AI Content Generator

AI Content Generator — hands-on reviews, top picks, pricing, pros and cons and a practical how-to guide on Aizhi.

Speculative decoding

Speculative decoding is an inference-time optimization for autoregressive large language models (LLMs) that generates multiple tokens per decoding step instead of one. A smaller draft model proposes a sequence of candidate tokens, and the larger target model verifies them in a single forward pass through a modified rejection sampling scheme. The verification preserves the target model's original output distribution, so the technique produces the same results as standard decoding while cutting latency by roughly two to three times. The name is an analogy to speculative execution in CPU design, where a processor runs instructions along a predicted branch before the outcome is known. == Background == Standard autoregressive decoding in large language models generates one token at a time. The model computes a probability distribution over its vocabulary, samples the next token, and feeds that token back as input. For large models, this process is bottlenecked by memory bandwidth rather than arithmetic throughput: loading the model's parameters from high-bandwidth memory (HBM) to the processor takes up most of the wall-clock time at each step. Because of this, a forward pass over one token and a forward pass over several tokens in a batch take roughly the same time. Speculative decoding relies on this property. == Mechanism == The technique alternates between two phases: drafting and verification. During drafting, a fast approximation model generates a short run of K candidate tokens, typically between 3 and 12. The draft model is usually a much smaller version of the target model or a lightweight auxiliary network. During verification, the target model scores the entire draft sequence in one batched forward pass. A modified rejection sampling algorithm compares the draft and target probabilities at each position. If the target model would have been at least as likely to produce a given token, that token is accepted; the first token that fails is resampled from a corrected distribution, and everything after it is thrown out. The result is that the output distribution is the same as if each token had been generated one at a time. How many tokens get accepted per cycle depends on how well the draft model matches the target. For common words and predictable continuations the match tends to be good, so the target model can confirm several tokens at once. == History == An early precursor was blockwise parallel decoding, proposed in 2018 by Stern, Shazeer, and Uszkoreit. Their method predicted multiple future tokens through auxiliary prediction heads and validated them against the autoregressive model, but it only worked with greedy decoding and did not preserve the full sampling distribution. The modern form of the technique came from Yaniv Leviathan, Matan Kalman, and Yossi Matias at Google Research, who posted "Fast Inference from Transformers via Speculative Decoding" on arXiv in November 2022. Separately and at about the same time, Charlie Chen and colleagues at DeepMind arrived at a closely related method they called speculative sampling, published in February 2023. Both papers introduced the use of rejection sampling to guarantee that the output distribution is unchanged. Leviathan et al. showed roughly 2–3x speedup on T5-XXL (11 billion parameters); Chen et al. reported 2–2.5x on the Chinchilla model (70 billion parameters). The Leviathan et al. paper was presented as an oral at the International Conference on Machine Learning in July 2023. == Variants == SpecInfer (Miao et al., 2024) uses multiple small language models to jointly build a tree of candidate continuations rather than a single chain. The target model verifies the whole tree in parallel and keeps the longest valid path, with reported speedups of 1.5–3.5x. Medusa (Cai et al., 2024) takes a different approach by not using a separate draft model at all. Extra lightweight decoding heads are attached to the target model itself, and each one predicts a token at a different future position. The candidates are evaluated through a tree-structured attention mechanism. The authors measured 2.2–3.6x speedup. EAGLE (Li et al., 2024) performs autoregression on the target model's internal feature representations (specifically the second-to-top layer) rather than on tokens directly. On LLaMA 2 Chat 70B, this gave a 2.7–3.5x latency reduction. Later versions added dynamic draft trees (EAGLE-2) and further optimizations (EAGLE-3), reaching 3–6.5x speedup. == Adoption == By 2024, speculative decoding had become a standard part of production LLM serving. Google uses it in the AI Overviews feature of Google Search. Open-source inference frameworks such as vLLM, NVIDIA's TensorRT-LLM, and SGLang all include built-in support for speculative decoding and its variants. Apple, AWS, and Meta have also published research extending the method or deploying it at scale.
Read more →
Ziad Obermeyer

