AI Code Vulnerability Scanner

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

• 

  Noisy text analytics

  Noisy text analytics is a process of information extraction whose goal is to automatically extract structured or semistructured information from noisy unstructured text data. While Text analytics is a growing and mature field that has great value because of the huge amounts of data being produced, processing of noisy text is gaining in importance because a lot of common applications produce noisy text data. Noisy unstructured text data is found in informal settings such as online chat, text messages, e-mails, message boards, newsgroups, blogs, wikis and web pages. Also, text produced by processing spontaneous speech using automatic speech recognition and printed or handwritten text using optical character recognition contains processing noise. Text produced under such circumstances is typically highly noisy containing spelling errors, abbreviations, non-standard words, false starts, repetitions, missing punctuations, missing letter case information, pause filling words such as “um” and “uh” and other texting and speech disfluencies. Such text can be seen in large amounts in contact centers, chat rooms, optical character recognition (OCR) of text documents, short message service (SMS) text, etc. Documents with historical language can also be considered noisy with respect to today's knowledge about the language. Such text contains important historical, religious, ancient medical knowledge that is useful. The nature of the noisy text produced in all these contexts warrants moving beyond traditional text analysis techniques. == Techniques for noisy text analysis == Missing punctuation and the use of non-standard words can often hinder standard natural language processing tools such as part-of-speech tagging and parsing. Techniques to both learn from the noisy data and then to be able to process the noisy data are only now being developed. == Possible source of noisy text == World Wide Web: Poorly written text is found in web pages, online chat, blogs, wikis, discussion forums, newsgroups. Most of these data are unstructured and the style of writing is very different from, say, well-written news articles. Analysis for the web data is important because they are sources for market buzz analysis, market review, trend estimation, etc. Also, because of the large amount of data, it is necessary to find efficient methods of information extraction, classification, automatic summarization and analysis of these data. Contact centers: This is a general term for help desks, information lines and customer service centers operating in domains ranging from computer sales and support to mobile phones to apparels. On an average a person in the developed world interacts at least once a week with a contact center agent. A typical contact center agent handles over a hundred calls per day. They operate in various modes such as voice, online chat and E-mail. The contact center industry produces gigabytes of data in the form of E-mails, chat logs, voice conversation transcriptions, customer feedback, etc. A bulk of the contact center data is voice conversations. Transcription of these using state of the art automatic speech recognition results in text with 30-40% word error rate. Further, even written modes of communication like online chat between customers and agents and even the interactions over email tend to be noisy. Analysis of contact center data is essential for customer relationship management, customer satisfaction analysis, call modeling, customer profiling, agent profiling, etc., and it requires sophisticated techniques to handle poorly written text. Printed Documents: Many libraries, government organizations and national defence organizations have vast repositories of hard copy documents. To retrieve and process the content from such documents, they need to be processed using Optical Character Recognition. In addition to printed text, these documents may also contain handwritten annotations. OCRed text can be highly noisy depending on the font size, quality of the print etc. It can range from 2-3% word error rates to as high as 50-60% word error rates. Handwritten annotations can be particularly hard to decipher, and error rates can be quite high in their presence. Short Messaging Service (SMS): Language usage over computer mediated discourses, like chats, emails and SMS texts, significantly differs from the standard form of the language. An urge towards shorter message length facilitating faster typing and the need for semantic clarity, shape the structure of this non-standard form known as the texting language.

  Read more →
• 

  Chainer

  Chainer is an open source deep learning framework written purely in Python on top of NumPy and CuPy Python libraries. The development is led by Japanese venture company Preferred Networks in partnership with IBM, Intel, Microsoft, and Nvidia. Chainer is notable for its early adoption of "define-by-run" scheme, as well as its performance on large scale systems. The first version was released in June 2015 and has gained large popularity in Japan since then. Furthermore, in 2017, it was listed by KDnuggets in top 10 open source machine learning Python projects. In December 2019, Preferred Networks announced the transition of its development effort from Chainer to PyTorch and it will only provide maintenance patches after releasing v7. == Define-by-run == Chainer was the first deep learning framework to introduce the define-by-run approach. The traditional procedure to train a network was in two phases: define the fixed connections between mathematical operations (such as matrix multiplication and nonlinear activations) in the network, and then run the actual training calculation. This is called the define-and-run or static-graph approach. Theano and TensorFlow are among the notable frameworks that took this approach. In contrast, in the define-by-run or dynamic-graph approach, the connection in a network is not determined when the training is started. The network is determined during the training as the actual calculation is performed. One of the advantages of this approach is that it is intuitive and flexible. If the network has complicated control flows such as conditionals and loops, in the define-and-run approach, specially designed operations for such constructs are needed. On the other hand, in the define-by-run approach, programming language's native constructs such as if statements and for loops can be used to describe such flow. This flexibility is especially useful to implement recurrent neural networks. Another advantage is ease of debugging. In the define-and-run approach, if an error (such as numeric error) has occurred in the training calculation, it is often difficult to inspect the fault, because the code written to define the network and the actual place of the error are separated. In the define-by-run approach, you can just suspend the calculation with the language's built-in debugger and inspect the data that flows on your code of the network. Define-by-run has gained popularity since the introduction by Chainer and is now implemented in many other frameworks, including PyTorch and TensorFlow. == Extension libraries == Chainer has four extension libraries, ChainerMN, ChainerRL, ChainerCV and ChainerUI. ChainerMN enables Chainer to be used on multiple GPUs with performance significantly faster than other deep learning frameworks. A supercomputer running Chainer on 1024 GPUs processed 90 epochs of ImageNet dataset on ResNet-50 network in 15 minutes, which is four times faster than the previous record held by Facebook. ChainerRL adds state of art deep reinforcement learning algorithms, and ChainerUI is a management and visualization tool. == Applications == Chainer is used as the framework for PaintsChainer, a service which does automatic colorization of black and white, line only, draft drawings with minimal user input.

