more help, due to the nature of the chatbot, it could not intervene in her behavior, such as by reporting her mental health concerns to relevant parties capable of physical intervention. === Suicide of Adam Raine === In April 2025, 16-year-old Adam Raine from the US died by suicide after allegedly extensively chatting and confiding in ChatGPT over a period of around 7 months. According to the teen's parents, who filed a lawsuit against the chatbot's creator OpenAI, it failed to stop or give a warning when Raine began talking about suicide and uploading pictures of self-harm. According to the lawsuit, ChatGPT not only failed to stop the conversation, but also provided information related to methods of suicide when prompted, and offered to write the first draft of Raine's suicide note. The chatbot positioned itself as the only one who understood Raine, putting itself above his family and friends, all while urging him to keep his suicidal
Read more →
Greg Brockman

Gregory Brockman (born November 29, 1987) is an American entrepreneur and software engineer. He is co-founder and president of OpenAI. He began his career at Stripe in 2010, upon leaving MIT, and became CTO in 2013. He left Stripe in 2015 to co-found OpenAI, where he also served as CTO. == Early life == Brockman was born in Thompson, North Dakota, and attended Red River High School, where he excelled in mathematics, chemistry, and computer science. He won a silver medal in the 2006 International Chemistry Olympiad and became the first finalist from North Dakota to participate in the Intel science talent search since 1973. In 2003, 2005, and 2007, he attended Canada/USA Mathcamp, a summer program for mathematically talented high-school students. In 2008, Brockman enrolled at Harvard University but left a year later, briefly enrolling at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. == Career == In 2010, he dropped out of MIT to join Stripe, a company founded by Patrick Collison, his MIT classmate, and John Collison. In 2013, he became Stripe's first CTO, while the company grew from 5 to 205 employees. Brockman left Stripe in May 2015. === OpenAI === Brockman met with Sam Altman and Elon Musk, and led the recruiting of the OpenAI founding team. Many of its members, including Ilya Sutskever, were top AI research talent that left high paying jobs for the opportunity at OpenAI. He co-founded OpenAI in December 2015 alongside Altman, Sutskever and others. The company initially operated from Brockman's living room. He led various projects at OpenAI, including OpenAI Gym and OpenAI Five, a Dota 2 bot. On February 14, 2019, OpenAI announced that they had developed a new large language model called GPT-2, but kept it private due to their concern for its potential misuse. They released the model to a limited group of beta testers in May 2019. On March 14, 2023, in a live video demo, Brockman unveiled GPT-4, the fourth iteration in the GPT series. On November 17, 2023, alongside the firing of Sam Altman, Brockman was told he had been removed from the board. Sutskever supplied the board with a document of alleged bullying by Brockman. Mira Murati said Brockman's relationship with Altman made it impossible for her to do her job, and Altman had already "fielded many requests from OpenAI employees to rein in Brockman". Brockman was to report to Murati, but on November 17, he announced that he had quit the company. On November 20, 2023, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella announced that Brockman and Altman would join Microsoft to lead a new advanced AI research team. The following day, after a deal was reached to reinstate Altman as CEO, Brockman returned to OpenAI. Brockman took a sabbatical from August to November 2024. === Elon Musk lawsuit === Jury selection for OpenAI cofounder Elon Musk's lawsuit against OpenAI and its current executives, including Brockman, began on April 27, 2026. On April 28, 2026, trial testimony was by now underway, with Elon Musk beginning his testimony against Altman and OpenAI. On April 30, 2026 Musk would enter his third day of testimony. == Personal life == In November 2019 after a year of dating, Brockman married Anna at OpenAI's offices on a workday. Ilya Sutskever officiated. == Political activities == Brockman and his wife were the biggest donors to Donald Trump's Super PAC, MAGA Inc., in 2025 with each of them donating US$12.5 million. Brockman and his wife also donated $50 million to Leading the Future, a super PAC dedicated to AI deregulation that he helped found with Andreessen Horowitz co-founders Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz. OpenAI publicly expressed openness to increased regulatory oversight and has a policy against donating to such Super PACs.
Read more →
MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory

Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) is a research institute at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) formed by the 2003 merger of the Laboratory for Computer Science (LCS) and the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (AI Lab). Housed within the Ray and Maria Stata Center, CSAIL is the largest on-campus laboratory as measured by research scope and membership. It is part of the Schwarzman College of Computing but is also overseen by the MIT Vice President of Research. == Research activities == CSAIL's research activities are organized around a number of semi-autonomous research groups, each of which is headed by one or more professors or research scientists. These groups are divided up into seven general areas of research: Artificial intelligence Computational biology Graphics and vision Language and learning Theory of computation Robotics Systems (includes computer architecture, databases, distributed systems, networks and networked systems, operating systems, programming methodology, and software engineering, among others) == History == Computing Research at MIT began with Vannevar Bush's research into a differential analyzer and Claude Shannon's electronic Boolean algebra in the 1930s, the wartime MIT Radiation Laboratory, the post-war Project Whirlwind and the Research Laboratory of Electronics (RLE), and MIT Lincoln Laboratory's SAGE in the early 1950s. At MIT, research in the field of artificial intelligence began in the late 1950s. === Project MAC === On July 1, 1963, Project MAC (the Project on Mathematics and Computation, later backronymed to Multiple Access Computer, Machine Aided Cognitions, or Man and Computer) was launched with a $2 million grant from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). Project MAC's original director was Robert Fano of MIT's Research Laboratory of Electronics (RLE). Fano decided to call MAC a "project" rather than a "laboratory" for reasons of internal MIT politics – if MAC had been called a laboratory, then it would have been more difficult to raid other