Ziad Obermeyer (Arabic: زياد أوبرماير) is a Lebanese American physician and researcher whose work focuses on machine learning, health policy, and clinical decision-making in medicine. He is the Blue Cross of California Distinguished Associate Professor at the UC Berkeley School of Public Health, a Chan Zuckerberg Biohub investigator, and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. He is known for his research on racial bias in health care algorithms and the use of artificial intelligence in health care. == Early life and education == Obermeyer was born in Beirut, Lebanon, and raised in Cambridge, Massachusetts. He earned a Bachelor of Arts degree from Harvard College and a Master of Philosophy (M.Phil.) in History and Science from the University of Cambridge. He received his Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) from Harvard Medical School in 2008. Before pursuing medicine, Obermeyer worked as a consultant at McKinsey & Company, advising pharmaceutical and global health clients in New Jersey, Geneva, and Tokyo. After completing his medical degree, he trained as an emergency physician at Mass General Brigham (MGB) in Boston, Massachusetts. He later continued practicing emergency medicine at the Fort Defiance Indian Hospital on the Navajo Nation in Arizona. == Academic career == Obermeyer served as an Assistant Professor at Harvard Medical School from 2014 to 2020. In 2020, he joined the University of California, Berkeley as an Associate Professor and the Blue Cross of California Distinguished Professor at the School of Public Health. == Research focus == === Algorithmic racial bias in healthcare === In 2019, Obermeyer and economist Sendhil Mullainathan examined a commercial healthcare algorithm by UnitedHealth Group, used in hospitals and by insurers to identify patients with complex health needs. The study found that the algorithm underestimated the health needs of Black patients compared to white patients with similar conditions and that reformulating it would reduce racial bias. In 2020, Obermeyer analyzed an algorithm used to allocate CARE Act relief funding to hospitals. The study identified allocation patterns that favored hospitals with higher revenues over hospitals serving larger numbers of COVID-19 patients who are predominantly Black. === Clinical decision-making === In 2021, Obermeyer and colleagues examined physician decision-making in cardiac care using machine learning models. The study found that physicians misdiagnose cases when they rely on symptoms representative of a heart attack, such as chest pain, over other symptoms. === Pain assessment === Obermeyer developed a deep learning approach to investigate the severity of osteoarthritis in underserved communities. == Policy and regulatory work == Following the publication of the 2019 algorithmic racial bias study, the New York Department of Financial Services and Department of Health launched an investigation into UnitedHealth Group's algorithm, requesting that the company cease using it, citing discriminatory business practices. Also related to this study, in December 2019, Democratic Senators Cory Booker and Ron Wyden released letters to the Federal Trade Commission and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services asking to investigate potential discrimination in decision-making algorithms against marginalized communities in healthcare. The senators also wrote to major healthcare companies, including Aetna and Blue Cross Blue Shield, about their internal safeguards against racial bias in their technology. In 2021, Obermeyer and colleagues at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business released the Algorithmic Bias Playbook, a resource for policymakers and technical teams working in healthcare on how to measure and mitigate algorithmic racial bias. Obermeyer testified before the U.S. Senate Financial Committee in February 2024 on artificial intelligence in healthcare, recommending transparency requirements for AI developers and independent algorithm evaluations. In December 2025, he testified before the United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on the role of AI in affordable healthcare and the impact of its integration on the workforce. == Organizations == In 2021, Obermeyer cofounded Nightingale Open Science, a non-profit that creates new medical imaging datasets available for research, and Dandelion Health, a health data analytics company. In June 2023, the company launched a program to audit and evaluate the performance of algorithms to identify potential racial, ethnic, and geographic bias, funded by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the SCAN Foundation. Dandelion Health partnered with the American Heart Association in 2025 to power an AI assessment lab for cardiovascular algorithms. Obermeyer is a founding faculty member of the University of California, Berkeley–University of California, San Francisco joint program in computational precision health. == Recognition == TIME magazine named Obermeyer one of the 100 most influential people in artificial intelligence in 2023. He has served as a Chan Zuckerberg Biohub Investigator since 2022, and as a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research since 2023. He was designated an Emerging Leader by the National Academy of Medicine in 2020. Obermeyer's racial bias study received the Willard G. Manning Memorial Award for the Best Research in Health Econometrics from the American Society of Health Economists (ASHEcon) in 2021 and the Responsible Business Education Award from the Financial Times in 2022.
Read more →
Best AI Headshot Generators in 2026