  Read more →
• 

  Cleverpath AION Business Rules Expert

  Cleverpath AION Business Rules Expert (formerly Platinum AIONDS, and before that Trinzic AIONDS, and originally Aion) is an expert system and Business rules engine owned by Computer Associates by 2000. == History == The product was created around 1986 as "Aion" by the Aion company. In its initial release Aion was multi-platform and continues to be deliverable to the PC, Unixs, and Mainframe computer's. In addition it ties in seamlessly with a variety of databases including Oracle, Microsoft SQL Server, and ODBC. Aion was founded by Harry Reinstein, Larry Cohn, Garry Hallee, Scott Grinis, and others. From Scott Grinis's bio: Scott founded Aion, a company that developed expert systems and whose advanced inference engine and object technology were used by financial services and insurance firms to develop risk-scoring and underwriting applications. Harry Reinstein was quoted as saying: “Our biggest competitor was not AICorp, it was COBOL” Trinzic owned AION by 1993. A reference in a 1993 announcement indicates that Trinzic's formation was the result of a merger (paraphased): Trinzic set three development initiatives shortly after its formation from the merger of Aion Corp. and AICorp. The other initiatives -- adding SQL extensions to Aion/DS and evaluating the unbundling of some of that product's object-oriented programming capabilities -- are still active. Writing in 1993 Judith Hodges and Deborah Melewski give the date for the merger: Two rival artificial intelligence software vendors -- AICorp, Inc. and Aion Corp. -- merged in September 1992 to form Trinzic Corp. As part of the merger, redundant jobs were eliminated (20% of the combined work force), leaving a total work force of 245 employees worldwide. The new firm also boasted a combined installed base of more than 1,200 sites representing more than 10,000 software licenses. Although in the merger, technically AICorp bought Aion, as AICorp was a public company and Aion was still private, the reality was that Aion's leadership and technology subsumed AICorp's. Jim Gagnard, the CEO of Aion, became CEO of Trinzic and AICorp's flagship product, KBMS, was discontinued, while the Aion Development System continued to be enhanced and KBMS customers were assisted in converting to AIONDS, under the continued technical leadership of Garry Hallee and Scott Grinis. On August 1, 1994 Trinzic released version 6.4 of AIONDS saying, in part: Trinzic Corp., Palo Alto, Calif., has unveiled The Aion Development System (AionDS) Version 6.4, an upgrade to the company's development environment for building business process automation applications. Version 6.4 provides a visual development environment for Microsoft Windows or OS/2 PM applications using business rules. Trinzic was acquired by PLATINUM Technologies in 1995 which retained at least some of Trinzic's acquisitions Platinum Technologies was acquired by Computer Associates in 1999. CA changed the system's name to CA Aion Business Rules Expert" on or before 2009. It is currently (June 2011) at Release 11 on a wide range of supported platforms. == Applications using Aion == Aion has been used in a variety of industries including Energy, Insurance, Military, Aviation, and Banking. At one point an Aion expert system application written by Covia, LLC existed to do airport gate assignment. Colossus, a computer program, developed by Computer Sciences Corporation is the insurance industry’s leading expert system for assisting adjusters in the evaluation of bodily injury claims (aka "pain and suffering"). Colossus helps adjusters reduce variance in payouts on similar bodily injury claims through objective use of industry standard rules.

