AI Detector Accuracy

AI Detector Accuracy — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Egocentric vision

Egocentric vision or first-person vision is a sub-field of computer vision that entails analyzing images and videos captured by a wearable camera, which is typically worn on the head or on the chest and naturally approximates the visual field of the camera wearer. Consequently, visual data capture the part of the scene on which the user focuses to carry out the task at hand and offer a valuable perspective to understand the user's activities and their context in a naturalistic setting. The wearable camera looking forwards is often supplemented with a camera looking inward at the user's eye and able to measure a user's eye gaze, which is useful to reveal attention and to better understand the user's activity and intentions. == History == The idea of using a wearable camera to gather visual data from a first-person perspective dates back to the 70s, when Steve Mann invented "Digital Eye Glass", a device that, when worn, causes the human eye itself to effectively become both an electronic camera and a television display. Subsequently, wearable cameras were used for health-related applications in the context of Humanistic Intelligence and Wearable AI. Egocentric vision is best done from the point-of-eye, but may also be done by way of a neck-worn camera when eyeglasses would be in-the-way. This neck-worn variant was popularized by way of the Microsoft SenseCam in 2006 for experimental health research works. The interest of the computer vision community into the egocentric paradigm has been arising slowly entering the 2010s and it is rapidly growing in recent years, boosted by both the impressive advances in the field of wearable technology and by the increasing number of potential applications. The prototypical first-person vision system described by Kanade and Hebert, in 2012 is composed by three basic components: a localization component able to estimate the surrounding, a recognition component able to identify object and people, and an activity recognition component, able to provide information about the current activity of the user. Together, these three components provide a complete situational awareness of the user, which in turn can be used to provide assistance to the user or to the caregiver. Following this idea, the first computational techniques for egocentric analysis focused on hand-related activity recognition and social interaction analysis. Also, given the unconstrained nature of the video and the huge amount of data generated, temporal segmentation and summarization were among the first problems addressed. After almost ten years of egocentric vision (2007–2017), the field is still undergoing diversification. Emerging research topics include: Social saliency estimation Multi-agent egocentric vision systems Privacy preserving techniques and applications Attention-based activity analysis Social interaction analysis Hand pose analysis Ego graphical User Interfaces (EUI) Understanding social dynamics and attention Revisiting robotic vision and machine vision as egocentric sensing Activity forecasting Gaze prediction == Technical challenges == Today's wearable cameras are small and lightweight digital recording devices that can acquire images and videos automatically, without the user intervention, with different resolutions and frame rates, and from a first-person point of view. Therefore, wearable cameras are naturally primed to gather visual information from our everyday interactions since they offer an intimate perspective of the visual field of the camera wearer. Depending on the frame rate, it is common to distinguish between photo-cameras (also called lifelogging cameras) and video-cameras. The former (e.g., Narrative Clip and Microsoft SenseCam), are commonly worn on the chest, and are characterized by a very low frame rate (up to 2fpm) that allows to capture images over a long period of time without the need of recharging the battery. Consequently, they offer considerable potential for inferring knowledge about e.g. behaviour patterns, habits or lifestyle of the user. However, due to the low frame-rate and the free motion of the camera, temporally adjacent images typically present abrupt appearance changes so that motion features cannot be reliably estimated. The latter (e.g., Google Glass, GoPro), are commonly mounted on the head, and capture conventional video (around 35fps) that allows to capture fine temporal details of interactions. Consequently, they offer potential for in-depth analysis of daily or special activities. However, since the camera is moving with the wearer head, it becomes more difficult to estimate the global motion of the wearer and in the case of abrupt movements, the images can result blurred. In both cases, since the camera is worn in a naturalistic setting, visual data present a huge variability in terms of illumination conditions and object appearance. Moreover, the camera wearer is not visible in the image and what he/she is doing has to be inferred from the information in the visual field of the camera, implying that important information about the wearer, such for instance as pose or facial expression estimation, is not available. == Applications == A collection of studies published in a special theme issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine has demonstrated the potential of lifelogs captured through wearable cameras from a number of viewpoints. In particular, it has been shown that used as a tool for understanding and tracking lifestyle behaviour, lifelogs would enable the prevention of noncommunicable diseases associated to unhealthy trends and risky profiles (such as obesity and depression). In addition, used as a tool of re-memory cognitive training, lifelogs would enable the prevention of cognitive and functional decline in elderly people. More recently, egocentric cameras have been used to study human and animal cognition, human-human social interaction, human-robot interaction, human expertise in complex tasks. Other applications include navigation/assistive technologies for the blind, monitoring and assistance of industrial workflows, and augmented reality interfaces.
Read more →
Chris Olah

Christopher Olah (born 1992 or 1993) is a Canadian machine learning researcher and a co-founder of Anthropic. He is known for his work on neural network interpretability, particularly mechanistic interpretability, and for research and tools that visualise internal representations in neural networks. In 2025, Forbes reported he had become a billionaire due to his ownership in Anthropic. == Early life and education == Olah was born in Canada. According to Wired, he left university at age 18 without earning a degree and later received a Thiel Fellowship, which supported him in pursuing independent work. == Career == Olah has worked on interpretability research at Google Brain, OpenAI, and Anthropic. Time called him one of the pioneers of mechanistic interpretability and noted that he pursued this research line first at Google, then at OpenAI, and later at Anthropic, which he co-founded. Wired reported that Olah was involved in neural network visualisation work including DeepDream in 2015, as part of efforts to better understand what neural networks learn. Later coverage linked him to more structured interpretability approaches such as "activation atlases". The Verge covered activation atlases as a collaboration between Google and OpenAI researchers to help inspect neural network representations. At Anthropic, Olah has been identified in major press coverage as leading interpretability work aimed at mapping internal "features" in large language models and relating interpretability findings to AI safety. Quanta Magazine has also quoted Olah in reporting on interpretability and the internal structure of modern language models. Time included Olah in its TIME100 AI list in 2024. === Vatican address on AI ethics === On May 25, 2026, Olah spoke at the Vatican during the official presentation of Magnifica Humanitas, the first encyclical of Pope Leo XIV, which addresses artificial intelligence and human dignity. Olah said AI could lead to large-scale displacement of human labor and exacerbate global inequality. He said the commercial and geopolitical incentives driving frontier AI labs often conflict with the public good, and described AI systems as "grown" rather than strictly engineered. Olah called for external moral oversight from religious institutions, scholars, and civil society to hold the technology sector accountable.
Read more →
Personal knowledge base