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

In computer science, a suffix automaton is an efficient data structure for representing the substring index of a given string which allows the storage, processing, and retrieval of compressed information about all its substrings. The suffix automaton of a string S {\displaystyle S} is the smallest directed acyclic graph with a dedicated initial vertex and a set of "final" vertices, such that paths from the initial vertex to final vertices represent the suffixes of the string. In terms of automata theory, a suffix automaton is the minimal partial deterministic finite automaton that recognizes the set of suffixes of a given string S = s 1 s 2 … s n {\displaystyle S=s_{1}s_{2}\dots s_{n}} . The state graph of a suffix automaton is called a directed acyclic word graph (DAWG), a term that is also sometimes used for any deterministic acyclic finite state automaton. Suffix automata were introduced in 1983 by a group of scientists from the University of Denver and the University of Colorado Boulder. They suggested a linear time online algorithm for its construction and showed that the suffix automaton of a string S {\displaystyle S} having length at least two characters has at most 2 | S | − 1 {\textstyle 2|S|-1} states and at most 3 | S | − 4 {\textstyle 3|S|-4} transitions. Further works have shown a close connection between suffix automata and suffix trees, and have outlined several generalizations of suffix automata, such as compacted suffix automaton obtained by compression of nodes with a single outgoing arc. Suffix automata provide efficient solutions to problems such as substring search and computation of the largest common substring of two and more strings. == History == The concept of suffix automaton was introduced in 1983 by a group of scientists from University of Denver and University of Colorado Boulder consisting of Anselm Blumer, Janet Blumer, Andrzej Ehrenfeucht, David Haussler and Ross McConnell, although similar concepts had earlier been studied alongside suffix trees in the works of Peter Weiner, Vaughan Pratt and Anatol Slissenko. In their initial work, Blumer et al. showed a suffix automaton built for the string S {\displaystyle S} of length greater than 1 {\displaystyle 1} has at most 2 | S | − 1 {\displaystyle 2|S|-1} states and at most 3 | S | − 4 {\displaystyle 3|S|-4} transitions, and suggested a linear algorithm for automaton construction. In 1983, Mu-Tian Chen and Joel Seiferas independently showed that Weiner's 1973 suffix-tree construction algorithm while building a suffix tree of the string S {\displaystyle S} constructs a suffix automaton of the reversed string S R {\textstyle S^{R}} as an auxiliary structure. In 1987, Blumer et al. applied the compressing technique used in suffix trees to a suffix automaton and invented the compacted suffix automaton, which is also called the compacted directed acyclic word graph (CDAWG). In 1997, Maxime Crochemore and Renaud Vérin developed a linear algorithm for direct CDAWG construction. In 2001, Shunsuke Inenaga et al. developed an algorithm for construction of CDAWG for a set of words given by a trie. == Definitions == Usually when speaking about suffix automata and related concepts, some notions from formal language theory and automata theory are used, in particular: "Alphabet" is a finite set Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } that is used to construct words. Its elements are called "characters"; "Word" is a finite sequence of characters ω = ω 1 ω 2 … ω n {\displaystyle \omega =\omega _{1}\omega _{2}\dots \omega _{n}} . "Length" of the word ω {\displaystyle \omega } is denoted as | ω | = n {\displaystyle |\omega |=n} ; "Formal language" is a set of words over given alphabet; "Language of all words" is denoted as Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} (where the "" character stands for Kleene star), "empty word" (the word of zero length) is denoted by the character ε {\displaystyle \varepsilon } ; "Concatenation of words" α = α 1 α 2 … α n {\displaystyle \alpha =\alpha _{1}\alpha _{2}\dots \alpha _{n}} and β = β 1 β 2 … β m {\displaystyle \beta =\beta _{1}\beta _{2}\dots \beta _{m}} is denoted as α ⋅ β {\displaystyle \alpha \cdot \beta } or α β {\displaystyle \alpha \beta } and corresponds to the word obtained by writing β {\displaystyle \beta } to the right of α {\displaystyle \alpha } , that is, α β = α 1 α 2 … α n β 1 β 2 … β m {\displaystyle \alpha \beta =\alpha _{1}\alpha _{2}\dots \alpha _{n}\beta _{1}\beta _{2}\dots \beta _{m}} ; "Concatenation of languages" A {\displaystyle A} and B {\displaystyle B} is denoted as A ⋅ B {\displaystyle A\cdot B} or A B {\displaystyle AB} and corresponds to the set of pairwise concatenations A B = { α β : α ∈ A , β ∈ B } {\displaystyle AB=\{\alpha \beta :\alpha \in A,\beta \in B\}} ; If the word ω ∈ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \omega \in \Sigma ^{}} may be represented as ω = α γ β {\displaystyle \omega =\alpha \gamma \beta } , where α , β , γ ∈ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \alpha ,\beta ,\gamma \in \Sigma ^{}} , then words α {\displaystyle \alpha } , β {\displaystyle \beta } and γ {\displaystyle \gamma } are called "prefix", "suffix" and "subword" (substring) of the word ω {\displaystyle \omega } correspondingly; If T = T 1 … T n {\displaystyle T=T_{1}\dots T_{n}} and T l T l + 1 … T r = S {\displaystyle T_{l}T_{l+1}\dots T_{r}=S} (with 1 ≤ l ≤ r ≤ n {\displaystyle 1\leq l\leq r\leq n} ) then S {\displaystyle S} is said to "occur" in T {\displaystyle T} as a subword. Here l {\displaystyle l} and r {\displaystyle r} are called left and right positions of occurrence of S {\displaystyle S} in T {\displaystyle T} correspondingly. == Automaton structure == Formally, deterministic finite automaton is determined by 5-tuple A = ( Σ , Q , q 0 , F , δ ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}=(\Sigma ,Q,q_{0},F,\delta )} , where: Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is an "alphabet" that is used to construct words, Q {\displaystyle Q} is a set of automaton "states", q 0 ∈ Q {\displaystyle q_{0}\in Q} is an "initial" state of automaton, F ⊂ Q {\displaystyle F\subset Q} is a set of "final" states of automaton, δ : Q × Σ ↦ Q {\displaystyle \delta :Q\times \Sigma \mapsto Q} is a partial "transition" function of automaton, such that δ ( q , σ ) {\displaystyle \delta (q,\sigma )} for q ∈ Q {\displaystyle q\in Q} and σ ∈ Σ {\displaystyle \sigma \in \Sigma } is either undefined or defines a transition from q {\displaystyle q} over character σ {\displaystyle \sigma } . Most commonly, deterministic finite automaton is represented as a directed graph ("diagram") such that: Set of graph vertices corresponds to the state of states Q {\displaystyle Q} , Graph has a specific marked vertex corresponding to initial state q 0 {\displaystyle q_{0}} , Graph has several marked vertices corresponding to the set of final states F {\displaystyle F} , Set of graph arcs corresponds to the set of transitions δ {\displaystyle \delta } , Specifically, every transition δ ( q 1 , σ ) = q 2 {\textstyle \delta (q_{1},\sigma )=q_{2}} is represented by an arc from q 1 {\displaystyle q_{1}} to q 2 {\displaystyle q_{2}} marked with the character σ {\displaystyle \sigma } . This transition also may be denoted as q 1 σ ⟶ q 2 {\textstyle q_{1}{\begin{smallmatrix}{\sigma }\\[-5pt]{\longrightarrow }\end{smallmatrix}}q_{2}} . In terms of its diagram, the automaton recognizes the word ω = ω 1 ω 2 … ω m {\displaystyle \omega =\omega _{1}\omega _{2}\dots \omega _{m}} only if there is a path from the initial vertex q 0 {\displaystyle q_{0}} to some final vertex q ∈ F {\displaystyle q\in F} such that concatenation of characters on this path forms ω {\displaystyle \omega } . The set of words recognized by an automaton forms a language that is set to be recognized by the automaton. In these terms, the language recognized by a suffix automaton of S {\displaystyle S} is the language of its (possibly empty) suffixes. === Automaton states === "Right context" of the word ω {\displaystyle \omega } with respect to language L {\displaystyle L} is a set [ ω ] R = { α : ω α ∈ L } {\displaystyle [\omega ]_{R}=\{\alpha :\omega \alpha \in L\}} that is a set of words α {\displaystyle \alpha } such that their concatenation with ω {\displaystyle \omega } forms a word from L {\displaystyle L} . Right contexts induce a natural equivalence relation [ α ] R = [ β ] R {\displaystyle [\alpha ]_{R}=[\beta ]_{R}} on the set of all words. If language L {\displaystyle L} is recognized by some deterministic finite automaton, there exists unique up to isomorphism automaton that recognizes the same language and has the minimum possible number of states. Such an automaton is called a minimal automaton for the given language L {\displaystyle L} . Myhill–Nerode theorem allows it to define it explicitly in terms of right contexts: In these terms, a "suffix automaton" is the minimal deterministic finite automaton recognizing the language of suffixes of the word S = s 1 s 2 … s n {\displaystyle S=s_{1}s_{2}\dots s_{n}} . The right context of the word ω {\displaystyle \omeg
Read more →
STIT logic