  Read more →
• 

  Effective accelerationism

  Effective accelerationism (e/acc) is a 21st-century ideological movement that advocates for an explicitly pro-technology stance. Its proponents believe that unrestricted technological progress, especially driven by artificial intelligence, is a solution to universal human problems, such as poverty, war, and climate change. They perceive themselves as a counterweight to more cautious views on technological innovation and often label their opponents derogatorily as "doomers" or "decels" (short for decelerationists). The movement carries utopian undertones and advocates for faster AI progress to ensure human survival and propagate consciousness throughout the universe. Although effective accelerationism has been described as a fringe movement and as cult-like, it has gained mainstream visibility in 2023. A number of high-profile Silicon Valley figures, including investors Marc Andreessen and Garry Tan, explicitly endorsed it by adding "e/acc" to their public social media profiles. == Etymology and central beliefs == Effective accelerationism, a portmanteau of "effective altruism" and "accelerationism", is a fundamentally techno-optimist movement. According to Guillaume Verdon, one of the movement's founders, its aim is for human civilization to "clim[b] the Kardashev gradient", meaning its purpose is for human civilization to rise to next levels on the Kardashev scale by maximizing energy usage. To achieve this goal, effective accelerationism wants to accelerate technological progress. It is strongly focused on artificial general intelligence (AGI), because it sees AGI as fundamental for climbing the Kardashev scale. The movement therefore advocates for unrestricted development and deployment of artificial intelligence. Regulation of artificial intelligence and government intervention in markets more generally is met with opposition. Many of its proponents have libertarian views and think that AGI will be most aligned if many AGIs compete against each other on the marketplace. The founders of the movement see it as rooted in Jeremy England's theory on the origin of life, which is focused on entropy and thermodynamics. According to them, the universe aims to increase entropy, and life is a way of increasing it. By spreading life throughout the universe and making life use up ever increasing amounts of energy, the universe's purpose would thus be fulfilled. == History == === Intellectual origins === While Nick Land is seen as the intellectual originator of contemporary accelerationism in general, the precise origins of effective accelerationism remain unclear. The earliest known reference to the movement can be traced back to a May 2022 newsletter published by four pseudonymous authors known by their X (formerly Twitter) usernames @BasedBeffJezos, @bayeslord, @zestular and @creatine_cycle. Effective accelerationism is an extension of the TESCREAL movement, being etymologically derived from Effective Altruism and heavily rooted in the older Silicon Valley subcultures of transhumanism and extropianism (which similarly emphasized the value of progress and resisted efforts to restrain the development of technology), alongside elements of singularitarianism, cosmism, and longtermism. It is also often considered to have emerged at least in part from the work of the Cybernetic Culture Research Unit (of which Nick Land was a leading member, alongside writers such as Mark Fisher and Sadie Plant). It is sometimes compared and contrasted with the work of philosopher Benjamin Bratton on planetary computation. === Disclosure of the identity of BasedBeffJezos === Forbes disclosed in December 2023 that the @BasedBeffJezos persona is maintained by Guillaume Verdon, a Canadian former Google quantum computing engineer and theoretical physicist. The revelation was supported by a voice analysis conducted by the National Center for Media Forensics of the University of Colorado Denver, which further confirmed the match between Jezos and Verdon. The magazine justified its decision to disclose Verdon's identity on the grounds of it being "in the public interest". On 29 December 2023 Guillaume Verdon was interviewed by Lex Fridman on the Lex Fridman Podcast and introduced as the "creator of the effective accelerationism movement". === Second Trump presidency === Following Donald Trump's victory in the 2024 U.S. presidential election, several prominent tech industry figures expressed support for positions aligned with effective accelerationism, particularly regarding deregulation and technological advancement. The potential appointment of Elon Musk to government roles focused on auditing federal programs drew support from venture capitalists who anticipated reduced regulatory oversight of the technology sector. Notable tech figures publicly connected these developments to the movement's principles. Aaron Levie, CEO of Box, expressed support for "removing unnecessary red tape and over-regulation", while Mark Pincus, early Facebook investor and Zynga founder, explicitly referenced "effective accelerationism" in his post-election commentary. Venture capitalists viewed the incoming administration as an opportunity to ease regulations that had affected technology mergers and acquisitions during the previous years. == Relation to other movements == === Traditional accelerationism === Traditional accelerationism, as developed by the British philosopher Nick Land, sees the acceleration of technological change as a way to bring about a fundamental transformation of current culture, society, and the political economy. This is done through capitalism, which Land views as "an autonomous force that’s reconfiguring society" that can overcome its limits if intensified. Land's work has also been characterized as concerning "the supposedly inevitable 'disintegration of the human species' when artificial intelligence improves sufficiently." While both concern ideas like a technocapital singularity and AGI progress, effective accelerationism focuses on using AGI for the greatest ethical good for conscious life and civilization (whether human or machine), as well as expanding civilization and maximizing energy usage in order to align with the "will of the universe". Land focuses on capitalist self-optimization as the driver of modernity, progress, and the eroding of existing social orders. Land has expressed support for effective accelerationism, while Thomas Murphy referred to the movement as "Nick Land diluted for LinkedIn". === Effective altruism === Effective accelerationism diverges from the principles of effective altruism, which prioritizes using evidence and reasoning to identify the most effective ways to altruistically improve the world. This divergence comes primarily from one of the causes effective altruists focus on – AI existential risk. Effective altruists (particularly longtermists) argue that AI companies should be cautious and strive to develop safe AI systems, as they fear that any misaligned AGI could eventually lead to human extinction. Proponents of effective accelerationism generally consider existential risks from AGI to be negligible, and claim that even if they were not, decentralized free markets would much better mitigate this risk than centralized governmental regulation. === Degrowth === Effective accelerationism stands in stark contrast with the degrowth movement, sometimes described by it as "decelerationism" or "decels". The degrowth movement advocates for reducing economic activity and consumption to address ecological and social issues. Effective accelerationism on the contrary embraces technological progress, energy consumption and the dynamics of capitalism, rather than advocating for a reduction in economic activity. == Reception == The "Techno-Optimist Manifesto", a 2023 essay by Marc Andreessen, has been described by the Financial Times and the German Süddeutsche Zeitung as espousing the views of effective accelerationism. Mother Jones also characterized it as expressing effective accelerationism and reported that Andressen cited Land's work. David Swan of The Sydney Morning Herald has criticized effective accelerationism due to its opposition to government and industry self-regulation. He argues that "innovations like AI needs thoughtful regulations and guardrails ... to avoid the myriad mistakes Silicon Valley has already made." During the 2023 Reagan National Defense Forum, U.S. Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo cautioned against embracing the "move fast and break things" mentality associated with "effective acceleration [sic]". She emphasized the need to exercise caution in dealing with AI, stating "that's too dangerous. You can't break things when you are talking about AI." In a similar vein, Ellen Huet argued on Bloomberg News that some of the ideas of the movement were "deeply unsettling", focusing especially on Guillaume Verdon's "post-humanism" and the view that "natural selection could lead AI to replace us as the dominant spe