A personal knowledge base (PKB) is an electronic tool used by an individual to express, capture, and later retrieve personal knowledge. It differs from a traditional database in that it contains subjective material particular to the owner, that others may not agree with nor care about. Importantly, a PKB consists primarily of knowledge, rather than information; in other words, it is not a collection of documents or other sources an individual has encountered, but rather an expression of the distilled knowledge the owner has extracted from those sources or from elsewhere. The term personal knowledge base was mentioned as early as the 1980s, but the term came to prominence in the 2000s when it was described at length in publications by computer scientist Stephen Davies and colleagues, who compared PKBs on a number of different dimensions, the most important of which is the data model that each PKB uses to organize knowledge. == Data models == Davies and colleagues examined three aspects of the data models of PKBs: their structural framework, which prescribes rules about how knowledge elements can be structured and interrelated (as a tree, graph, tree plus graph, spatially, categorically, as n-ary links, chronologically, or ZigZag); their knowledge elements, or basic building blocks of information that a user creates and works with, and the level of granularity of those knowledge elements (such as word/concept, phrase/proposition, free text notes, links to information sources, or composite); and their schema, which involves the level of formal semantics introduced into the data model (such as a type system and related schemas, keywords, attribute–value pairs, etc.). Davies and colleagues also emphasized the principle of transclusion, "the ability to view the same knowledge element (not a copy) in multiple contexts", which they considered to be "pivotal" to an ideal PKB. They concluded, after reviewing many design goals, that the ideal PKB was still to come in the future. === Personal knowledge graph === In their publications on PKBs, Davies and colleagues discussed knowledge graphs as they were implemented in some software of the time. Later, other writers used the term personal knowledge graph (PKG) to refer to a PKB featuring a graph structure and graph visualization. However, the term personal knowledge graph is also used by software engineers to refer to the different subject of a knowledge graph about a person, in contrast to a knowledge graph created by a person in a PKB. == Software architecture == Davies and colleagues also differentiated PKBs according to their software architecture: file-based, database-based, or client–server systems (including Internet-based systems accessed through desktop computers and/or handheld mobile devices). == History == Non-electronic personal knowledge bases have probably existed in some form for centuries: Leonardo da Vinci's journals and notes are a famous example of the use of notebooks. Commonplace books, florilegia, annotated private libraries, and card files (in German, Zettelkästen) of index cards and edge-notched cards are examples of formats that have served this function in the pre-electronic age. Undoubtedly the most famous early formulation of an electronic PKB was Vannevar Bush's description of the "memex" in 1945. In a 1962 technical report, human–computer interaction pioneer Douglas Engelbart (who would later become famous for his 1968 "Mother of All Demos" that demonstrated almost all the fundamental elements of modern personal computing) described his use of edge-notched cards to partially model Bush's memex. == Examples == The following software applications have been used to build PKBs using various data models and architectures. The list includes software mentioned by Davies and colleagues in their 2005 paper, and additional software. Open source Compendium Haystack (MIT project) Joplin Logseq NoteCards Org-mode QOwnNotes TiddlyWiki Closed source Evernote Microsoft OneNote MindManager MyLifeBits Notion Obsidian Personal Knowbase PersonalBrain Roam Tinderbox
Read more →
Safe Superintelligence Inc.

Safe Superintelligence Inc. (SSI Inc.) is an Israeli-American artificial intelligence company founded by Ilya Sutskever, the former chief scientist of OpenAI; Daniel Gross, former head of Apple’s AI efforts; and Daniel Levy, an investor and AI researcher. The company's mission is to focus on safely developing a superintelligence, a computer-based agent capable of surpassing human intelligence. == History == On May 15, 2024, OpenAI co-founder Ilya Sutskever left OpenAI after a board dispute where he voted to fire Sam Altman amid concerns about communication and trust. Sutskever and others additionally believed that OpenAI was neglecting its original focus on safety in favor of pursuing opportunities for commercialization. On June 19, 2024, Sutskever posted on X that he was starting SSI Inc, with the goal to safely develop superintelligent AI, alongside Daniel Levy, and Daniel Gross. The company, composed of a small team, is split between Palo Alto, California and Tel Aviv, Israel. In September 2024, SSI revealed it had raised $1 billion from venture capital firms including SV Angel, DST Global, Sequoia Capital, and Andreessen Horowitz. The money will be used to build up more computing power and hire top individuals in the field. In March 2025, SSI reached a $30 billion valuation in a funding round led by Greenoaks Capital. This is six times its previous $5 billion valuation from September 2024. Despite not yet generating revenue and having approximately 20 employees, the company has attracted significant investor interest, largely due to co-founder Ilya Sutskever's reputation and its focus on developing safe superintelligence. In April 2025, Google Cloud announced a partnership to provide TPUs for SSI's research. In the first half of 2025, Meta attempted to acquire SSI but was rebuffed by Sutskever. In July 2025, co-founder Gross left the company to join Meta Superintelligence Labs, and Sutskever became the CEO of SSI.
Read more →
Representation collapse