STIT logic (from seeing to it that) is a family of modal and branching-time logics for reasoning about agency and choice. A typical STIT operator has the form [ i s t i t : φ ] {\displaystyle [i\ {\mathsf {stit}}:\varphi ]} , usually read as "agent i {\displaystyle i} sees to it that φ {\displaystyle \varphi } ", and is interpreted in models where agents choose between alternative possible futures. STIT logics are used in action theory, deontic logic, epistemic logic, and the theory of intelligent agents to formalise notions such as "could have done otherwise", responsibility, joint action, and strategic ability in an indeterministic world. == Etymology == The acronym STIT comes from the English phrase "seeing to it that", introduced in influential work by Nuel Belnap and Michael Perloff on the logical analysis of agentive expressions. In this tradition, "to see to it that φ {\displaystyle \varphi } " is treated as a primitive agency operator, rather than being reduced to ordinary modal necessity. == History == Modern STIT logic arose in the 1980s in the context of branching-time semantics and formal theories of agency. Belnap and Perloff's article "Seeing to it that: A canonical form for agentives" introduced the idea of treating expressions of the form "agent i sees to it that φ" as a primitive modal operator, and analysed such sentences using a branching tree of moments and histories. This approach was further developed in a series of papers on indeterminism and agency and provided the conceptual core for later STIT formalisms. In the 1990s the basic formal systems of STIT logic were worked out. Horty and Belnap's influential paper on the deliberative STIT operator distinguished between a "Chellas" STIT that merely records the result of an agent's present choice and a "deliberative" STIT that requires the agent's choice to make a difference, and connected STIT with issues of action, omission, ability and obligation. Around the same time, Ming Xu proved completeness and decidability results for basic STIT systems, including a single-agent logic with Kripke-style semantics and axiomatizations for multi-agent deliberative STIT, thereby establishing STIT as a well-behaved normal modal framework. This early work was systematised in Belnap, Perloff and Xu's monograph Facing the Future: Agents and Choices in Our Indeterminist World, which presents a general branching-time semantics for individual and group STIT operators, discusses independence-of-agents conditions and articulates the metaphysical picture of an indeterministic "tree" of moments. At roughly the same time, Horty's book Agency and Deontic Logic developed deontic STIT logics in which obligations are tied to agents' available choices rather than to static states of affairs, and used the resulting systems to analyse "ought implies can", contrary-to-duty obligations and deontic paradoxes. These works helped to position STIT at the intersection of action theory, temporal logic and deontic logic. From the late 1990s and 2000s onward, STIT logics were combined with epistemic, temporal and strategic modalities. Broersen introduced complete STIT logics for knowledge and action and deontic-epistemic STIT systems that distinguish different modes of mens rea, with applications to responsibility and the specification of multi-agent systems. Work on group and coalitional agency investigated axiomatisations and complexity results for group STIT logics, and related STIT-based analyses of agency to coalition logic and alternating-time temporal logic (ATL) by exhibiting formal embeddings between the frameworks. Explicit temporal operators were added to STIT in so-called temporal STIT logics. Lorini proposed a temporal STIT with "next" and "until" operators along histories and showed how it can be applied to normative reasoning about ongoing behaviour and commitments. Ciuni and Lorini compared different semantics for temporal STIT, clarifying the relationships between branching-time, game-based and epistemic approaches, while Boudou and Lorini gave a semantics for temporal STIT based on concurrent game structures, thus strengthening links with standard models of multi-agent interaction used for ATL and strategy logic. In parallel, complexity-theoretic work by Balbiani, Herzig and Troquard and by Schwarzentruber and co-authors investigated the satisfiability and model-checking problems for various STIT fragments, showing for instance that many expressive group STIT logics are undecidable or of high computational complexity. In the 2010s, STIT ideas were combined with justification logic, imagination operators and refined deontic notions. Justification STIT logics, developed by Olkhovikov and others, merge explicit justifications with STIT-style agency so that producing a proof can itself be treated as an action that brings about knowledge, and they come with completeness and decidability results. Olkhovikov and Wansing introduced STIT imagination logics, together with axiomatic systems and tableau calculi, to model acts of voluntary imagining and their role in doxastic control. Other authors have proposed STIT-based logics of responsibility, blameworthiness and intentionality for use in philosophical and AI settings. Xu's survey article "Combinations of STIT with Ought and Know" (2015) reviews many of these developments and emphasises the interplay between deontic and epistemic STIT logics. Current research on STIT focuses on proof theory, automated reasoning and richer expressive resources. Lyon and van Berkel, building on earlier work on labelled calculi for STIT, have developed cut-free sequent systems and proof-search algorithms that yield syntactic decision procedures for a range of deontic and non-deontic multi-agent STIT logics and support applications such as duty checking and compliance checking in autonomous systems. Sawasaki has proposed first-order cstit-based STIT logics that can distinguish de re and de dicto readings of agency statements and has proved strong completeness results for Hilbert systems over finite models, moving the STIT programme beyond the purely propositional level. Further work investigates interpreted-system and computationally grounded semantics for STIT and its extensions in order to model the behaviour of autonomous agents in multi-agent settings, and proposes STIT-based semantics for epistemic notions based on patterns of information disclosure in interactive systems. == Branching-time semantics == STIT logics are usually interpreted over branching-time models. A standard STIT frame consists of: a non-empty set of moments T {\displaystyle T} , partially ordered by < {\displaystyle <} so that ( T , < ) {\displaystyle (T,<)} forms a tree (every pair of moments with a common predecessor has a greatest lower bound); a set of histories, each history being a maximal linearly ordered subset of T {\displaystyle T} ; a non-empty set of agents A g {\displaystyle Ag} ; for each agent i ∈ A g {\displaystyle i\in Ag} and moment m {\displaystyle m} , a choice function c h o i c e i m {\displaystyle {\mathsf {choice}}_{i}^{m}} that partitions the set of histories passing through m {\displaystyle m} into choice cells. The idea is that a moment represents a time at which choices are made, and histories represent complete possible future courses of events. At each moment, each agent's choice corresponds to selecting one of the available cells of histories determined by their choice function. Formulas are evaluated at pairs ( m , h ) {\displaystyle (m,h)} of a moment and a history through that moment (sometimes written m / h {\displaystyle m/h} ). A valuation assigns truth-values to atomic propositions at such indices; Boolean connectives are interpreted pointwise as in Kripke-style modal logic. == Chellas and deliberative STIT operators == Several STIT operators have been distinguished in the literature. A common approach uses two closely related operators, often called Chellas STIT and deliberative STIT. Let H m {\displaystyle H_{m}} be the set of histories passing through a moment m {\displaystyle m} , and write H m {\displaystyle H_{m}} ⟦ φ ⟧ m = { h ∈ H m ∣ M , m / h ⊨ φ } {\displaystyle {\text{⟦}}\varphi {\text{⟧}}_{m}=\{h\in H_{m}\mid M,m/h\models \varphi \}} for the set of histories at m {\displaystyle m} where φ {\displaystyle \varphi } holds. The Chellas STIT operator, often written [ i c s t i t : φ ] {\displaystyle [i\ {\mathsf {cstit}}:\varphi ]} , is given by M , m / h ⊨ [ i c s t i t : φ ] iff c h o i c e i m ( h ) ⊆ ⟦ φ ⟧ m . {\displaystyle M,m/h\models [i\ {\mathsf {cstit}}:\varphi ]\quad {\text{iff}}\quad {\mathsf {choice}}_{i}^{m}(h)\subseteq {\text{⟦}}\varphi {\text{⟧}}_{m}.} Intuitively, agent i {\displaystyle i} sees to it that φ {\displaystyle \varphi } if φ {\displaystyle \varphi } holds at all histories compatible with their present choice. The deliberative STIT operator, [ i d s t i t : φ ] {\displaystyle [i\ {\mathsf {dstit}}:\varphi ]} , adds
Read more →
Roni Rosenfeld

