AI Content Repurposing Service

AI Content Repurposing Service — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

  • Ibotta

    Ibotta

    Ibotta, Inc. is an American mobile technology company headquartered in Denver, Colorado. Founded in 2011, the company offers cash back rewards on various purchases through its Ibotta Performance Network and direct to consumer app. Ibotta partners with CPG (consumer packaged goods) brands and network publishers to provide these rewards. As of 2024, the company operates solely in the United States. The company's rewards-as-a-service offering, the Ibotta Performance Network, went live in 2022. In August 2019, Ibotta received a $1 billion valuation after its Series D funding, and in 2023, the company surpassed $1.5 billion cash rewards paid to over 50 million consumers since the company's founding. Ibotta became a publicly traded company in April 2024 with a listing on the New York Stock Exchange. As of September 2025, Ibotta is trading at approximately $27.13 per share, marking a 69% decline from its initial public offering price of $88 per share on April 18, 2024. == History == === Founding through early 2019 === Ibotta was founded by current CEO Bryan Leach. The company was incorporated in 2011 and the app launched to both the App Store and Google Play stores in 2012. Early investors included entrepreneur and computer scientist Jim Clark and Tom “TJ” Jermoluk, Chairman of @Home Network. In 2015, Ibotta expanded beyond item level grocery, adding the ability to get cash back on in-store retail purchases. In 2016, in-app mobile commerce began, allowing users to navigate from the Ibotta app to its partners' apps to earn cash back on purchases. In 2016 with a Series C investment, Ibotta had raised over $73 million in funding. In March of that year, Ibotta partnered with Anheuser-Busch to offer cash back for adults who purchased its products. In May, the company partnered with LiveRamp so that companies could use their CRM data to create segmented, personalized campaigns. At the time, the company had around 200 full- and part-time employees and moved from offices in Lower Downtown Denver (LoDo) to a 40,000-square-foot office in the central Denver business district. A year later, the company had to expand to a second floor as it added almost another 100 employees. In 2017, Ibotta added cash back for Uber to its app as well as cash back rewards for online and mobile purchases. In 2018, Ibotta was listed on the Inc. 5,000 list as one of the fastest growing private companies in the U.S. A year later, in January 2019, the Ibotta app had been downloaded more than 30 million times with users receiving a reported $500 million in cash back rewards. That year, Ibotta was the largest mobile company in Colorado with six million monthly active users. === August 2019 to present === In August 2019, Ibotta was valued at $1 billion, following a Series D round of funding. The round was led by Koch Disruptive Technologies, a subsidiary of Koch Industries. 2019 was also the year the company introduced Pay with Ibotta, which allowed users to complete purchases at key retailers on the Ibotta app and earn instant cash back in the process. With that new service, users were able to enter their purchase total and use a QR code to checkout and receive immediate cash back. In 2020, the company partnered with Trees for the Future to plant up to 1 million trees as part of an Earth Month campaign to raise awareness about the waste of unused paper coupons. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Ibotta partnered with CPG brands in their “Here to Help” campaign and together committed over $10 million in cash back to American consumers. The company added the ability to earn cash back from online grocery pick-up and delivery orders. Later that year, Ibotta started its free Thanksgiving program, providing users with 100% cash back on select groceries needed for a Thanksgiving meal. By 2022, the company had provided approximately 10 million Thanksgiving meals. In 2021, Ibotta acquired the company OctoShop (originally InStok), a shopping browser extension company. The OctoShop app enables users to compare prices across stores and set restock and price-drop alerts. In April 2022, the Ibotta Performance Network (IPN) was launched. The IPN allows brands to deliver digital offers to consumers through third party publishers. Retailers including Walmart, Dollar General and Family Dollar, food delivery services including Instacart, and convenience stores including Shell are all part of the Ibotta Performance Network. This pay-per-sales or success-based performance network reaches over 200 million consumers. On April 18, 2024, Ibotta had its initial public offering (IPO), trading on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) under the ticker symbol IBTA. It was the largest technology IPO in Colorado history. In October 2025, Ibotta announced a partnership with technology and analytics company Circana, integrating Circana's Household Lift measurement into Ibotta campaigns to give CPG brands an increased understanding of the impact of their promotional campaigns. On November 3, 2025, Ibotta launched LiveLift, a tool for companies to measure the return on investment of digital promotions, in order to optimize performance marketing goals. === Athletic partnerships === Ibotta became the official jersey patch partner of the New Orleans Pelicans, a professional men's basketball team in the National Basketball Association (NBA), for the 2020–2021 and 2023–2024 seasons. Ibotta became the official jersey patch partner of the 2023 NBA champion Denver Nuggets baskeetball team beginning in the 2023–2024 season. In March 2023, F1 driver Logan Sargeant, the first U.S. racer to compete in F1 since 2015, partnered with Ibotta. The Ibotta logo was displayed on Sargeant's racing helmet throughout his F1 career. In June 2023, UConn Huskies women's basketball player Paige Bueckers entered into a "name, image, and likeness" (NIL) promotional agreement with Ibotta. According to a press release by Ibotta, the company has agreements with The Brandr Group, which finds NIL opportunities for women college athletes, and the Pearpop social media marketing platform to promote Ibotta. == Legal issues == In April 2025, shareholders filed a class action lawsuit—Fortune v. Ibotta, Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado (Case No. 25-cv-01213)—alleging that the registration statement in connection with Ibotta’s April 2024 initial public offering omitted material information. The complaint claims that, although Ibotta disclosed detailed terms for its contract with Walmart Inc., it failed to warn investors that its agreement with The Kroger Co., its second-largest client, was terminable at will and thus could be canceled without warning, creating a misleading impression of stability.

