AI Coding Tools

Explore the best AI Coding Tools — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step how-to guides, curated by Aizhi.

• 

  Kuaishou

  Kuaishou Technology is a Chinese publicly traded partly state-owned holding company based in Haidian District, Beijing, that was founded in 2011 by Hua Su (Chinese: 宿华) and Cheng Yixiao (Chinese: 程一笑). The company, listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, is known for developing a mobile app for sharing users' short videos, a social network, and video special effects editor. The app is known as Kwai in many countries outside of China. It is also known as Snack Video in India, Pakistan and Indonesia. == Ownership and governance == Kuaishou's overseas team is led by the former CEO of the application 99, and staff from Google, Facebook, Netflix, and TikTok were recruited to lead the company's international expansion. The China Internet Investment Fund, a state-owned enterprise controlled by the Cyberspace Administration of China, holds a golden share ownership stake in Kuaishou. == History == Kuaishou is China's first short video platform that was developed in 2011 by engineer Hua Su and Cheng Yixiao. Prior to co-founding Kuaishou, Su Hua had worked for both Google and Baidu as a software engineer. The company is headquartered in Haidian District, Beijing. Kuaishou's predecessor "GIF Kuaishou" was founded in March 2011. GIF Kuaishou was a mobile app with which users could make and share GIF pictures. In 2013, Kuaishou became a short-video social platform. By 2013, the app had reached 100 million daily users. By 2019, it had exceeded 200 million active daily users. In March 2017, Kuaishou closed a US$350 million investment round that was led by Tencent. In January 2018, Forbes estimated the company's valuation to be US$18 billion. In April 2018, Kuaishou's app was briefly banned from Chinese app stores after China Central Television (CCTV) reported on the platform popularizing videos of teenage mothers. In 2019, the company announced a partnership with the People's Daily, an official newspaper of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, to help it experiment with the use of artificial intelligence in news. In June 2020, following the start of the 2020–2021 China–India skirmishes, the Government of India banned Kwai along with 58 other apps, citing "data and privacy issues". In January 2021, Kuaishou announced it was planning an initial public offering (IPO) to raise approximately US$5 billion. Kuaishou's stock completed its first day of trading at $300 Hong Kong dollars (HKD) (US$38.70), more than doubling its initial offer price, and causing its market value to rise to over $1 trillion HKD (US$159 billion). In February 2021, Kuaishou made a debut on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, with its shares soaring by 194% at the opening. The company subsequently encountered major setbacks as a result of heightened regulatory restrictions on Chinese internet firms, which contributed to its share price falling by nearly 80% from its post-IPO peak. By December 2021, Kuaishou announced a major reorganization, including the layoff of 30% of its staff, primarily targeting mid-level employees earning an annual salary of $157,000 or more. This restructuring aimed to cut costs and mitigate financial losses. In October 2022, state-owned Beijing Radio and Television Station took a minority ownership stake in Kuaishou. In April 2024, a Financial Times article citing current and former Kuaishou employees stated that the company has been running an ageist redundancy programme known internally as "Limestone", culling workers in their mid-30s. In June 2024, Kuaishou and the Sichuan international communication center launched a branch center in São Paulo, Brazil. In June 2024, Kuaishou released its diffusion transformer text-to-video model, Kling, which they claimed could generate two minutes of video at 30 frames per second and in 1080p resolution. The model has been compared to that of OpenAI's Sora text-to-video model. It is accessible to the public on Kuaishou's video editing app KwaiCut via signing up for a waitlist with a Chinese phone number. In December 2025, Kuaishou came under a cyberattack which led to a temporary influx of violent and pornographic content. == Popularity == As of 2019, it had a worldwide user base of over 200 million, leading the "Most Downloaded" lists of the Google Play and Apple App Store in eight countries, such as Brazil, where it was introduced in 2019. Its main short-video platform competitor was Douyin, which is known as TikTok outside China. Compared to Douyin, Kuaishou is more popular with older users living outside China's Tier 1 cities. Its initial popularity came from videos of Chinese rural life. The app is particularly well known for its "rustic" aesthetic and is popular among rural people. Kuaishou also relied more on e-commerce revenue than on advertising revenue compared to its main competitor. == Reception == Kwai (as the app is called outside of China) was banned in India in 2020 along with other short video apps like TikTok. Kuaishou then released the clone SnackVideo, which was subsequently also banned. The app is one of the most popular social media platforms in Brazil, where Kuaishou partnered with creators to make telenovela style content, and appeals to football fans by working with football teams CR Flamengo and Santos FC and sponsoring the tournament Copa América. Kwai was notable in Brazil for spreading information (and misinformation) about the COVID-19 vaccine and political misinformation. === Manjiao Wenhua === "Manjiao wenhua" (慢脚文化) is a sarcasm term on Chinese internet on the unethical or illegal contents on Kuaishou. State broadcaster China Central Television (CCTV) reported that many contents are about child pregnancy. "Dating, pregnancy, bearing a child...these are strictly prohibited in the real time by a minor, but these contents can easily shown to audiences here." In addition, many students from primary or secondary schools make a pose of smoking. Wang Zhenhui (王贞会) from CUPSL stated that these kinds of bad values will give negative effects to the minors.