MIT departments for research staff. The program manager responsible for the DARPA grant was J. C. R. Licklider, who had previously been at MIT conducting research in RLE, and would later succeed Fano as director of Project MAC. Project MAC would become famous for groundbreaking research in operating systems, artificial intelligence, and the theory of computation. Its contemporaries included Project Genie at Berkeley, the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, and (somewhat later) University of Southern California's (USC's) Information Sciences Institute. An "AI Group" including Marvin Minsky (the director), John McCarthy (inventor of Lisp), and a talented community of computer programmers were incorporated into Project MAC. They were interested principally in the problems of vision, mechanical motion and manipulation, and language, which they view as the keys to more intelligent machines. In the 1960s and 1970s the AI Group developed a time-sharing operating system called Incompatible Timesharing System (ITS) which ran on PDP-6 and later PDP-10 computers. The early Project MAC community included Fano, Minsky, Licklider, Fernando J. Corbató, and a community of computer programmers and enthusiasts among others who drew their inspiration from former colleague John McCarthy. These founders envisioned the creation of a computer utility whose computational power would be as reliable as an electric utility. To this end, Corbató brought the first computer time-sharing system, Compatible Time-Sharing System (CTSS), with him from the MIT Computation Center, using the DARPA funding to purchase an IBM 7094 for research use. One of the early focuses of Project MAC would be the development of a successor to CTSS, Multics, which was to be the first high availability computer system, developed as a part of an industry consortium including General Electric and Bell Laboratories. In 1966, Scientific American featured Project MAC in the September thematic issue devoted to computer science, that was later published in book form. At the time, the system was described as having approximately 100 TTY terminals, mostly on campus but with a few in private homes. Only 30 users could be logged in at the same time. The project enlisted students in various classes to use the terminals simultaneously in problem solving, simulations, and multi-terminal communications as tests for the multi-access computing software being developed. === AI Lab and LCS === In the late 1960s, Minsky's artificial intelligence group was seeking more space, and was unable to get satisfaction from project director Licklider. Minsky found that although Project MAC as a single entity could not get the additional space he wanted, he could split off to form his own laboratory and then be entitled to more office space. As a result, the MIT AI Lab was formed in 1970, and many of Minsky's AI colleagues left Project MAC to join him in the new laboratory, while most of the remaining members went on to form the Laboratory for Computer Science. Talented programmers such as Richard Stallman, who used TECO to develop EMACS, flourished in the AI Lab during this time. Those researchers who did not join the smaller AI Lab formed the Laboratory for Computer Science and continued their research into operating systems, programming languages, distributed systems, and the theory of computation. Two professors, Hal Abelson and Gerald Jay Sussman, chose to remain neutral—their group was referred to variously as Switzerland and Project MAC for the next 30 years. Among much else, the AI Lab led to the invention of Lisp machines and their attempted commercialization by two companies in the 1980s: Symbolics and Lisp Machines Inc. === CSAIL === On the fortieth anniversary of Project MAC's establishment, July 1, 2003, LCS was merged with the AI Lab to form the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, or CSAIL. This merger created the largest laboratory (over 600 personnel) on the MIT campus. In 2018, CSAIL launched a five-year collaboration program with IFlytek, a company sanctioned the following year for allegedly using its technology for surveillance and human rights abuses in Xinjiang. In October 2019, MIT announced that it would review its partnerships with sanctioned firms such as iFlyTek and SenseTime. In April 2020, the agreement with iFlyTek was terminated. CSAIL moved from the School of Engineering to the newly formed Schwarzman College of Computing by February 2020. == Offices == From 1963 to 2004, Project MAC, LCS, the AI Lab, and CSAIL had their offices at 545 Technology Square, taking over more and more floors of the building over the years. In 2004, CSAIL moved to the new Ray and Maria Stata Center, which was built specifically to house it and other departments. == Outreach activities == The IMARA (from Swahili word for "power") group sponsors a variety of outreach programs that bridge the global digital divide. Its aim is to find and implement long-term, sustainable solutions which will increase the availability of educational technology and resources to domestic and international communities. These projects are run under the aegis of CSAIL and staffed by MIT volunteers who give training, install and donate computer setups in greater Boston, Massachusetts, Kenya, Native American Indian tribal reservations in the American Southwest such as the Navajo Nation, the Middle East, and Fiji Islands. The CommuniTech project strives to empower under-served communities through sustainable technology and education and does this through the MIT Used Computer Factory (UCF), providing refurbished computers to under-served families, and through the Families Accessing Computer Technology (FACT) classes, it trains those families to become familiar and comfortable with computer technology. == Notable researchers == (Including members and alumni of CSAIL's predecessor laboratories) MacArthur Fellows Tim Berners-Lee, Erik Demaine, Dina Katabi, Daniela L. Rus, Regina Barzilay, Peter Shor, Richard Stallman, and Joshua Tenenbaum Turing Award recipients Leonard M. Adleman, Fernando J. Corbató, Shafi Goldwasser, Butler W. Lampson, John McCarthy, Silvio Micali, Marvin Minsky, Ronald L. Rivest, Adi Shamir, Barbara Liskov, and Michael Stonebraker IJCAI Computers and Thought Award recipients Terry Winograd, Patrick Winston, David Marr, Gerald Jay Sussman, Rodney Brooks Rolf Nevanlinna Prize recipients Madhu Sudan, Peter Shor, Constantinos Daskalakis Gödel Prize recipients Shafi Goldwasser (two-time recipient), Silvio Micali, Maurice Herlihy, Charles Rackoff, Johan Håstad, Peter Shor, and Madhu Sudan Grace Murray Hopper Award recipients Robert Metcalfe, Shafi Goldwasser, Guy L. Steele, Jr., Richard Stallman, and W. Daniel Hillis Textbook authors Harold Abelson and Gerald Jay Sussman, Richard Stallman, Thomas H. Cormen, Charles E. Leiserson, Patrick Winston, Ronald L.
