AI Detector Yang Dipakai Dosen

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

• 

  Artificial general intelligence

  Artificial general intelligence (AGI) is a hypothetical type of artificial intelligence that matches or surpasses human capabilities across virtually all cognitive tasks. Beyond AGI, artificial superintelligence (ASI) would outperform the best human abilities across every domain by a wide margin. Unlike artificial narrow intelligence (ANI), whose competence is confined to well‑defined tasks, an AGI system can generalise knowledge, transfer skills between domains, and solve novel problems without task‑specific reprogramming. Creating AGI is a stated goal of technology companies such as OpenAI, Google, xAI, and Meta. A 2020 survey identified 72 active AGI research and development projects across 37 countries. AGI is a common topic in science fiction and futures studies. Contention exists over whether AGI represents an existential risk. Some AI experts and industry figures have stated that mitigating the risk of human extinction posed by AGI should be a global priority. Others find the development of AGI to be in too remote a stage to present such a risk. == Terminology == AGI is also known as strong AI, full AI, human-level AI, human-level intelligent AI, or general intelligent action. The term "artificial general intelligence" was used in 1997 by Mark Gubrud in a discussion of the implications of fully automated military production and operations. A mathematical formalism of AGI named AIXI was proposed in 2000 by Marcus Hutter, who defines intelligence as "an agent’s ability to achieve goals or succeed in a wide range of environments". This type of AGI has also been called "universal artificial intelligence". The term AGI was re-introduced and popularized by Shane Legg and Ben Goertzel around 2002. Some academic sources reserve the term "strong AI" for computer programs that will experience sentience or consciousness. In contrast, weak AI (or narrow AI) can solve a specific problem but lacks general cognitive abilities. Some academic sources use "weak AI" to refer more broadly to any programs that neither experience consciousness nor have a mind in the same sense as humans. Related concepts include artificial superintelligence and transformative AI. An artificial superintelligence (ASI) is a hypothetical type of AGI that is much more generally intelligent than humans, while the notion of transformative AI relates to AI having a large impact on society, for example, similar to the agricultural or industrial revolution. A framework for classifying AGI was proposed in 2023 by Google DeepMind researchers. They define five performance levels of AGI: emerging, competent, expert, virtuoso, and superhuman. For example, a competent AGI is defined as an AI that outperforms 50% of skilled adults in a wide range of non-physical tasks, and a superhuman AGI (i.e., an artificial superintelligence) is similarly defined but with a threshold of 100%. They consider large language models like ChatGPT or LLaMA 2 to be instances of emerging AGI (comparable to unskilled humans). Regarding the autonomy of AGI and associated risks, they define five levels: tool (fully in human control), consultant, collaborator, expert, and agent (fully autonomous). == Characteristics == There is no single agreed-upon definition of intelligence as applied to computers. Computer scientist John McCarthy wrote in 2007: "We cannot yet characterize in general what kinds of computational procedures we want to call intelligent." === Intelligence traits === Researchers generally hold that a system is required to do all of the following to be regarded as an AGI: reason, use strategy, solve puzzles, and make judgments under uncertainty, represent knowledge, including common sense knowledge, plan, learn, communicate in natural language, if necessary, integrate these skills in completion of any given goal. Many interdisciplinary approaches (e.g. cognitive science, computational intelligence, and decision making) consider additional traits such as imagination (the ability to form novel mental images and concepts) and autonomy. Computer-based systems exhibiting these capabilities are now widespread, with modern large language models demonstrating computational creativity, automated reasoning, and decision support simultaneously across domains. === Physical traits === Other capabilities are considered desirable in intelligent systems, as they may affect intelligence or aid in its expression. These include: the ability to sense (e.g. see, hear, etc.), and the ability to act (e.g. move and manipulate objects, change location to explore, etc.) This includes the ability to detect and respond to hazard. === Tests for human-level AGI === Several tests meant to confirm human-level AGI have been considered. ==== Turing test ==== The Turing test was proposed by Alan Turing in his 1950 paper "Computing Machinery and Intelligence". This test involves a human judge engaging in natural language conversations with both a human and a machine designed to generate human-like responses. The machine passes the test if it can convince the judge that it is human a significant fraction