    Read more →
  • Jump-and-Walk algorithm

    Jump-and-Walk algorithm

    Jump-and-Walk is an algorithm for point location in triangulations (though most of the theoretical analysis were performed in 2D and 3D random Delaunay triangulations). Surprisingly, the algorithm does not need any preprocessing or complex data structures except some simple representation of the triangulation itself. The predecessor of Jump-and-Walk was due to Lawson (1977) and Green and Sibson (1978), which picks a random starting point S and then walks from S toward the query point Q one triangle at a time. But no theoretical analysis was known for these predecessors until after mid-1990s. Jump-and-Walk picks a small group of sample points and starts the walk from the sample point which is the closest to Q until the simplex containing Q is found. The algorithm was a folklore in practice for some time, and the formal presentation of the algorithm and the analysis of its performance on 2D random Delaunay triangulation was done by Devroye, Mucke and Zhu in mid-1990s (the paper appeared in Algorithmica, 1998). The analysis on 3D random Delaunay triangulation was done by Mucke, Saias and Zhu (ACM Symposium of Computational Geometry, 1996). In both cases, a boundary condition was assumed, namely, Q must be slightly away from the boundary of the convex domain where the vertices of the random Delaunay triangulation are drawn. In 2004, Devroye, Lemaire and Moreau showed that in 2D the boundary condition can be withdrawn (the paper appeared in Computational Geometry: Theory and Applications, 2004). Jump-and-Walk has been used in many famous software packages, e.g., QHULL, Triangle and CGAL.

    Read more →
  • Lion algorithm

    Lion algorithm

    Lion algorithm (LA) is one among the bio-inspired (or) nature-inspired optimization algorithms (or) that are mainly based on meta-heuristic principles. It was first introduced by B. R. Rajakumar in 2012 in the name, Lion’s Algorithm. It was further extended in 2014 to solve the system identification problem. This version was referred as LA, which has been applied by many researchers for their optimization problems. == Inspiration from lion’s social behaviour == Lions form a social system called a "pride", which consists of 1–3 pair of lions. A pride of lions shares a common area known as territory in which a dominant lion is called as territorial lion. The territorial lion safeguards its territory from outside attackers, especially nomadic lions. This process is called territorial defense. It protects the cubs till they become sexually matured. The maturity period is about 2–4 years. The pride undergoes survival fights to protect its territory and the cubs from nomadic lions. Upon getting defeated by the nomadic lions, the dominating nomadic lion takes the role of territorial lion by killing or driving out the cubs of the pride. The lioness of the pride give birth to cubs though the new territorial lion. When the cubs of the pride mature and considered to be stronger than the territorial lion, they take over the pride. This process is called territorial take-over. If territorial take-over happens, either the old territorial lion, which is considered to be laggard, is driven out or it leaves the pride. The stronger lions and lioness form the new pride and give birth to their own cubs == Terminology == In the LA, the terms that are associated with lion’s social system are mapped to the terminology of optimization problems. Few of such notable terms are related here. Lion: A potential solution to be generated or determined as optimal (or) near-optimal solution of the problem. The lion can be a territorial lion and lioness, cubs and nomadic lions that represent the solution based on the processing steps of the LA. Territorial lion: The strongest solution of the pride that tends to meet the objective function. Nomadic lion: A random solution, sometimes termed as nomad, to facilitate the exploration principle Laggard lion: Poor solutions that are failed in the survival fight. Pride: A pool of potential solutions i.e. a lion, lioness and their cubs, that are potential solutions of the search problem. Fertility evaluation: A process of evaluating whether the territorial lion and lioness are able to provide potential solutions in the future generations i.e. It ensures that the lion or lioness converge at every generation. Survival fight: It is a greedy selection process, which is often carried out between the pride and nomadic lion. == Algorithm == The steps involved in LA are given below: Pride Generation: Generate X m a l e {\displaystyle X^{male}} , X f e m a l e {\displaystyle X^{female}} and X 1 n o m a d {\displaystyle X_{1}^{nomad}} Determine f ( X m a l e ) {\displaystyle f(X^{male})} , f ( X f e m a l e ) {\displaystyle f(X^{female})} , f ( X 1 n o m a d ) {\displaystyle f(X_{1}^{nomad})} Initialize f r e f {\displaystyle f^{ref}} as f ( X m a l e ) {\displaystyle f(X^{male})} and N g {\displaystyle N_{g}} as 0 Memorize X m a l e {\displaystyle X^{male}} and X f e m a l e {\displaystyle X^{female}} Apply Fertility evaluation Process Generation of cubpool by mating Gender clustering: Define X c u b m a l e {\displaystyle X_{cub}^{male}} and X c u b f e m a l e {\displaystyle X_{cub}^{female}} Initialize a g e c u b {\displaystyle age_{cub}} as zero Apply Cub growth function Territorial defense: If X m a l e {\displaystyle X^{male}} (or pride) fails in the survival fight i.e. X 1 n o m a d {\displaystyle X_{1}^{nomad}} defeats the pride, go to step 4, else continue Increase a g e c u b {\displaystyle age_{cub}} by 1 and check whether cub attains maturity i.e., if a g e c u b > a g e m a x {\displaystyle age_{cub}>age_{max}} , go to Step 9, else continue Territorial takeover: If X c u b m a l e {\displaystyle X_{cub}^{male}} and X c u b f e m a l e {\displaystyle X_{cub}^{female}} are found to be closer to optimal solution, update X m a l e {\displaystyle X^{male}} and X f e m a l e {\displaystyle X^{female}} Increment N g {\displaystyle N_{g}} by 1 Repeat from Step 5, if termination criterion is not violated, else return X m a l e {\displaystyle X^{male}} as the near-optimal solution == Variants == The LA has been further taken forward to adopt in different problem areas. According to the characteristics of the problem area, significant amendment has been done in the processes and the models used in the LA. Accordingly, diverse variants have been developed by the researchers. They can be broadly grouped as hybrid LAs and non-hybrid LAs. Hybrid LAs are the LAs that are amended by the principle of other meta-heuristics, whereas the Non-hybrid LAs take any scientific amendment inside its operation that are felt to be essential to attend the respective problem area. == Applications == LA is applied in diverse engineering applications that range from network security, text mining, image processing, electrical systems, data mining and many more. Few of the notable applications are discussed here. Networking applications: In WSN, LA is used to solve the cluster head selection problem by determining optimal cluster head. Route discovery problem in both the VANET and MANET are also addressed by the LA in the literature. It is also used to detect attacks in advanced networking scenarios such as Software-Defined Networks (SDN) Power Systems: LA has attended generation rescheduling problem in a deregulated environment, optimal localization and sizing of FACTS devices for power quality enhancement and load-frequency controlling problem Cloud computing: LA is used in optimal container-resource allocation problem in cloud environment and cloud security