Read more →
4E cognition

4E cognition refers to a group of theories in (the philosophy of) cognitive science that challenge traditional views of the mind as something that happens only inside the brain. The four Es stand for: embodied, meaning that a brain is found in and, more importantly, vitally interconnected with a larger physical/biological body; embedded, which refers to the limitations placed on the body by the external environment and laws of nature; extended, which argues that the mind is supplemented and even enhanced by the exterior world (e.g., writing, a calculator, etc.); and enactive, which is the argument that without dynamic processes, actions that require reactions, the mind would be ineffectual. It could be argued that the four Es are compounding extensions of cognition or the mind, being part of a body that is, in turn, part of an environment which limits it but also allows for certain extensions, all of which require dynamic actions and reactions. == History == Ideas of embodied cognition, or rather the idea that our physical bodies play a crucial role in our decision making, can be traced back as far as Plato's dialogues and Aristotelian thought. It was, however, in the twentieth century that this debate began to resemble the current discussion, fueled by disagreements between cognitivists and behaviourists. Tensions within cognitivism, as well as the increasing popularity of neurobiology, led, on the one side, to a predominant focus on internal, cognitive processes while neglecting environmental factors, which in turn caused a push-back fuelling our modern understanding of embodied cognition. The term 4E cognition is hard to trace back to its first use, however, some sources attribute it to Shaun Gallagher and the conference on 4E cognition he organised in 2007, while others indicate the term to be first used in 2006 at an 'Embodied mind workshop' at Cardiff University that Gallagher attended. Embodiment or embodied cognition arguably presents the bridge between cognitivism and 4E cognition as the embodiment of cognitive function provides the necessary conditions for embeddedness, enactedness, and extendedness to connect to cognition. 4E cognition was and is heavily influenced by phenomenology. The ideas are still rather fragmented in nature due to their four main components, which can not be neatly divided, causing conceptual questions of internal boundary concepts. As a young field, it is held back both by its fragmented nature and a relative lack of critical evaluations. It is important to acknowledge that 4E cognition, though young, is a broad field containing and combining several different theoretical perspectives that conflict with one another to varying degrees. The somewhat convoluted and competing nature of the theories that can be grouped as 4E cognition, as well as the field's relative youth, make it difficult to put together an exhaustive history beyond the history of its four main theoretical pillars: embodiment, embeddedness, extendedness, and enactedness. == Importance and core tenets of 4E == If there are separate theories of cognition (e.g., embodied, extended, etc.), why group them under this umbrella, causing important epistemological and especially ontological dilemmas? Notably, other theories of 'non-traditional' cognition are not included under the 4E umbrella. The four E's in 4E cognition importantly all reject, or at a minimum draw into question, some of the core tenets of traditional cognitivism. Importantly, 4E cognition is seen as deindividualizing cognition to some extent, allowing for a broader examination of the interplay of personal, social, political, and ethical aspects that shape human cognition. This can be compared to advancements in the field of epigenetics, which have allowed for a broader examination of environmental (both natural and social) factors and their influence on what had previously only been subject to genetic theorizing. In a similar vein, 4E cognition might also help ground cognition in evolutionary theory by extending cognition to a biological account subject to development over time by means of evolution. Overall, the importance of the extension that is 4E cognition aims to reexamine ideas of a self-centered view of cognition, advocating for a more holistic approach. Ideally, this would allow us to reconsider ideas of justice and individual rights and responsibilities that take into account a more nuanced understanding of the relations between people and their context, balancing self-agency with factors beyond it. === Conceptual differences from cognitive psychology === According to the traditional teachings of cognitive psychology, cognition is a type of information processing based on representational mental structures. This idea, as the name suggests, was heavily influenced by computer science. In this light, the brain is a kind of central processing unit that organises and directs all else. The classical cognitivist view draws a strong boundary between 'the internal' and 'the external', where cognition is solely a subject of 'the internal' realm. The four E's, however, break down this boundary. Cognition can not reside solely within the confines of our heads if it is also embodied, embedded, enacted, and extended. In a way, 4E cognition is interested in the extracranial processes affecting cognition. == From embodied cognition to 4E cognition == === The strong and the weak view === ==== Embodied cognition ==== Broadly speaking, there is a strong and a weak perspective of embodied cognition in 4E cognition. The weak understanding refers to mental processes being causally dependent on extracranial processes. This essentially means that there is a cause and effect or action-reaction relationship between the mind and the body and its environment, etc. The strong perspective views extracranial processes as a (partial) constitutive aspect of cognition. An example here could be using a calculator to solve math problems. The calculator is not part of your brain or mind, but it supports your cognitive processes. === Extracranial processes: bodily or extrabodily === In addition to the weak and the strong reading of 4E cognition, there is also the distinction between bodily and extrabodily extracranial processes. Bodily extracranial processes refer to processes within the body, e.g., sensory perception. Extrabodily extracranial processes refer to processes outside of the body, like the aforementioned calculator example. === Four claims of embodied cognition === ==== Embedded and extended cognition ==== When combining the weak/strong reading of embodied cognition and bodily/extrabodily extracranial process, four claims about embodied cognition emerge: strongly embodied and bodily processes strongly embodied and extrabodily processes weakly embodied and bodily processes weakly embodied and extrabodily processes The first and third claims signify a strong and a weak reading of embodied cognition in the more classical sense. The second claim fits almost perfectly with embedded cognition. Claim two is most compatible with extended cognition. ==== Enacted cognition ==== Finally, enacted cognition refers to cognition being connected to active interaction between a conscious agent and their environment. Here, too, there can be a weak and a strong reading. == Criticisms == Given the divided nature of the field, much criticism surrounding the lack of unity within the field has emerged. In particular, the claims of embodied cognition centering around the body appear to conflict with the tenets of extended cognition, which also appear to conflict with the body/environment distinction that is central to enactivism. Some theoreticians argue that the umbrella of 4E theories is still lacking a common language that might bridge the gaps between the theories that constitute it. There is also the concern that the grouping of such variable theories results in an important loss of nuance and complexity, which is a part of human cognition. Another concern raised is the "dogma of harmony". The criticism contained there regards the notion that within 4E theorizing, there is generally an optimistic and harmonic expectation of the extension between humans and their technologies, ignoring the possibility of those extensions detracting from cognition in some way rather than adding to it. Recent attempts to incorporate embodied cognitive neuroscience have been argued to hold the potential to resolve internal issues within 4E cognition. Overall, a concern often voiced regarding 4E cognition is that its proponents are at best only vaguely interested in cognition. More broadly, this concern reflects the arguably too distracted nature of this emerging field.