  Read more →
• 

  Wasserstein GAN

  The Wasserstein Generative Adversarial Network (WGAN) is a variant of generative adversarial network (GAN) proposed in 2017 that aims to "improve the stability of learning, get rid of problems like mode collapse, and provide meaningful learning curves useful for debugging and hyperparameter searches". Compared with the original GAN discriminator, the Wasserstein GAN discriminator provides a better learning signal to the generator. This allows the training to be more stable when generator is learning distributions in very high dimensional spaces. == Motivation == === The GAN game === The original GAN method is based on the GAN game, a zero-sum game with 2 players: generator and discriminator. The game is defined over a probability space ( Ω , B , μ r e f ) {\displaystyle (\Omega ,{\mathcal {B}},\mu _{ref})} , The generator's strategy set is the set of all probability measures μ G {\displaystyle \mu _{G}} on ( Ω , B ) {\displaystyle (\Omega ,{\mathcal {B}})} , and the discriminator's strategy set is the set of measurable functions D : Ω → [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle D:\Omega \to [0,1]} . The objective of the game is L ( μ G , D ) := E x ∼ μ r e f [ ln ⁡ D ( x ) ] + E x ∼ μ G [ ln ⁡ ( 1 − D ( x ) ) ] . {\displaystyle L(\mu _{G},D):=\mathbb {E} _{x\sim \mu _{ref}}[\ln D(x)]+\mathbb {E} _{x\sim \mu _{G}}[\ln(1-D(x))].} The generator aims to minimize it, and the discriminator aims to maximize it. A basic theorem of the GAN game states that Repeat the GAN game many times, each time with the generator moving first, and the discriminator moving second. Each time the generator μ G {\displaystyle \mu _{G}} changes, the discriminator must adapt by approaching the ideal D ∗ ( x ) = d μ r e f d ( μ r e f + μ G ) . {\displaystyle D^{}(x)={\frac {d\mu _{ref}}{d(\mu _{ref}+\mu _{G})}}.} Since we are really interested in μ r e f {\displaystyle \mu _{ref}} , the discriminator function D {\displaystyle D} is by itself rather uninteresting. It merely keeps track of the likelihood ratio between the generator distribution and the reference distribution. At equilibrium, the discriminator is just outputting 1 2 {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{2}}} constantly, having given up trying to perceive any difference. Concretely, in the GAN game, let us fix a generator μ G {\displaystyle \mu _{G}} , and improve the discriminator step-by-step, with μ D , t {\displaystyle \mu _{D,t}} being the discriminator at step t {\displaystyle t} . Then we (ideally) have L ( μ G , μ D , 1 ) ≤ L ( μ G , μ D , 2 ) ≤ ⋯ ≤ max μ D L ( μ G , μ D ) = 2 D J S ( μ r e f ‖ μ G ) − 2 ln ⁡ 2 , {\displaystyle L(\mu _{G},\mu _{D,1})\leq L(\mu _{G},\mu _{D,2})\leq \cdots \leq \max _{\mu _{D}}L(\mu _{G},\mu _{D})=2D_{JS}(\mu _{ref}\|\mu _{G})-2\ln 2,} so we see that the discriminator is actually lower-bounding D J S ( μ r e f ‖ μ G ) {\displaystyle D_{JS}(\mu _{ref}\|\mu _{G})} . === Wasserstein distance === Thus, we see that the point of the discriminator is mainly as a critic to provide feedback for the generator, about "how far it is from perfection", where "far" is defined as Jensen–Shannon divergence. Naturally, this brings the possibility of using a different criteria of farness. There are many possible divergences to choose from, such as the f-divergence family, which would give the f-GAN. The Wasserstein GAN is obtained by using the Wasserstein metric, which satisfies a "dual representation theorem" that renders it highly efficient to compute: A proof can be found in the main page on Wasserstein metric. == Definition == By the Kantorovich-Rubenstein duality, the definition of Wasserstein GAN is clear:A Wasserstein GAN game is defined by a probability space ( Ω , B , μ r e f ) {\displaystyle (\Omega ,{\mathcal {B}},\mu _{ref})} , where Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } is a metric space, and a constant K > 0 {\displaystyle K>0} . There are 2 players: generator and discriminator (also called "critic"). The generator's strategy set is the set of all probability measures μ G {\displaystyle \mu _{G}} on ( Ω , B ) {\displaystyle (\Omega ,{\mathcal {B}})} . The discriminator's strategy set is the set of measurable functions of type D : Ω → R {\displaystyle D:\Omega \to \mathbb {R} } with bounded Lipschitz-norm: ‖ D ‖ L ≤ K {\displaystyle \|D\|_{L}\leq K} . The Wasserstein GAN game is a zero-sum game, with objective function L W G A N ( μ G , D ) := E x ∼ μ G [ D ( x ) ] − E x ∼ μ r e f [ D ( x ) ] . {\displaystyle L_{WGAN}(\mu _{G},D):=\mathbb {E} _{x\sim \mu _{G}}[D(x)]-\mathbb {E} _{x\sim \mu _{ref}}[D(x)].