Roni Rosenfeld (Hebrew: רוני רוזנפלד) is an Israeli-American computer scientist and computational epidemiologist, currently serving as the head of the Machine Learning Department at Carnegie Mellon University. He is an international expert in machine learning, infectious disease forecasting, statistical language modeling and artificial intelligence. == Education == Rosenfeld received his B.Sc. in mathematics and physics from Tel Aviv University in 1985. He received his Ph.D. in computer science from Carnegie Mellon University in 1994. While a graduate student, he developed and open-sourced a statistical language-modeling toolkit to allow anyone to create statistical language models from their own corpora and experiment with and extend the toolkit's capabilities. The toolkit has been used by more than 100 NLP laboratories in more than 20 countries. Rosenfeld's Ph.D. thesis, A Maximum Entropy Approach to Adaptive Statistical Language Modeling, was advised by Raj Reddy and Xuedong Huang and won the 2001 Computer, Speech and Language award for "Most Influential Paper in the Last 5 Years." == Career == Shortly after receiving his Ph.D., Rosenfeld joined the faculty of the Carnegie Mellon School of Computer Science as an assistant professor. He was promoted to the rank of associate professor in 1999 and received tenure in 2001. In 2005 he was promoted to professor of language technologies, machine learning computer science and computational biology in the School of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University. Rosenfeld also holds adjunct appointments at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, department of computational and systems biology. From 2002 to 2003, Rosenfeld was a visiting professor at the University of Hong Kong. Rosenfeld is the director of Carnegie Mellon's Machine Learning for Social Good (ML4SG) program. He has held educational leadership positions in a variety of programs, including the M.S. in computational finance (1997–1999), graduate computational and statistical learning (2001–2003), M.S. in machine learning (2017) and undergraduate minor in machine learning. Rosenfeld was appointed Head of Carnegie Mellon's Machine Learning Department in 2018. == Research == Rosenfeld's research interests include epidemiological forecasting, information and communication technologies for development (ICT4D), and machine learning for social good. === Epidemiological forecasting === Rosenfeld is a world expert in epidemiological forecasting. He founded and directs the Delphi research group, which has won most of the epidemiological forecasting challenges organized by the U.S. CDC and other U.S. government agencies. In December 2016, the CDC named his group the "Most Accurate Forecaster" for 2015–2016, and in October 2017, the Delphi group's two systems took the top two spots in the 2016-2017 flu forecasting challenge. The CDC recognized Rosenfeld's Delphi group at Carnegie Mellon University as having contributed the most accurate national-, regional-, and state-level influenza-like illness forecasts and national-level hospitalization forecasts to the site. In 2019, the CDC recognized forecasts provided by the Delphi group at Carnegie Mellon as having been the most accurate for five seasons in a row, and named the Delphi group an Influenza Forecasting Center of Excellence, a five-year designation that includes $3 million in research funding. Rosenfeld describes his forecasting research goal as "to make epidemiological forecasting as universally accepted and useful as weather forecasting is today." His recent work in the area has focused on selecting high value epidemiological forecasting targets (e.g. Influenza and Dengue); creating baseline forecasting methods for them; establishing metrics for measuring and tracking forecasting accuracy; estimating the limits of forecastability for each target; and identifying new sources of data that could be helpful to the forecasting goal. == Honors and awards == 2017 Joel and Ruth Spira Teaching Award 2017 CDC Influenza Forecasting Challenge "Most Accurate Forecaster" 1992 Allen Newell Medal for Research Excellence
Read more →
AI Humanizers: Free vs Paid (2026)

