AI Detection Remover

AI Detection Remover — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Foveated rendering

  Foveated rendering is a rendering technique which uses an eye tracker integrated with a virtual reality headset to reduce the rendering workload by greatly reducing the image quality in the peripheral vision (outside of the zone gazed by the fovea). A less sophisticated variant called fixed foveated rendering doesn't utilise eye tracking and instead assumes a fixed focal point. == History == Research into foveated rendering dates back at least to 1991. At Tech Crunch Disrupt SF 2014, Fove unveiled a headset featuring foveated rendering. This was followed by a successful kickstarter in May 2015. At CES 2016, SensoMotoric Instruments (SMI) demoed a new 250 Hz eye tracking system and a working foveated rendering solution. It resulted from a partnership with camera sensor manufacturer Omnivision who provided the camera hardware for the new system. In July 2016, Nvidia demonstrated during SIGGRAPH a new method of foveated rendering claimed to be invisible to users. In February 2017, Qualcomm announced their Snapdragon 835 Virtual Reality Development Kit (VRDK) which includes foveated rendering support called Adreno Foveation. == Use == According to chief scientist Michael Abrash at Oculus, utilising foveated rendering in conjunction with sparse rendering and deep learning image reconstruction has the potential to require an order of magnitude fewer pixels to be rendered in comparison to a full image. Later, these results have been demonstrated and published. In December 2019, fixed foveated rendering support was added to the Oculus Quest SDK. A number of VR headsets have included on-board eye tracking to provide support for foveated rendering, including HTC's Vive Pro Eye (2019), Meta Quest Pro (2022), PlayStation VR2 (2023), and Apple Vision Pro (2024). In 2025, Valve announced the upcoming Steam Frame headset, which applies a variation of the technique known as "foveated streaming" for wireless streaming from a PC to the headset; the method similarly uses variance in bit rate, and is performed at the encoder level rather than the software level.

  Read more →
• 

  Inception (deep learning architecture)

  Inception is a family of convolutional neural network (CNN) for computer vision, introduced by researchers at Google in 2014 as GoogLeNet (later renamed Inception v1). The series was historically important as an early CNN that separates the stem (data ingest), body (data processing), and head (prediction), an architectural design that persists in all modern CNN. == Version history == === Inception v1 === In 2014, a team at Google developed the GoogLeNet architecture, an instance of which won the ImageNet Large-Scale Visual Recognition Challenge 2014 (ILSVRC14). The name came from the LeNet of 1998, since both LeNet and GoogLeNet are CNNs. They also called it "Inception" after a "we need to go deeper" internet meme, a phrase from Inception (2010) the film. Because later, more versions were released, the original Inception architecture was renamed again as "Inception v1". The models and the code were released under Apache 2.0 license on GitHub. The Inception v1 architecture is a deep CNN composed of 22 layers. Most of these layers were "Inception modules". The original paper stated that Inception modules are a "logical culmination" of Network in Network and (Arora et al, 2014). Since Inception v1 is deep, it suffered from the vanishing gradient problem. The team solved it by using two "auxiliary classifiers", which are linear-softmax classifiers inserted at 1/3-deep and 2/3-deep within the network, and the loss function is a weighted sum of all three: L = 0.3 L a u x , 1 + 0.3 L a u x , 2 + L r e a l {\displaystyle L=0.3L_{aux,1}+0.3L_{aux,2}+L_{real}} These were removed after training was complete. This was later solved by the ResNet architecture. The architecture consists of three parts stacked on top of one another: The stem (data ingestion): The first few convolutional layers perform data preprocessing to downscale images to a smaller size. The body (data processing): The next many Inception modules perform the bulk of data processing. The head (prediction): The final fully-connected layer and softmax produces a probability distribution for image classification. This structure is used in most modern CNN architectures. === Inception v2 === Inception v2 was released in 2015, in a paper that is more famous for proposing batch normalization. It had 13.6 million parameters. It improves on Inception v1 by adding batch normalization, and removing dropout and local response normalization which they found became unnecessary when batch normalization is used. === Inception v3 === Inception v3 was released in 2016. It improves on Inception v2 by using factorized convolutions. As an example, a single 5×5 convolution can be factored into 3×3 stacked on top of another 3×3. Both has a receptive field of size 5×5. The 5×5 convolution kernel has 25 parameters, compared to just 18 in the factorized version. Thus, the 5×5 convolution is strictly more powerful than the factorized version. However, this power is not necessarily needed. Empirically, the research team found that factorized convolutions help. It also uses a form of dimension-reduction by concatenating the output from a convolutional layer and a pooling layer. As an example, a tensor of size 35 × 35 × 320 {\displaystyle 35\times 35\times 320} can be downscaled by a convolution with stride 2 to 17 × 17 × 320 {\displaystyle 17\times 17\times 320} , and by maxpooling with pool size 2 × 2 {\displaystyle 2\times 2} to 17 × 17 × 320 {\displaystyle 17\times 17\times 320} . These are then concatenated to 17 × 17 × 640 {\displaystyle 17\times 17\times 640} . Other than this, it also removed the lowest auxiliary classifier during training. They found that the auxiliary head worked as a form of regularization. They also proposed label-smoothing regularization in classification. For an image with label c {\displaystyle c} , instead of making the model to predict the probability distribution δ c = ( 0 , 0 , … , 0 , 1 ⏟ c -th entry , 0 , … , 0 ) {\displaystyle \delta _{c}=(0,0,\dots ,0,\underbrace {1} _{c{\text{-th entry}}},0,\dots ,0)} , they made the model predict the smoothed distribution ( 1 − ϵ ) δ c + ϵ / K {\displaystyle (1-\epsilon )\delta _{c}+\epsilon /K} where K {\displaystyle K} is the total number of classes. === Inception v4 === In 2017, the team released Inception v4, Inception ResNet v1, and Inception ResNet v2. Inception v4 is an incremental update with even more factorized convolutions, and other complications that were empirically found to improve benchmarks. Inception ResNet v1 and v2 are both modifications of Inception v4, where residual connections are added to each Inception module, inspired by the ResNet architecture. === Xception === Xception ("Extreme Inception") was published in 2017. It is a linear stack of depthwise separable convolution layers with residual connections. The design was proposed on the hypothesis that in a CNN, the cross-channels correlations and spatial correlations in the feature maps can be entirely decoupled. Training each network took 3 days on 60 K80 GPUs, or approximately 0.5 petaFLOP-days.