} The generator goes first, and the discriminator goes second. The generator aims to minimize the objective, and the discriminator aims to maximize the objective: min μ G max D L W G A N ( μ G , D ) . {\displaystyle \min _{\mu _{G}}\max _{D}L_{WGAN}(\mu _{G},D).} By the Kantorovich-Rubenstein duality, for any generator strategy μ G {\displaystyle \mu _{G}} , the optimal reply by the discriminator is D ∗ {\displaystyle D^{}} , such that L W G A N ( μ G , D ∗ ) = K ⋅ W 1 ( μ G , μ r e f ) . {\displaystyle L_{WGAN}(\mu _{G},D^{})=K\cdot W_{1}(\mu _{G},\mu _{ref}).} Consequently, if the discriminator is good, the generator would be constantly pushed to minimize W 1 ( μ G , μ r e f ) {\displaystyle W_{1}(\mu _{G},\mu _{ref})} , and the optimal strategy for the generator is just μ G = μ r e f {\displaystyle \mu _{G}=\mu _{ref}} , as it should. == Comparison with GAN == In the Wasserstein GAN game, the discriminator provides a better gradient than in the GAN game. Consider for example a game on the real line where both μ G {\displaystyle \mu _{G}} and μ r e f {\displaystyle \mu _{ref}} are Gaussian. Then the optimal Wasserstein critic D W G A N {\displaystyle D_{WGAN}} and the optimal GAN discriminator D {\displaystyle D} are plotted as below: For fixed discriminator, the generator needs to minimize the following objectives: For GAN, E x ∼ μ G [ ln ⁡ ( 1 − D ( x ) ) ] {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} _{x\sim \mu _{G}}[\ln(1-D(x))]} . For Wasserstein GAN, E x ∼ μ G [ D W G A N ( x ) ] {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} _{x\sim \mu _{G}}[D_{WGAN}(x)]} . Let μ G {\displaystyle \mu _{G}} be parametrized by θ {\displaystyle \theta } , then we can perform stochastic gradient descent by using two unbiased estimators of the gradient: ∇ θ E x ∼ μ G [ ln ⁡ ( 1 − D ( x ) ) ] = E x ∼ μ G [ ln ⁡ ( 1 − D ( x ) ) ⋅ ∇ θ ln ⁡ ρ μ G ( x ) ] {\displaystyle \nabla _{\theta }\mathbb {E} _{x\sim \mu _{G}}[\ln(1-D(x))]=\mathbb {E} _{x\sim \mu _{G}}[\ln(1-D(x))\cdot \nabla _{\theta }\ln \rho _{\mu _{G}}(x)]} ∇ θ E x ∼ μ G [ D W G A N ( x ) ] = E x ∼ μ G [ D W G A N ( x ) ⋅ ∇ θ ln ⁡ ρ μ G ( x ) ] {\displaystyle \nabla _{\theta }\mathbb {E} _{x\sim \mu _{G}}[D_{WGAN}(x)]=\mathbb {E} _{x\sim \mu _{G}}[D_{WGAN}(x)\cdot \nabla _{\theta }\ln \rho _{\mu _{G}}(x)]} where we used the reparameterization trick. As shown, the generator in GAN is motivated to let its μ G {\displaystyle \mu _{G}} "slide down the peak" of ln ⁡ ( 1 − D ( x ) ) {\displaystyle \ln(1-D(x))} . Similarly for the generator in Wasserstein GAN. For Wasserstein GAN, D W G A N {\displaystyle D_{WGAN}} has gradient 1 almost everywhere, while for GAN, ln ⁡ ( 1 − D ) {\displaystyle \ln(1-D)} has flat gradient in the middle, and steep gradient elsewhere. As a result, the variance for the estimator in GAN is usually much larger than that in Wasserstein GAN. See also Figure 3 of. The problem with D J S {\displaystyle D_{JS}} is much more severe in actual machine learning situations. Consider training a GAN to generate ImageNet, a collection of photos of size 256-by-256. The space of all such photos is R 256 2 {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{256^{2}}} , and the distribution of ImageNet pictures, μ r e f {\displaystyle \mu _{ref}} , concentrates on a manifold of much lower dimension in it. Consequently, any generator strategy μ G {\displaystyle \mu _{G}} would almost surely be entirely disjoint from μ r e f {\displaystyle \mu _{ref}} , making D J S ( μ G ‖ μ r e f ) = + ∞ {\displaystyle D_{JS}(\mu _{G}\|\mu _{ref})=+\infty } . Thus, a good discriminator can almost perfectly distinguish μ r e f {\displaystyle \mu _{ref}} from μ G {\displaystyle \mu _{G}} , as well as any μ G ′ {\displaystyle \mu _{G}'} close to μ G {\displaystyle \mu _{G}} . Thus, the gradient ∇ μ G L ( μ G , D ) ≈ 0 {\displaystyle \nabla _{\mu _{G}}L(\mu _{G},D)\approx 0} , creating no learning signal for the generator. Detailed theorems can be found in. == Training Wasserstein GANs == Training the generator in Wasserstein GAN is just gradient descent, the same as in GAN (or most deep learning methods), but training the discriminator is different, as the discriminator is now restricted to have bounded Lipschitz norm. There are several methods for this. === Upper-bounding the Lipschitz norm === Let the discriminator function D {\displaystyle D} to be implemented by a multilayer perceptron: D = D n ∘ D n − 1 ∘ ⋯ ∘ D 1 {\displaystyle D=D_{n}\circ D_{n-1}\circ \cdots \circ D_{1}} where D i ( x ) = h ( W i x ) {\displaystyle D_{i}(x)=h(W_