Trying to pick the best AI humanizer? An AI humanizer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI humanizer slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.
Read more →
Localization Industry Standards Association

Localization Industry Standards Association or LISA was a Swiss-based trade body concerning the translation of computer software (and associated materials) into multiple natural languages, which existed from 1990 to February 2011. It counted among its members most of the large information technology companies of the period, including Adobe, Cisco, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, McAfee, Nokia, Novell and Xerox. LISA played a significant role in representing its partners at the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), and the TermBase eXchange (TBX) standard developed by LISA was submitted to ISO in 2007 and became ISO 30042:2008. LISA also had a presence at the W3C. A number of the LISA standards are used by the OASIS Open Architecture for XML Authoring and Localization framework. LISA shut down on 28 February 2011, and its website went offline shortly afterwards. In the wake of the closure of LISA, the European Telecommunications Standards Institute started an Industry Specification Group (ISG) for localization. The ISG has five work items: Term-Base eXchange (TBX) / ISO 30042:2008 Translation Memory eXchange (TMX), with GALA Segmentation Rules eXchange (SRX) / ISO/CD 24621) Global information management Metrics eXchange – Volume (GMX-V); Another organization that was formed in response to the closure of LISA is Terminology for Large Organizations (TerminOrgs), a consortium of terminology professionals who promote terminology management best practices.
Read more →
Document-oriented database

A document-oriented database, or document store, is a computer program and data storage system designed for storing, retrieving, and managing document-oriented information, also known as semi-structured data. Document-oriented databases are one of the main categories of NoSQL databases, and the popularity of the term "document-oriented database" has grown alongside the adoption of NoSQL itself. XML databases are a subclass of document-oriented databases optimized for XML documents. Graph databases are similar, but add another layer, the relationship, which allows them to link documents for rapid traversal. Document-oriented databases are conceptually an extension of the key–value store, another type of NoSQL database. In key-value stores, data is treated as opaque by the database, whereas document-oriented systems exploit the internal structure of documents to extract metadata and optimize storage and queries. Although in practice the distinction can be minimal due to modern tooling, document stores are designed to provide a richer programming experience with modern programming techniques. Document databases differ significantly from traditional relational databases (RDBs). Relational databases store data in predefined tables, often requiring an object to be split across multiple tables. In contrast, document databases store all information for a given object in a single document, with each document potentially having a unique structure. This design eliminates the need for object-relational mapping when loading data into the database. == Documents == The central concept of a document-oriented database is the notion of a document. Although implementations vary in their specific definitions, document-oriented databases generally treat documents as self-contained units that encapsulate and encode data in a standardized format. Common encoding formats include XML, YAML, JSON, as well as binary representations such as BSON. Documents in a document store are equivalent to the programming concept of an object. They are not required to adhere to a fixed schema, and documents within the same collection may contain different fields or structures. Fields may be optional, and documents of the same logical type may differ in composition. For example, the following illustrates a document encoded in JSON: A second document might be encoded in XML as: The two example documents share some structural elements but also contain unique fields. The structure, text, and other data within each document are collectively referred to as the document's content and can be accessed or modified using retrieval or editing operations. Unlike relational databases, in which each record contains the same fields and unused fields are left empty, document-oriented databases do not require uniform fields across documents. This design allows new information to be added to some documents without affecting the structure of others. Document databases often support the storage of additional metadata alongside the document content. Such metadata may relate to organizational features, security, indexing, or other implementation-specific features. === CRUD operations === The core operations supported by a document-oriented database for manipulating documents are similar to those in other databases. Although terminology is not perfectly standardized, these operations are generally recognized as Create, Read, Update, and Delete (CRUD). Creation (C): Adds a new document to the database. Retrieval (R): Retrieves documents or fields based on queries. Update (U): Modifies the contents of existing documents. Deletion (D): Removes documents from the database. === Keys === Documents in a document-oriented database are addressed via a unique identifier. This identifier, often a string, URI, or path, can be used to retrieve the document from the database. Most document stores maintain an index on the key to optimize retrieval, and in some implementations the key is required when creating or inserting a new document. === Retrieval === In addition to key-based access, document-oriented databases typically provide an API or query language that enables retrieval based on document content or associated metadata. For example, a query may return all documents with a specific field matching a given value. The available query features, indexing options, and performance characteristics vary across implementations. Document stores differ from key-value stores in that they exploit the internal structure and metadata of stored documents. In many key-value stores, values are treated as opaque or "black-box" data, meaning the database system does not interpret their internal structure. By contrast, document-oriented databases can classify and interpret document content. This enables queries that distinguish between types of data––for example, retrieving all phone numbers containing "555" without also matching a postal code such as "55555." === Editing === Document databases typically provide mechanisms for updating or editing the content or metadata of a document. Updates may involve replacing the entire document or modifying individual elements or fields within the document. === Organization === Document database implementations support a variety of methods for organizing documents, including: Collections: Groups of documents. Depending on the implementation, a document may be required to belong to a single collection or may be allowed in multiple collections. Tags and non-visible metadata: Additional data stored outside the main document content. Directory hierarchies: Documents organized in a tree-like structure, often based on path or URI. These organizational structures may differ between logical and physical representations (e.g. on disk or in memory). == Relationship to other databases == === Relationship to key-value stores === A document-oriented database can be viewed as a specialized form of key-value store, which is itself a category of NoSQL database. In a basic key-value store, the stored value is typically treated as opaque by the database system. By contrast, a document-oriented database provides APIs or a query and update language that allows queries and modifications based on the internal structure of the document. For users who do not require advanced query, retrieval, or update capabilities, the distinction between document-oriented databases and key-value stores may be minimal. === Relationship to search engines === Some search engine and information retrieval systems, such as Apache Solr and Elasticsearch, provide document storage and support core document operations. As a result, they may meet certain functional definitions of a document-oriented database, although their primary design goals differ. === Relationship to relational databases === In a relational database, data is organized into predefined types represented as tables. Each table contains rows (records) with a fixed set of columns (fields), so all records in a table share the same structure. Administrators typically define indexes on selected fields to improve query performance. A central principle of relational database design is database normalization, in which data that might otherwise be repeated is stored in separate tables and linked using keys. When records in different tables are related, a foreign key is used to associate them. For example, an address book application may store a contact's name, image, phone numbers, mailing addresses, and email addresses. In a normalized relational design, separate tables might be created for contacts, phone numbers, and email addresses. The phone number table would include a foreign key referencing the associated contact. To reconstruct a complete contact record, the database retrieves related information from each table using the foreign keys and combines it into a single record. In contrast, a document-oriented database stores all data related to an object within a single document, and stored in the database as a single entry. In the address book example,the contact's name, image, and contact information may be stored together in one document. The document is retrieved using a unique key, and all related information is returned together, without needing to look up multiple tables. A key difference between the document-oriented and relational models is that the data formats are not predefined in the document case. In most cases, any sort of document can be stored in a database, and documents can change in type and form over time. For example, a new field such as COUNTRY_FLAG can be added to new documents as they are inserted without affecting existing documents. To aid retrieval, document-oriented systems generally allow the administrator to provide hints to the database for locating certain types of information. These hints work in a similar fashion to indexes in relational databases. Many systems also allow additional metadata outside the content of the document itself
Read more →
Top 10 AI Text-to-video Tools Compared (2026)