Representation collapse is a phenomenon in machine learning and representation learning where a model maps different inputs to the same or very similar embeddings, which means it loses important information about how the data is spread out. It is frequently encountered in self-supervised learning, especially within contrastive and non-contrastive frameworks, when training objectives or model architectures do not maintain variance across representations. Collapse results in degenerate solutions characterized by uninformative learned features, significantly impairing downstream task performance. Various techniques have been proposed to mitigate representation collapse, including the use of negative samples, architectural asymmetry, stop-gradient operations, variance regularization, and redundancy reduction objectives, as seen in methods such as SimCLR, BYOL, and VICReg. Comprehending and averting representation collapse is regarded as a fundamental challenge in the advancement of stable and efficient self-supervised learning systems.
Read more →
UMBEL

UMBEL (Upper Mapping and Binding Exchange Layer) is a logically organized knowledge graph of 34,000 concepts and entity types that can be used in information science for relating information from disparate sources to one another. It was retired at the end of 2019. UMBEL was first released in July 2008. Version 1.00 was released in February 2011. Its current release is version 1.50. The grounding of this information occurs by common reference to the permanent URIs for the UMBEL concepts; the connections within the UMBEL upper ontology enable concepts from sources at different levels of abstraction or specificity to be logically related. Since UMBEL is an open-source extract of the OpenCyc knowledge base, it can also take advantage of the reasoning capabilities within Cyc. UMBEL has two means to promote the semantic interoperability of information:. It is: An ontology of about 35,000 reference concepts, designed to provide common mapping points for relating different ontologies or schema to one another, and A vocabulary for aiding that ontology mapping, including expressions of likelihood relationships distinct from exact identity or equivalence. This vocabulary is also designed for interoperable domain ontologies. UMBEL is written in the Semantic Web languages of SKOS and OWL 2. It is a class structure used in Linked Data, along with OpenCyc, YAGO, and the DBpedia ontology. Besides data integration, UMBEL has been used to aid concept search, concept definitions, query ranking, ontology integration, and ontology consistency checking. It has also been used to build large ontologies and for online question answering systems. Including OpenCyc, UMBEL has about 65,000 formal mappings to DBpedia, PROTON, GeoNames, and schema.org, and provides linkages to more than 2 million Wikipedia pages (English version). All of its reference concepts and mappings are organized under a hierarchy of 31 different "super types", which are mostly disjoint from one another. Each of these "super types" has its own typology of entity classes to provide flexible tie-ins for external content. 90% of UMBEL is contained in these entity classes.
Read more →
Ratio Club

The Ratio Club was a small British informal dining club from 1949 to 1958 of young psychiatrists, psychologists, physiologists, mathematicians and engineers who met to discuss issues in cybernetics. == History == The idea of the club arose from a symposium on animal behaviour held in July 1949 by the Society of Experimental Biology in Cambridge. The club was founded by the neurologist John Bates, with other notable members such as W. Ross Ashby. The name Ratio was suggested by Albert Uttley, it being the Latin root meaning "computation or the faculty of mind which calculates, plans and reasons". He pointed out that it is also the root of rationarium, meaning a statistical account, and ratiocinatius, meaning argumentative. The use was probably inspired by an earlier suggestion by Donald Mackay of the 'MR club', from Machina ratiocinatrix, a term used by Norbert Wiener in the introduction to his then recently published book Cybernetics, or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. Wiener used the term in reference to calculus ratiocinator, a calculating machine constructed by Leibniz. The initial membership was W. Ross Ashby, Horace Barlow, John Bates, George Dawson, Thomas Gold, W. E. Hick, Victor Little, Donald MacKay, Turner McLardy, P. A. Merton, John Pringle, Harold Shipton, Donald Sholl, Eliot Slater, Albert Uttley, W. Grey Walter and John Hugh Westcott. Alan Turing joined after the first meeting with I. J. Good, Philip Woodward and William Rushton added soon after. Giles Brindley attended several meetings as a guest. Warren McCulloch made presentations to the club twice, the first time at its inaugural meeting (a talk which the members found disappointing), and became a correspondent with and supporter of a number of its members. Others who attended at least one Ratio Club event as guests included Walter Pitts, Claude Shannon, J.Z. Young, C.H. Waddington, Peter Elias, J. C. R. Licklider, Oliver Selfridge, Benoît Mandelbrot, Colin Cherry and Anthony Oettinger. One one occasion I.J. Good brought along the then director of the USA's National Security Agency (presumably either Ralph Canine or John Samford given the dates). Several members admired the work of psychologist and philosopher Kenneth Craik and considered him an important influence; according to Husbands and Holland "there is no doubt Craik would have been a leading member of the club" had he not died young in 1945. The club has been considered the most influential cybernetics group in the UK, and many of its members went on to become prominent scientists.
Read more →
Public First Action