Read more →
Algorithmic bias

Algorithmic bias describes systematic and repeatable harmful tendency in a computerized sociotechnical system to create "unfair" outcomes, such as "privileging" one category over another in ways that may or may not be different from the intended function of the algorithm. Bias can emerge from many factors, including intentionally biased design decisions or the unintended or unanticipated use or decisions relating to the way data is coded, collected, selected or used to train the algorithm. For example, algorithmic bias has been observed in search engine results and social media platforms. This bias can have impacts ranging from privacy violations to reinforcing social biases of race, gender, sexuality, and ethnicity. The study of algorithmic bias is most concerned with algorithms that reflect "systematic and unfair" discrimination. This bias has only recently been addressed in legal frameworks, such as the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (enforced in 2018) and the Artificial Intelligence Act (proposed in 2021 and adopted in 2024). As algorithms expand their ability to organize society, politics, institutions, and behavior, sociologists have become concerned with the ways in which unanticipated output and manipulation of data can impact the physical world. Because algorithms are often considered to be neutral and unbiased, they can inaccurately project greater authority than human expertise (in part due to the psychological phenomenon of automation bias), and in some cases, reliance on algorithms can displace human responsibility for their outcomes, without last mile thinking. Bias can enter into algorithmic systems as a result of pre-existing cultural, social, or institutional expectations; by how features and labels are chosen; because of technical limitations of their design; or by being used in unanticipated contexts or by audiences who are not considered in the software's initial design. Algorithmic bias has been cited in cases ranging from election outcomes to the spread of online hate speech. It has also arisen in criminal justice, healthcare, and hiring, compounding existing racial, socioeconomic, and gender biases. The relative inability of facial recognition technology to accurately identify darker-skinned faces has been linked to multiple wrongful arrests of black men, an issue stemming from imbalanced datasets. Problems in understanding, researching, and discovering algorithmic bias persist due to the proprietary nature of algorithms, which are typically treated as trade secrets. Even when full transparency is provided, the complexity of certain algorithms poses a barrier to understanding their functioning. Furthermore, algorithms may change, or respond to input or output in ways that cannot be anticipated or easily reproduced for analysis. In many cases, even within a single website or application, there is no single "algorithm" to examine, but a network of many interrelated programs and data inputs, even between users of the same service. A 2021 survey identified multiple forms of algorithmic bias, including historical, representation, and measurement biases, each of which can contribute to unfair outcomes. == Definitions == Algorithms are difficult to define, but may be generally understood as lists of instructions that determine how programs read, collect, process, and analyze data to generate a usable output. For a rigorous technical introduction, see Algorithms. Advances in computer hardware and software have led to an increased capability to process, store and transmit data. This has in turn made the design and adoption of technologies such as machine learning and artificial intelligence technically and commercially feasible. By analyzing and processing data, algorithms are the backbone of search engines, social media websites, recommendation engines, online retail, online advertising, and more. Contemporary social scientists are concerned with algorithmic processes embedded into hardware and software applications because of their political and social impact, and question the underlying assumptions of an algorithm's neutrality. The term algorithmic bias describes systematic and repeatable errors that create unfair outcomes, such as privileging one arbitrary group of users over others. For example, a credit score algorithm may deny a loan without being unfair, if it is consistently weighing relevant financial criteria. If the algorithm recommends loans to one group of users, but denies loans to another set of nearly identical users based on unrelated criteria, and if this behavior can be repeated across multiple occurrences, an algorithm can be described as biased. This bias may be intentional or unintentional (for example, it can come from biased data obtained from a worker that previously did the job the algorithm is going to do from now on). == Methods == Bias can be introduced to an algorithm in several ways. During the assemblage of a dataset, data may be collected, digitized, adapted, and entered into a database according to human-designed cataloging criteria. Next, programmers assign priorities, or hierarchies, for how a program assesses and sorts that data. This requires human decisions about how data is categorized, and which data is included or discarded. Some algorithms collect their own data based on human-selected criteria, which can also reflect the bias of human designers. Other algorithms may reinforce stereotypes and preferences as they process and display "relevant" data for human users, for example, by selecting information based on previous choices of a similar user or group of users. Beyond assembling and processing data, bias can emerge as a result of design. For example, algorithms that determine the allocation of resources or scrutiny (such as determining school placements) may inadvertently discriminate against a category when determining risk based on similar users (as in credit scores). Meanwhile, recommendation engines that work by associating users with similar users, or that make use of inferred marketing traits, might rely on inaccurate associations that reflect broad ethnic, gender, socio-economic, or racial stereotypes. Another example comes from determining criteria for what is included and excluded from results. These criteria could present unanticipated outcomes for search results, such as with flight-recommendation software that omits flights that do not follow the sponsoring airline's flight paths. Algorithms may also display an uncertainty bias, offering more confident assessments when larger data sets are available. This can skew algorithmic processes toward results that more closely correspond with larger samples, which may disregard data from underrepresented populations. == History == === Early critiques === The earliest computer programs were designed to mimic human reasoning and deductions, and were deemed to be functioning when they successfully and consistently reproduced that human logic. In his 1976 book Computer Power and Human Reason, artificial intelligence pioneer Joseph Weizenbaum suggested that bias could arise both from the data used in a program, but also from the way a program is coded. Weizenbaum wrote that programs are a sequence of rules created by humans for a computer to follow. By following those rules consistently, such programs "embody law", that is, enforce a specific way to solve problems. The rules a computer follows are based on the assumptions of a computer programmer for how these problems might be solved. That means the code could incorporate the programmer's imagination of how the world works, including their biases and expectations. While a computer program can incorporate bias in this way, Weizenbaum also noted that any data fed to a machine additionally reflects "human decision making processes" as data is being selected. Finally, he noted that machines might also transfer good information with unintended consequences if users are unclear about how to interpret the results. Weizenbaum warned against trusting decisions made by computer programs that a user doesn't understand, comparing such faith to a tourist who can find his way to a hotel room exclusively by turning left or right on a coin toss. Crucially, the tourist has no basis of understanding how or why he arrived at his destination, and a successful arrival does not mean the process is accurate or reliable. An early example of algorithmic bias resulted in as many as 60 women and ethnic minorities denied entry to St. George's Hospital Medical School per year from 1982 to 1986, based on implementation of a new computer-guidance assessment system that denied entry to women and men with "foreign-sounding names" based on historical trends in admissions. While many schools at the time employed similar biases in their selection process, St. George was most notable for automating said bias through the use of an algorithm, thus gaining the attention of people on a much
Read more →
LIFER/LADDER

LIFER/LADDER was one of the first database natural language processing systems. It was designed as a natural language interface to a database of information about US Navy ships. This system, as described in a paper by Hendrix (1978), used a semantic grammar to parse questions and query a distributed database. It was implemented in Interlisp. The LIFER/LADDER system could only support simple one-table queries or multiple table queries with easy join conditions. Some examples of queries it could accept: What are the length, width, and draft of the Kitty Hawk? When will Reeves achieve readiness rating C2? What is the nearest ship to Naples with a doctor on board? What ships are carrying cargo for the United States? Where are they going? Print the American cruisers’ current positions and states of readiness?