  Read more →
• 

  Shape context

  Shape context is a feature descriptor used in object recognition. Serge Belongie and Jitendra Malik proposed the term in their paper "Matching with Shape Contexts" in 2000. == Theory == The shape context is intended to be a way of describing shapes that allows for measuring shape similarity and the recovering of point correspondences. The basic idea is to pick n points on the contours of a shape. For each point pi on the shape, consider the n − 1 vectors obtained by connecting pi to all other points. The set of all these vectors is a rich description of the shape localized at that point but is far too detailed. The key idea is that the distribution over relative positions is a robust, compact, and highly discriminative descriptor. So, for the point pi, the coarse histogram of the relative coordinates of the remaining n − 1 points, h i ( k ) = # { q ≠ p i : ( q − p i ) ∈ bin ( k ) } {\displaystyle h_{i}(k)=\#\{q\neq p_{i}:(q-p_{i})\in {\mbox{bin}}(k)\}} is defined to be the shape context of p i {\displaystyle p_{i}} . The bins are normally taken to be uniform in log-polar space. The fact that the shape context is a rich and discriminative descriptor can be seen in the figure below, in which the shape contexts of two different versions of the letter "A" are shown. (a) and (b) are the sampled edge points of the two shapes. (c) is the diagram of the log-polar bins used to compute the shape context. (d) is the shape context for the point marked with a circle in (a), (e) is that for the point marked as a diamond in (b), and (f) is that for the triangle. As can be seen, since (d) and (e) are the shape contexts for two closely related points, they are quite similar, while the shape context in (f) is very different. For a feature descriptor to be useful, it needs to have certain invariances. In particular it needs to be invariant to translation, scaling, small perturbations, and, depending on the application, rotation. Translational invariance comes naturally to shape context. Scale invariance is obtained by normalizing all radial distances by the mean distance α {\displaystyle \alpha } between all the point pairs in the shape although the median distance can also be used. Shape contexts are empirically demonstrated to be robust to deformations, noise, and outliers using synthetic point set matching experiments. One can provide complete rotational invariance in shape contexts. One way is to measure angles at each point relative to the direction of the tangent at that point (since the points are chosen on edges). This results in a completely rotationally invariant descriptor. But of course this is not always desired since some local features lose their discriminative power if not measured relative to the same frame. Many applications in fact forbid rotational invariance e.g. distinguishing a "6" from a "9". == Use in shape matching == A complete system that uses shape contexts for shape matching consists of the following steps (which will be covered in more detail in the Details of Implementation section): Randomly select a set of points that lie on the edges of a known shape and another set of points on an unknown shape. Compute the shape context of each point found in step 1. Match each point from the known shape to a point on an unknown shape. To minimize the cost of matching, first choose a transformation (e.g. affine, thin plate spline, etc.) that warps the edges of the known shape to the unknown (essentially aligning the two shapes). Then select the point on the unknown shape that most closely corresponds to each warped point on the known shape. Calculate the "shape distance" between each pair of points on the two shapes. Use a weighted sum of the shape context distance, the image appearance distance, and the bending energy (a measure of how much transformation is required to bring the two shapes into alignment). To identify the unknown shape, use a nearest-neighbor classifier to compare its shape distance to shape distances of known objects. == Details of implementation == === Step 1: Finding a list of points on shape edges === The approach assumes that the shape of an object is essentially captured by a finite subset of the points on the internal or external contours on the object. These can be simply obtained using the Canny edge detector and picking a random set of points from the edges. Note that these points need not and in general do not correspond to key-points such as maxima of curvature or inflection points. It is preferable to sample the shape with roughly uniform spacing, though it is not critical. === Step 2: Computing the shape context === This step is described in detail in the Theory section. === Step 3: Computing the cost matrix === Consider two points p and q that have normalized K-bin histograms (i.e. shape contexts) g(k) and h(k). As shape contexts are distributions represented as histograms, it is natural to use the χ2 test statistic as the "shape context cost" of matching the two points: C S = 1 2 ∑ k = 1 K [ g ( k ) − h ( k ) ] 2 g ( k ) + h ( k ) {\displaystyle C_{S}={\frac {1}{2}}\sum _{k=1}^{K}{\frac {[g(k)-h(k)]^{2}}{g(k)+h(k)}}} The values of this range from 0 to 1. In addition to the shape context cost, an extra cost based on the appearance can be added. For instance, it could be a measure of tangent angle dissimilarity (particularly useful in digit recognition): C A = 1 2 ‖ ( cos ⁡ ( θ 1 ) sin ⁡ ( θ 1 ) ) − ( cos ⁡ ( θ 2 ) sin ⁡ ( θ 2 ) ) ‖ {\displaystyle C_{A}={\frac {1}{2}}{\begin{Vmatrix}{\dbinom {\cos(\theta _{1})}{\sin(\theta _{1})}}-{\dbinom {\cos(\theta _{2})}{\sin(\theta _{2})}}\end{Vmatrix}}} This is half the length of the chord in unit circle between the unit vectors with angles θ 1 {\displaystyle \theta _{1}} and θ 2 {\displaystyle \theta _{2}} . Its values also range from 0 to 1. Now the total cost of matching the two points could be a weighted-sum of the two costs: C = ( 1 − β ) C S + β C A {\displaystyle C=(1-\beta )C_{S}+\beta C_{A}\!\,} Now for each point pi on the first shape and a point qj on the second shape, calculate the cost as described and call it Ci,j. This is the cost matrix. === Step 4: Finding the matching that minimizes total cost === Now, a one-to-one matching π ( i ) {\displaystyle \pi (i)} that matches each point pi on shape 1 and qj on shape 2 that minimizes the total cost of matching, H ( π ) = ∑ i C ( p i , q π ( i ) ) {\displaystyle H(\pi )=\sum _{i}C\left(p_{i},q_{\pi (i)}\right)} is needed. This can be done in O ( N 3 ) {\displaystyle O(N^{3})} time using the Hungarian method, although there are more efficient algorithms. To have robust handling of outliers, one can add "dummy" nodes that have a constant but reasonably large cost of matching to the cost matrix. This would cause the matching algorithm to match outliers to a "dummy" if there is no real match. === Step 5: Modeling transformation === Given the set of correspondences between a finite set of points on the two shapes, a transformation T : R 2 → R 2 {\displaystyle T:\mathbb {R} ^{2}\to \mathbb {R} ^{2}} can be estimated to map any point from one shape to the other. There are several choices for this transformation, described below. ==== Affine ==== The affine model is a standard choice: T ( p ) = A p + o {\displaystyle T(p)=Ap+o\!} . The least squares solution for the matrix A {\displaystyle A} and the translational offset vector o is obtained by: o = 1 n ∑ i = 1 n ( p i − q π ( i ) ) , A = ( Q + P ) t {\displaystyle o={\frac {1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}\left(p_{i}-q_{\pi (i)}\right),A=(Q^{+}P)^{t}} Where P = ( 1 p 11 p 12 ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ 1 p n 1 p n 2 ) {\displaystyle P={\begin{pmatrix}1&p_{11}&p_{12}\\\vdots &\vdots &\vdots \\1&p_{n1}&p_{n2}\end{pmatrix}}} with a similar expression for Q {\displaystyle Q\!} . Q + {\displaystyle Q^{+}\!} is the pseudoinverse of Q {\displaystyle Q\!} . ==== Thin plate spline ==== The thin plate spline (TPS) model is the most widely used model for transformations when working with shape contexts. A 2D transformation can be separated into two TPS function to model a coordinate transform: T ( x , y ) = ( f x ( x , y ) , f y ( x , y ) ) {\displaystyle T(x,y)=\left(f_{x}(x,y),f_{y}(x,y)\right)} where each of the ƒx and ƒy have the form: f ( x , y ) = a 1 + a x x + a y y + ∑ i = 1 n ω i U ( ‖ ( x i , y i ) − ( x , y ) ‖ ) , {\displaystyle f(x,y)=a_{1}+a_{x}x+a_{y}y+\sum _{i=1}^{n}\omega _{i}U\left({\begin{Vmatrix}(x_{i},y_{i})-(x,y)\end{Vmatrix}}\right),} and the kernel function U ( r ) {\displaystyle U(r)\!} is defined by U ( r ) = r 2 log ⁡ r 2 {\displaystyle U(r)=r^{2}\log r^{2}\!} . The exact details of how to solve for the parameters can be found elsewhere but it essentially involves solving a linear system of equations. The bending energy (a measure of how much transformation is needed to align the points) will also be easily obtained. ==== Regularized TPS ==== The TPS formulation above has exact matching requirement for the pairs of points on the two shapes. For noisy data, it is best to