Public First Action is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization focused on United States public policy related to artificial intelligence. Public First Action is a bipartisan group that advocates for AI transparency, safeguards, and export controls on advanced AI chips. The organization is aligned with the political action committees Jobs and Democracy, Defending Our Values and Public First. == History == Public First Action was formed in 2025 by former Congressmen Brad Carson, a Democrat, and Chris Stewart, a Republican, to advocate for federal, state, and local regulations related to AI. The group's formation followed the founding of a super PAC network, Leading the Future, which advocates for deregulation of the AI industry and faster development of the new technology. Public First Action supports measures that would increase transparency at frontier AI companies and impose export controls on advanced AI chips, in addition to opposing the preemption of state-level AI laws. In February 2026, Public First Action received $20 million from the AI company Anthropic. That same month, the group announced plans to support 30 to 50 Democrats and Republicans in state and federal races, with Public First Action and aligned super PACs launching advertisements in Nebraska, Tennessee, and other states. In one ad, Public First Action touted Senator Marsha Blackburn for her work on child online safety. As of 2026, the group plans to raise between $50 and $75 million for public oversight of AI and related reforms. == Organization == === Leadership and funding === Public First Action is led by Carson and Stewart. The group has raised nearly $50 million in funding with a goal of raising $75 million during the 2026 midterms. Anthropic has contributed $20 million to the group. === Structure === Public First Action is aligned with three political action committees: "Jobs and Democracy", which supports Democratic candidates; "Defending Our Values", which supports Republican candidates; and "Public First", which supports both Republicans and Democrats.
Read more →
Three-factor learning

In neuroscience and machine learning, three-factor learning is the combination of Hebbian plasticity with a third modulatory factor to stabilise and enhance synaptic learning. This third factor can represent various signals such as reward, punishment, error, surprise, or novelty, often implemented through neuromodulators. == Description == Three-factor learning introduces the concept of eligibility traces, which flag synapses for potential modification pending the arrival of the third factor, and helps temporal credit assignement by bridging the gap between rapid neuronal firing and slower behavioral timescales, from which learning can be done. Biological basis for Three-factor learning rules have been supported by experimental evidence. This approach addresses the instability of classical Hebbian learning by minimizing autocorrelation and maximizing cross-correlation between inputs.
Read more →
Google Brain

Google Brain was a deep learning artificial intelligence research team that served as the sole AI branch of Google before being incorporated under the newer umbrella of Google AI, a research division at Google dedicated to artificial intelligence. Formed in 2011, it combined open-ended machine learning research with information systems and large-scale computing resources. It created tools such as TensorFlow, which allow neural networks to be used by the public, and multiple internal AI research projects, and aimed to create research opportunities in machine learning and natural language processing. It was merged into former Google sister company DeepMind to form Google DeepMind in April 2023. == History == The Google Brain project began in 2011 as a part-time research collaboration between Google fellow Jeff Dean and Google Researcher Greg Corrado. Google Brain started as a Google X project and became so successful that it was graduated back to Google: Astro Teller has said that Google Brain paid for the entire cost of Google X. In June 2012, The New York Times reported that a cluster of 16,000 processors in 1,000 computers dedicated to mimicking some aspects of human brain activity had successfully trained itself to recognize a cat based on 10 million digital images taken from YouTube videos. The story was also covered by National Public Radio (NPR). In March 2013, Google hired Geoffrey Hinton, a leading researcher in the deep learning field, and acquired the company DNNResearch Inc. headed by Hinton. Hinton said that he would be dividing his future time between his university research and his work at Google. In April 2023, Google Brain merged with Google sister company DeepMind to form Google DeepMind, as part of the company's continued efforts to accelerate work on AI. == Team and location == Google Brain was initially established by Google Fellow Jeff Dean and visiting Stanford professor Andrew Ng. In 2014, the team included Jeff Dean, Quoc V. Le, Ilya Sutskever, Alex Krizhevsky, Samy Bengio, and Vincent Vanhoucke. In 2017, team members included Anelia Angelova, Samy Bengio, Greg Corrado, George Dahl, Michael Isard, Anjuli Kannan, Hugo Larochelle, Chris Olah, Benoit Steiner, Vincent Vanhoucke, Vijay Vasudevan, and Fernanda Viegas. Chris Lattner, who created Apple's programming language Swift and then ran Tesla's autonomy team for six months, joined Google Brain's team in August 2017. Lattner left the team in January 2020 and joined SiFive. As of 2021, Google Brain was led by Jeff Dean, Geoffrey Hinton, and Zoubin Ghahramani. Other members include Katherine Heller, Pi-Chuan Chang, Ian Simon, Jean-Philippe Vert, Nevena Lazic, Anelia Angelova, Lukasz Kaiser, Carrie Jun Cai, Eric Breck, Ruoming Pang, Carlos Riquelme, Hugo Larochelle, and David Ha. Samy Bengio left the team in April 2021, and Zoubin Ghahramani took on his responsibilities. Google Research includes Google Brain and is based in Mountain View. It also has satellite groups in Accra, Amsterdam, Atlanta, Beijing, Berlin, Cambridge, Israel, Los Angeles, London, Montreal, Munich, New York City, Paris, Pittsburgh, Princeton, San Francisco, Seattle, Tokyo, Toronto, and Zurich. == Projects == === Artificial-intelligence-devised encryption system === In October 2016, Google Brain designed an experiment to determine that neural networks are capable of learning secure symmetric encryption. In this experiment, three neural networks were created: Alice, Bob and Eve. Adhering to the idea of a generative adversarial network (GAN), the goal of the experiment was for Alice to send an encrypted message to Bob that Bob could decrypt, but the adversary, Eve, could not. Alice and Bob maintained an advantage over Eve, in that they shared a key used for encryption and decryption. In doing so, Google Brain demonstrated the capability of neural networks to learn secure encryption. === Image enhancement === In February 2017, Google Brain determined a probabilistic method for converting pictures with 8x8 resolution to a resolution of 32x32. The method built upon an already existing probabilistic model called pixelCNN to generate pixel translations. The proposed software utilizes two neural networks to make approximations for the pixel makeup of translated images. The first network, known as the "conditioning network," downsizes high-resolution images to 8x8 and attempts to create mappings from the original 8x8 image to these higher-resolution ones. The other network, known as the "prior network," uses the mappings from the previous network to add more detail to the original image. The resulting translated image is not the same image in higher resolution, but rather a 32x32 resolution estimation based on other existing high-resolution images. Google Brain's results indicate the possibility for neural networks to enhance images. === Google Translate === The Google Brain contributed to the Google Translate project by employing a new deep learning system that combines artificial neural networks with vast databases of multilingual texts. In September 2016, Google Neural Machine Translation (GNMT) was launched, an end-to-end learning framework, able to learn from a large number of examples. Previously, Google Translate's Phrase-Based Machine Translation (PBMT) approach would statistically analyze word by word and try to match corresponding words in other languages without considering the surrounding phrases in the sentence. But rather than choosing a replacement for each individual word in the desired language, GNMT evaluates word segments in the context of the rest of the sentence to choose more accurate replacements. Compared to older PBMT models, the GNMT model scored a 24% improvement in similarity to human translation, with a 60% reduction in errors. The GNMT has also shown significant improvement for notoriously difficult translations, like Chinese to English. While the introduction of the GNMT has increased the quality of Google Translate's translations for the pilot languages, it was very difficult to create such improvements for all of its 103 languages. Addressing this problem, the Google Brain Team was able to develop a Multilingual GNMT system, which extended the previous one by enabling translations between multiple languages. Furthermore, it allows for Zero-Shot Translations, which are translations between two languages that the system has never explicitly seen before. Google announced that Google Translate can now also translate without transcribing, using neural networks. This means that it is possible to translate speech in one language directly into text in another language, without first transcribing it to text. According to the Researchers at Google Brain, this intermediate step can be avoided using neural networks. In order for the system to learn this, they exposed it to many hours of Spanish audio together with the corresponding English text. The different layers of neural networks, replicating the human brain, were able to link the corresponding parts and subsequently manipulate the audio waveform until it was transformed to English text. Another drawback of the GNMT model is that it causes the time of translation to increase exponentially with the number of words in the sentence. This caused the Google Brain Team to add 2000 more processors to ensure the new translation process would still be fast and reliable. === Robotics === Aiming to improve traditional robotics control algorithms where new skills of a robot need to be hand-programmed, robotics researchers at Google Brain are developing machine learning techniques to allow robots to learn new skills on their own. They also attempt to develop ways for information sharing between robots so that robots can learn from each other during their learning process, also known as cloud robotics. As a result, Google has launched the Google Cloud Robotics Platform for developers in 2019, an effort to combine robotics, AI, and the cloud to enable efficient robotic automation through cloud-connected collaborative robots. Robotics research at Google Brain has focused mostly on improving and applying deep learning algorithms to enable robots to complete tasks by learning from experience, simulation, human demonstrations, and/or visual representations. For example, Google Brain researchers showed that robots can learn to pick and throw rigid objects into selected boxes by experimenting in an environment without being pre-programmed to do so. In another research, researchers trained robots to learn behaviors such as pouring liquid from a cup; robots learned from videos of human demonstrations recorded from multiple viewpoints. Google Brain researchers have collaborated with other companies and academic institutions on robotics research. In 2016, the Google Brain Team collaborated with researchers at X in a research on learning hand-eye coordination for robotic grasping. Their method allowed real-time robot control for grasping novel objec
Read more →
Information Coding Classification