    Read more →
  • Known-item search

    Known-item search

    Known-item search is a specialization of information exploration which represents the activities carried out by searchers who have a particular item in mind. In the context of library catalogs, known‐item search means a search for an item for which the author or title is known. Although the concept of known-item search originated in library science, it is now applied in the context of web search and other online search activities. Known-item search is distinguished from exploratory search, in which a searcher is unfamiliar with the domain of their search goal, unsure about the ways to achieve their goal, and/or unsure about what their goal is.

    Read more →
  • Leakage (machine learning)

    Leakage (machine learning)

    In statistics and machine learning, leakage (also known as data leakage or target leakage) refers to the use of information during model training that would not be available at prediction time. This results in overly optimistic performance estimates, as the model appears to perform better during evaluation than it actually would in a production environment. Leakage is often subtle and indirect, making it difficult to detect and eliminate. It can lead a statistician or modeler to select a suboptimal model, which may be outperformed by a leakage-free alternative. == Leakage modes == Leakage can occur at multiple stages of the machine learning workflow. Broadly, its sources can be divided into two categories: those arising from features and those arising from training examples. === Feature leakage === Feature or column-wise leakage is caused by the inclusion of columns which are one of the following: a duplicate label, a proxy for the label, or the label itself. These features, known as anachronisms, will not be available when the model is used for predictions, and result in leakage if included when the model is trained. For example, including a "MonthlySalary" column when predicting "YearlySalary"; or "MinutesLate" when predicting "IsLate". === Training example leakage === Row-wise leakage is caused by improper sharing of information between rows of data. Types of row-wise leakage include: Premature featurization; leaking from premature featurization before Cross-validation/Train/Test split (must fit MinMax/ngrams/etc on only the train split, then transform the test set) Duplicate rows between train/validation/test (for example, oversampling a dataset to pad its size before splitting; or, different rotations/augmentations of a single image; bootstrap sampling before splitting; or duplicating rows to up sample the minority class) Non-independent and identically distributed random (non-IID) data Time leakage (for example, splitting a time-series dataset randomly instead of newer data in test set using a train/test split or rolling-origin cross-validation) Group leakage—not including a grouping split column (for example, Andrew Ng's group had 100k x-rays of 30k patients, meaning ~3 images per patient. The paper used random splitting instead of ensuring that all images of a patient were in the same split. Hence the model partially memorized the patients instead of learning to recognize pneumonia in chest x-rays.) A 2023 review found data leakage to be "a widespread failure mode in machine-learning (ML)-based science", having affected at least 294 academic publications across 17 disciplines, and causing a potential reproducibility crisis. == Detection == Data leakage in machine learning can be detected through various methods, focusing on performance analysis, feature examination, data auditing, and model behavior analysis. Performance-wise, unusually high accuracy or significant discrepancies between training and test results often indicate leakage. Inconsistent cross-validation outcomes may also signal issues. Feature examination involves scrutinizing feature importance rankings and ensuring temporal integrity in time series data. A thorough audit of the data pipeline is crucial, reviewing pre-processing steps, feature engineering, and data splitting processes. Detecting duplicate entries across dataset splits is also important. For language models, the Min-K% method can detect the presence of data in a pretraining dataset. It presents a sentence suspected to be present in the pretraining dataset, and computes the log-likelihood of each token, then compute the average of the lowest K of these. If this exceeds a threshold, then the sentence is likely present. This method is improved by comparing against a baseline of the mean and variance. Analyzing model behavior can reveal leakage. Models relying heavily on counter-intuitive features or showing unexpected prediction patterns warrant investigation. Performance degradation over time when tested on new data may suggest earlier inflated metrics due to leakage. Advanced techniques include backward feature elimination, where suspicious features are temporarily removed to observe performance changes. Using a separate hold-out dataset for final validation before deployment is advisable.