  Read more →
• 

  Data remanence

  Data remanence is the residual representation of digital data that remains even after attempts have been made to remove or erase the data. This residue may result from data being left intact by a nominal file deletion operation, by reformatting of storage media that does not remove data previously written to the media, or through physical properties of the storage media that allow previously written data to be recovered. Data remanence may make inadvertent disclosure of sensitive information possible should the storage media be released into an uncontrolled environment (e.g., thrown in refuse containers or lost). Various techniques have been developed to counter data remanence. These techniques are classified as clearing, purging/sanitizing, or destruction. Specific methods include overwriting, degaussing, encryption, and media destruction. Effective application of countermeasures can be complicated by several factors, including media that are inaccessible, media that cannot effectively be erased, advanced storage systems that maintain histories of data throughout the data's life cycle, and persistence of data in memory that is typically considered volatile. Several standards exist for the secure removal of data and the elimination of data remanence. == Causes == Many operating systems, file managers, and other software provide a facility where a file is not immediately deleted when the user requests that action. Instead, the file is moved to a holding area (i.e. the "trash"), making it easy for the user to undo a mistake. Similarly, many software products automatically create backup copies of files that are being edited, to allow the user to restore the original version, or to recover from a possible crash (autosave feature). Even when an explicit deleted file retention facility is not provided or when the user does not use it, operating systems do not actually remove the contents of a file when it is deleted unless they are aware that explicit erasure commands are required, like on a solid-state drive. (In such cases, the operating system will issue the Serial ATA TRIM command or the SCSI UNMAP command to let the drive know to no longer maintain the deleted data.) Instead, they simply remove the file's entry from the file system directory because this requires less work and is therefore faster, and the contents of the file—the actual data—remain on the storage medium. The data will remain there until the operating system reuses the space for new data. In some systems, enough filesystem metadata are also left behind to enable easy undeletion by commonly available utility software. Even when undelete has become impossible, the data, until it has been overwritten, can be read by software that reads disk sectors directly. Computer forensics often employs such software. Likewise, reformatting, repartitioning, or reimaging a system is unlikely to write to every area of the disk, though all will cause the disk to appear empty or, in the case of reimaging, empty except for the files present in the image, to most software. Finally, even when the storage media is overwritten, physical properties of the media may permit recovery of the previous contents. In most cases however, this recovery is not possible by just reading from the storage device in the usual way, but requires using laboratory techniques such as disassembling the device and directly accessing/reading from its components. § Complications below gives further explanations for causes of data remanence. == Countermeasures == There are three levels commonly recognized for eliminating remnant data: === Clearing === Clearing is the removal of sensitive data from storage devices in such a way that there is assurance that the data may not be reconstructed using normal system functions or software file/data recovery utilities. The data may still be recoverable, but not without special laboratory techniques. Clearing is typically an administrative protection against accidental disclosure within an organization. For example, before a hard drive is re-used within an organization, its contents may be cleared to prevent their accidental disclosure to the next user. === Purging === Purging or sanitizing is the physical rewrite of sensitive data from a system or storage device done with the specific intent of rendering the data unrecoverable at a later time. Purging, proportional to the sensitivity of the data, is generally done before releasing media beyond control, such as before discarding old media, or moving media to a computer with different security requirements. === Destruction === The storage media is made unusable for conventional equipment. Effectiveness of destroying the media varies by medium and method. Depending on recording density of the media, and/or the destruction technique, this may leave data recoverable by laboratory methods. Conversely, destruction using appropriate techniques is the most secure method of preventing retrieval. == Specific methods == === Overwriting === A common method used to counter data remanence is to overwrite the storage media with new data. This is often called wiping or shredding a disk or file, by analogy to common methods of destroying print media, although the mechanism bears no similarity to these. Because such a method can often be implemented in software alone, and may be able to selectively target only part of the media, it is a popular, low-cost option for some applications. Overwriting is generally an acceptable method of clearing, as long as the media is writable and not damaged. The simplest overwrite technique writes the same data everywhere—often just a pattern of all zeros. At a minimum, this will prevent the data from being retrieved simply by reading from the media again using standard system functions. The UEFI in modern machines may offer an ATA class disk erase function as well. The ATA-6 standard governs secure erases specifications. Bitlocker is whole disk encryption and illegible without the key. Writing a fresh GPT allows a new file system to be established. Blocks will set empty but LBA read is illegible. New data will be unaffected and work fine. In an attempt to counter more advanced data recovery techniques, specific overwrite patterns and multiple passes have often been prescribed. These may be generic patterns intended to eradicate any trace signatures; an example is the seven-pass pattern 0xF6, 0x00, 0xFF, , 0x00, 0xFF, , sometimes erroneously attributed to US standard DOD 5220.22-M. One challenge with overwriting is that some areas of the disk may be inaccessible, due to media degradation or other errors. Software overwrite may also be problematic in high-security environments, which require stronger controls on data commingling than can be provided by the software in use. The use of advanced storage technologies may also make file-based overwrite ineffective (see the related discussion below under § Complications). There are specialized machines and software that are capable of doing overwriting. The software can sometimes be a standalone operating system specifically designed for data destruction. There are also machines specifically designed to wipe hard drives to the department of defense specifications DOD 5220.22-M. Writing zero to each block on hard disks and SSDs has the advantage of affording the firmware to deploy spare blocks when bad blocks are identified. Bitlocker has the advantage that data is illegible without the key. Seatools and other tools can erase disks with zero which is typical to revive old consumer class disks but they can wipe server disks albeit slowly. Modern 28TB and larger disks have an enormous number of LBA48 blocks. 40TB and 60TB disks will take proportionately longer times to wipe. ==== Feasibility of recovering overwritten data ==== Peter Gutmann investigated data recovery from nominally overwritten media in the mid-1990s. He suggested magnetic force microscopy may be able to recover such data, and developed specific patterns, for specific drive technologies, designed to counter such. These patterns have come to be known as the Gutmann method. Gutmann's belief in the possibility of data recovery is based on many questionable assumptions and factual errors that indicate a low level of understanding of how hard drives work. Daniel Feenberg, an economist at the private National Bureau of Economic Research, claims that the chances of overwritten data being recovered from a modern hard drive amount to "urban legend". He also points to the "18+1⁄2-minute gap" Rose Mary Woods created on a tape of Richard Nixon discussing the Watergate break-in. Erased information in the gap has not been recovered, and Feenberg claims doing so would be an easy task compared to recovery of a modern high density digital signal. As of November 2007, the United States Department of Defense considers overwriting acceptable for clearing magnetic media within the same security area/