The Information Coding Classification (ICC) is a classification system covering almost all extant 6500 knowledge fields (knowledge domains). Its conceptualization goes beyond the scope of the well known library classification systems, such as Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), and Library of Congress Classification (LCC), by extending also to knowledge systems that so far have not afforded to classify literature. ICC actually presents a flexible universal ordering system for both literature and other kinds of information, set out as knowledge fields. From a methodological point of view, ICC differs from the above-mentioned systems along the following three lines: Its main classes are not based on disciplines but on nine live stages of development, so-called ontical levels. It breaks them roughly down into hierarchical steps by further nine categories which makes decimal number coding possible. The contents of a knowledge field is earmarked via a digital position scheme, which makes the first hierarchical step refer to the nine ontical levels (object areas as subject categories), and the second hierarchical step refer to nine functionally ordered form categories. Respective knowledge fields permit to step down by the same principle to a third and forth level, and even further to a fifth and sixth level. Finally, knowledge field subdivisions will have to conform to said digital position scheme. Hence, for a given knowledge field identical codes will mark identical categories under respective numbers of the coding system. This mnemotechnical aspect of the system helps memorizing and straightaway retrieving the whereabouts of respective interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary fields. The first two hierarchical levels may be regarded as a top- or upper ontology for ontologies and other applications. The terms of the first three hierarchical levels were set out in German and English in Wissensorganisation. Entwicklung, Aufgabe, Anwendung, Zukunft, on pp. 82 to 100. It was published in 2014 and available so far only in German. In the meantime, also the French terms of the knowledge fields have been collected. Competence for maintenance and further development rests with the German Chapter of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO) e.V. == Historical development == At the end of 1970, Prof. Alwin Diemer, Univ.of Düsseldorf proposed to Ingetraut Dahlberg to undertake a philosophical dissertation on The universal classification system of knowledge, its ontological, epistemological, and information theoretical foundations. Diemer had in mind an innovating ontological approach for such a system based on the whole spectrum of kinds of being and complying with epistemological requirements. The third requirement had already been taken up somehow in the Indian Colon Classification, yet it still called for explanations and additions. In 1974, the dissertation was published in German entitled Grundlagen universaler Wissensordnung. It started with conceptual clarifications, and why and how the term „universal“ was linked to knowledge, including knowledge fields, such as commodity science, artefacts, statistics, patents, standardization, communication, utility services et al. In chapter 3, six universal classification systems (DDC, UDC, LCC, BC, CC and BBK) were presented, analyzed and compared. While preparing the dissertation, Dahlberg started with elaborating the new universal system by first gleaning a lot of extant designations of knowledge fields from whatever available reference works. This was funded by the German Documentation Society (DGD) (1971-2) under the title of Order system of knowledge fields. In addition, the syllabuses of German universities and polytechniques were explored for relevant terms and documented (1975). Thereafter, it seemed necessary to add definitions from special dictionaries and encyclopediae; it soon appeared that the 12.500 terms included numerous synonyms, so that the whole collection boiled down to about 6.500 concept designations (Project Logstruktur, supported by the German Science Foundation (DFG) 1976-78). The outcome of this work was the formulation of 30 theses which ended up in 12 principles for the new system, published 40 years later under. These principles refer not only to theoretical foundations but also to structure and other organizational aspects of the whole array of knowledge fields. In 1974, the digital position scheme for field subdivision had already been developed to allow for classifying classification literature in the bibliographical section of the first issue of the Journal International Classification. In 1977, the entire ICC was ready for presentation at a seminar in Bangalore, India. A publication of the first three hierarchical levels appeared however only in 1982. It was applied to the bibliography of classification systems and thesauri in vol.1 of the International Classification and Indexing Bibliography; it has been updated. == Governing principles == These were published in full length in the book Wissensorganisation. Entwicklung, Aufgabe, Anwendung, Zukunft and the article Information Coding Classification. Geschichtliches, Prinzipien, Inhaltliches, hence it suffices to just mention their topics with some necessary additions. Principle 1: Concept theoretical approaches. Concepts are the contents of ICC, they are understood as being units of knowledge. The „birth“ of a concept. Where do the characteristics, the knowledge elements come from? How do conceptual relations arise? Principle 2: The four kinds of concept relations and their applications. Principle 3: Decimal numbers form the ICC codes as its universal language. Principle 4: The nine ontical levels of ICC. They were grouped under three captions: Prolegomena (1-3), life sciences (4-6) and human output (7-9): Structure and form Matter and energy Cosmos and earth Biosphere Anthroposphere Sociosphere Material products (economics and technology) Intellectual products (knowledge and information) Spiritual products (products of mind and culture) Principle 5: Knowledge fields are structured by categories, based on the Aristotelian form-categories, under a digital position scheme, a kind of scaling rule for subdividing a given field as follows: General area: problems, theories, principles (axiom and structure) Object area: objects, kinds, parts, properties of objects Activity area: methods, processes, activities Field properties or first characterization Persons or secondary characterization Societies or tertiary characterization Influences from outside Applications of the field to other fields Field information and synthesizing tasks The digital position scheme, called Systematifier, has also been used for structuring the entire system via the categories figuring on the upper zero level. An example of its application is the structure of the classification system for knowledge organization literature Gliederung der Klassifikationsliteratur. (A simplified version with an additional introduction is given in, p. 71) Principle 6: The ontical levels outlined under principle 4 conform to the „integrative level theory“ which means that every level is integrated in the following one. In addition, each knowledge area presumes the following one. Principle 7: The combination potential of knowledge fields (interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity)is determined by the digital position scheme. (Examples are given in, p. 103-4) Principle 8: The categories of the zero-level are general concepts, their possible subdivisions could once be used for classificatory statements. (These subdivisions still need elaboration) Principle 9 and 10: These relate to the combination potential of classificatory statements with space and time concepts. (Still to be elaborated) Principle 11: The system's mnemotechnical aspect relies on the fixed system position codes and on the 3x3 form- and subject-categories. Principle 12: The combination potential of system position 1, 8 and 9 make ICC to a self-networking system which complies with the present scientific development. == In matrix form == The first two levels of ICC can be represented by following matrix. The first hierarchical level of the 9 subject categories results from the first vertical array under codes 1-9. The second hierarchical level of subject categories is structured by the 9 functionally ordered form categories, listed in the first horizontal line under codes 01-09. Some exceptions are mentioned in principle 7. == Research == === Exploration of automatic classification === For classifying web documents as conceived by Jens Hartmann, University of Karlsruhe, Prof.Walter Koch, University of Graz, has explored in his Institute for Applied Information Technology Research Society (AIT) the application of ICC to automatically classifying metadata of some 350.000 documents. This was facilitated by data generated within the framework of an E
Read more →
Horovod (machine learning)