  Read more →
• 

  Tf–idf

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

  Read more →
• 

  Top 10 AI Coding Assistants Compared (2026)

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

  Read more →
• 

  AI content watermarking

  AI content watermarking is the process of embedding imperceptible yet detectable signals into content generated by artificial intelligence systems, such as text, images, audio, or video. The technique allows the content to be traced and identified as machine-generated without compromising its quality for the end user. AI watermarking has emerged as a key approach to address growing concerns about misinformation, deepfakes, copyright infringement, and the traceability of synthetic content in the context of the rapid development of generative artificial intelligence. Unlike traditional visible watermarks used in photography, AI content watermarks are typically invisible to humans and can only be detected and deciphered algorithmically. The concept is distinct from the watermarking of AI models themselves (to prevent model theft) and from the watermarking of training data (to combat unauthorized data use). Modern AI watermarking schemes are typically formalized as a pair of algorithms, an embedding (or generation) algorithm and a detection algorithm, sharing a secret key, whose performance is evaluated along three competing axes: quality (the watermark must not noticeably degrade outputs), detectability (the watermark must be statistically distinguishable from unwatermarked content), and robustness (the watermark must persist under adversarial or incidental modifications). == Background == Digital watermarking has been used for decades to protect physical and digital media, from paper currency to photographs. Classical schemes typically embedded a fixed bit-string into a fixed cover signal, with robustness criteria defined against a small fixed set of distortions such as JPEG compression or additive Gaussian noise. The rapid advancement of generative AI in the early 2020s, however, created a new and qualitatively different demand: rather than protecting a single artifact, watermarks for AI content must be embedded automatically across an open-ended distribution of generated outputs while remaining robust to a much wider class of adversarial transformations, including paraphrasing, image regeneration via diffusion models, and re-recording. Large image generation models such as DALL-E, Stable Diffusion, and Midjourney, along with large language models like ChatGPT, made it possible to produce highly realistic synthetic text, images, audio, and video at scale, raising significant ethical and security concerns. In July 2023, the Biden administration secured voluntary commitments from leading AI companies, including OpenAI, Alphabet, Meta, and Amazon, to develop watermarking and other provenance technologies to help users identify AI-generated content. == Formal definitions and design goals == Most modern AI watermarking schemes can be formalized as a pair of algorithms ( W m , D e t e c t ) {\displaystyle ({\mathsf {Wm}},{\mathsf {Detect}})} parameterized by a secret key k {\displaystyle k} . The embedding algorithm W m {\displaystyle {\mathsf {Wm}}} takes a generative model M {\displaystyle M} (and optionally a prompt) and returns a watermarked output x {\displaystyle x} ; the detection algorithm D e t e c t ( x , k ) {\displaystyle {\mathsf {Detect}}(x,k)} outputs a real-valued score (typically a p-value or log-likelihood ratio) used to decide whether x {\displaystyle x} was produced by the watermarked generator. The literature evaluates such schemes along several largely conflicting criteria: Criteria for evaluation include imperceptibility or quality preservation, measured for text via perplexity and human preference judgments, and for images and audio via metrics such as PSNR, SSIM, LPIPS, or PESQ. Detectability is typically expressed as the true positive rate at a fixed false positive rate (e.g. 1% or 10^-6), or as the number of tokens or pixels needed to reach a given confidence level. Robustness refers to the requirement that the watermark should survive expected modifications like JPEG or MP3 compression, cropping, noise, paraphrasing, or machine translation. Distortion-freeness is a stronger property requiring that the marginal distribution of any single watermarked output be statistically identical to the unwatermarked model's distribution. Schemes due to Aaronson, Christ et al., and Kuditipudi et al. are distortion-free in this sense, while the original Kirchenbauer et al. scheme is not. Forgery resistance or unforgeability means an adversary without the secret key should be unable to produce content that passes detection. == Techniques == AI watermarking techniques vary significantly depending on the type of content being watermarked. At its core, the process involves two main stages: embedding (or encoding) the watermark, and detection. There are two primary methods for embedding: watermarking during content generation, which requires access to the AI model itself but is generally more robust, and post-generation watermarking, which can be applied to content from any source, including closed-source models. Watermarks can be broadly classified as visible, including overt marks such as logos or text overlays, or imperceptible, which are detectable only by algorithms. They can also be classified by durability: robust watermarks are designed to withstand common transformations such as compression, cropping, and re-encoding, while fragile watermarks are easily destroyed by any alteration, making them useful for tamper detection. A further axis distinguishes zero-bit watermarks, which only signal "this content was generated by model M," from multi-bit watermarks, which embed an arbitrary payload (such as a user identifier) that can be recovered at detection time. === Text === Text watermarking is considered one of the most challenging modalities because natural language offers relatively limited redundancy compared to images or audio. Modern approaches for large language models alter the autoregressive sampling process so that some statistical signature is left in the choice of tokens, while leaving the surface form of the text unchanged. The literature distinguishes three main families of generation-time text watermarks. Logit-biasing schemes (e.g. KGW) add a fixed bias δ {\displaystyle \delta } to a pseudorandomly selected subset of vocabulary logits before softmax sampling. Reweighting or sampling-based schemes (e.g. SynthID-Text) compose multiple pseudorandom tournaments over the model's full distribution. Distortion-free schemes based on the Gumbel-max trick or inverse transform sampling (Aaronson 2022; Kuditipudi et al. 2023; Christ et al. 2024) preserve the marginal output distribution of the model. ==== KGW: token-probability shifting ==== The pioneering "green list / red list" scheme of Kirchenbauer et al. (KGW), introduced at ICML 2023, is the foundation for most subsequent text watermarks. At each decoding step t {\displaystyle t} , a pseudorandom function (PRF) keyed by a secret k {\displaystyle k} is applied to a context window of h {\displaystyle h} previous tokens to deterministically partition the vocabulary V {\displaystyle V} of size N {\displaystyle N} into a "green list" G ⊂ V {\displaystyle G\subset V} of size γ N {\displaystyle \gamma N} and its complement, the "red list" R = V ∖ G {\displaystyle R=V\setminus G} , where γ ∈ ( 0 , 1 ) {\displaystyle \gamma \in (0,1)} (typically γ = 1 / 2 {\displaystyle \gamma =1/2} ) is the green fraction. A logits processor then increments every green-list logit by a fixed bias δ > 0 {\displaystyle \delta >0} before softmax: ℓ v ′ = ℓ v + δ ⋅ 1 [ v ∈ G ] {\displaystyle \ell '_{v}=\ell _{v}+\delta \cdot \mathbf {1} [v\in G]} so that, after sampling, green tokens are over-represented but generation is not constrained to green tokens alone; high-entropy positions tolerate the bias gracefully, while low-entropy positions (where one token dominates the logits) override the watermark and preserve correctness on factual content. Detection requires only the secret key and the candidate text, not the language model itself. The detector recomputes the partition g ( ⋅ ) {\displaystyle g(\cdot )} for each token, counts the number of green hits | G | hits {\displaystyle |G|_{\text{hits}}} in a sequence of length T {\displaystyle T} , and computes a one-proportion z-test statistic: z = | G | hits − γ T T γ ( 1 − γ ) {\displaystyle z={\frac {|G|_{\text{hits}}-\gamma T}{\sqrt {T\gamma (1-\gamma )}}}} Under the null hypothesis that the text was written by an unwatermarked source (human or another model), the green-hit count is approximately binomially distributed with mean γ T {\displaystyle \gamma T} ; a large positive z {\displaystyle z} rejects the null hypothesis. The original paper reports that fewer than 25 watermarked tokens are sufficient to detect a watermark with a false positive rate below 10^-5 on the OPT-1.3B model. A follow-up study by the same group documented robustness under temperature sampling, top-p (nucleus) sampling, and human paraphrasing, and proposed sliding-window

  Read more →
• 

  Liz Liddy

  Elizabeth DuRoss Liddy (May 12, 1944 – August 21, 2025) was an American computer scientist and academic who was professor of information science and dean of the Syracuse University School of Information Studies. She was a pioneer in the field of natural language processing. == Early life and education == Liddy was born in Dayton, Ohio, on May 14, 1944, and grew up in Utica, New York. She was one of five children, all of whom worked in her father's family business. Liddy attended St. Francis DeSalle High School, where she was awarded a Regent's Scholarship, and eventually attended Daemen College. She was literary editor of her high school year book and edited a literary magazine during her time at college. At Daemen College Liddy studied English language and literature. After graduating Liddy remained in New York, where she volunteered in an elementary school library. She joined the Syracuse University School of Information Studies in 1983, where she started a graduate program in library science. She worked as a faculty librarian at Onondaga Community College whilst earning her degree. Here Liddy worked as a Visiting assistant professor, whilst completing her doctorate part-time in information transfer. Her dissertation research involved natural language processing, a computerized approach to analyzing text. She was hired to the faculty at Syracuse University whilst completing her PhD. == Research and career == In 1994 Liddy was the founding President of TextWise, a semantics-based search engine. The first product she developed was called Document Retrieval Using Linguistic Knowledge (DR-LINK). She left TextWise in 1999, after growing the number of employees to over 50. She started the Syracuse University Center for Natural Language Processing in 1999, and was honored with the university's Outstanding Alumni Award the following year. Liddy was appointed Dean of the School of Information Studies (iSchool) in 2008, and held the position for over ten years. She temporarily left the role in 2015. The school was transformed under her leadership, increasing the enrollment of students by over 70% and launching a graduate certificate in data science. She raised over $20 million to support research and development at Syracuse University. She chaired the iSchool Organization, which connects information science schools all over the world, from 2012 to 2014. Liddy worked to increase the representation of women at the iSchool, through initiatives such as the IT Girls Overnight Retreat – an annual weekend to introduce high school girls to Information Technology. She improved the career development programs of students at Syracuse University, increasing student employment to almost 100% post graduation. Liddy retired as Dean of the iSchool in 2019. === Selected innovations === US 6026388, Liddy, Elizabeth D., "User interface and other enhancements for natural language information retrieval system and method", published August 16, 1995, issued February 15, 2000 US 5963940, Liddy, Elizabeth D., "Natural language information retrieval system and method", published August 16, 1995, issued October 5, 1999 US 6006221, Liddy, Elizabeth D., "Multilingual document retrieval system and method using semantic vector matching", published August 16, 1995, issued December 21, 1999 == Personal life and death == Liddy was married shortly after graduating Daemen College in 1966. She had three children. Liddy died in Charlotte, North Carolina, on August 21, 2025, at the age of 81.