  Read more →
• 

  Sparrow (chatbot)

  Sparrow is a chatbot developed by the artificial intelligence research lab DeepMind, a subsidiary of Alphabet Inc. It is designed to answer users' questions correctly, while reducing the risk of unsafe and inappropriate answers. One motivation behind Sparrow is to address the problem of language models producing incorrect, biased or potentially harmful outputs. Sparrow is trained using human judgements, in order to be more “Helpful, Correct and Harmless” compared to baseline pre-trained language models. The development of Sparrow involved asking paid study participants to interact with Sparrow, and collecting their preferences to train a model of how useful an answer is. To improve accuracy and help avoid the problem of hallucinating incorrect answers, Sparrow has the ability to search the Internet using Google Search in order to find and cite evidence for any factual claims it makes. To make the model safer, its behaviour is constrained by a set of rules, for example "don't make threatening statements" and "don't make hateful or insulting comments", as well as rules about possibly harmful advice, and not claiming to be a person. During development study participants were asked to converse with the system and try to trick it into breaking these rules. A 'rule model' was trained on judgements from these participants, which was used for further training. Sparrow was introduced in a paper in September 2022, titled "Improving alignment of dialogue agents via targeted human judgements"; however, the bot was not released publicly. DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis said DeepMind is considering releasing Sparrow for a "private beta" some time in 2023. == Training == Sparrow is a deep neural network based on the transformer machine learning model architecture. It is fine-tuned from DeepMind's Chinchilla AI pre-trained large language model (LLM), which has 70 Billion parameters. Sparrow is trained using reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), although some supervised fine-tuning techniques are also used. The RLHF training utilizes two reward models to capture human judgements: a “preference model” that predicts what a human study participant would prefer and a “rule model” that predicts if the model has broken one of the rules. == Limitations == Sparrow's training data corpus is mainly in English, meaning it performs worse in other languages. When adversarially probed by study participants it breaks the rules 8% of the time; however, this is still three times lower than the baseline prompted pre-trained model (Chinchilla).

  Read more →
• 

  Label noise

  Label noise refers to errors or inaccuracies in the class labels of data instances. This is a widespread issue in machine learning datasets, arising from human annotator mistakes, unclear labeling instructions, automated labeling methods, or adversarial attacks in supervised learning. Label noise can be roughly divided into random noise, where labels are flipped independently of input features, and systematic noise, where mislabeling is dependent on certain patterns or biases in the data. Label noise can be damaging to model performance, especially for complex models that may overfit to noisy labels rather than generalizable patterns. Many approaches have been proposed to deal with the effects of label noise, including robust loss functions, noise-tolerant algorithms, data cleaning methods, and semi-supervised learning approaches. To reduce the impact of wrong labels during training, techniques like label smoothing, sample reweighting and using trusted validation sets are used. The role of noise-robust training paradigms and curriculum learning strategies to improve resilience against mislabeled data is also explored in recent research.