Horovod is a free and open-source distributed deep learning training framework for TensorFlow, Keras, PyTorch and Apache MXNet. It is designed to scale existing single-GPU training scripts to efficiently run on multiple GPUs and computer nodes with minimal code changes, using synchronous data-parallel training based on the ring-allreduce communication pattern. Horovod was initially developed at Uber and released as an open-source project in 2017, and is now hosted by the LF AI & Data Foundation, a project of the Linux Foundation. == History == Horovod was created at Uber as part of the company's internal machine learning platform Michelangelo to simplify scaling TensorFlow models across many GPUs. The first public release of the library, version 0.9.0, was tagged on GitHub in August 2017 under the Apache 2.0 licence. In October 2017, Uber Engineering publicly introduced Horovod as an open-source component of its deep learning toolkit. In February 2018 Alexander Sergeev and Mike Del Balso published a technical paper describing Horovod's design and benchmarking its performance on up to 512 GPUs, showing near-linear scaling for several image-classification models when compared with single-GPU baselines. In December 2018 Uber contributed Horovod to the LF Deep Learning Foundation (later LF AI & Data), making it a Linux Foundation project. Horovod entered incubation under LF AI & Data and graduated as a full foundation project in 2020. Since its initial release the project has expanded beyond TensorFlow to provide APIs for PyTorch, Keras and Apache MXNet, as well as integrations with frameworks such as Apache Spark and Ray, support for elastic training, and tooling for automated performance tuning and profiling. == Design and features == Horovod core principles are based on the MPI concepts size, rank, local rank, allreduce, allgather, broadcast, and alltoall. Horovod implements synchronous data-parallel training, in which each worker process maintains a replica of the model and computes gradients on different mini-batches of data. The gradients are aggregated across workers using the ring-allreduce communication pattern rather than a central parameter server, which reduces communication bottlenecks and can improve scaling on multi-GPU clusters. Communication is built on top of collective-communication libraries such as MPI, NCCL, Gloo and Intel oneCCL, and supports both GPU and CPU training. In the benchmark experiments reported in the original paper, Horovod achieved around 90% scaling efficiency on 512 GPUs for the ResNet-101 and Inception v3 convolutional neural networks, and around 68% scaling efficiency for the VGG-16 model. Horovod can be deployed on-premises or in cloud environments and is distributed as a Python package with optional GPU support via CUDA. The official documentation provides guides for running Horovod with Docker, Kubernetes (including via Kubeflow and the MPI Operator), commercial platforms such as Databricks, and cluster schedulers such as LSF. == Adoption and use cases == Within Uber, Horovod has been used for applications including autonomous driving research, fraud detection and trip forecasting. Major cloud providers have integrated Horovod into their managed machine learning offerings. Amazon Web Services supports distributed training with Horovod in services such as Amazon SageMaker and AWS Deep Learning Containers, while Microsoft Azure documents Horovod-based training workflows for Azure Synapse Analytics. Technical guides from academic and research computing centres, including Purdue University and the NASA Advanced Supercomputing programme, describe Horovod-based workflows for multi-GPU training on supercomputers and clusters. Horovod is also used in conjunction with Apache Spark and dedicated storage systems as part of end-to-end data processing and model-training pipelines. Industry blogs and technical tutorials describe deployments of Horovod on Kubernetes, on-premises clusters and cloud-managed Kubernetes services such as Amazon EKS.
Read more →
Turret lathe