Trying to pick the best AI text-to-video tool? An AI text-to-video tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI text-to-video tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.
Read more →
Vlado Keselj

Vlado Keselj (Vlado Kešelj) is a Serbian-Canadian computer scientist known for his research in natural language processing and authorship attribution. He is a professor at Dalhousie University. == Education == As a high school student in Yugoslavia, Keselj competed in the 1987 International Mathematical Olympiad, earning a bronze medal. He earned his Ph.D. in 2002 at the University of Waterloo, with the dissertation Modular Stochastic HPSGs for Question Answering supervised by Nick Cercone. == Awards == Vlado Keselj is a recipient of the 2019 CAIAC Distinguished Service Award, awarded by the Canadian Artificial Intelligence Association (CAIAC). == Selected publications == Kešelj, V., Peng, F., Cercone, N., & Thomas, C. (2003, August). N-gram-based author profiles for authorship attribution. In Proceedings of the Conference of the Pacific Association for Computational Linguistics, PACLING 2003 (Vol. 3, pp. 255–264).
Read more →
Universal Networking Language

Universal Networking Language (UNL) is a declarative formal language specifically designed to represent semantic data extracted from natural language texts. It can be used as a pivot language in interlingual machine translation systems or as a knowledge representation language in information retrieval applications. == Structure == In UNL, the information conveyed by the natural language is represented sentence by sentence as a hypergraph composed of a set of directed binary labeled links between nodes or hypernodes. As an example, the English sentence "The sky was blue?!" can be represented in UNL as follows: In the example above, sky(icl>natural world) and blue(icl>color), which represent individual concepts, are UW's attributes of an object directed to linking the semantic relation between the two UWs; "@def", "@interrogative", "@past", "@exclamation" and "@entry" are attributes modifying UWs. UWs are expressed in natural language to be humanly readable. They consist of a "headword" (the UW root) and a "constraint list" (the UW suffix between parentheses), where the constraints are used to disambiguate the general concept conveyed by the headword. The set of UWs is organized in the UNL Ontology. Relations are intended to represent semantic links between words in every existing language. They can be ontological (such as "icl" and "iof"), logical (such as "and" and "or"), or thematic (such as "agt" = agent, "ins" = instrument, "tim" = time, "plc" = place, etc.). There are currently 46 relations in the UNL Specs that jointly define the UNL syntax. Within the UNL program, the process of representing natural language sentences in UNL graphs is called UNLization, and the process of generating natural language sentences out of UNL graphs is called NLization. UNLization is intended to be carried out semi-automatically (i.e., by humans with computer aids), and NLization is intended to be carried out automatically. == History == The UNL program started in 1996 as an initiative of the Institute of Advanced Studies (IAS) of the United Nations University (UNU) in Tokyo, Japan. In January 2001, the United Nations University set up an autonomous and non-profit organization, the UNDL Foundation, to be responsible for the development and management of the UNL program. It inherited from the UNU/IAS the mandate of implementing the UNL program. The overall architecture of the UNL System has been developed with a set of basic software and tools. It was recognized by the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) for the "industrial applicability" of the UNL, which was obtained in May 2002 through the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO); the UNL acquired the US patents 6,704,700 and 7,107,206.
Read more →
Resolution enhancement technology