  Read more →
• 

  The Synthetic Party

  Det Syntetiske Parti (English: The Synthetic Party) is a political party driven by artificial intelligence (AI), founded in May 2022 in Denmark. The party aims to represent non-voters and fringe political parties while raising awareness of AI's societal role and exploring how it can be integrated into democratic processes. == Founder == The founder and continuous party secretary is Asker Bryld Staunæs, a philosopher from Aarhus University and a conceptual artist. == Main goal == The political goals have been machine learned from texts by Danish fringe parties since 1970 and represent the 20 percent of Danes who do not vote in the election. The party is synthetic; as such, many of the policies, such as universal basic income, can be contradictory to one another. == International collaborations == The Synthetic Party has signed bilateral collaboration agreements with the Finnish AI Party and AI Party (Japan) concerning the development of a global project created around artificial intelligence and politics These collaborations were expanded during the exhibition-event Synthetic Summit (28 February – 13 April 2025) at Kunsthal Aarhus, curated by Computer Lars (Asker Bryld Staunæs) on behalf of The Synthetic Party. The summit staged parliamentary scenography, performances, and computer sculptures, and invited both the public and policymakers to encounter an international line-up of AI parties and virtual politicians. Aarhus University described the event as part of Staunæs's PhD research, positioning it as an international top-meeting of virtual politicians. Participants included the Japanese AI Party, the Swedish AI Party, the Finnish AI Party, Parker Politics (New Zealand), Lex AI (Brazil), the Simiyya collective (Egypt/Sweden), the Synthetic Party (Denmark), and Wiktoria Cukt 2.0 (Poland). As part of the summit, the one-day AI World Congress was held on 1 March 2025, structured as a performative assembly where each group participated through both machinic agents and human delegates. Sessions were chaired by participating parties, with Computer Lars delivering the opening presentation. Throughout the day, contributions were synthesized into a common record using a shared AI system. The congress concluded with the adoption of the Synthetic Summit Resolution, a collectively authored treaty of algorithmic governance. Signatories included Floor Kist and Nick Gerritsen (Parker Politics), Michihito Matsuda (Japanese AI Party), Emma Bexell (Swedish AI Party), Samee Haapa (Finnish AI Party), Pedro Markun (Lex AI), Kristian T. Madsen and Michael Birkebæk Jensen (NextGen Democracy / DemAI), Asker Bryld Staunæs, Benjamin Asger Krog Møller, Caroline Sofie Axelsson, Life with Artificials (The Synthetic Party), and Piotr Wyrzykowski (Wiktoria Cukt 2.0).

  Read more →
• 

  Juergen Pirner

  Juergen Pirner (born 1956) is the German creator of Jabberwock, a chatterbot that won the 2003 Loebner prize. Pirner created Jabberwock modelling the Jabberwocky from Lewis Carroll's poem of the same name. Initially, Jabberwock would just give rude or fantasy-related answers; but over the years, Pirner has programmed better responses into it. As of 2007 he has taught it 2.7 million responses. Pirner lives in Hamburg, Germany.

  Read more →
• 

  ChipTest

  ChipTest was a 1985 chess playing computer built by Feng-hsiung Hsu, Thomas Anantharaman and Murray Campbell at Carnegie Mellon University. It is the predecessor of Deep Thought which in turn evolved into Deep Blue. == History == ChipTest was based on a special VLSI-technology move generator chip developed by Hsu. ChipTest was controlled by a Sun-3/160 workstation and capable of searching approximately 50,000 moves per second. Hsu and Anantharaman entered ChipTest in the 1986 North American Computer Chess Championship, and it was only partially tested when the tournament began. It lost its first two rounds, but finished with an even score. In August 1987, ChipTest was overhauled and renamed ChipTest-M, M standing for microcode. The new version had eliminated ChipTest's bugs and was ten times faster, searching 500,000 moves per second and running on a Sun-4 workstation. ChipTest-M won the North American Computer Chess Championship in 1987 with a 4–0 sweep. ChipTest was invited to play in the 1987 American Open, but the team did not enter due to an objection by the HiTech team, also from Carnegie Mellon University. HiTech and ChipTest shared some code, and Hitech was already playing in the tournament. The two teams became rivals. Designing and implementing ChipTest revealed many possibilities for improvement, so the designers started on a new machine. Deep Thought 0.01 was created in May 1988 and the version 0.02 in November the same year. This new version had two customized VLSI chess processors and it was able to search 720,000 moves per second. With the "0.02" dropped from its name, Deep Thought won the World Computer Chess Championship with a perfect 5–0 score in 1989.