    Read more →
  • Information scientist

    Information scientist

    The term information scientist developed in the latter part of the twentieth century by Wm. Hovey Smith to describe an individual, usually with a relevant subject degree (such as one in Information and Computer Science - CIS) or high level of subject knowledge, providing focused information to scientific and technical research staff in industry. It is a role quite distinct from and complementary to that of a librarian. Developments in end-user searching, together with some convergence between the roles of librarian and information scientist, have led to a diminution in its use in this context, and the term information officer or information professional (information specialist) are also now used. The term was, and is, also used for an individual carrying out research in information science. Brian C. Vickery mentions that the Institute of Information Scientists (IIS) was established in London during 1958 and lists the criteria put forward by this institute "Criteria for Information Science" (appendix 1) as well as his own "Areas of study in information science" (appendix 2). The IIS merged with the Library Association in 2002 to form the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP). == Notable Information Scientists == See also Award of Merit - Association for Information Science and Technology Marcia Bates David Blair (information technologist) Samuel C. Bradford Michael Buckland John M. Carroll Blaise Cronin Emilia Currás Brenda Dervin Eugene Garfield Paul B. Kantor Frederick Wilfrid Lancaster Calvin Mooers Tefko Saracevic Linda C. Smith Robert Saxton Taylor Brian Campbell Vickery Thomas D. Wilson == Additional reading == Ellis, David and Merete Haugan. (1997) "Modelling the information seeking patterns of engineers and research scientists in an industrial environment" (Journal of Documentation, Volume 53(4): pp. 384–403) Poole, Alex H. (2024). "'There's a big difference between going through life with the wind at your back, and going through life leaning into the wind': Feminism in Post-World War II Information Science". Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 61: 300–313. doi:10.1002/pra2.1029. Vickery, Brian Campbell (1988) "Essays presented to B. C. Vickery" (Journal of Documentation, Volume 44, pp. 199–283). Vickery, B. & Vickery, A. (1987) Information Science in theory and practice (London: Bowker-Saur, pp. 361–369)

    Read more →
  • Webometrics

    Webometrics

    The science of webometrics (also referred to as cybermetrics) aims to quantify the World Wide Web to get knowledge about the number and types of hyperlinks, the structure of the World Wide Web, and using patterns. According to Björneborn and Ingwersen, the definition of webometrics is "the study of the quantitative aspects of the construction and use of information resources, structures and technologies on the Web drawing on bibliometric and informetric approaches." The term webometrics was coined by Almind and Ingwersen (1997). A second definition of webometrics has also been introduced, "the study of web-based content with primarily quantitative methods for social science research goals using techniques that are not specific to one field of study", which emphasizes the development of applied methods for use in the wider social sciences. The purpose of this alternative definition was to help publicize appropriate methods outside the information-science discipline rather than to replace the original definition within information science. Similar scientific fields are: bibliometrics, informetrics, scientometrics, virtual ethnography, and web mining. One relatively straightforward measure is the "web impact factor" (WIF) introduced by Ingwersen (1998). The WIF measure may be defined as the number of web pages in a web site receiving links from other web sites, divided by the number of web pages published in the site that are accessible to the crawler. However, the use of WIF has been disregarded due to the mathematical artifacts derived from power law distributions of these variables. Other similar indicators using size of the institution instead of number of webpages have been proved more useful.

    Read more →
  • Harold Borko

    Harold Borko

    Harold Borko (1922-2012) was an American psychologist and researcher working primarily in the field of information science. == Biography == Borko was born in 1922 in New York City, New York. After serving in the US Army from 1942 to 1946 he obtained a BA in Psychology from the University of California, Los Angeles in 1948 and both his MA and PhD from the University of Southern California in Psychology in 1952. He returned to the army as a psychologist until 1956 after which he began a career working in and teaching information science. He died in California in 2012. == Information Science Career == After leaving the military Borko began working at the RAND Corporation as a Systems Training Specialist in 1956 and moved to the Systems Development Corporation a year later working in the Language Processing and Retrieval department. Alongside this work he taught Psychology at USC from 1957-65 and then moved into teaching Library Science at UCLA from 1965. In 1967 Borko left his role at the Systems Development Corporation and continued as a full-time professor at UCLA until his retirement in 1993.. From 1961 to 1995 Borko authored and co-authored over 100 articles on new developments in the field as well as the historiography of information science. He served as an editor of the Journal of Educational Data Processing from 1963-1975 and as President of the American Society for Information Science in 1966 == Partial list of works == Borko, H. (1962, May). The construction of an empirically based mathematically derived classification system. In Proceedings of the May 1-3, 1962, spring joint computer conference (pp. 279-289). Borko, H., & Bernick, M. (1963). Automatic document classification. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 10(2), 151-162. Borko, H. (1964). The Storage and Retrieval of Educational Information. Journal of Teacher Education, 15(4), 449-452. Borko, H. (1964). Measuring the reliability of subject classification by men and machines. American Documentation, 15(4), 268-273. Borko, H. (1965). The conceptual foundations of information systems. Borko, H. (1968), Information science: What is it?†. Amer. Doc., 19: 3-5. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.5090190103 Borko, H. (1970). Experiments in book indexing by computer. Information storage and retrieval, 6(1), 5-16. Borko, H. (1985). An introduction to computer-based library systems (Lucy A. Tedd). Education for Information, 3(1), 61.