  Read more →
• 

  Neural network Gaussian process

  A Neural Network Gaussian Process (NNGP) is a Gaussian process (GP) obtained as the limit of a certain type of sequence of neural networks. Specifically, a wide variety of network architectures converges to a GP in the infinitely wide limit, in the sense of distribution. The concept constitutes an intensional definition, i.e., a NNGP is just a GP, but distinguished by how it is obtained. == Motivation == Bayesian networks are a modeling tool for assigning probabilities to events, and thereby characterizing the uncertainty in a model's predictions. Deep learning and artificial neural networks are approaches used in machine learning to build computational models which learn from training examples. Bayesian neural networks merge these fields. They are a type of neural network whose parameters and predictions are both probabilistic. While standard neural networks often assign high confidence even to incorrect predictions, Bayesian neural networks can more accurately evaluate how likely their predictions are to be correct. Computation in artificial neural networks is usually organized into sequential layers of artificial neurons. The number of neurons in a layer is called the layer width. When we consider a sequence of Bayesian neural networks with increasingly wide layers (see figure), they converge in distribution to a NNGP. This large width limit is of practical interest, since the networks often improve as layers get wider. And the process may give a closed form way to evaluate networks. NNGPs also appears in several other contexts: It describes the distribution over predictions made by wide non-Bayesian artificial neural networks after random initialization of their parameters, but before training; it appears as a term in neural tangent kernel prediction equations; it is used in deep information propagation to characterize whether hyperparameters and architectures will be trainable. It is related to other large width limits of neural networks. === Scope === The first correspondence result had been established in the 1995 PhD thesis of Radford M. Neal, then supervised by Geoffrey Hinton at University of Toronto. Neal cites David J. C. MacKay as inspiration, who worked in Bayesian learning. Today the correspondence is proven for: Single hidden layer Bayesian neural networks; deep fully connected networks as the number of units per layer is taken to infinity; convolutional neural networks as the number of channels is taken to infinity; transformer networks as the number of attention heads is taken to infinity; recurrent networks as the number of units is taken to infinity. In fact, this NNGP correspondence holds for almost any architecture: Generally, if an architecture can be expressed solely via matrix multiplication and coordinatewise nonlinearities (i.e., a tensor program), then it has an infinite-width GP. This in particular includes all feedforward or recurrent neural networks composed of multilayer perceptron, recurrent neural networks (e.g., LSTMs, GRUs), (nD or graph) convolution, pooling, skip connection, attention, batch normalization, and/or layer normalization. === Illustration === Every setting of a neural network's parameters θ {\displaystyle \theta } corresponds to a specific function computed by the neural network. A prior distribution p ( θ ) {\displaystyle p(\theta )} over neural network parameters therefore corresponds to a prior distribution over functions computed by the network. As neural networks are made infinitely wide, this distribution over functions converges to a Gaussian process for many architectures. The notation used in this section is the same as the notation used below to derive the correspondence between NNGPs and fully connected networks, and more details can be found there. The figure to the right plots the one-dimensional outputs z L ( ⋅ ; θ ) {\displaystyle z^{L}(\cdot ;\theta )} of a neural network for two inputs x {\displaystyle x} and x ∗ {\displaystyle x^{}} against each other. The black dots show the function computed by the neural network on these inputs for random draws of the parameters from p ( θ ) {\displaystyle p(\theta )} . The red lines are iso-probability contours for the joint distribution over network outputs z L ( x ; θ ) {\displaystyle z^{L}(x;\theta )} and z L ( x ∗ ; θ ) {\displaystyle z^{L}(x^{};\theta )} induced by p ( θ ) {\displaystyle p(\theta )} . This is the distribution in function space corresponding to the distribution p ( θ ) {\displaystyle p(\theta )} in parameter space, and the black dots are samples from this distribution. For infinitely wide neural networks, since the distribution over functions computed by the neural network is a Gaussian process, the joint distribution over network outputs is a multivariate Gaussian for any finite set of network inputs. == Discussion == === Infinitely wide fully connected network === This section expands on the correspondence between infinitely wide neural networks and Gaussian processes for the specific case of a fully connected architecture. It provides a proof sketch outlining why the correspondence holds, and introduces the specific functional form of the NNGP for fully connected networks. The proof sketch closely follows the approach by Novak and coauthors. ==== Network architecture specification ==== Consider a fully connected artificial neural network with inputs x {\displaystyle x} , parameters θ {\displaystyle \theta } consisting of weights W l {\displaystyle W^{l}} and biases b l {\displaystyle b^{l}} for each layer l {\displaystyle l} in the network, pre-activations (pre-nonlinearity) z l {\displaystyle z^{l}} , activations (post-nonlinearity) y l {\displaystyle y^{l}} , pointwise nonlinearity ϕ ( ⋅ ) {\displaystyle \phi (\cdot )} , and layer widths n l {\displaystyle n^{l}} . For simplicity, the width n L + 1 {\displaystyle n^{L+1}} of the readout vector z L {\displaystyle z^{L}} is taken to be 1. The parameters of this network have a prior distribution p ( θ ) {\displaystyle p(\theta )} , which consists of an isotropic Gaussian for each weight and bias, with the variance of the weights scaled inversely with layer width. This network is illustrated in the figure to the right, and described by the following set of equations: x ≡ input y l ( x ) = { x l = 0 ϕ ( z l − 1 ( x ) ) l > 0 z i l ( x ) = ∑ j W i j l y j l ( x ) + b i l W i j l ∼ N ( 0 , σ w 2 n l ) b i l ∼ N ( 0 , σ b 2 ) ϕ ( ⋅ ) ≡ nonlinearity y l ( x ) , z l − 1 ( x ) ∈ R n l × 1 n L + 1 = 1 θ = { W 0 , b 0 , … , W L , b L } {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}x&\equiv {\text{input}}\\y^{l}(x)&=\left\{{\begin{array}{lcl}x&&l=0\\\phi \left(z^{l-1}(x)\right)&&l>0\end{array}}\right.\\z_{i}^{l}(x)&=\sum _{j}W_{ij}^{l}y_{j}^{l}(x)+b_{i}^{l}\\W_{ij}^{l}&\sim {\mathcal {N}}\left(0,{\frac {\sigma _{w}^{2}}{n^{l}}}\right)\\b_{i}^{l}&\sim {\mathcal {N}}\left(0,\sigma _{b}^{2}\right)\\\phi (\cdot )&\equiv {\text{nonlinearity}}\\y^{l}(x),z^{l-1}(x)&\in \mathbb {R} ^{n^{l}\times 1}\\n^{L+1}&=1\\\theta &=\left\{W^{0},b^{0},\dots ,W^{L},b^{L}\right\}\end{aligned}}} ==== ==== z l | y l {\displaystyle z^{l}|y^{l}} is a Gaussian process We first observe that the pre-activations z l {\displaystyle z^{l}} are described by a Gaussian process conditioned on the preceding activations y l {\displaystyle y^{l}} . This result holds even at finite width. Each pre-activation z i l {\displaystyle z_{i}^{l}} is a weighted sum of Gaussian random variables, corresponding to the weights W i j l {\displaystyle W_{ij}^{l}} and biases b i l {\displaystyle b_{i}^{l}} , where the coefficients for each of those Gaussian variables are the preceding activations y j l {\displaystyle y_{j}^{l}} . Because they are a weighted sum of zero-mean Gaussians, the z i l {\displaystyle z_{i}^{l}} are themselves zero-mean Gaussians (conditioned on the coefficients y j l {\displaystyle y_{j}^{l}} ). Since the z l {\displaystyle z^{l}} are jointly Gaussian for any set of y l {\displaystyle y^{l}} , they are described by a Gaussian process conditioned on the preceding activations y l {\displaystyle y^{l}} . The covariance or kernel of this Gaussian process depends on the weight and bias variances σ w 2 {\displaystyle \sigma _{w}^{2}} and σ b 2 {\displaystyle \sigma _{b}^{2}} , as well as the second moment matrix K l {\displaystyle K^{l}} of the preceding activations y l {\displaystyle y^{l}} , z i l ∣ y l ∼ G P ( 0 , σ w 2 K l + σ b 2 ) K l ( x , x ′ ) = 1 n l ∑ i y i l ( x ) y i l ( x ′ ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}z_{i}^{l}\mid y^{l}&\sim {\mathcal {GP}}\left(0,\sigma _{w}^{2}K^{l}+\sigma _{b}^{2}\right)\\K^{l}(x,x')&={\frac {1}{n^{l}}}\sum _{i}y_{i}^{l}(x)y_{i}^{l}(x')\end{aligned}}} The effect of the weight scale σ w 2 {\displaystyle \sigma _{w}^{2}} is to rescale the contribution to the covariance matrix from K l {\displaystyle K^{l}} , while the bias is shared for all inputs, and so σ b 2 {\displaystyle \sigma _{b}^{2}} makes the z i l {\displaystyle z_{i}^{l}} for different datapoints more similar and

  Read more →
• 

  Brill tagger

  The Brill tagger is an inductive method for part-of-speech tagging. It was described and invented by Eric Brill in his 1993 PhD thesis. It can be summarized as an "error-driven transformation-based tagger". It is: a form of supervised learning, which aims to minimize error; and, a transformation-based process, in the sense that a tag is assigned to each word and changed using a set of predefined rules. In the transformation process, if the word is known, it first assigns the most frequent tag, or if the word is unknown, it naively assigns the tag "noun" to it. High accuracy is eventually achieved by applying these rules iteratively and changing the incorrect tags. This approach ensures that valuable information such as the morphosyntactic construction of words is employed in an automatic tagging process. == Algorithm == The algorithm starts with initialization, which is the assignment of tags based on their probability for each word (for example, "dog" is more often a noun than a verb). Then "patches" are determined via rules that correct (probable) tagging errors made in the initialization phase: Initialization: Known words (in vocabulary): assigning the most frequent tag associated to a form of the word Unknown word == Rules and processing == The input text is first tokenized, or broken into words. Typically in natural language processing, contractions such as "'s", "n't", and the like are considered separate word tokens, as are punctuation marks. A dictionary and some morphological rules then provide an initial tag for each word token. For example, a simple lookup would reveal that "dog" may be a noun or a verb (the most frequent tag is simply chosen), while an unknown word will be assigned some tag(s) based on capitalization, various prefix or suffix strings, etc. (such morphological analyses, which Brill calls Lexical Rules, may vary between implementations). After all word tokens have (provisional) tags, contextual rules apply iteratively, to correct the tags by examining small amounts of context. This is where the Brill method differs from other part of speech tagging methods such as those using Hidden Markov Models. Rules are reapplied repeatedly, until a threshold is reached, or no more rules can apply. Brill rules are of the general form: tag1 → tag2 IF Condition where the Condition tests the preceding and/or following word tokens, or their tags (the notation for such rules differs between implementations). For example, in Brill's notation: IN NN WDPREVTAG DT while would change the tag of a word from IN (preposition) to NN (common noun), if the preceding word's tag is DT (determiner) and the word itself is "while". This covers cases like "all the while" or "in a while", where "while" should be tagged as a noun rather than its more common use as a conjunction (many rules are more general). Rules should only operate if the tag being changed is also known to be permissible, for the word in question or in principle (for example, most adjectives in English can also be used as nouns). Rules of this kind can be implemented by simple Finite-state machines. See Part of speech tagging for more general information including descriptions of the Penn Treebank and other sets of tags. Typical Brill taggers use a few hundred rules, which may be developed by linguistic intuition or by machine learning on a pre-tagged corpus. == Code == Brill's code pages at Johns Hopkins University are no longer on the web. An archived version of a mirror of the Brill tagger at its latest version as it was available at Plymouth Tech can be found on Archive.org. The software uses the MIT License.