  Read more →
• 

  Richardson–Lucy deconvolution

  The Richardson–Lucy algorithm, also known as Lucy–Richardson deconvolution, is an iterative procedure for recovering an underlying image that has been blurred by a known point spread function. It was named after William Richardson and Leon B. Lucy, who described it independently. == Description == When an image is produced using an optical system and detected using photographic film, a charge-coupled device or a CMOS sensor, for example, it is inevitably blurred, with an ideal point source not appearing as a point but being spread out into what is known as the point spread function. Extended sources can be decomposed into the sum of many individual point sources, thus the observed image can be represented in terms of a transition matrix p operating on an underlying image: d i = ∑ j p i , j u j , {\displaystyle d_{i}=\sum _{j}p_{i,j}u_{j},} where u j {\displaystyle u_{j}} is the intensity of the underlying image at pixel j {\displaystyle j} , and d i {\displaystyle d_{i}} is the detected intensity at pixel i {\displaystyle i} . In general, a matrix whose elements are p i , j {\displaystyle p_{i,j}} describes the portion of light from source pixel j that is detected in pixel i. In most good optical systems (or in general, linear systems that are described as shift-invariant) the transfer function p can be expressed simply in terms of the spatial offset between the source pixel j and the observation pixel i: p i , j = P ( i − j ) , {\displaystyle p_{i,j}=P(i-j),} where P ( Δ i ) {\displaystyle P(\Delta i)} is called a point spread function. In that case the above equation becomes a convolution. This has been written for one spatial dimension, but most imaging systems are two-dimensional, with the source, detected image, and point spread function all having two indices. So a two-dimensional detected image is a convolution of the underlying image with a two-dimensional point spread function P ( Δ x , Δ y ) {\displaystyle P(\Delta x,\Delta y)} plus added detection noise. In order to estimate u j {\displaystyle u_{j}} given the observed d i {\displaystyle d_{i}} and a known P ( Δ i x , Δ j y ) {\displaystyle P(\Delta i_{x},\Delta j_{y})} , the following iterative procedure is employed in which the estimate of u j {\displaystyle u_{j}} (called u ^ j ( t ) {\displaystyle {\hat {u}}_{j}^{(t)}} ) for iteration number t is updated as follows: u ^ j ( t + 1 ) = u ^ j ( t ) ∑ i d i c i p i j , {\displaystyle {\hat {u}}_{j}^{(t+1)}={\hat {u}}_{j}^{(t)}\sum _{i}{\frac {d_{i}}{c_{i}}}p_{ij},} where c i = ∑ j p i j u ^ j ( t ) , {\displaystyle c_{i}=\sum _{j}p_{ij}{\hat {u}}_{j}^{(t)},} and ∑ j p i j = 1 {\displaystyle \sum _{j}p_{ij}=1} is assumed. It has been shown empirically that if this iteration converges, it converges to the maximum likelihood solution for u j {\displaystyle u_{j}} . Writing this more generally for two (or more) dimensions in terms of convolution with a point spread function P: u ^ ( t + 1 ) = u ^ ( t ) ⋅ ( d u ^ ( t ) ⊗ P ⊗ P ∗ ) , {\displaystyle {\hat {u}}^{(t+1)}={\hat {u}}^{(t)}\cdot \left({\frac {d}{{\hat {u}}^{(t)}\otimes P}}\otimes P^{}\right),} where the division and multiplication are element-wise, ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } indicates a 2D convolution, and P ∗ {\displaystyle P^{}} is the mirrored point spread function, or the inverse Fourier transform of the Hermitian transpose of the optical transfer function. In problems where the point spread function p i j {\displaystyle p_{ij}} is not known a priori, a modification of the Richardson–Lucy algorithm has been proposed, in order to accomplish blind deconvolution. == Derivation == In the context of fluorescence microscopy, the probability of measuring a set of number of photons (or digitalization counts proportional to detected light) m = [ m 0 , … , m K ] {\displaystyle \mathbf {m} =[m_{0},\dots ,m_{K}]} for expected values E = [ E 0 , … , E K ] {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} =[E_{0},\dots ,E_{K}]} for a detector with K + 1 {\displaystyle K+1} pixels is given by P ( m ∣ E ) = ∏ i K Poisson ⁡ ( E i ) = ∏ i K E i m i e − E i m i ! . {\displaystyle P(\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} )=\prod _{i}^{K}\operatorname {Poisson} (E_{i})=\prod _{i}^{K}{\frac {E_{i}^{m_{i}}e^{-E_{i}}}{m_{i}!}}.} Since in the context of maximum-likelihood estimation the aim is to locate the maximum of the likelihood function without concern for its absolute value, it is convenient to work with ln ⁡ ( P ) {\displaystyle \ln(P)} : ln ⁡ P ( m ∣ E ) = ∑ i K [ ( m i ln ⁡ E i − E i ) − ln ⁡ ( m i ! ) ] . {\displaystyle \ln P(\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} )=\sum _{i}^{K}[(m_{i}\ln E_{i}-E_{i})-\ln(m_{i}!)].} Moreover, since ln ⁡ ( m i ! ) {\displaystyle \ln(m_{i}!)} is a constant, it does not give any additional information regarding the position of the maximum, so consider α ( m ∣ E ) = ∑ i K [ m i ln ⁡ E i − E i ] , {\displaystyle \alpha (\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} )=\sum _{i}^{K}[m_{i}\ln E_{i}-E_{i}],} where α {\displaystyle \alpha } is something that shares the same maximum position as P ( m ∣ E ) {\displaystyle P(\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} )} . Now consider that E {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} } comes from a ground truth x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } and a measurement H {\displaystyle \mathbf {H} } which is assumed to be linear. Then E = H x , {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} =\mathbf {H} \mathbf {x} ,} where a matrix multiplication is implied. This can also be written in the form E m = ∑ n K H m n x n , {\displaystyle E_{m}=\sum _{n}^{K}H_{mn}x_{n},} where it can be seen how H {\displaystyle H} mixes or blurs the ground truth. It can also be shown that the derivative of an element of E {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} } , ( E i ) {\displaystyle (E_{i})} with respect to some other element of x j {\displaystyle x_{j}} can be written as It is easy to see this by writing a matrix H {\displaystyle \mathbf {H} } of, say, 5 × 5 and two arrays E {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} } and x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } of 5 elements and check it. This last equation can be interpreted as how much one element of x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } , say element i {\displaystyle i} , influences the other elements j ≠ i {\displaystyle j\neq i} (and of course the case i = j {\displaystyle i=j} is also taken into account). For example, in a typical case an element of the ground truth x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } will influence nearby elements in E {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} } but not the very distant ones (a value of 0 {\displaystyle 0} is expected on those matrix elements). Now, the key and arbitrary step: x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } is not known but may be estimated by x ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {\mathbf {x} }}} . Let's call x ^ old {\displaystyle {\hat {\mathbf {x} }}_{\text{old}}} and x ^ new {\displaystyle {\hat {\mathbf {x} }}_{\text{new}}} the estimated ground truths while using the RL algorithm, where the hat symbol is used to distinguish ground truth from estimator of the ground truth where ∂ ∂ x {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial }{\partial \mathbf {x} }}} stands for a K {\displaystyle K} -dimensional gradient. Performing the partial derivative of α ( m ∣ E ( x ) ) {\displaystyle \alpha (\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} (\mathbf {x} ))} yields the following expression: ∂ α ( m ∣ E ( x ) ) ∂ x j = ∂ ∂ x j ∑ i K [ m i ln ⁡ E i − E i ] = ∑ i K [ m i E i ∂ ∂ x j E i − ∂ ∂ x j E i ] = ∑ i K ∂ E i ∂ x j [ m i E i − 1 ] . {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial \alpha (\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} (\mathbf {x} ))}{\partial x_{j}}}={\frac {\partial }{\partial x_{j}}}\sum _{i}^{K}[m_{i}\ln E_{i}-E_{i}]=\sum _{i}^{K}\left[{\frac {m_{i}}{E_{i}}}{\frac {\partial }{\partial x_{j}}}E_{i}-{\frac {\partial }{\partial x_{j}}}E_{i}\right]=\sum _{i}^{K}{\frac {\partial E_{i}}{\partial x_{j}}}\left[{\frac {m_{i}}{E_{i}}}-1\right].} By substituting (1), it follows that ∂ α ( m ∣ E ( x ) ) ∂ x j = ∑ i K H i j [ m i E i − 1 ] . {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial \alpha (\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} (\mathbf {x} ))}{\partial x_{j}}}=\sum _{i}^{K}H_{ij}\left[{\frac {m_{i}}{E_{i}}}-1\right].} Note that H j i T = H i j {\displaystyle H_{ji}^{T}=H_{ij}} by the definition of a matrix transpose. And hence Since this equation is true for all j {\displaystyle j} spanning all the elements from 1 {\displaystyle 1} to K {\displaystyle K} , these K {\displaystyle K} equations may be compactly rewritten as a single vectorial equation ∂ α ( m ∣ E ( x ) ) ∂ x = H T [ m E − 1 ] , {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial \alpha (\mathbf {m} \mid \mathbf {E} (\mathbf {x} ))}{\partial \mathbf {x} }}=\mathbf {H} ^{T}\left[{\frac {\mathbf {m} }{\mathbf {E} }}-\mathbf {1} \right],} where H T {\displaystyle \mathbf {H} ^{T}} is a matrix, and m {\displaystyle \mathbf {m} } , E {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} } and 1 {\displaystyle \mathbf {1} } are vectors. Now, as a seemingly arbitrary but key step, let where 1 {\displaystyle \mathbf {1} } is a vector of ones of size K {\displaystyle K} (same as m {\displaystyle \mathbf {m} } , E {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} } and x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } ), and the d