    Read more →
  • IQTELL

    IQTELL

    IQTELL was a productivity app that allowed users to manage email, tasks, projects, calendars, contacts, Evernotes and more in a single app. IQTELL was available as a web app, as well as an iOS and Android app. All user information was automatically synced between all devices. iOS and Android apps supported offline access. The app could be used to implement concepts and techniques described in the book Getting Things Done by David Allen. == History == IQTELL was created by Ran Flam and released in 2013. In 2014, mobile apps for iOS and Android were released. In 2015, Premium and Platinum subscription plans were introduced (while maintaining the free user version). In April 2017, a new web app was launched. On July 31, 2017, all IQTell services have been closed. == Productivity methods == IQTell was designed to fit in with the Getting Things Done (GTD) productivity methods. Users may have had utilized GTD lists, such as Inbox, Actions, Projects, Someday, Ticklers, and Reference information to process their Inbox items into relevant GTD lists. Using the web app, iOS and/or Android apps, users could deploy macros/shortcuts to quickly process their email. Email was turned into tasks (actions), projects, etc. The original email was removed from the email inbox. The email became a part of the items created (e.g. actions, project, etc.) and could also be viewed in the All Mail folder (if Gmail), or the Archive folder (if non-Gmail). Users had flexibility to use the out-of-the-box macros/shortcuts as well as edit/create additional macros. IQTELL features included email, calendars, contacts, list management, sharing and collaboration with team members. All of the features were compatible with commonly used organization software such as Evernote and iCloud.

    Read more →
  • Block swap algorithms

    Block swap algorithms

    In computer algorithms, block swap algorithms swap two regions of elements of an array. It is simple to swap two non-overlapping regions of an array of equal size. However, it is not as simple to swap two contiguous regions of an array of unequal sizes (algorithms that perform such swapping are called rotation algorithms). A few well-known algorithms can accomplish this: Bentley's juggling (also known as the dolphin algorithm), Gries-Mills rotation, triple reversal algorithm, conjoined triple reversal algorithm (also known as the trinity rotation) and Successive rotation. == Triple reversal algorithm == The triple reversal algorithm is the simplest to explain, using rotations. A rotation is an in-place reversal of array elements. This method swaps two elements of an array from outside in within a range. The rotation works for an even or odd number of array elements. The reversal algorithm uses three in-place rotations to accomplish an in-place block swap: Rotate region A Rotate region B Rotate region AB Where A and B are adjacent regions of an array that together form the region AB. Gries-Mills and reversal algorithms perform better than Bentley's juggling, because of their cache-friendly memory access pattern behavior. The triple reversal algorithm parallelizes well, because rotations can be split into sub-regions, which can be rotated independently of others.