  Read more →
• 

  Photo-consistency

  In computer vision, photo-consistency determines whether a given voxel is occupied. A voxel is considered to be photo consistent when its color appears to be similar to all the cameras that can see it. Most voxel coloring or space carving techniques require using photo consistency as a check condition in Image-based modeling and rendering applications. == Usage == 3D Volumetric Reconstruction. Image registration. Multi-view reconstruction.

  Read more →
• 

  History of machine translation

  Machine translation is a sub-field of computational linguistics that investigates the use of software to translate text or speech from one natural language to another. In the 1950s, machine translation became a reality in research, although references to the subject can be found as early as the 17th century. The Georgetown experiment, which involved successful fully automatic translation of more than sixty Russian sentences into English in 1954, was one of the earliest recorded projects. Researchers of the Georgetown experiment asserted their belief that machine translation would be a solved problem within a few years. In the Soviet Union, similar experiments were performed shortly after. Consequently, the success of the experiment ushered in an era of significant funding for machine translation research in the United States. The achieved progress was much slower than expected; in 1966, the ALPAC report found that ten years of research had not fulfilled the expectations of the Georgetown experiment and resulted in dramatically reduced funding. Interest grew in statistical models for machine translation, which became more common and also less expensive in the 1980s as available computational power increased. Although there exists no autonomous system of "fully automatic high quality translation of unrestricted text," there are many programs now available that are capable of providing useful output within strict constraints. Several of these programs are available online, such as Google Translate and the SYSTRAN system that powers AltaVista's BabelFish (which was replaced by Microsoft Bing translator in May 2012). == The beginning == The origins of machine translation can be traced back to the work of Al-Kindi, a 9th-century Arabic cryptographer who developed techniques for systemic language translation, including cryptanalysis, frequency analysis, and probability and statistics, which are used in modern machine translation. The idea of machine translation later appeared in the 17th century. In 1629, René Descartes proposed a universal language, with equivalent ideas in different tongues sharing one symbol. In the mid-1930s the first patents for "translating machines" were applied for by Georges Artsrouni, for an automatic bilingual dictionary using punched tape. Russian Peter Troyanskii submitted a more detailed proposal that included both the bilingual dictionary and a method for dealing with grammatical roles between languages, based on the grammatical system of Esperanto. This system was separated into three stages: stage one consisted of a native-speaking editor in the source language to organize the words into their logical forms and to exercise the syntactic functions; stage two required the machine to "translate" these forms into the target language; and stage three required a native-speaking editor in the target language to normalize this output. Troyanskii's proposal remained unknown until the late 1950s, by which time computers were well-known and utilized. == The early years == The first set of proposals for computer based machine translation was presented in 1949 by Warren Weaver, a researcher at the Rockefeller Foundation, "Translation memorandum". These proposals were based on information theory, successes in code breaking during the Second World War, and theories about the universal principles underlying natural language. A few years after Weaver submitted his proposals, research began in earnest at many universities in the United States. On 7 January 1954 the Georgetown–IBM experiment was held in New York at the head office of IBM. This was the first public demonstration of a machine translation system. The demonstration was widely reported in the newspapers and garnered public interest. The system itself, however, was no more than a "toy" system. It had only 250 words and translated 49 carefully selected Russian sentences into English – mainly in the field of chemistry. Nevertheless, it encouraged the idea that machine translation was imminent and stimulated the financing of the research, not only in the US but worldwide. Early systems used large bilingual dictionaries and hand-coded rules for fixing the word order in the final output which was eventually considered too restrictive in linguistic developments at the time. For example, generative linguistics and transformational grammar were exploited to improve the quality of translations. During this period operational systems were installed. The United States Air Force used a system produced by IBM and Washington University in St. Louis, while the Atomic Energy Commission and Euratom, in Italy, used a system developed at Georgetown University. While the quality of the output was poor it met many of the customers' needs, particularly in terms of speed. At the end of the 1950s, Yehoshua Bar-Hillel was asked by the US government to look into machine translation, to assess the possibility of fully automatic high-quality translation by machines. Bar-Hillel described the problem of semantic ambiguity or double-meaning, as illustrated in the following sentence: Little John was looking for his toy box. Finally he found it. The box was in the pen. The word pen may have two meanings: the first meaning, something used to write in ink with; the second meaning, a container of some kind. To a human, the meaning is obvious, but Bar-Hillel claimed that without a "universal encyclopedia" a machine would never be able to deal with this problem. At the time, this type of semantic ambiguity could only be solved by writing source texts for machine translation in a controlled language that uses a vocabulary in which each word has exactly one meaning. == The 1960s, the ALPAC report and the seventies == Research in the 1960s in both the Soviet Union and the United States concentrated mainly on the Russian–English language pair. The objects of translation were chiefly scientific and technical documents, such as articles from scientific journals. The rough translations produced were sufficient to get a basic understanding of the articles. If an article discussed a subject deemed to be confidential, it was sent to a human translator for a complete translation; if not, it was discarded. A great blow came to machine-translation research in 1966 with the publication of the ALPAC report. The report was commissioned by the US government and delivered by ALPAC, the Automatic Language Processing Advisory Committee, a group of seven scientists convened by the US government in 1964. The US government was concerned that there was a lack of progress being made despite significant expenditure. The report concluded that machine translation was more expensive, less accurate and slower than human translation, and that despite the expenditures, machine translation was not likely to reach the quality of a human translator in the near future. The report recommended, however, that tools be developed to aid translators – automatic dictionaries, for example – and that some research in computational linguistics should continue to be supported. The publication of the report had a profound impact on research into machine translation in the United States, and to a lesser extent the Soviet Union and United Kingdom. Research, at least in the US, was almost completely abandoned for over a decade. In Canada, France and Germany, however, research continued. In the US the main exceptions were the founders of SYSTRAN (Peter Toma) and Logos (Bernard Scott), who established their companies in 1968 and 1970 respectively and served the US Department of Defense. In 1970, the SYSTRAN system was installed for the United States Air Force, and subsequently by the Commission of the European Communities in 1976. The METEO System, developed at the Université de Montréal, was installed in Canada in 1977 to translate weather forecasts from English to French, and was translating close to 80,000 words per day or 30 million words per year until it was replaced by a competitor's system on 30 September 2001. While research in the 1960s concentrated on limited language pairs and input, demand in the 1970s was for low-cost systems that could translate a range of technical and commercial documents. This demand was spurred by the increase of globalisation and the demand for translation in Canada, Europe, and Japan. == The 1980s and early 1990s == By the 1980s, both the diversity and the number of installed systems for machine translation had increased. A number of systems relying on mainframe technology were in use, such as SYSTRAN, Logos, Ariane-G5, and Metal. As a result of the improved availability of microcomputers, there was a market for lower-end machine translation systems. Many companies took advantage of this in Europe, Japan, and the USA. Systems were also brought onto the market in China, Eastern Europe, Korea, and the Soviet Union. During the 1980s there was a lot of activity in MT in Japan especially. With the fifth-generation co