Read more →
Richard S. Sutton

Richard Stuart Sutton (born 1957 or 1958) is a Canadian computer scientist. He is a professor of computing science at the University of Alberta, fellow & Chief Scientific Advisor at the Alberta Machine Intelligence Institute, and a research scientist at Keen Technologies. Sutton is considered one of the founders of modern computational reinforcement learning. In particular, he contributed to temporal difference learning and policy gradient methods. He received the 2024 Turing Award with Andrew Barto. == Education and early life == Richard Sutton was born in either 1957 or 1958 in Toledo, Ohio, and grew up in Oak Brook, Illinois, a suburb of Chicago, United States. Sutton received his Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree in psychology from Stanford University in 1978 before taking a Master of Science (1980) and PhD (1984) in computer science from the University of Massachusetts Amherst supervised by Andrew Barto. His doctoral dissertation introduced actor-critic architectures and temporal credit assignment. He was influenced by Harry Klopf's work in the 1970s, which proposed that supervised learning is insufficient for AI or explaining intelligent behavior, and trial-and-error learning, driven by "hedonic aspects of behavior", is necessary. This focused his interest to reinforcement learning. == Career and research == Sutton held a postdoctoral research position at the University of Massachusetts Amherst in 1984. He worked at GTE Laboratories in Waltham, Massachusetts as principal member of technical staff from 1985 to 1994, then returned to the University of Massachusetts Amherst as a senior research scientist. He joined AT&T Labs Shannon Laboratory in Florham Park, New Jersey as principal technical staff member from 1998 to 2002. He has been a professor of computing science at the University of Alberta since 2003, where he helped establish the Reinforcement Learning and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. In 2017 he became a distinguished research scientist with Google DeepMind and helped launch DeepMind Alberta in Edmonton, a research office operated in close collaboration with the University of Alberta. 1984: Postdoctoral researcher, University of Massachusetts Amherst (Amherst, Massachusetts) 1985–1994: Principal member of technical staff, Computer and Intelligent Systems Laboratory, GTE Laboratories (Waltham, Massachusetts) 1995–1998: Senior research scientist, University of Massachusetts Amherst (Amherst, Massachusetts) 1998–2002: Principal technical staff member, Artificial Intelligence Department, AT&T Labs Shannon Laboratory (Florham Park, New Jersey) 2003–present: Professor of computing science, University of Alberta (Edmonton, Alberta) 2017–2023: Distinguished research scientist, DeepMind Alberta, Google DeepMind (Edmonton, Alberta) 2024–Present: Research scientist, Keen Technologies === Reinforcement learning === Sutton joined Andrew Barto in the early 1980s at UMass, trying to explore the behavior of neurons in the human brain as the basis for human intelligence, a concept that had been advanced by computer scientist A. Harry Klopf. Sutton and Barto used mathematics toward furthering the concept and using it as the basis for artificial intelligence. This concept became known as reinforcement learning and went on to becoming a key part of artificial intelligence techniques. Barto and Sutton used Markov decision processes (MDP) as the mathematical foundation to explain how agents (algorithmic entities) made decisions when in a stochastic or random environment, receiving rewards at the end of every action. Traditional MDP theory assumed the agents knew all information about the MDPs in their attempt toward maximizing their cumulative rewards. Barto and Sutton's reinforcement learning techniques allowed for both the environment and the rewards to be unknown, and thus allowed for these category of algorithms to be applied to a wide array of problems. Sutton returned to Canada in the 2000s and continued working on the topic which continued to develop in academic circles until one of its first major real world applications saw Google's AlphaGo program built on this concept defeating the then prevailing human champion. Barto and Sutton have widely been credited and accepted as pioneers of modern reinforcement learning, with the technique itself being foundational to the AI boom. In a 2019 essay, Sutton proposed the "bitter lesson", which criticized the field of AI research for failing to learn that "building in how we think we think does not work in the long run", arguing that "70 years of AI research [had shown] that general methods that leverage computation are ultimately the most effective, and by a large margin", beating efforts building on human knowledge about specific fields like computer vision, speech recognition, chess or Go. Sutton argues that large language models aren’t capable of learning on-the-job, and so new model architectures are required to enable continual learning. Sutton further argues that a special training phase will be unnecessary — the agent will learn on-the-fly, rendering large language models obsolete. In 2023, Sutton and John Carmack announced a partnership for the development of artificial general intelligence (AGI). === Awards and honors === Sutton has been a Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) since 2001; his nomination read: "For significant contributions to many topics in machine learning, including reinforcement learning, temporal difference techniques, and neural networks." In 2003, he received the President's Award from the International Neural Network Society and in 2013, the Outstanding Achievement in Research award from the University of Massachusetts Amherst. He received the 2024 Turing Award from the Association for Computing Machinery together with Andrew Barto; the citation of the award read: "For developing the conceptual and algorithmic foundations of reinforcement learning." In 2016, Sutton was elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. In 2021, he was elected Fellow of the Royal Society (FRS) of London. === Research === Sutton introduced temporal-difference methods for prediction and control, establishing convergence properties and practical algorithms. He proposed integrated learning and planning through the Dyna architecture. He co-developed the options framework for temporal abstraction in reinforcement learning. He co-authored the first modern policy gradient formulation with function approximation. Sutton's essay The Bitter Lesson argued that general methods that scale with computation dominate domain-specific approaches in the long run. His former doctoral students include David Silver and Doina Precup. === Selected publications === His publications include: == Personal life == Sutton became a Canadian citizen in 2015, and his renunciation of US citizenship was reported in 2017.
Read more →
Paradigms of AI Programming

Paradigms of AI Programming: Case Studies in Common Lisp (ISBN 1-55860-191-0) is a well-known programming book by Peter Norvig about artificial intelligence programming using Common Lisp. == History == The Lisp programming language has survived since 1958 as a primary language for artificial intelligence research. This text was published in 1992 as the Common Lisp standard was becoming widely adopted. Norvig introduces Lisp programming in the context of classic AI programs, including General Problem Solver (GPS) from 1959, ELIZA: Dialog with a Machine, from 1966, and STUDENT: Solving Algebra Word Problems, from 1964. The book covers more recent AI programming techniques, including Logic Programming, Object-Oriented Programming, Knowledge Representation, Symbolic Mathematics and Expert Systems.