    Read more →
  • Five safes

    Five safes

    The Five Safes is a framework for helping make decisions about making effective use of data which is confidential or sensitive. It is mainly used to describe or design research access to statistical data held by government and health agencies, and by data archives such as the UK Data Service. It is not an internationally accepted standard. Two of the Five Safes refer to statistical disclosure control, and so the Five Safes is usually used to contrast statistical and non-statistical controls when comparing data management options. == Concept == The Five Safes proposes that data management decisions be considered as solving problems in five 'dimensions': projects, people, settings, data and outputs. The combination of the controls leads to 'safe use'. These are most commonly expressed as questions, for example: These dimensions are scales, not limits. That is, solutions can have a mix of more or fewer controls in each dimension, but the overall aim of 'safe use' independent of the particular mix. For example, a public use file available for open download cannot control who uses it, where or for what purpose, and so all the control (protection) must be in the data itself. In contrast, a file which is only accessed through a secure environment with certified users can contain very sensitive information: the non-statistical controls allow the data to be 'unsafe'. One academic likened the process to a graphic equalizer, where bass and treble can be combined independently to produce a sound the listener likes, which has proven to be a very useful metaphor. This 2023 Data Foundation webinar is an expert discussion of how the elements interact, including an excellent introductory representation. There is no 'order' to the Five Safes, in that one is necessarily more important than the others. However, Ritchie argued that the 'managerial' controls (projects, people, setting) should be addressed before the 'statistical' controls (data, output). The Five Safes concept is associated with other topics which developed from the same programme at ONS, although these are not necessarily implemented. Safe people is associated with 'active researcher management', while safe outputs is linked with principles-based output statistical disclosure control. The Five Safes is a positive framework, describing what is and is not. The EDRU ('evidence-based, default-open, risk-managed, user-centred') attitudinal model is sometimes used to give a normative context == The 'data access spectrum' == From 2003 the Five Safes was also represented in a simpler form as a 'Data Access Spectrum'. The non-data controls (project, people, setting, outputs) tend to work together, in that organisations often see these as a complementary set of restrictions on access. These can then be contrasted with choices about data anonymisation to present a linear representation of data access options. This presentation is consistent with the idea of 'data as a residual', as well as data protection laws of the time which often characterised data simply as anonymous or not anonymous. A similar idea had already been developed independently in 2001 by Chuck Humphrey of the Canadian RDC network, the 'continuum of access'. More recently, The Open Data Institute has developed a 'Data Spectrum toolkit' which includes industry-specific examples. == History and terminology == The Five Safes was devised in the winter of 2002/2003 by Felix Ritchie at the UK Office for National Statistics (ONS) to describe its secure remote-access Virtual Microdata Laboratory (VML). It was described at this time as the 'VML Security Model'. This was adopted by the NORC data enclave, and more widely in the US, as the 'portfolio model' (although this is now also used to refer to a slightly different legal/statistical/educational breakdown). In 2012 the framework as was still being referred to as the 'VML security model', but its increasing use among non-UK organisations led to the adoption of the more general and informative phrase 'Five Safes'. The original framework only had four safes (projects, people, settings and outputs): the framework was used to describe highly detailed data access through a secure environment, and so the 'data' dimension was irrelevant. From 2007 onwards, 'safe data' was included as the framework was used to a describe a wider range of ONS activities. As the US version was based upon the 2005 specification, some US iterations uses have the original four dimensions (eg). Some discussions, such as the OECD, use the term 'secure' instead 'safe'. However, the use of both these terms can cause presentational problems: less control in a particular dimension could be seen to imply 'unsafe users' or 'insecure settings', for example, which distracts from the main message. Hence, the Australian government uses the term "five data sharing principles". The 'Anonymisation Decision-Making Framework' uses a framework based on the Five Safes but relabelling "projects", "people", and "settings" as "governance", "agency" and "infrastructure", respectively; "Output" is omitted, and "safe use" becomes "functional anonymisation". There is no reference to the Five Safes or any associated literature. The Australian version was required to include references to the Five Safes, and presented it as an alternative without comment. == Application == The framework has had three uses: pedagogical, descriptive, and design. Since 2016, it has also been used, directly and indirectly in legislation. See for more detailed examples. === Pedagogy === The first significant use of the framework, other than internal administrative use, was to structure researcher training courses at the UK Office for National Statistics from 2003. UK Data Archive, Administrative Data Research Network, Eurostat, Statistics New Zealand, the Mexican National Institute of Statistics and Geography, NORC, Statistics Canada and the Australian Bureau of Statistics, amongst others, have also used this framework. Most of these courses are for researchers using restricted-access facilities; the Eurostat courses are unusual in that they are designed for all users of sensitive data. === Description === The framework is often used to describe existing data access solutions (e.g. UK HMRC Data Lab, UK Data Service, Statistics New Zealand) or planned/conceptualised ones (e.g. Eurostat in 2011). An early use was to help identify areas where ONS' still had 'irreducible risks' in its provision of secure remote access. The framework is mostly used for confidential social science data. To date it appears to have made little impact on medical research planning, although it is now included in the revised guidelines on implementing HIPAA regulations in the US, and by Cancer Research UK and the Health Foundation in the UK. It has also been used to describe a security model for the Scottish Health Informatics Programme. === Design === In general the Five Safes has been used to describe solutions post-factum, and to explain/justify choices made, but an increasing number of organisations have used the framework to design data access solutions. For example, the Hellenic Statistical Agency developed a data strategy built around the Five Safes in 2016; the UK Health Foundation used the Five Safes to design its data management and training programmes. Use in the private sector is less common but some organisations have incorporated the Five Safes into consulting services. In 2015 the UK Data Service organized a workshop to encourage data users from the academic and private sectors to think about how to manage confidential research data, using the Five Safes to demonstrate alternative options and best practice. Early adopters for strategic design use were in Australia: both the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the Australian Department of Social Service used the Five Safes as an ex ante design tool. In 2017 the Australian Productivity Commission recommended adopting a version of the framework to support cross-government data sharing and re-use. This underwent extensive consultation and culminated in the DAT Act 2022. Since 2020 the Five Safes has been the overriding framework for the design of new secure facilities and data sharing arrangements in the UK for public health and social sciences. This has been promoted by the Office for Statistics Regulation, the UK Statistics Authority, NHS DIgital, and the research funding bodies Administrative Data Research UK and DARE UK. === Regulation and legislation === Three laws have incorporated the Fives Safes. They are explicit in the South Australian Public Sector (Data Sharing) Act 2016, and implicit in the research provisions of the UK Digital Economy Act 2017. The Australian Data Availability and Transparency Act 2022 renames the Five Safes as the Five Data Sharing Principles.A 2025 statutory review of the DAT Act 2022 found "that the DAT Act has not been effective in achieving its objectives.". The review includes specific referen

    Read more →
  • Causal AI

    Causal AI

    Causal AI is a technique in artificial intelligence that builds a causal model and can thereby make inferences using causality rather than just correlation. One practical use for causal AI is for organisations to explain decision-making and the causes for a decision. Systems based on causal AI, by identifying the underlying web of causality for a behaviour or event, provide insights that solely predictive AI models might fail to extract from historical data. An analysis of causality may be used to supplement human decisions in situations where understanding the causes behind an outcome is necessary, such as quantifying the impact of different interventions, policy decisions or performing scenario planning. A 2024 paper from Google DeepMind demonstrated mathematically that "Any agent capable of adapting to a sufficiently large set of distributional shifts must have learned a causal model". The paper offers the interpretation that learning to generalise beyond the original training set requires learning a causal model, concluding that causal AI is necessary for artificial general intelligence. == History == The concept of causal AI and the limits of machine learning were raised by Judea Pearl, the Turing Award-winning computer scientist and philosopher, in 2018's The Book of Why: The New Science of Cause and Effect. Pearl asserted: “Machines' lack of understanding of causal relations is perhaps the biggest roadblock to giving them human-level intelligence.” In 2020, Columbia University established a Causal AI Lab under Director Elias Bareinboim. Professor Bareinboim's research focuses on causal and counterfactual inference and their applications to data-driven fields in the health and social sciences as well as artificial intelligence and machine learning. Technological research and consulting firm Gartner for the first time included causal AI in its 2022 Hype Cycle report, citing it as one of five critical technologies in accelerated AI automation. Causal AI is closely related to but distinct from fields such as causal inference, explainable AI and causal reasoning. While causal inference focuses on estimating cause-effect relationships (often from observational data), causal AI emphasises the integration of those causal models into AI systems for prediction, planning and adaptation.