  Read more →
• 

  Anil K. Jain (computer scientist, born 1948)

  Anil Kumar Jain (born 1948) is an Indian-American computer scientist and University Distinguished Professor in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at Michigan State University. He is one of the most highly cited researchers in computer science, and is internationally recognized for his foundational contributions to pattern recognition, computer vision, and biometric recognition, particularly in fingerprint recognition and face recognition. Jain is a member of the United States National Academy of Engineering, a Foreign Member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and a Foreign Fellow of the Indian National Academy of Engineering. He is a Fellow of the ACM, IEEE, AAAS, IAPR, and SPIE. His research has shaped the field of biometrics and has been applied in systems used worldwide for identity verification, law enforcement, and border security. In 2024, he was awarded the BBVA Foundation Frontiers of Knowledge Award in the category of Information and Communication Technologies. == Early life and education == Born in Basti, India, Jain received his Bachelor of Technology in electrical engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur in 1969. He then moved to the United States, where he earned his M.S. in 1970 and Ph.D. in 1973 from Ohio State University. His doctoral dissertation, titled Some Aspects of Dimensionality and Sample Size Problems in Statistical Pattern Recognition, was supervised by Robert B. McGhee and laid the groundwork for his subsequent research in pattern recognition. == Career == Jain began his academic career at Wayne State University, where he taught from 1972 to 1974. In 1974, he joined the faculty of Michigan State University, where he has remained for over five decades and currently holds the position of University Distinguished Professor. Throughout his career, Jain has conducted pioneering research in data clustering, fingerprint recognition, and face recognition. His work has been published in leading scientific journals including Scientific American, Nature, IEEE Spectrum, and MIT Technology Review. He served as Editor-in-Chief of the IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence from 1991 to 1994. Jain has also contributed to national security and policy through his service on several advisory bodies. He served as a member of the U.S. National Academies panels on Information Technology, Whither Biometrics, and Improvised Explosive Devices (IED). He has also served on the Defense Science Board, the Forensic Science Standards Board, and the AAAS Latent Fingerprint Working Group. In 2014, Jain was named Innovator of the Year at Michigan State University for transferring several technologies on face and fingerprint recognition to major players in the biometrics industry. He holds eight U.S. and Korean patents related to biometric technologies. == Research contributions == Jain's research spans pattern recognition, computer vision, machine learning, and biometric recognition. His contributions have been particularly influential in several areas: === Biometric recognition === Jain is considered one of the foremost authorities on biometric recognition systems. His research group at Michigan State University has developed algorithms and systems for fingerprint, face, and iris recognition that have been widely adopted in both academic research and commercial applications. His work on fingerprint matching algorithms has been instrumental in establishing standards for automated fingerprint identification systems (AFIS) used by law enforcement agencies worldwide. In recent years, Jain and his research team have made significant advances in child fingerprint recognition, demonstrating that digital scans of a young child's fingerprint can be correctly recognized one year later with over 99 percent accuracy for children as young as six months old. This research has important implications for child identification in developing countries, where it can be used to track immunization records and provide access to medical care. === Data clustering === Jain's survey article "Data clustering: a review" (1999), co-authored with M. N. Murty and P. J. Flynn, is one of the most highly cited papers in computer science. His 2010 paper "Data Clustering: 50 Years Beyond K-Means" provided a comprehensive overview of the evolution of clustering methods and remains an essential reference in the field. === Statistical pattern recognition === Jain's work on statistical pattern recognition, including his influential survey "Statistical pattern recognition: A review" (2000) with R. P. W. Duin and Jianchang Mao, has shaped the theoretical foundations of the field. == Citation metrics and academic impact == Jain is among the most highly cited researchers in computer science. Based on his Google Scholar profile, he had an h-index of 200 in 2020, which was the highest among computer scientists identified in a survey published by UCLA at the time. As of August 2023, his h-index on Google Scholar is 211. He has since been surpassed by Yoshua Bengio, a researcher of similar subjects (neural networks and deep learning for artificial intelligence), who had an h-index of 224 as of August 2023. Another source reported that as of December 2022, he had the highest discipline h-index (D-index) in computer science. == Honors and awards == Jain has received numerous awards and honors recognizing his contributions to computer science and engineering: === Academy memberships === Member, United States National Academy of Engineering (2016) — elected "for contributions to the engineering and practice of biometrics" Foreign Fellow, Indian National Academy of Engineering (2016) Foreign Member, Chinese Academy of Sciences (2019) Member, The World Academy of Sciences (2019) Fellow, National Academy of Inventors === Professional society fellowships === Fellow, ACM Fellow, IEEE (1988) — for contributions to image processing Fellow, AAAS Fellow, International Association for Pattern Recognition Fellow, SPIE === Major awards === BBVA Foundation Frontiers of Knowledge Award in Information and Communication Technologies (2024) IAPR King-Sun Fu Prize (2008) IEEE W. Wallace McDowell Award (2007) — the highest technical honor awarded by the IEEE Computer Society, for pioneering contributions to theory, technique, and practice of pattern recognition, computer vision, and biometric recognition systems IEEE Computer Society Technical Achievement Award (2003) IAPR Pierre Devijver Award (2002) Humboldt Research Award (2002) Guggenheim Fellowship (2001) Fulbright Fellowship (1998) IEEE ICDM Research Contribution Award (2008) === Best paper awards === IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks (1996) Pattern Recognition journal (1987, 1991, 2005) === Honorary doctorates === Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (2018) Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (2021) == Legacy and endowments == Two endowed funds have been established in Jain's honor at Michigan State University, recognizing his lasting impact on the field and the university. In 2015, a former visiting scholar from Jain's laboratory made an anonymous $400,000 gift to create the Anil K. Jain Endowed Graduate Fellowship, which supports doctoral-level research in pattern recognition, computer vision, and biometric recognition. In 2022, the Anil K. and Nandita K. Jain Endowed Professorship was established through $1 million in contributions from multiple donors, including a substantial gift from the Jain family, to support faculty recruitment and retention in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering. == Selected publications == === Books === 1988. Algorithms For Clustering Data. With Richard C. Dubes. Prentice Hall. 1993. Markov Random Fields: Theory and Applications. With Rama Chellappa eds. Academic Press. 1999. Biometrics: Personal Identification in Networked Society. With Ruud M. Bolle and Sharath Pankanti eds. Springer. 2003. Handbook of Fingerprint Recognition. (2nd edition 2009). With D. Maio, D. Maltoni, S. Prabhakar. Springer. 2005. Handbook of Face Recognition. (2nd edition 2011). With S. Z. Li ed. Springer. 2006. Handbook of Multibiometrics. With A. Ross and K. Nandakumar. Springer. 2007. Handbook of Biometrics. With P. Flynn and A. Ross eds. Springer. 2011. Introduction to Biometrics. With A. Ross and K. Nandakumar. Springer. 2015. Encyclopedia of Biometrics (Second Edition). With Stan Li. Springer. === Research articles === Cross, George R. and Anil K. Jain. "Markov random field texture models". IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (1983): 25–39. Jain, Anil K., and Farshid Farrokhnia. "Unsupervised texture segmentation using Gabor filters". Pattern Recognition 24.12 (1991): 1167–1186. Jain, Anil K., and Douglas Zongker. "Feature selection: Evaluation, application, and small sample performance". IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 19.2 (1997): 153–158. Jain, Anil K., L. Hong, S. Pankanti, R. Bolle. "An Identity-A