  Read more →
• 

  Intelligent Robotics Group

  The Intelligent Robotics Group (IRG) is a research organization within the Intelligent Systems Division at the NASA Ames Research Center in California's Silicon Valley. IRG conducts applied research in the area of robotics and autonomy and is one of the principal organizations at NASA responsible for robotics expertise, along with groups at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and Johnson Space Center. The group's portfolio includes robotics in support of human exploration, perception and navigation, user interfaces, software architectures, and simulation. IRG developed the Astrobee free-flying robots on the International Space Station and was a primary contributor to the VIPER lunar rover in the areas of flight software, navigation, simulation, and mission operations. IRG has also conducted many robotic field test campaigns in support of spaceflight mission concept developments. These experiences led to the commercialization of the GigaPan system in collaboration with Carnegie Mellon University.

  Read more →
• 

  Political Declaration on Responsible Military Use of Artificial Intelligence and Autonomy

  The Political Declaration on Responsible Military Use of Artificial Intelligence and Autonomy is an international norms and arms control proposal by the U.S. government for artificial intelligence in the military. It was announced at the Summit on Responsible Artificial Intelligence in the Military Domain by Bonnie Jenkins, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control. As of January 2024, fifty-one countries have signed the declaration. The US government sees it as an extension of the Department of Defense Directive 3000.09 which is the current US policy on autonomous weapons. It covers areas such as Lethal autonomous weapons and weapons decision-making.

  Read more →
• 

  Graphics Turing test

  In computer graphics the graphics Turing test is a variant of the Turing test, the twist being that a human judge viewing and interacting with an artificially generated world should be unable to reliably distinguish it from reality. The original formulation of the test is: "The subject views and interacts with a real or computer generated scene. The test is passed if the subject can not determine reality from simulated reality better than a random guess. (a) The subject operates a remotely controlled (or simulated) robotic arm and views a computer screen. (b) The subject enters a door to a controlled vehicle or motion simulator with computer screens for windows. An eye patch can be worn on one eye, as stereo vision is difficult to simulate." The "graphics Turing scale" of computer power is then defined as the computing power necessary to achieve success in the test. It was estimated in, as 1036.8 TFlops peak and 518.4 TFlops sustained. Actual rendering tests with a Blue Gene supercomputer showed that current supercomputers are not up to the task scale yet. A restricted form of the graphic Turing test has been investigated, where test subjects look into a box, and try to tell whether the contents are real or virtual objects. For the very simple case of scenes with a cardboard pyramid or a styrofoam sphere, subjects were not able to reliably tell reality and graphics apart.

  Read more →
• 

  Rapid PHP Editor

  rapid PHP Editor is a PHP Editor that incorporates many functions such as AutoComplete, Syntax checker, debugger and many other tools for fast PHP development. Rapid PHP Editor also contain other development tools for helping on HTML, CSS, JavaScript and many other languages. Is part of a family of products covering most aspects of modern web development integrating as well many other capabilities used by developers. Some features: (X)HTML to HTML5 CSS to CSS3 Code intelligence Powerful search and replace Support for several frameworks Code beautifier FTP Explorer (FTP/SFTP/FTPS) File explorer Database explorer Code snippets Validators and Debuggers FAST, real fast Many other tools available (many more to describe all here) == History == Rapid PHP Editor was built using the Delphi programming language.