Resolution enhancement technology (RET) is a form of image processing technology used to manipulate dot characteristics popular among laser printer and inkjet printer manufacturers. Closely related RET techniques are also used in VLSI photolithography manufacturing technology, in particular in relation to 90 nanometre technology. Resolution refers to the sharpness of image detail, smoothness of curved lines, and the faithful reproduction of an image. In both cases, RET uses pre-compensation of the image in order to try to mitigate the effects of the printing process. Among the major issues in RET in VLSI technology are the fundamental properties of a wave: amplitude, phase, and direction.
Read more →
Collocation

In corpus linguistics, a collocation is a series of words or terms that co-occur more often than would be expected by chance. In phraseology, a collocation is a type of compositional phraseme, meaning that it can be understood from the words that make it up. This contrasts with an idiom, where the meaning of the whole cannot be inferred from its parts, and may be completely unrelated. There are about seven main types of collocations: adjective + noun, noun + noun (such as collective nouns), noun + verb, verb + noun, adverb + adjective, verbs + prepositional phrase (phrasal verbs), and verb + adverb. Collocation extraction is a computational technique that finds collocations in a document or corpus, using various computational linguistics elements resembling data mining. == Expanded definition == Collocations are partly or fully fixed expressions that become established through repeated context-dependent use. Such terms as crystal clear, middle management, nuclear family, and cosmetic surgery are examples of collocated pairs of words. Collocations can be in a syntactic relation (such as verb–object: make and decision), lexical relation (such as antonymy), or they can be in no linguistically defined relation. Knowledge of collocations is vital for the competent use of a language: a grammatically correct sentence will stand out as awkward if collocational preferences are violated. This makes collocation a common focus for language teaching. Corpus linguists specify a key word in context (KWIC) and identify the words immediately surrounding them, to illustrate the way words are used in practice. The processing of collocations involves a number of parameters, the most important of which is the measure of association, which evaluates whether the co-occurrence is purely by chance or statistically significant. Due to the non-random nature of language, most collocations are classed as significant, and the association scores are simply used to rank the results. Commonly used measures of association include mutual information, t scores, and log-likelihood. Rather than select a single definition, Gledhill proposes that collocation involves at least three different perspectives: co-occurrence, a statistical view, which sees collocation as the recurrent appearance in a text of a node and its collocates; construction, which sees collocation either as a correlation between a lexeme and a lexical-grammatical pattern, or as a relation between a base and its collocative partners; and expression, a pragmatic view of collocation as a conventional unit of expression, regardless of form. These different perspectives contrast with the usual way of presenting collocation in phraseological studies. Traditionally speaking, collocation is explained in terms of all three perspectives at once, in a continuum: == In dictionaries == In 1933, Harold Palmer's Second Interim Report on English Collocations highlighted the importance of collocation as a key to producing natural-sounding language, for anyone learning a foreign language. Thus from the 1940s onwards, information about recurrent word combinations became a standard feature of monolingual learner's dictionaries. As these dictionaries became "less word-centred and more phrase-centred", more attention was paid to collocation. This trend was supported, from the beginning of the 21st century, by the availability of large text corpora and intelligent corpus-querying software, making it possible to provide a more systematic account of collocation in dictionaries. Using these tools, dictionaries such as the Macmillan English Dictionary and the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English included boxes or panels with lists of frequent collocations. There are also a number of specialized dictionaries devoted to describing the frequent collocations in a language. These include (for Spanish) Redes: Diccionario combinatorio del español contemporaneo (2004), (for French) Le Robert: Dictionnaire des combinaisons de mots (2007), and (for English) the LTP Dictionary of Selected Collocations (1997) and the Macmillan Collocations Dictionary (2010). == Statistically significant collocation == Student's t-test can be used to determine whether the occurrence of a collocation in a corpus is statistically significant. For a bigram w 1 w 2 {\displaystyle w_{1}w_{2}} , let P ( w 1 ) = # w 1 N {\displaystyle P(w_{1})={\frac {\#w_{1}}{N}}} be the unconditional probability of occurrence of w 1 {\displaystyle w_{1}} in a corpus with size N {\displaystyle N} , and let P ( w 2 ) = # w 2 N {\displaystyle P(w_{2})={\frac {\#w_{2}}{N}}} be the unconditional probability of occurrence of w 2 {\displaystyle w_{2}} in the corpus. The t-score for the bigram w 1 w 2 {\displaystyle w_{1}w_{2}} is calculated as: where x ¯ = # w i w j N {\displaystyle {\bar {x}}={\frac {\#w_{i}w_{j}}{N}}} is the sample mean of the occurrence of w 1 w 2 {\displaystyle w_{1}w_{2}} , # w 1 w 2 {\displaystyle \#w_{1}w_{2}} is the number of occurrences of w 1 w 2 {\displaystyle w_{1}w_{2}} , μ = P ( w i ) P ( w j ) {\displaystyle \mu =P(w_{i})P(w_{j})} is the probability of w 1 w 2 {\displaystyle w_{1}w_{2}} under the null-hypothesis that w 1 {\displaystyle w_{1}} and w 2 {\displaystyle w_{2}} appear independently in the text, and s 2 = x ¯ ( 1 − x ¯ ) ≈ x ¯ {\displaystyle s^{2}={\bar {x}}(1-{\bar {x}})\approx {\bar {x}}} is the sample variance. With a large N {\displaystyle N} , the t-test is equivalent to a Z-test.
Read more →
AI Background Removers Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

Trying to pick the best AI background remover? An AI background remover is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI background remover slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.
Read more →