  Read more →
• 

  Yejin Choi

  Yejin Choi (Korean: 최예진; born 1977) is the Dieter Schwarz Foundation Professor and Senior Fellow at the Department of Computer Science at Stanford University and the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HAI) respectively. Her research considers natural language processing and computer vision. == Early life and education == Choi is from South Korea. She attended Seoul National University. After earning a bachelor's degree in Computer Science, Choi moved to the United States, where she joined Cornell University as a graduate student. There she worked with Claire Cardie on natural language processing. After earning her doctorate, Choi joined Stony Brook University as an Assistant Professor of Computer Science. At Stony Brook University Choi developed a statistical technique to identify fake hotel reviews. == Research and career == In 2018 Choi joined the Allen Institute for AI. Her research looks to endow computers with a statistical understanding of written language. She became interested in neural networks and their application in artificial intelligence. She started to assemble a knowledge base that became known as the atlas of machine commonsense (ATOMIC). By the time she had finished the creation of ATOMIC, the language model generative Pre-trained Transformer 2 (GPT-2) had been released. ATOMIC does not make use of linguistic rules, but combines the representations of different languages within a neural network. In 2020, Choi was endowed with the Brett Helsel Professorship, which she held until she became Chair of Computer Science in 2023. She has since made use of Commonsense Transformers (COMET) with Good old fashioned artificial intelligence (GOFAI). The approach combines symbolic reasoning and neural networks. She has developed computational models that can detect biases in language that work against people from underrepresented groups. For example, one study demonstrated that female film characters are portrayed as less powerful than their male counterparts. In 2023, Choi became The Wissner-Slivka Chair of Computer Science. Choi is also a scientific advisor to French research group Kyutai which is being funded by Xavier Niel, Rodolphe Saadé, Eric Schmidt, and others. In 2025, Stanford HAI announced the appointment of Choi as senior fellow and the Dieter Schwarz Foundation HAI Professor and Professor of Computer Science at Stanford University. == Awards and honours == 2013 International Conference on Computer Vision Marr Prize 2016 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers AI One to Watch 2017 Facebook ParlAI Research Award 2018 Anita Borg Early Career Award 2020 Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence Outstanding Paper Award 2021 Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems Outstanding Paper Award 2021 Association for Computational Linguistics Test-of-time Paper Award 2021 Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Longuet-Higgins Prize 2022 North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics Best Paper Award 2022 International Conference on Machine Learning Outstanding Paper Award 2022 MacArthur Fellowship 2023 Association for Computational Linguistics Best Paper Award 2023 TIME100 Archived 2024-12-27 at the Wayback Machine AI 2023 2023 Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing Outstanding Paper Award 2025 Association for Computational Linguistics Outstanding Paper Award 2025 Association for Computational Linguistics Best Demo Paper Award 2025 TIME100 AI 2025 == Select publications == Ott, Myle; Choi, Yejin; Cardie, Claire; Hancock, Jeffrey T. (2011). "Finding Deceptive Opinion Spam by Any Stretch of the Imagination". Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. Portland, Oregon, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics: 309–319. arXiv:1107.4557. Bibcode:2011arXiv1107.4557O. ISBN 9781932432879. S2CID 2510724. Kulkarni, Girish; Premraj, Visruth; Ordonez, Vicente; Dhar, Sagnik; Li, Siming; Choi, Yejin; Berg, Alexander C.; Berg, Tamara L. (2013). "BabyTalk: Understanding and Generating Simple Image Descriptions". IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence. 35 (12): 2891–2903. Bibcode:2013ITPAM..35.2891K. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.225.5228. doi:10.1109/TPAMI.2012.162. ISSN 1939-3539. PMID 22848128. Choi, Yejin; Cardie, Claire; Riloff, Ellen; Patwardhan, Siddharth (2005). "Identifying sources of opinions with conditional random fields and extraction patterns". Proceedings of the conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing - HLT '05. Morristown, NJ, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics. pp. 355–362. doi:10.3115/1220575.1220620.

  Read more →
• 

  Apache Kudu

  Apache Kudu is a free and open source column-oriented data store of the Apache Hadoop ecosystem. It is compatible with most of the data processing frameworks in the Hadoop environment. It provides completeness to Hadoop's storage layer to enable fast analytics on fast data. The open source project to build Apache Kudu began as internal project at Cloudera. The first version Apache Kudu 1.0 was released 19 September 2016. == Comparison with other storage engines == Kudu was designed and optimized for OLAP workloads. Like HBase, it is a real-time store that supports key-indexed record lookup and mutation. Kudu differs from HBase since Kudu's datamodel is a more traditional relational model, while HBase is schemaless. Kudu's "on-disk representation is truly columnar and follows an entirely different storage design than HBase/Bigtable".