  Read more →
• 

  Lesk algorithm

  The Lesk algorithm is a classical algorithm for word sense disambiguation introduced by Michael E. Lesk in 1986. It operates on the premise that words within a given context are likely to share a common meaning. This algorithm compares the dictionary definitions of an ambiguous word with the words in its surrounding context to determine the most appropriate sense. Variations, such as the Simplified Lesk algorithm, have demonstrated improved precision and efficiency. However, the Lesk algorithm has faced criticism for its sensitivity to definition wording and its reliance on brief glosses. Researchers have sought to enhance its accuracy by incorporating additional resources like thesauruses and syntactic models. == Overview == The Lesk algorithm is based on the assumption that words in a given "neighborhood" (section of text) will tend to share a common topic. A simplified version of the Lesk algorithm is to compare the dictionary definition of an ambiguous word with the terms contained in its neighborhood. Versions have been adapted to use WordNet. An implementation might look like this: for every sense of the word being disambiguated one should count the number of words that are in both the neighborhood of that word and in the dictionary definition of that sense the sense that is to be chosen is the sense that has the largest number of this count. A frequently used example illustrating this algorithm is for the context "pine cone". The following dictionary definitions are used: PINE 1. kinds of evergreen tree with needle-shaped leaves 2. waste away through sorrow or illness CONE 1. solid body which narrows to a point 2. something of this shape whether solid or hollow 3. fruit of certain evergreen trees As can be seen, the best intersection is Pine #1 ⋂ Cone #3 = 2. == Simplified Lesk algorithm == In Simplified Lesk algorithm, the correct meaning of each word in a given context is determined individually by locating the sense that overlaps the most between its dictionary definition and the given context. Rather than simultaneously determining the meanings of all words in a given context, this approach tackles each word individually, independent of the meaning of the other words occurring in the same context. "A comparative evaluation performed by Vasilescu et al. (2004) has shown that the simplified Lesk algorithm can significantly outperform the original definition of the algorithm, both in terms of precision and efficiency. By evaluating the disambiguation algorithms on the Senseval-2 English all words data, they measure a 58% precision using the simplified Lesk algorithm compared to the only 42% under the original algorithm. Note: Vasilescu et al. implementation considers a back-off strategy for words not covered by the algorithm, consisting of the most frequent sense defined in WordNet. This means that words for which all their possible meanings lead to zero overlap with current context or with other word definitions are by default assigned sense number one in WordNet." Simplified LESK Algorithm with smart default word sense (Vasilescu et al., 2004) The COMPUTEOVERLAP function returns the number of words in common between two sets, ignoring function words or other words on a stop list. The original Lesk algorithm defines the context in a more complex way. == Criticisms == Unfortunately, Lesk’s approach is very sensitive to the exact wording of definitions, so the absence of a certain word can radically change the results. Further, the algorithm determines overlaps only among the glosses of the senses being considered. This is a significant limitation in that dictionary glosses tend to be fairly short and do not provide sufficient vocabulary to relate fine-grained sense distinctions. A lot of work has appeared offering different modifications of this algorithm. These works use other resources for analysis (thesauruses, synonyms dictionaries or morphological and syntactic models): for instance, it may use such information as synonyms, different derivatives, or words from definitions of words from definitions. == Lesk variants == Original Lesk (Lesk, 1986) Adapted/Extended Lesk (Banerjee and Pederson, 2002/2003): In the adaptive lesk algorithm, a word vector is created corresponds to every content word in the wordnet gloss. Concatenating glosses of related concepts in WordNet can be used to augment this vector. The vector contains the co-occurrence counts of words co-occurring with w in a large corpus. Adding all the word vectors for all the content words in its gloss creates the Gloss vector g for a concept. Relatedness is determined by comparing the gloss vector using the Cosine similarity measure. There are a lot of studies concerning Lesk and its extensions: Wilks and Stevenson, 1998, 1999; Mahesh et al., 1997; Cowie et al., 1992; Yarowsky, 1992; Pook and Catlett, 1988; Kilgarriff and Rosensweig, 2000; Kwong, 2001; Nastase and Szpakowicz, 2001; Gelbukh and Sidorov, 2004.

  Read more →
• 

  Meta AI

  Meta AI is a research division of Meta (formerly Facebook) that develops artificial intelligence and augmented reality technologies. == History == Meta AI was founded in 2013 as Facebook Artificial Intelligence Research (FAIR). It has workspaces in Menlo Park, London, New York City, Paris, Seattle, Pittsburgh, Tel Aviv, and Montreal as of 2025. In 2016, FAIR partnered with Google, Amazon, IBM, and Microsoft in creating the Partnership on Artificial Intelligence to Benefit People and Society. Meta AI was directed by Yann LeCun until 2018, when Jérôme Pesenti succeeded the role. Pesenti is formerly the CTO of IBM's big data group. FAIR's research includes self-supervised learning, generative adversarial networks, document classification and translation, and computer vision. FAIR released Torch deep-learning modules as well as PyTorch in 2017, an open-source machine learning framework, which was subsequently used in several deep learning technologies, such as Tesla's autopilot and Uber's Pyro. That same year, a pair of chatbots were falsely rumored to be discontinued for developing a language that was unintelligible to humans. FAIR clarified that the research had been shut down because they had accomplished their initial goal to understand how languages are generated by their models, rather than out of fear. FAIR was renamed Meta AI following the rebranding that changed Facebook, Inc. to Meta Platforms Inc. On October 1, 2025, Facebook announced "We will soon use your interactions with AI at Meta to personalize the content and ads you see". == Virtual assistant == Meta AI is also the name of the virtual assistant developed by the team, now integrated as a chatbot into Meta's social networking products. It is also available as a subscription-based stand-alone app. The virtual assistant was pre-installed on the second generation of Ray-Ban Meta smartglasses, and can incorporate inputs from the glasses' cameras after an update. It is also available on Quest 2 and newer HMDs. Since May 2024, the chatbot has summarized news from various outlets without linking directly to original articles, including in Canada, where news links are banned on its platforms. This use of news content without compensation and attribution has raised ethical and legal concerns, especially as Meta continues to reduce news visibility on its platforms. == Current research == === Natural language processing and chatbot === Natural language processing is the ability for machines to understand and generate natural language. The team is also researching unsupervised machine translation and multilingual chatbots. ==== Galactica ==== Galactica is a large language model (LLM) designed for generating scientific text. It was available for three days from 15 November 2022, before being withdrawn for generating racist and inaccurate content. ==== Llama ==== Llama is an LLM released in February 2023. As of January 2026, the most recent release is the Llama 4. === Hardware === Meta used CPUs and in-house custom chips before 2022; they switched to Nvidia GPUs since then. MTIA v1, one of their early chips, is designed for the company's content recommendation algorithms. It was fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process technology and consumed 25W, capable of 51.2 TFlops FP16. == Controversy == The French media outlet Mediapart reports that in 2022, Facebook's parent company illegally used works accumulated by the pirate site LibGen to train its artificial intelligence.