    Read more →
  • Commonsense knowledge (artificial intelligence)

    Commonsense knowledge (artificial intelligence)

    In artificial intelligence research, commonsense knowledge consists of facts about the everyday world, such as "Lemons are sour" or "Cows say moo", that all humans are expected to know. It is currently an unsolved problem in artificial general intelligence. The first AI program to address common sense knowledge was Advice Taker in 1959 by John McCarthy. Commonsense knowledge can underpin a commonsense reasoning process, to attempt inferences such as "You might bake a cake because you want people to eat the cake." A natural language processing process can be attached to the commonsense knowledge base to allow the knowledge base to attempt to answer questions about the world. Common sense knowledge also helps to solve problems in the face of incomplete information. Using widely held beliefs about everyday objects, or common sense knowledge, AI systems make common sense assumptions or default assumptions about the unknown similar to the way people do. In an AI system or in English, this is expressed as "Normally P holds", "Usually P" or "Typically P so Assume P". For example, if we know the fact "Tweety is a bird", because we know the commonly held belief about birds, "typically birds fly," without knowing anything else about Tweety, we may reasonably assume the fact that "Tweety can fly." As more knowledge of the world is discovered or learned over time, the AI system can revise its assumptions about Tweety using a truth maintenance process. If we later learn that "Tweety is a penguin" then truth maintenance revises this assumption because we also know "penguins do not fly". == Commonsense reasoning == Commonsense reasoning simulates the human ability to use commonsense knowledge to make presumptions about the type and essence of ordinary situations they encounter every day, and to change their "minds" should new information come to light. This includes time, missing or incomplete information and cause and effect. The ability to explain cause and effect is an important aspect of explainable AI. Truth maintenance algorithms automatically provide an explanation facility because they create elaborate records of presumptions. Compared with humans, all existing computer programs that attempt human-level AI perform extremely poorly on modern "commonsense reasoning" benchmark tests such as the Winograd Schema Challenge. The problem of attaining human-level competency at "commonsense knowledge" tasks is considered to probably be "AI complete" (that is, solving it would require the ability to synthesize a fully human-level intelligence), although some oppose this notion and believe compassionate intelligence is also required for human-level AI. Common sense reasoning has been applied successfully in more limited domains such as natural language processing and automated diagnosis or analysis. == Commonsense knowledge base construction == Compiling comprehensive knowledge bases of commonsense assertions (CSKBs) is a long-standing challenge in AI research. From early expert-driven efforts like CYC and WordNet, significant advances were achieved via the crowdsourced OpenMind Commonsense project, which led to the crowdsourced ConceptNet KB. Several approaches have attempted to automate CSKB construction, most notably, via text mining (WebChild, Quasimodo, TransOMCS, Ascent), as well as harvesting these directly from pre-trained language models (AutoTOMIC). These resources are significantly larger than ConceptNet, though the automated construction mostly makes them of moderately lower quality. Challenges also remain on the representation of commonsense knowledge: Most CSKB projects follow a triple data model, which is not necessarily best suited for breaking more complex natural language assertions. A notable exception here is GenericsKB, which applies no further normalization to sentences, but retains them in full. == Applications == Around 2013, MIT researchers developed BullySpace, an extension of the commonsense knowledgebase ConceptNet, to catch taunting social media comments. BullySpace included over 200 semantic assertions based around stereotypes, to help the system infer that comments like "Put on a wig and lipstick and be who you really are" are more likely to be an insult if directed at a boy than a girl. ConceptNet has also been used by chatbots and by computers that compose original fiction. At Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, common sense knowledge was used in an intelligent software agent to detect violations of a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty. == Data == As an example, as of 2012 ConceptNet includes these 21 language-independent relations: IsA (An "RV" is a "vehicle" | X is an instance of a Y) UsedFor (a "cake tin" is used for "making cakes" | X is used for the purpose Y) HasA (A "rabbit" has a "tail" | X possesses Y element or feature) CapableOf (a "cook" is capable of "making baked goods" | X is capable of doing Y) Desires (a "child" desires "the aroma of baking" | X has a desire for Y) CreatedBy ("cake" is created by a "baker" | X is created by Y) PartOf (a "knife" is be part of a "knife set" | X is a part of Y) Causes ("Heat" causes "cooking"| X is what causes Y) LocatedNear (the "oven" is located near the "refrigerator" | X is located near Y) AtLocation (Somewhere a "Cook" can be at a "restaurant" | X is at the location of Y) DefinedAs (a "Cupcake" is defined as a "cake" that also has the qualities of being "small", "baked within a wrapper", and "containing only one area of frosting or icing" | X is defined as Y that also has the properties A, B & C) SymbolOf (a "heart" is a symbol of "affection" | X is a symbolic representation of Y) ReceivesAction ("cake" can receive the action of being "eaten" | X is capable of receiving action Y) HasPrerequisite ("baking" has the prerequisite of obtaining the "ingredients" | X cannot do Y unless A does B) MotivatedByGoal ("baking" is motivated by the goal of "consumption"/"eating" | X has the motivation of Y goal) CausesDesire ("baking" makesYou want to "follow recipe" | X causes the desire to do Y) MadeOf ("Cake" is made of "flour"/"eggs"/"sugar"/"oil"/etc | X is made of Y) HasFirstSubevent ("baking" has first subevent "make batter" | To do X the first thing that needs to be done is Y) HasSubevent ("eat" has subevent "swallow" | Doing X will lead to Y event following) HasLastSubevent ("sleeping" has last subevent of "waking" | Doing X ends with the event Y) == Commonsense knowledge bases == Cyc Open Mind Common Sense (data source) and ConceptNet (datastore and NLP engine) Evi Graphiq