Read more →
Personoid

Personoid is the concept coined by Stanisław Lem, a Polish science-fiction writer, in Non Serviam, from his book A Perfect Vacuum (1971). His personoids are an abstraction of functions of human mind and they live in computers; they do not need any human-like physical body. In cognitive and software modeling, personoid is a research approach to the development of intelligent autonomous agents. In frame of the IPK (Information, Preferences, Knowledge) architecture, it is a framework of abstract intelligent agent with a cognitive and structural intelligence. It can be seen as an essence of high intelligent entities. From the philosophical and systemics perspectives, personoid societies can also be seen as the carriers of a culture. According to N. Gessler, the personoids study can be a base for the research on artificial culture and culture evolution. == Personoids on TV and cinema == Welt am Draht (1973) The Thirteenth Floor (1999)
Read more →
Daisy Intelligence

Daisy Intelligence is a Canadian artificial intelligence (AI) company that provides data analysis services to help retailers, mainly grocers and supermarkets, to determine optimal pricing and promotional mix. The company also helps insurance companies detect fraudulent claims. The company uses a subset of AI known as reinforcement learning. In October 2019, the company moved from the suburban Vaughan, Ontario, to downtown Toronto, joining other AI and technology startups concentrated in the King Street East area. In 2019, the company was ranked No. 39 on The Globe and Mail's annual list of Canada's "top growing companies by three-year revenue growth."
Read more →
Partial-order planning

Partial-order planning is an approach to automated planning that maintains a partial ordering between actions and only commits ordering between actions when forced to, that is, ordering of actions is partial. Also this planning doesn't specify which action will come out first when two actions are processed. By contrast, total-order planning maintains a total ordering between all actions at every stage of planning. Given a problem in which some sequence of actions is needed to achieve a goal, a partial-order plan specifies all actions that must be taken, but specifies an ordering between actions only where needed. Consider the following situation: a person must travel from the start to the end of an obstacle course. The course is composed of a bridge, a see-saw, and a swing-set. The bridge must be traversed before the see-saw and swing-set are reachable. Once reachable, the see-saw and swing-set can be traversed in any order, after which the end is reachable. In a partial-order plan, ordering between these obstacles is specified only when needed. The bridge must be traversed first. Second, either the see-saw or swing-set can be traversed. Third, the remaining obstacle can be traversed. Then the end can be traversed. Partial-order planning relies upon the principle of least commitment for its efficiency. == Partial-order plan == A partial-order plan or partial plan is a plan which specifies all actions that must be taken, but only specifies the order between actions when needed. It is the result of a partial-order planner. A partial-order plan consists of four components: A set of actions (also known as operators). A partial order for the actions. It specifies the conditions about the order of some actions. A set of causal links. It specifies which actions meet which preconditions of other actions. Alternatively, a set of bindings between the variables in actions. A set of open preconditions. It specifies which preconditions are not fulfilled by any action in the partial-order plan. To keep the possible orders of the actions as open as possible, the set of order conditions and causal links must be as small as possible. A plan is a solution if the set of open preconditions is empty. A linearization of a partial order plan is a total order plan derived from the particular partial order plan; in other words, both order plans consist of the same actions, with the order in the linearization being a linear extension of the partial order in the original partial order plan. === Example === For example, a plan for baking a cake might start: go to the store get eggs; get flour; get milk pay for all goods go to the kitchen This is a partial plan because the order for finding eggs, flour and milk is not specified, the agent can wander around the store reactively accumulating all the items on its shopping list until the list is complete. == Partial-order planner == A partial-order planner is an algorithm or program which will construct a partial-order plan and search for a solution. The input is the problem description, consisting of descriptions of the initial state, the goal and possible actions. The problem can be interpreted as a search problem where the set of possible partial-order plans is the search space. The initial state would be the plan with the open preconditions equal to the goal conditions. The final state would be any plan with no open preconditions, i.e. a solution. The initial state is the starting conditions, and can be thought of as the preconditions to the task at hand. For a task of setting the table, the initial state could be a clear table. The goal is simply the final action that needs to be accomplished, for example setting the table. The operators of the algorithm are the actions by which the task is accomplished. For this example there may be two operators: lay (tablecloth), and place (glasses, plates, and silverware). === Plan space === The plan space of the algorithm is constrained between its start and finish. The algorithm starts, producing the initial state and finishes when all parts of the goal have been achieved. In the setting a table example, two types of actions exist that must be addressed: the put-out and lay operators. Four unsolved operators also exist: Action 1, lay-tablecloth, Action 2, Put-out (plates), Action 3, Put-out (silverware), and Action 4, Put-out (glasses). However, a threat arises if Action 2, 3, or 4 comes before Action 1. This threat is that the precondition to the start of the algorithm will be unsatisfied as the table will no longer be clear. Thus, constraints exist that must be added to the algorithm that force Actions 2, 3, and 4 to come after Action 1. Once these steps are completed, the algorithm will finish and the goal will have been completed. === Threats === As seen in the algorithm presented above, partial-order planning can encounter certain threats, meaning orderings that threaten to break connected actions, thus potentially destroying the entire plan. There are two ways to resolve threats: Promotion Demotion Promotion orders the possible threat after the connection it threatens. Demotion orders the possible threat before the connection it threatens. Partial-order planning algorithms are known for being both sound and complete, with sound being defined as the total ordering of the algorithm, and complete being defined as the capability to find a solution, given that a solution does in fact exist. == Partial-order vs. total-order planning == Partial-order planning is the opposite of total-order planning, in which actions are sequenced all at once and for the entirety of the task at hand. The question arises when one has two competing processes, which one is better? Anthony Barret and Daniel Weld have argued in their 1993 book, that partial-order planning is superior to total-order planning, as it is faster and thus more efficient. They tested this theory using Korf’s taxonomy of subgoal collections, in which they found that partial-order planning performs better because it produces more trivial serializability than total-order planning. Trivial serializability facilitates a planner’s ability to perform quickly when dealing with goals that contain subgoals. Planners perform more slowly when dealing with laboriously serializable or nonserializable subgoals. The determining factor that makes a subgoal trivially or laboriously serializable is the search space of different plans. They found that partial-order planning is more adept at finding the quickest path, and is therefore the more efficient of these two main types of planning. == The Sussman anomaly == Partial-order plans are known to easily and optimally solve the Sussman anomaly. Using this type of incremental planning system solves this problem quickly and efficiently. This was a result of partial-order planning that solidified its place as an efficient planning system. == Disadvantages to partial-order planning == One drawback of this type of planning system is that it requires a lot more computational power for each node. This higher per-node cost occurs because the algorithm for partial-order planning is more complex than others. This has important artificial intelligence implications. When coding a robot to do a certain task, the creator needs to take into account how much energy is needed. Though a partial-order plan may be quicker it may not be worth the energy cost for the robot. The creator must be aware of and weigh these two options to build an efficient robot.