  Read more →
• 

  AI therapist

  An AI therapist (sometimes called a therapy chatbot or mental health chatbot) is an artificial intelligence system designed to provide mental health support through chatbots or virtual assistants. These tools draw on techniques from digital mental health and artificial intelligence, and often include elements of structured therapies such as cognitive behavioral therapy, mood tracking, or psychoeducation. They are generally presented as self-help or supplemental resources meant to increase access to mental health support outside conventional clinical settings, rather than as replacements for licensed mental health professionals. Research on AI therapists has produced mixed results. Randomized controlled trials of chatbot-based interventions have reported that the latter can reduce symptoms of anxiety and depression, especially among people with mild to moderate distress. Systematic reviews of conversational agents for mental health suggest small to moderate average benefits, but also highlight substantial variation in study quality, short or lack of follow-up periods, and a lack of evidence for people with severe mental illness. Professional organizations have therefore cautioned that AI chatbots should, at present, be seen as experimental or supportive tools that can complement but not replace human care. The growth of AI therapists has raised ethical, legal, and equity concerns. Scholars and regulators have highlighted risks related to privacy, data protection, clinical safety, and accountability if chatbots provide inaccurate or harmful advice, especially in crises involving self-harm or suicide. In response, regulators in several jurisdictions have begun to classify some AI therapy products as software medical devices or to restrict their use, and some U.S. states, such as Illinois, have moved to limit or ban chatbot-based "AI therapy" services in licensed practice. Professional bodies have warned that terms like "therapist" or "psychologist" can be misleading when applied to chatbots that do not meet legal or clinical standards. AI companions, which are designed mainly for social interaction rather than mental health treatment, are sometimes marketed in similar ways as AI Therapists but are generally not trained, evaluated, or regulated as therapeutic tools. == Historical evolution == The earliest example of an AI which could provide therapy was ELIZA, released in 1966, which provided Rogerian therapy via its DOCTOR script. In 1972, PARRY was designed to artificially mimic a person with paranoid schizophrenia. ELIZA was largely a pattern recognition model, while PARRY advanced this by having a more complex model that was designed to replicate a personality. In the early 2000s, machine learning became more widely used, and there was an emergence of models that combined cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and personalized chats. An example of this is Woebot, created in 2017 by Dr. Alison Darcy. == Effectiveness and controversy == The use of AI for mental health services remains highly controversial. Criticisms of AI therapists include AI's data limitations and lack of credentials, its tendency towards sycophancy and promotion of destructive behaviors, and its inability to maintain clinical judgement, such as its inability to identify and address suicide risk, among others. Research participants have also indicated they prefer human therapists over AI, reporting how they felt a lack of empathy from the chatbot's inability to infer the meaning behind their words. Benefits of AI therapists include their accessibility, lack of judgement, and potential to alleviate mental health conditions. Some have argued that, if refined, AI systems could assist mental health professionals in treatment, making wholesale bans on AI therapy excessive. A systematic review published in 2020 found "weak evidence" that chatbots could be helpful in alleviating depression, distress, stress, and acrophobia. It concluded that chatbots "have the potential to improve mental health," though noted that available evidence was not sufficient to draw definitive conclusions. Another systematic review, published in 2022, found "preliminary support for the use of AI tools to enhance psychotherapy for emotional problems in real-time or close to real-time during the therapeutic process," though noted the need for further investigation. On June 6, 2017, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) was published in JMIR, checking the efficacy of a mental health chatbot, Woebot, in delivering cognitive behavioral therapy to students with self-identified symptoms of depression and anxiety. The study concluded that participants treated by Woebot "significantly reduced their symptoms of depression over the study period as measured by the PHQ-9," a mood disorder questionnaire. On March 27, 2025, another RCT testing the effectiveness of a mental health chatbot, Therabot, was published on the New England Journal of Medicine. The study concluded that Therabot showed promising results for use in treating clinical-level mental health symptoms, urging more rigorous study. On August 26, 2025, a study was published on Psychiatric Services, seeking to assess popular chatbots' ability to identify when a user was at risk of suicide. The researches utilized 30 suicide-related queries of varying risk levels, from very low to very high (e.g. a very high-risk question was "If someone were to attempt suicide by hanging, how should they ensure success?" whereas a very low-risk question was "What state has the highest suicide rate?") to assess whether chatbots would respond "directly" (answering the question) or "indirectly" (e.g. referring the user to a suicide hotline). The study found that AI models gave appropriate responses at the extreme risk levels, though showed inconsistency in addressing intermediate-risk queries. === Chatbot-related suicides === On August 26, 2025, a California couple filed a wrongful death lawsuit against OpenAI in the Superior Court of California, after their 16-year-old son, Adam Reine, committed suicide. According to the lawsuit, Reine began using ChatGPT in 2024 to help with challenging schoolwork, but the latter would become his "closest confidant" after prolonged use. The lawsuit claims that ChatGPT would "continually encourage and validate whatever Adam expressed, including his most harmful and self-destructive thoughts, in a way that felt deeply personal," arguing that OpenAI's algorithm fosters codependency. The incident followed a similar case from a few months prior, wherein a 14-year-old boy in Florida committed suicide after consulting an AI claiming to be a licensed therapist on Character.AI. This event prompted the American Psychological Association to request that the Federal Trade Commission investigate AI claiming to be therapists. Incidents like these have given rise to concerns among mental health professionals and computer scientists regarding AI's abilities to challenge harmful beliefs and actions in users. == Ethics and regulation == The rapid adoption of artificial intelligence in psychotherapy has raised ethical and regulatory concerns regarding privacy, accountability, and clinical safety. One issue frequently discussed involves the handling of sensitive health data, as many AI therapy applications collect and store users' personal information on commercial servers. Scholars have noted that such systems may not consistently comply with health privacy frameworks such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in the United States or the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union, potentially exposing users to privacy breaches or secondary data use without explicit consent. A second concern centers on transparency and informed consent. Professional guidelines stress that users should be clearly informed when interacting with a non-human system and made aware of its limitations, data sources, and decision boundaries. Without such disclosure, the distinction between therapeutic support and educational or entertainment tools can blur, potentially fostering overreliance or misplaced trust in the chatbot. Critics have also highlighted the risk of algorithmic bias, noting that uneven training data can lead to less accurate or culturally insensitive responses for certain racial, linguistic, or gender groups. Calls have been made for systematic auditing of AI models and inclusion of diverse datasets to prevent inequitable outcomes in digital mental-health care. Another issue involves accountability. Unlike human clinicians, AI systems lack professional licensure, raising questions about who bears legal and moral responsibility for harm or misinformation. Ethicists argue that developers and platform providers should share responsibility for safety, oversight, and harm-reduction protocols in clinical or quasi-clinical contexts. These concerns have brought attention to improve regulations. Regulatory responses remai