  Read more →
• 

  Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act

  The Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act, or SB 1047, was a failed 2024 California bill intended to "mitigate the risk of catastrophic harms from AI models so advanced that they are not yet known to exist". Specifically, the bill would have applied to models which cost more than $100 million to train and were trained using a quantity of computing power greater than 1026 integer or floating-point operations. SB 1047 would have applied to all AI companies doing business in California—the location of the company would not matter. The bill would have created protections for whistleblowers and required developers to perform risk assessments of their models prior to release, with guidance from the Government Operations Agency. It would also have established CalCompute, a University of California public cloud computing cluster for startups, researchers and community groups. == Background == The rapid increase in capabilities of AI systems in the 2020s, including the release of ChatGPT in November 2022, caused some researchers and members of the public to become concerned about the existential risks associated with increasingly powerful AI systems. Hundreds of tech executives and AI researchers, including two of the so-called "Godfathers of AI", Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio, signed a statement in May 2023 calling for the mitigation of the "risk of extinction from AI" to be a global priority alongside "pandemics and nuclear war". However, the plausibility of these risks is still widely debated. Strong regulation of AI has been criticized for purportedly causing regulatory capture by large AI companies like OpenAI, a phenomenon in which regulation advances the interest of larger companies at the expense of smaller competition and the public in general, although OpenAI ended up opposing the bill. Other advocates of AI regulation aim to prevent bias and privacy violations, rather than existential risks. For example, some experts who view existential concerns as overblown and unrealistic view them as a distraction from near-term harms of AI like discriminatory automated decision making. In the face of existential concerns, technology companies have made voluntary commitments to conduct safety testing, for example at the AI Safety Summit and AI Seoul Summit. In 2023, not long before the bill was proposed, Governor Newsom of California and President Biden issued executive orders on artificial intelligence. State Senator Wiener said SB 1047 draws heavily on the Biden executive order, and is motivated by the absence of unified federal legislation on AI safety. Historically, California has passed regulation on several tech issues itself, including consumer privacy and net neutrality, in the absence of action by Congress. == History == === Proposal and voting === The bill was authored by State Senator Scott Wiener. Wiener first proposed AI legislation for California through an intent bill called SB 294, the Safety in Artificial Intelligence Act, in September 2023. On February 7, 2024, Wiener introduced SB 1047. On May 21, SB 1047 passed the Senate 32–1. The bill was significantly amended by Wiener on August 15, 2024, in response to industry advice. Amendments included adding clarifications, and removing the creation of a "Frontier Model Division" and the penalty of perjury. On August 28, the bill passed the State Assembly 48–16. Then, due to the amendments, the bill was once again voted on by the Senate, passing 30–9. === Veto by governor === On September 29, Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed the bill. The deadline for California lawmakers to overrule Newsom's veto was November 30, 2024. Newsom cited concerns over the bill's regulatory framework targeting only large AI models based on their computational size, while not taking into account whether the models are deployed in high-risk environments. Newsom emphasized that this approach could create a false sense of security, overlooking smaller models that might present equally significant risks. He acknowledged the need for AI safety protocols but stressed the importance of adaptability in regulation as AI technology continues to evolve rapidly. Governor Newsom also committed to working with technology experts, federal partners, and research institutions, including the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, led by former California Supreme Court Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar; and Stanford University's Human-Centered AI (HAI) Institute, led by Dr. Fei-Fei Li. He announced plans to collaborate with these entities to advance responsible AI development, aiming to protect the public while fostering innovation. == Provisions == SB 1047 would have covered AI models with training compute over 1026 integer or floating-point operations and a cost of over $100 million. If a covered model is fine-tuned using more than $10 million, the resulting model would also have been covered. The bill would have defined critical harms with respect to four categories: Creation or use of a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapon Cyberattacks on critical infrastructure causing mass casualties or at least $500 million of damage Autonomous crimes causing mass casualties or at least $500 million of damage Other harms of comparable severity Developers would have needed to create a "safety and security protocol" before training covered models. Before deployment, they would have submitted a statement of compliance, confirming they took reasonable care to take measures to prevent covered models that pose an unreasonable risk of critical harms. The statement would have included risk assessments and descriptions of their compliance process. These rules would have applied to both covered models and their derivatives, including post-training modifications, with annual third-party audits required starting in 2026. Safeguards to reduce risk included the ability to shut down the model, which has been variously described as a "kill switch" and "circuit breaker". Whistleblowing provisions would have protected employees who report safety problems and incidents. Additionally, SB 1047 would have created a public cloud computing cluster called CalCompute, associated with the University of California, to support startups, researchers, and community groups that lack large-scale computing resources. === Compliance and supervision === SB 1047 would have required developers, beginning January 1, 2026, to annually retain a third-party auditor to perform an independent audit of compliance with the requirements of the bill, as provided. The Government Operations Agency would have reviewed the results of safety tests and incidents, and issue guidance, standards, and best practices. The bill would have created a Board of Frontier Models to supervise the application of the bill by the Government Operations Agency. It is would be composed of 9 members. == Reception == === Subjects of debate === Proponents of the bill described its provisions as simple and narrowly focused, with Sen. Scott Weiner describing it as a "light-touch, basic safety bill". This was disputed by critics of the bill, who described the bill's language as vague and criticized it as consolidating power in the largest AI companies at the expense of smaller ones. Proponents, in turn, argued that the bill only applies to models trained using more than 1026 FLOPS and with over $100 million, or fine-tuned with more than $10 million, and that the threshold could be increased if needed. The penalty of perjury was also a subject of debate, and was eventually removed through an amendment. The scope of the "kill switch" requirement was also reduced, following concerns from open-source developers. The use of the term "reasonable assurance" in the bill was also controversial, and it was eventually amended to "reasonable care". Critics then argued that "reasonable care" imposed an excessive burden by requiring confidence that models could not be used to cause catastrophic harm; proponents claimed that the standard did not require certainty and that it already applied to AI developers under existing law. === Support and opposition === Individual supporters of the bill included Turing Award recipients Yoshua Bengio and Geoffrey Hinton, Elon Musk, Bill de Blasio, Kevin Esvelt, Dan Hendrycks, Vitalik Buterin, OpenAI whistleblowers Daniel Kokotajlo and William Saunders, Lawrence Lessig, Sneha Revanur, Stuart Russell, Jan Leike, actors Mark Ruffalo, Sean Astin, and Rosie Perez, Scott Aaronson, and Max Tegmark. Over 120 Hollywood celebrities, including Mark Hamill, Jane Fonda, and J. J. Abrams, also signed a statement in support of the bill. Max Tegmark likened the bill's focus on holding companies responsible for the harms caused by their models to the FDA requiring clinical trials before a company can release a drug to the market. Organizations sponsoring the bill included the Center for AI Safety, Economic Security California and Encode. The la

  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 →