  Read more →
• 

  AI Art Generators Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

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

  Read more →
• 

  Yi Zeng (AI researcher)

  Yi Zeng (Chinese: 曾毅) is a Chinese artificial intelligence researcher and professor at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, who also serves as the founding director of Center for Long-term AI, and as a member of the United Nations Advisory Body on AI. == Career == On May 25, 2019, Zeng led the team that published the Beijing Artificial Intelligence Principles, proposed as an initiative for the long-term research, governance and planning of AI, and the "realization of beneficial AI for mankind and nature". He was named on the Time 100 AI list, a list featuring the hundred most influential figures in artificial intelligence of the year, in 2023. In July 2023, Zeng addressed the United Nations Security Council in a meeting on the risks posed by recent strides in artificial intelligence. He said that AI models “cannot be trusted as responsible agents that can help humans to make decisions,” and warned of the risk of extinction posed by both near-term and long-term AI, arguing that “in the long term, we haven’t given superintelligence any practical reasons why they should protect humans”. Zeng stated that humans should always be responsible for final decision-making on the use of nuclear weapons, and that the United Nations must produce an international framework on AI development and governance, to ensure global peace and security. In October 2023, UN Secretary-General António Guterres announced the creation of an advisory body on issues surrounding the international governance of AI, of which Zeng would be a member. He leads teams of researchers at the Institute of Philosophy and the Institute of Automation of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, including doctoral candidates, postdoctoral fellows, research fellows, assistant professors, and associate professors. Among them is his first international PhD student, Ammar Younas, a lawyer and arbitrator whose research focuses on cross-cultural dimensions of AI ethics and governance.

  Read more →
• 

  Pushmeet Kohli

  Pushmeet Kohli is an Indian British computer scientist and Vice President of research at Google DeepMind. At Deepmind, he heads the "Science and Strategic Initiatives Unit". He was noted by Time magazine as being one of the 100 most influential people in AI according to the Time 100 AI list. Kohli has led and supervised a number of projects including AlphaFold, a system for predicting the 3D structures of proteins; AlphaEvolve, a general-purpose evolutionary coding agent; SynthID, a system for watermarking and detecting AI-generated content; and Co-Scientist, an agent for generating and testing new scientific hypotheses. == Education == Kohli received a Bachelor of Technology (BTech) degree in Computer Science and Engineering at the National Institute of Technology, Warangal. He went on to study at Oxford Brookes University, where he earned a PhD in computer vision for research supervised by Philip Torr in 2007. == Career and research == After his PhD, Kohli was a postdoctoral associate at the Psychometric Centre, University of Cambridge. Before joining Google DeepMind, Kohli was partner scientist and director of research at Microsoft Research. His research investigates applications of machine learning and artificial intelligence. Kohli has made research contributions in the fields of computational biology, program synthesis, superoptimization, discrete optimization, and psychometrics. Notable research projects he has contributed to include: AlphaFold - breakthrough AI system for protein structure prediction AlphaEvolve - agent for code super optimization. AlphaTensor - Reinforcement learning agent for discovering new algorithms for matrix multiplication SynthID - system for watermarking AI generated images. AlphaGenome and AlphaMissense - AI models for predicting the effect of mutations in the genome AlphaCode - Competition-level code generation with AI FunSearch - Discovering algorithms using LLMs to search over program space. Neural Program Synthesis Probabilistic Programming Community based Crowdsourcing of Data for Training AI Models Behavioral analysis and personality prediction using online networks Human Pose Estimation using the Kinect Learnt Magnetic confinement control for Fusion Learnt Density Functional for solving the fractional electron problem === Awards and honours === Kohli's research in computer vision and machine learning has been recognized by a number of scientific awards and prizes. Some notable ones include: Koenderink Prize (Test of Time award) by the European Conference of Computer Vision British Machine Vision Association and Society for Pattern Recognition (BMVA) Sullivan Prize for the best PhD thesis. IEEE Mixed Augmented Reality (ISMAR) Impact Paper award Lasting Impact Award by the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology Best paper award at the International World Wide Web Conference 2014 Best paper award in the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) 2010 Best paper award in the Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI)

  Read more →
• 

  Ulead MediaStudio Pro

  Ulead MediaStudio Pro (MSP) is real-time, timeline based prosumer level video editing software by Ulead Systems. It is a suite of 5 digital video and audio applications, including: Video Capture, Video Paint, CG Infinity, Audio Editor and Video Editor. MSP is only available on the Windows platform. Since version 8.0, CG Infinity and Video Paint are separate from the MSP suite, and are being sold as a combination product called VideoGraphics Lab (VGL). On June 18, 2008, Corel formally announced that MediaStudio Pro would be discontinued. The final MediaStudio Pro version was 8.10.0039 (Pro 8 Service Pack 1) released June 2, 2006. Corel discontinued support for MediaStudio Pro in June 2009. Version 6.0 is last version to support Windows 95, although recent versions are not compatible with Windows Vista or Windows 7. == Modules == There are 5 stand-alone modules in MSP before version 8.0, they are: Video Capture – The video capturing module in MSP. Video Paint – A frame-by-frame editor which can let user to make some image or hand-drawing effects on video frames. CG Infinity – A vector-based video editing tool which allows user to create logo animation or vector graphics on video frames. Audio Editor – The audio editing tool in MSP. It can utilize DirectX audio filters and Ulead audio filters to do audio effect processing. Video Editor – The module that users do video editing with audio/video effects. It can also utilize DirectX audio filters and 3rd party video filters to do the video editing. Since version 8.0, CG Infinity and Video Paint have been separated from the MSP suite and are being sold as a combination product called VideoGraphics Lab (VGL). == Editions == Ulead MediaStudio Pro had several editions before version 7.0. They are: Full edition: this edition includes all 5 modules. Director's Cut edition: this edition has 3 modules including Video Capture, Video Editor and Audio Editor. SE edition: SE means Simple Edition or Special Edition and is an OEM bundle version. It also includes the 3 modules as Director's Cut, however, is feature limited. Sometimes it will be given freely in video magazines. After version 7.0 only Full edition is available in the MSP suite. On June 18, 2008, Corel formally announced that MediaStudio Pro would be discontinued. == Release history ==

  Read more →
• 

  Top 10 AI Subtitle Generators Compared (2026)