A turret lathe is a form of metalworking lathe that is used for repetitive production of duplicate parts, which by the nature of their cutting process are usually interchangeable. It evolved from earlier lathes with the addition of the turret, which is an indexable toolholder that allows multiple cutting operations to be performed, each with a different cutting tool, in easy, rapid succession, with no need for the operator to perform set-up tasks in between (such as installing or uninstalling tools) or to control the toolpath. The latter is due to the toolpath's being controlled by the machine, either in jig-like fashion, via the mechanical limits placed on it by the turret's slide and stops, or via digitally-directed servomechanisms for computer numerical control lathes. The name derives from the way early turrets took the general form of a flattened cylindrical block mounted to the lathe's cross-slide, capable of rotating about the vertical axis and with toolholders projecting out to all sides, and thus vaguely resembled a swiveling gun turret. Capstan lathe is the usual name in the UK and Commonwealth, though the two terms are also used in contrast: see below, Capstan versus turret. == History == Turret lathes became indispensable to the production of interchangeable parts and for mass production. The first turret lathe was built by Stephen Fitch in 1845 to manufacture screws for pistol percussion parts. In the mid-nineteenth century, the need for interchangeable parts for Colt revolvers enhanced the role of turret lathes in achieving this goal as part of the "American system" of manufacturing arms. Clock-making and bicycle manufacturing had similar requirements. Christopher Spencer invented the first fully automated turret lathe in 1873, which led to designs using cam action or hydraulic mechanisms. From the late-19th through mid-20th centuries, turret lathes, both manual and automatic (i.e., screw machines and chuckers), were one of the most important classes of machine tools for mass production. They were used extensively in the mass production for the war effort in World War II. The U.S. company Warner & Swasey was one of the premier brands in heavy turret lathes between the 1910s and 1960s; it became the world's largest manufacturer of such lathes by 1928. During World War II, it employed 7,000 people and produced half of the turret lathes manufactured in the United States. == Types == There are many variants of the turret lathe. They can be most generally classified by size (small, medium, or large); method of control (manual, automated mechanically, or automated via computer (numerical control (NC) or computer numerical control (CNC)); and bed orientation (horizontal or vertical). === Archetypical: horizontal, manual === In the late 1830s a "capstan lathe" with a turret was patented in Britain. The first American turret lathe was invented by Stephen Fitch in 1845. The archetypical turret lathe, and the first in order of historical appearance, is the horizontal-bed, manual turret lathe. The term "turret lathe" without further qualification is still understood to refer to this type. The formative decades for this class of machine were the 1840s through 1860s, when the basic idea of mounting an indexable turret on a bench lathe or engine lathe was born, developed, and disseminated from the originating shops to many other factories. Some important tool-builders in this development were Stephen Fitch; Gay, Silver & Co.; Elisha K. Root of Colt; J.D. Alvord of the Sharps Armory; Frederick W. Howe, Richard S. Lawrence, and Henry D. Stone of Robbins & Lawrence; J.R. Brown of Brown & Sharpe; and Francis A. Pratt of Pratt & Whitney. Various designers at these and other firms later made further refinements. === Semi-automatic === Sometimes machines similar to those above, but with power feeds and automatic turret-indexing at the end of the return stroke, are called "semi-automatic turret lathes". This nomenclature distinction is blurry and not consistently observed. The term "turret lathe" encompasses them all. During the 1860s, when semi-automatic turret lathes were developed, they were sometimes called "automatic". What we today would call "automatics", that is, fully automatic machines, had not been developed yet. During that era both manual and semi-automatic turret lathes were sometimes called "screw machines", although we today reserve that term for fully automatic machines. === Automatic === During the 1870s through 1890s, the mechanically automated "automatic" turret lathe was developed and disseminated. These machines can execute many part-cutting cycles without human intervention. Thus the duties of the operator, which were already greatly reduced by the manual turret lathe, were even further reduced, and productivity increased. These machines use cams to automate the sliding and indexing of the turret and the opening and closing of the chuck. Thus, they execute the part-cutting cycle somewhat analogously to the way in which an elaborate cuckoo clock performs an automated theater show. Small- to medium-sized automatic turret lathes are usually called "screw machines" or "automatic screw machines", while larger ones are usually called "automatic chucking lathes", "automatic chuckers", or "chuckers". Such machine tools of the "automatic" variety, which in the pre-computer era meant mechanically automated, had already reached a highly advanced state by World War I. === Computer numerical control === When World War II ended, the digital computer was poised to develop from a colossal laboratory curiosity into a practical technology that could begin to disseminate into business and industry. The advent of computer-based automation in machine tools via numerical control (NC) and then computer numerical control (CNC) displaced to a large extent, but not at all completely, the previously existing manual and mechanically automated machines. Numerically controlled turrets allow automated selection of tools on a turret. CNC lathes may be horizontal or vertical in orientation and mount six separate tools on one or more turrets. Such machine tools can work in two axes per turret, with up to six axes being feasible for complex work. === Vertical === Vertical turret lathes have the workpiece held vertically, which allows the headstock to sit on the floor and the faceplate to become a horizontal rotating table, analogous to a huge potter's wheel. This is useful for the handling of very large, heavy, short workpieces. Vertical lathes in general are also called "vertical boring mills" or often simply "boring mills"; therefore a vertical turret lathe is a vertical boring mill equipped with a turret. == Other variations == === Capstan versus turret === The term "capstan lathe" overlaps in sense with the term "turret lathe" to a large extent. In many times and places, it has been understood to be synonymous with "turret lathe". In other times and places it has been held in technical contradistinction to "turret lathe", with the difference being in whether the turret's slide is fixed to the bed (ram-type turret) or slides on the bed's ways (saddle-type turret). The difference in terminology is mostly a matter of United Kingdom and Commonwealth usage versus United States usage. === Flat === A subtype of horizontal turret lathe is the flat-turret lathe. Its turret is flat (and analogous to a rotary table), allowing the turret to pass beneath the part. Patented by James Hartness of Jones & Lamson, and first disseminated in the 1890s, it was developed to provide more rigidity via requiring less overhang in the tool setup, especially when the part is relatively long. === Hollow-hexagon === Hollow-hexagon turret lathes competed with flat-turret lathes by taking the conventional hexagon turret and making it hollow, allowing the part to pass into it during the cut, analogously to how the part would pass over the flat turret. In both cases, the main idea is to increase rigidity by allowing a relatively long part to be turned without the tool overhang that would be needed with a conventional turret, which is not flat or hollow. === Monitor lathe === The term "monitor lathe" formerly (1860s–1940s) referred to the class of small- to medium-sized manual turret lathes used on relatively small work. The name was inspired by the monitor-class warships, which the monitor lathe's turret resembled. Today, lathes of such appearance, such as the Hardinge DSM-59 and its many clones, are still common, but the name "monitor lathe" is no longer current in the industry. === Toolpost turrets and tailstock turrets === Turrets can be added to non-turret lathes (bench lathes, engine lathes, toolroom lathes, etc.) by mounting them on the toolpost, tailstock, or both. Often these turrets are not as large as a turret lathe's, and they usually do not offer the sliding and stopping that a turret lathe's turret does; but they do offer the ability to index through successive tool
Read more →
Semantic analysis (knowledge representation)