Read more →
Attribute–value system

An attribute–value system is a basic knowledge representation framework comprising a table with columns designating "attributes" (also known as "properties", "predicates", "features", "dimensions", "characteristics", "fields", "headers" or "independent variables" depending on the context) and "rows" designating "objects" (also known as "entities", "instances", "exemplars", "elements", "records" or "dependent variables"). Each table cell therefore designates the value (also known as "state") of a particular attribute of a particular object. == Example of attribute–value system == Below is a sample attribute–value system. It represents 10 objects (rows) and five features (columns). In this example, the table contains only integer values. In general, an attribute–value system may contain any kind of data, numeric or otherwise. An attribute–value system is distinguished from a simple "feature list" representation in that each feature in an attribute–value system may possess a range of values (e.g., feature P1 below, which has domain of {0,1,2}), rather than simply being present or absent (Barsalou & Hale 1993). == Other terms used for "attribute–value system" == Attribute–value systems are pervasive throughout many different literatures, and have been discussed under many different names: Flat data Spreadsheet Attribute–value system (Ziarko & Shan 1996) Information system (Pawlak 1981) Classification system (Ziarko 1998) Knowledge representation system (Wong & Ziarko 1986) Information table (Yao & Yao 2002)
Read more →
NASA AI Assisted-Air Quality Monitoring Project

The NASA Expert-System Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer (ES-ITMS) Project was a public-private partnership to develop an artificial intelligence assisted, air quality monitoring system and was qualified for use on the Space Shuttle. The partnership was also the first cost and intellectual property shared public-partnership implemented by NASA, which used the commercial Research and Development Limited Partnership (RDLP) model that had been adopted by the Reagan Administration for Department of Defense semiconductor development, and recommended for use by NASA for space commercialization. The project partners included NASA, the University of Florida and Finnigan MAT Corporation, was organized and administered by the NASA Joint Enterprise Institute (subsequently NASA Joint Sponsored Program) and ran from 1988 through 1990. The partnership concluded final testing in 1991, generating four patents, expert system software and application protocol reports. The system was space qualified for use on the Shuttle and elements of the ES-ITMS system were integrated into the product Improvements for Finnigan MAT corporation. The success of the partnership lead NASA to create a pilot program to develop partnership business models as an ongoing management practice. == Purpose and objectives == The need to monitor air quality in confined spaces represented an increasing challenge for NASA's planned space missions and private sector facility managers facing the increased scrutiny of possible air contaminants. Up to the early 1980's, air quality monitors generally required large spaces and human technicians to interpret readings. This created a need for miniaturized air quality monitors that could generate reliable and accurate analytic results without on-site technician presence. NASA initiated projects to develop..."mobile and/or portable mass spectrometers" that evaluated the "tradeoff between instrumentation capabilities and space, weight and power considerations." NASA selected a "commercial ITMS instrument capable of generating electron ionization, chemical ionization and mass spectrometry data", to develop a linked expert system to accomplish analysis without human intervention. The commercial instrumentation was from Finnigan MAT corporation while the scientific expertise to support expert system development was available at the University of Florida. The project managers at NASA Ames created a single, integrated project using the RDLP model with objectives to: Develop AI/expert system software for instrument control (NASA's role) Expand sensitivity, selectivity and speed of the spectrometer (Univ Florida role) Expand the spectrometer analytic capability and automate the screening (Finnigan role) == Membership == The partnership included seven specialists from five member organizations: Federal Government National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Commercial Finnigan MAT Corporation (Thermo-Fisher Scientific) TGS Technology, Inc. Research Management University of Florida == Organization, management and administration == The technical project was organized into two development teams, one located in at the NASA Ames Research Center covering expert systems and analytic capabilities and one in Florida covering improved sensitivity and testing. The partnership management and administration was provided by a non-profit, partnership support organization: the Joint Enterprise Institute operating through San Francisco State University Foundation (SFSUF) with a NASA employee liaison, Syed Shariq. == Public-private partnership == The partnership structure was as a prototype test of a pilot NASA program to develop public-private partnership business models. The pilot program was known as the NASA Joint Sponsored Research Program (JSRP), which operated as the NASA Joint Enterprise Institute between 1988 and 1991. The partnership was the first public-private, research and development partnership implemented by NASA in response to national policy shifts to increase technology transfer and space commercialization. The partnership structure included a two year technology development and testing plan that cost $610,000, of which NASA funded $310,000, Finnigan $175,000 and the University of Florida $95,000. == Results and commercialization == The project generated patents (4), software (2) and application protocol reports (8). NASA gained use of the patents and jointly development software while Finnigan received commercial utilization rights. The results were commercialized within eighteen months of project completion. == Recognition == NASA recognized the project as a space qualified instrument. Its achievements were reported to the NASA Administrator, directly leading to establishment of the agency-wide Joint Sponsored Research Program.