    Read more →
  • Information seeking

    Information seeking

    Information seeking is the process or activity of attempting to obtain information in both human and technological contexts. Information seeking is related to, but different from, information retrieval (IR). == Compared to information retrieval == Traditionally, IR tools have been designed for IR professionals to enable them to effectively and efficiently retrieve information from a source. It is assumed that the information exists in the source and that a well-formed query will retrieve it (and nothing else). It has been argued that laypersons' information seeking on the internet is very different from information retrieval as performed within the IR discourse. Yet, internet search engines are built on IR principles. Since the late 1990s a body of research on how casual users interact with internet search engines has been forming, but the topic is far from fully understood. IR can be said to be technology-oriented, focusing on algorithms and issues such as precision and recall. Information seeking may be understood as a more human-oriented and open-ended process than information retrieval. In information seeking, one does not know whether there exists an answer to one's query, so the process of seeking may provide the learning required to satisfy one's information need. == In different contexts == Much library and information science (LIS) research has focused on the information-seeking practices of practitioners within various fields of professional work. Studies have been carried out into the information-seeking behaviors of librarians, academics, medical professionals, engineers, lawyers and mini-publics(among others). Much of this research has drawn on the work done by Leckie, Pettigrew (now Fisher) and Sylvain, who in 1996 conducted an extensive review of the LIS literature (as well as the literature of other academic fields) on professionals' information seeking. The authors proposed an analytic model of professionals' information seeking behaviour, intended to be generalizable across the professions, thus providing a platform for future research in the area. The model was intended to "prompt new insights... and give rise to more refined and applicable theories of information seeking" (1996, p. 188). The model has been adapted by Wilkinson (2001) who proposes a model of the information seeking of lawyers. Recent studies in this topic address the concept of information-gathering that "provides a broader perspective that adheres better to professionals' work-related reality and desired skills." (Solomon & Bronstein, 2021). == Theories of information-seeking behavior == A variety of theories of information behavior – e.g. Zipf's Principle of Least Effort, Brenda Dervin's Sense Making, Elfreda Chatman's Life in the Round – seek to understand the processes that surround information seeking. In addition, many theories from other disciplines have been applied in investigating an aspect or whole process of information seeking behavior. A review of the literature on information seeking behavior shows that information seeking has generally been accepted as dynamic and non-linear (Foster, 2005; Kuhlthau 2006). People experience the information search process as an interplay of thoughts, feelings and actions (Kuhlthau, 2006). Donald O. Case (2007) also wrote a good book that is a review of the literature. Information seeking has been found to be linked to a variety of interpersonal communication behaviors beyond question-asking, to include strategies such as candidate answers. Robinson's (2010) research suggests that when seeking information at work, people rely on both other people and information repositories (e.g., documents and databases), and spend similar amounts of time consulting each (7.8% and 6.4% of work time, respectively; 14.2% in total). However, the distribution of time among the constituent information seeking stages differs depending on the source. When consulting other people, people spend less time locating the information source and information within that source, similar time understanding the information, and more time problem solving and decision making, than when consulting information repositories. Furthermore, the research found that people spend substantially more time receiving information passively (i.e., information that they have not requested) than actively (i.e., information that they have requested), and this pattern is also reflected when they provide others with information. == Wilson's nested model of conceptual areas == The concepts of information seeking, information retrieval, and information behaviour are objects of investigation of information science. Within this scientific discipline a variety of studies has been undertaken analyzing the interaction of an individual with information sources in case of a specific information need, task, and context. The research models developed in these studies vary in their level of scope. Wilson (1999) therefore developed a nested model of conceptual areas, which visualizes the interrelation of the here mentioned central concepts. Wilson defines models of information behavior to be "statements, often in the form of diagrams, that attempt to describe an information-seeking activity, the causes and consequences of that activity, or the relationships among stages in information-seeking behaviour" (1999: 250).

    Read more →
  • Anyword

    Anyword

    Anyword is a technology company that offers an artificial intelligence platform, using natural language processing to generate and optimize marketing text for websites, social media, email, and ads. The company also offers a complete managed service to publishers and brands to help them increase their revenue through social ads. It is used by National Geographic, Red Bull, The New York Times, BBC, Ted Baker, etc. The company has an office in New York, and Tel Aviv. == History == It was founded in 2013 — its original name was Keywee Inc. In March 2015, Anyword received $9.1 million in the Series A funding round led by a notable group of investors. In July 2016, the company was selected as an official Facebook Marketing Partner. In August 2019, Anyword was named Best Content Marketing Platform in the Digiday Technology Award winners. In November 2021, it raised $21 million in its Series B funding round.

    Read more →