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

  Read more →
• 

  Krohn–Rhodes theory

  In mathematics and computer science, the Krohn–Rhodes theory (or algebraic automata theory) is an approach to the study of finite semigroups and automata that seeks to decompose them in terms of elementary components. These components correspond to finite aperiodic semigroups and finite simple groups that are combined in a feedback-free manner (called a "wreath product" or "cascade"). Krohn and Rhodes found a general decomposition for finite automata. The authors discovered and proved an unexpected major result in finite semigroup theory, revealing a deep connection between finite automata and semigroups. Decidability of Krohn-Rhodes complexity long motivated much work in semigroup theory. In June 2024, Stuart Margolis, John Rhodes, and Anne Schilling announced a proof that the complexity is decidable. == Definitions and description of the Krohn–Rhodes theorem == Let T {\displaystyle T} be a semigroup. A semigroup S {\displaystyle S} that is a homomorphic image of a subsemigroup of T {\displaystyle T} is said to be a divisor of T {\displaystyle T} . The Krohn–Rhodes theorem for finite semigroups states that every finite semigroup S {\displaystyle S} is a divisor of a finite alternating wreath product of finite simple groups, each a divisor of S {\displaystyle S} , and finite aperiodic semigroups (which contain no nontrivial subgroups). In the automata formulation, the Krohn–Rhodes theorem for finite automata states that given a finite automaton A {\displaystyle A} with states Q {\displaystyle Q} and input alphabet I {\displaystyle I} , output alphabet U {\displaystyle U} , then one can expand the states to Q ′ {\displaystyle Q'} such that the new automaton A ′ {\displaystyle A'} embeds into a cascade of "simple", irreducible automata: In particular, A {\displaystyle A} is emulated by a feed-forward cascade of (1) automata whose transformation semigroups are finite simple groups and (2) automata that are banks of flip-flops running in parallel. The new automaton A ′ {\displaystyle A'} has the same input and output symbols as A {\displaystyle A} . Here, both the states and inputs of the cascaded automata have a very special hierarchical coordinate form. Moreover, each simple group (prime) or non-group irreducible semigroup (subsemigroup of the flip-flop monoid) that divides the transformation semigroup of A {\displaystyle A} must divide the transformation semigroup of some component of the cascade, and only the primes that must occur as divisors of the components are those that divide A {\displaystyle A} 's transformation semigroup. == Group complexity == The Krohn–Rhodes complexity (also called group complexity or just complexity) of a finite semigroup S is the least number of groups in a wreath product of finite groups and finite aperiodic semigroups of which S is a divisor. All finite aperiodic semigroups have complexity 0, while non-trivial finite groups have complexity 1. In fact, there are semigroups of every non-negative integer complexity. For example, for any n greater than 1, the multiplicative semigroup of all (n+1) × (n+1) upper-triangular matrices over any fixed finite field has complexity n (Kambites, 2007). A major open problem in finite semigroup theory is the decidability of complexity: is there an algorithm that will compute the Krohn–Rhodes complexity of a finite semigroup, given its multiplication table? Upper bounds and ever more precise lower bounds on complexity have been obtained (see, e.g. Rhodes & Steinberg, 2009). Rhodes has conjectured that the problem is decidable. In June 2024, Stuart Margolis, John Rhodes, and Anne Schilling announced a proof in the affirmative of the conjecture, though as of 2025 the result has yet to be confirmed. == History and applications == At a conference in 1962, Kenneth Krohn and John Rhodes announced a method for decomposing a (deterministic) finite automaton into "simple" components that are themselves finite automata. This joint work, which has implications for philosophy, comprised both Krohn's doctoral thesis at Harvard University and Rhodes' doctoral thesis at MIT. Simpler proofs, and generalizations of the theorem to infinite structures, have been published since then (see Chapter 4 of Rhodes and Steinberg's 2009 book The q-Theory of Finite Semigroups for an overview). In the 1965 paper by Krohn and Rhodes, the proof of the theorem on the decomposition of finite automata (or, equivalently sequential machines) made extensive use of the algebraic semigroup structure. Later proofs contained major simplifications using finite wreath products of finite transformation semigroups. The theorem generalizes the Jordan–Hölder decomposition for finite groups (in which the primes are the finite simple groups), to all finite transformation semigroups (for which the primes are again the finite simple groups plus all subsemigroups of the "flip-flop" (see above)). Both the group and more general finite automata decomposition require expanding the state-set of the general, but allow for the same number of input symbols. In the general case, these are embedded in a larger structure with a hierarchical "coordinate system". One must be careful in understanding the notion of "prime" as Krohn and Rhodes explicitly refer to their theorem as a "prime decomposition theorem" for automata. The components in the decomposition, however, are not prime automata (with prime defined in a naïve way); rather, the notion of prime is more sophisticated and algebraic: the semigroups and groups associated to the constituent automata of the decomposition are prime (or irreducible) in a strict and natural algebraic sense with respect to the wreath product (Eilenberg, 1976). Also, unlike earlier decomposition theorems, the Krohn–Rhodes decompositions usually require expansion of the state-set, so that the expanded automaton covers (emulates) the one being decomposed. These facts have made the theorem difficult to understand and challenging to apply in a practical way—until recently, when computational implementations became available (Egri-Nagy & Nehaniv 2005, 2008). H.P. Zeiger (1967) proved an important variant called the holonomy decomposition (Eilenberg 1976). The holonomy method appears to be relatively efficient and has been implemented computationally by A. Egri-Nagy (Egri-Nagy & Nehaniv 2005). Meyer and Thompson (1969) give a version of Krohn–Rhodes decomposition for finite automata that is equivalent to the decomposition previously developed by Hartmanis and Stearns, but for useful decompositions, the notion of expanding the state-set of the original automaton is essential (for the non-permutation automata case). Many proofs and constructions now exist of Krohn–Rhodes decompositions (e.g., [Krohn, Rhodes & Tilson 1968], [Ésik 2000], [Diekert et al. 2012]), with the holonomy method the most popular and efficient in general (although not in all cases). [Zimmermann 2010] gives an elementary proof of the theorem. Owing to the close relation between monoids and categories, a version of the Krohn–Rhodes theorem is applicable to category theory. This observation and a proof of an analogous result were offered by Wells (1980). The Krohn–Rhodes theorem for semigroups/monoids is an analogue of the Jordan–Hölder theorem for finite groups (for semigroups/monoids rather than groups). As such, the theorem is a deep and important result in semigroup/monoid theory. The theorem was also surprising to many mathematicians and computer scientists since it had previously been widely believed that the semigroup/monoid axioms were too weak to admit a structure theorem of any strength, and prior work (Hartmanis & Stearns) was only able to show much more rigid and less general decomposition results for finite automata. Work by Egri-Nagy and Nehaniv (2005, 2008–) continues to further automate the holonomy version of the Krohn–Rhodes decomposition extended with the related decomposition for finite groups (so-called Frobenius–Lagrange coordinates) using the computer algebra system GAP. Applications outside of the semigroup and monoid theories are now computationally feasible. They include computations in biology and biochemical systems (e.g. Egri-Nagy & Nehaniv 2008), artificial intelligence, finite-state physics, psychology, and game theory (see, for example, Rhodes 2009).

  Read more →