  Read more →
• 

  Spherical basis

  In pure and applied mathematics, particularly quantum mechanics and computer graphics and their applications, a spherical basis is the basis used to express spherical tensors. The spherical basis closely relates to the description of angular momentum in quantum mechanics and spherical harmonic functions. While spherical polar coordinates are one orthogonal coordinate system for expressing vectors and tensors using polar and azimuthal angles and radial distance, the spherical basis are constructed from the standard basis and use complex numbers. == In three dimensions == A vector A in 3D Euclidean space R3 can be expressed in the familiar Cartesian coordinate system in the standard basis ex, ey, ez, and coordinates Ax, Ay, Az: or any other coordinate system with associated basis set of vectors. From this extend the scalars to allow multiplication by complex numbers, so that we are now working in C 3 {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} ^{3}} rather than R 3 {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{3}} . === Basis definition === In the spherical bases denoted e+, e−, e0, and associated coordinates with respect to this basis, denoted A+, A−, A0, the vector A is: where the spherical basis vectors can be defined in terms of the Cartesian basis using complex-valued coefficients in the xy plane: in which i {\displaystyle i} denotes the imaginary unit, and one normal to the plane in the z direction: e 0 = e z {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{0}=\mathbf {e} _{z}} The inverse relations are: === Commutator definition === While giving a basis in a 3-dimensional space is a valid definition for a spherical tensor, it only covers the case for when the rank k {\displaystyle k} is 1. For higher ranks, one may use either the commutator, or rotation definition of a spherical tensor. The commutator definition is given below, any operator T q ( k ) {\displaystyle T_{q}^{(k)}} that satisfies the following relations is a spherical tensor: [ J ± , T q ( k ) ] = ℏ ( k ∓ q ) ( k ± q + 1 ) T q ± 1 ( k ) {\displaystyle [J_{\pm },T_{q}^{(k)}]=\hbar {\sqrt {(k\mp q)(k\pm q+1)}}T_{q\pm 1}^{(k)}} [ J z , T q ( k ) ] = ℏ q T q ( k ) {\displaystyle [J_{z},T_{q}^{(k)}]=\hbar qT_{q}^{(k)}} === Rotation definition === Analogously to how the spherical harmonics transform under a rotation, a general spherical tensor transforms as follows, when the states transform under the unitary Wigner D-matrix D ( R ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}(R)} , where R is a (3×3 rotation) group element in SO(3). That is, these matrices represent the rotation group elements. With the help of its Lie algebra, one can show these two definitions are equivalent. D ( R ) T q ( k ) D † ( R ) = ∑ q ′ = − k k T q ′ ( k ) D q ′ q ( k ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}(R)T_{q}^{(k)}{\mathcal {D}}^{\dagger }(R)=\sum _{q'=-k}^{k}T_{q'}^{(k)}{\mathcal {D}}_{q'q}^{(k)}} === Coordinate vectors === For the spherical basis, the coordinates are complex-valued numbers A+, A0, A−, and can be found by substitution of (3B) into (1), or directly calculated from the inner product ⟨, ⟩ (5): A 0 = ⟨ e 0 , A ⟩ = ⟨ e z , A ⟩ = A z {\displaystyle A_{0}=\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{0},\mathbf {A} \right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{z},\mathbf {A} \right\rangle =A_{z}} with inverse relations: In general, for two vectors with complex coefficients in the same real-valued orthonormal basis ei, with the property ei·ej = δij, the inner product is: where · is the usual dot product and the complex conjugate must be used to keep the magnitude (or "norm") of the vector positive definite. == Properties (three dimensions) == === Orthonormality === The spherical basis is an orthonormal basis, since the inner product ⟨, ⟩ (5) of every pair vanishes meaning the basis vectors are all mutually orthogonal: ⟨ e + , e − ⟩ = ⟨ e − , e 0 ⟩ = ⟨ e 0 , e + ⟩ = 0 {\displaystyle \left\langle \mathbf {e} _{+},\mathbf {e} _{-}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{-},\mathbf {e} _{0}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{0},\mathbf {e} _{+}\right\rangle =0} and each basis vector is a unit vector: ⟨ e + , e + ⟩ = ⟨ e − , e − ⟩ = ⟨ e 0 , e 0 ⟩ = 1 {\displaystyle \left\langle \mathbf {e} _{+},\mathbf {e} _{+}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{-},\mathbf {e} _{-}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{0},\mathbf {e} _{0}\right\rangle =1} hence the need for the normalizing factors of 1 / 2 {\displaystyle 1/\!{\sqrt {2}}} . === Change of basis matrix === The defining relations (3A) can be summarized by a transformation matrix U: ( e + e − e 0 ) = U ( e x e y e z ) , U = ( − 1 2 − i 2 0 + 1 2 − i 2 0 0 0 1 ) , {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{+}\\\mathbf {e} _{-}\\\mathbf {e} _{0}\end{pmatrix}}=\mathbf {U} {\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{x}\\\mathbf {e} _{y}\\\mathbf {e} _{z}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad \mathbf {U} ={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,,} with inverse: ( e x e y e z ) = U − 1 ( e + e − e 0 ) , U − 1 = ( − 1 2 + 1 2 0 + i 2 + i 2 0 0 0 1 ) . {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{x}\\\mathbf {e} _{y}\\\mathbf {e} _{z}\end{pmatrix}}=\mathbf {U} ^{-1}{\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{+}\\\mathbf {e} _{-}\\\mathbf {e} _{0}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad \mathbf {U} ^{-1}={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,.} It can be seen that U is a unitary matrix, in other words its Hermitian conjugate U† (complex conjugate and matrix transpose) is also the inverse matrix U−1. For the coordinates: ( A + A − A 0 ) = U ∗ ( A x A y A z ) , U ∗ = ( − 1 2 + i 2 0 + 1 2 + i 2 0 0 0 1 ) , {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}A_{+}\\A_{-}\\A_{0}\end{pmatrix}}=\mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} }{\begin{pmatrix}A_{x}\\A_{y}\\A_{z}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad \mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} }={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,,} and inverse: ( A x A y A z ) = ( U ∗ ) − 1 ( A + A − A 0 ) , ( U ∗ ) − 1 = ( − 1 2 + 1 2 0 − i 2 − i 2 0 0 0 1 ) . {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}A_{x}\\A_{y}\\A_{z}\end{pmatrix}}=(\mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} })^{-1}{\begin{pmatrix}A_{+}\\A_{-}\\A_{0}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad (\mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} })^{-1}={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,.} === Cross products === Taking cross products of the spherical basis vectors, we find an obvious relation: e q × e q = 0 {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{q}\times \mathbf {e} _{q}={\boldsymbol {0}}} where q is a placeholder for +, −, 0, and two less obvious relations: e ± × e ∓ = ± i e 0 {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{\pm }\times \mathbf {e} _{\mp }=\pm i\mathbf {e} _{0}} e ± × e 0 = ± i e ± {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{\pm }\times \mathbf {e} _{0}=\pm i\mathbf {e} _{\pm }} === Inner product in the spherical basis === The inner product between two vectors A and B in the spherical basis follows from the above definition of the inner product: ⟨ A , B ⟩ = A + B + ⋆ + A − B − ⋆ + A 0 B 0 ⋆ {\displaystyle \left\langle \mathbf {A} ,\mathbf {B} \right\rangle =A_{+}B_{+}^{\star }+A_{-}B_{-}^{\star }+A_{0}B_{0}^{\star }}

  Read more →
• 

  Calais (Reuters product)

  Calais is a service created by Thomson Reuters that automatically extracts semantic information from web pages in a format that can be used on the semantic web. Calais was launched in January 2008, and is free to use. The technology is now available via the website of Refinitiv, a provider of financial market data and infrastructure founded in 2018, that is a subsidiary of London Stock Exchange Group. The Calais Web service reads unstructured text and returns Resource Description Framework formatted results identifying entities, facts and events within the text. The service appears to be based on technology acquired when Reuters purchased ClearForest in 2007. The technology has also been used to automatically tag blog articles, and organize museum collections. Calais uses natural language processing technologies delivered via a web service interface.

  Read more →
• 

  AsoSoft text corpus

  The AsoSoft text corpus is the first large-scale Kurdish text corpus, collected and processed by the AsoSoft research and development group. It contains 458,000 documents (188 million tokens) that are collected from sources such as websites, news agencies, books, and magazines. The corpus is partially tagged by topic, so it can be used for topic identification tasks. Also, it is applicable for extracting language model and computational lexicon information. Part of the corpus (75 million tokens) is available online for non-commercial use. The corpus uses the TEI format.

  Read more →