Semantic analysis is a method for eliciting and representing knowledge about organisations. Initially the problem must be defined by domain experts and passed to the project analyst(s). The next step is the generation of candidate affordances. This step will generate a list of semantic units that may be included in the schema. The candidate grouping follows where some of the semantic units that will appear in the schema are placed in simple groups. Finally the groups will be integrated together into an ontology chart. Semantic analysis always starts from the problem definition which if not clear, require the analyst to employ relevant literature, interviews with the stakeholders and other techniques towards collecting supplementary information. All assumptions made must be genuine and not limiting the system.
Read more →
Catholic Church and artificial intelligence

The Catholic Church views artificial intelligence as a significant technological development that must be governed by strict ethical principles rooted in human dignity and the common good. In January 2025, the Church issued the doctrinal note Antiqua et nova co-issued by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Dicastery for Culture and Education. It addresses the "relationship between artificial intelligence and human intelligence" and offers reflections on the "anthropological and ethical challenges raised by AI". In August 2025, Time magazine included Pope Leo XIV in its 2025 list of the World’s Most Influential People in Artificial Intelligence. In May 2026, Pope Leo XIV approved the creation of a new Vatican commission on artificial intelligence. He released his first papal encyclical, titled Magnifica humanitas, on the topic later in the month.
Read more →