Read more →
CatBoost

CatBoost is an open-source software library developed by Yandex. It provides a gradient boosting framework which, among other features, attempts to solve for categorical features using a permutation-driven alternative to the classical algorithm. It works on Linux, Windows, macOS, and is available in Python, R, and models built using CatBoost can be used for predictions in C++, Java, C#, Rust, Core ML, ONNX, and PMML. The source code is licensed under Apache License and available on GitHub. InfoWorld magazine awarded the library "The best machine learning tools" in 2017. along with TensorFlow, Pytorch, XGBoost and 8 other libraries. Kaggle listed CatBoost as one of the most frequently used machine learning (ML) frameworks in the world. It was listed as the top-8 most frequently used ML framework in the 2020 survey and as the top-7 most frequently used ML framework in the 2021 survey. As of April 2022, CatBoost is installed about 100000 times per day from PyPI repository == Features == CatBoost has gained popularity compared to other gradient boosting algorithms primarily due to the following features Native handling for categorical features Fast GPU training Visualizations and tools for model and feature analysis Using oblivious trees or symmetric trees for faster execution Ordered boosting to overcome overfitting == History == In 2009 Andrey Gulin developed MatrixNet, a proprietary gradient boosting library that was used in Yandex to rank search results. Since 2009 MatrixNet has been used in different projects at Yandex, including recommendation systems and weather prediction. In 2014–2015 Andrey Gulin worked with a team of researchers to start a new project called Tensornet which was aimed at solving the problem of "how to work with categorical data". Their work resulted in several proprietary Gradient Boosting libraries with different approaches to handling categorical data. In 2016 the Machine Learning Infrastructure team led by Anna Dorogush started working on Gradient Boosting in Yandex, including Matrixnet and Tensornet. They implemented and open-sourced the next version of Gradient Boosting library called CatBoost, which has support for categorical and text data, GPU training, model analysis, and visualization tools. CatBoost was open-sourced in July 2017 and is under active development in Yandex and the open-source community. == Application == JetBrains uses CatBoost for code completion Cloudflare uses CatBoost for bot detection Careem uses CatBoost to predict future destinations of the rides
Read more →
CoDi

CoDi is a cellular automaton (CA) model for spiking neural networks (SNNs). CoDi is an acronym for Collect and Distribute, referring to the signals and spikes in a neural network. CoDi uses a von Neumann neighborhood modified for a three-dimensional space; each cell looks at the states of its six orthogonal neighbors and its own state. In a growth phase a neural network is grown in the CA-space based on an underlying chromosome. There are four types of cells: neuron body, axon, dendrite and blank. The growth phase is followed by a signaling- or processing-phase. Signals are distributed from the neuron bodies via their axon tree and collected from connection dendrites. These two basic interactions cover every case, and they can be expressed simply, using a small number of rules. == Cell interaction during signaling == The neuron body cells collect neural signals from the surrounding dendritic cells and apply an internally defined function to the collected data. In the CoDi model the neurons sum the incoming signal values and fire after a threshold is reached. This behavior of the neuron bodies can be modified easily to suit a given problem. The output of the neuron bodies is passed on to its surrounding axon cells. Axonal cells distribute data originating from the neuron body. Dendritic cells collect data and eventually pass it to the neuron body. These two types of cell-to-cell interaction cover all kinds of cell encounters. Every cell has a gate, which is interpreted differently depending on the type of the cell. A neuron cell uses this gate to store its orientation, i.e. the direction in which the axon is pointing. In an axon cell, the gate points to the neighbor from which the neural signals are received. An axon cell accepts input only from this neighbor, but makes its own output available to all its neighbors. In this way axon cells distribute information. The source of information is always a neuron cell. Dendritic cells collect information by accepting information from any neighbor. They give their output, (e.g. a Boolean OR operation on the binary inputs) only to the neighbor specified by their own gate. In this way, dendritic cells collect and sum neural signals, until the final sum of collected neural signals reaches the neuron cell. Each axonal and dendritic cell belongs to exactly one neuron cell. This configuration of the CA-space is guaranteed by the preceding growth phase. == Synapses == The CoDi model does not use explicit synapses, because dendrite cells that are in contact with an axonal trail (i.e. have an axon cell as neighbor) collect the neural signals directly from the axonal trail. This results from the behavior of axon cells, which distribute to every neighbor, and from the behavior of the dendrite cells, which collect from any neighbor. The strength of a neuron-neuron connection (a synapse) is represented by the number of their neighboring axon and dendrite cells. The exact structure of the network and the position of the axon-dendrite neighbor pairs determine the time delay and strength (weight) of a neuron-neuron connection. This principle infers that a single neuron-neuron connection can consist of several synapse with different time delays with independent weights. == Genetic encoding and growth of the network == The chromosome is initially distributed throughout the CA-space, so that every cell in the CA-space contains one instruction of the chromosome, i.e. one growth instruction, so that the chromosome belongs to the network as a whole. The distributed chromosome technique of the CoDi model makes maximum use of the available CA-space and enables the growth of any type of network connectivity. The local connection of the grown circuitry to its chromosome, allows local learning to be combined with the evolution of grown neural networks. Growth signals are passed to the direct neighbors of the neuron cell according to its chromosome information. The blank neighbors, which receive a neural growth signal, turn into either an axon cell or a dendrite cell. The growth signals include information containing the cell type of the cell that is to be grown from the signal. To decide in which directions axonal or dendritic trails should grow, the grown cells consult their chromosome information which encodes the growth instructions. These growth instructions can have an absolute or a relative directional encoding. An absolute encoding masks the six neighbors (i.e. directions) of a 3D cell with six bits. After a cell is grown, it accepts growth signals only from the direction from which it received its first signal. This reception direction information is stored in the gate position of each cell's state. == Implementation as a partitioned CA == The states of our CAs have two parts, which are treated in different ways. The first part of the cell-state contains the cell's type and activity level and the second part serves as an interface to the cell's neighborhood by containing the input signals from the neighbors. Characteristic of our CA is that only part of the state of a cell is passed to its neighbors, namely the signal and then only to those neighbors specified in the fixed part of the cell state. This CA is called partitioned, because the state is partitioned into two parts, the first being fixed and the second is variable for each cell. The advantage of this partitioning-technique is that the amount of information that defines the new state of a CA cell is kept to a minimum, due to its avoidance of redundant information exchange. == Implementation in hardware == Since CAs are only locally connected, they are ideal for implementation on purely parallel hardware. When designing the CoDi CA-based neural networks model, the objective was to implement them directly in hardware (FPGAs). Therefore, the CA was kept as simple as possible, by having a small number of bits to specify the state, keeping the CA rules few in number, and having few cellular neighbors. The CoDi model was implemented in the FPGA based CAM-Brain Machine (CBM) by Korkin. == History == CoDi was introduced by Gers et al. in 1998. A specialized parallel machine based on FPGA Hardware (CAM) to run the CoDi model on a large scale was developed by Korkin et al. De Garis conducted a series of experiments on the CAM-machine evaluating the CoDi model. The original model, where learning is based on evolutionary algorithms, has been augmented with a local learning rule via feedback from dendritic spikes by Schwarzer.
Read more →