of the time. Turing proposed this as a practical measure of machine intelligence, focusing on the ability to produce human-like responses rather than on the internal workings of the machine. The idea of the test is that the machine has to try and pretend to be a man, by answering questions put to it, and it will only pass if the pretence is reasonably convincing. A considerable portion of a jury, who should not be experts about machines, must be taken in by the pretence. In 2014, a chatbot named Eugene Goostman, designed to imitate a 13-year-old Ukrainian boy, reportedly passed a Turing Test event by convincing 33% of judges that it was human. However, this claim was met with significant skepticism from the AI research community, who questioned the test's implementation and its relevance to AGI. A 2025 pre‑registered, three‑party Turing‑test study by Cameron R. Jones and Benjamin K. Bergen showed that GPT-4.5 was judged to be the human in 73% of five‑minute text conversations—surpassing the 67% humanness rate of real confederates and meeting the researchers' criterion for having passed the test. ==== Ikea test ==== The "Ikea test", also known as the Flat Pack Furniture Test, involves an AI controlling a robot which attempts to assemble an Ikea flat-pack furniture product after having been shown the parts and instructions. As early as 2013, MIT's IkeaBot demonstrated fully autonomous multi-robot assembly of an IKEA Lack table in ten minutes, with no human intervention and no pre-programmed assembly instructions. The robots inferred the assembly sequence from the geometry of the parts alone. ==== Coffee test ==== Steve Wozniak proposed a test where a machine is required to enter an average American home and figure out how to make coffee. It must find the coffee machine, find the coffee, add water, find a mug, and brew the coffee by pushing the proper buttons. This test has been substantially approached across multiple systems. In January 2024, Figure AI's Figure 01 humanoid learned to operate a Keurig coffee machine autonomously after watching video demonstrations, using end-to-end neural networks to translate visual input into motor actions. In 2025, researchers at the University of Edinburgh published the ELLMER framework in Nature Machine Intelligence, demonstrating a robotic arm that interprets verbal instructions, analyses its surroundings, and autonomously makes coffee in dynamic kitchen environments — adapting to unforeseen obstacles in real time rather than following pre-programmed sequences. ==== Suleyman's test ==== Mustafa Suleyman's test proposes giving an AI model US$100,000 and asking it to obtain US$1 million. ==== Use of video-games ==== Adams, et al. propose that the ability to learn and succeed in a wide range of video games can be used to test AI intelligence. This range would include games unknown to the AGI developers before the test is administered. === AI-complete problems === A problem is informally called "AI-complete" or "AI-hard" if it is believed that AGI would be needed to solve it, because the solution is beyond the capabilities of a purpose-specific algorithm. == History == === Classical AI === Modern AI research began in the mid-1950s. The first generation of AI researchers were convinced that artificial general intelligence was possible and that it would exist in just a few decades. AI pioneer Herbert A. Simon wrote in 1965: "machines will be capable, within twenty years, of doing any work a man can do". Their predictions were the inspiration for Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke's fictional character HAL 9000, who embodied what AI researchers believed they could create by the year 2001. AI pioneer Marvin Minsky was a consultant on the project of making HAL 9000 as realistic as possible according to the consensus predictions of the time. He said in 1967, "Within a generation... the problem of

  Read more →
• 

  Someday (short story)

  "Someday" is a science fiction short story by American writer Isaac Asimov. It was first published in the August 1956 issue of Infinity Science Fiction and reprinted in the collections Earth Is Room Enough (1957), The Complete Robot (1982), Robot Visions (1990), and The Complete Stories, Volume 1 (1990). == Plot summary == The story is set in a future where computers play a central role in organizing society. Humans are employed as computer operators, but they leave most of the thinking to machines. Indeed, whilst binary programming is taught at school, reading and writing have become obsolete. The story concerns a pair of boys who dismantle and upgrade an old Bard, a child's computer whose sole function is to generate random fairy tales. The boys download a book about computers into the Bard's memory in an attempt to expand its vocabulary, but the Bard simply incorporates computers into its standard fairy tale repertoire. The story ends with the boys excitedly leaving the room after deciding to go to the library to learn "squiggles" (writing) as a means of passing secret messages to one another. As they leave, one of the boys accidentally kicks the Bard's on switch. The Bard begins reciting a new story about a poor mistreated and often ignored robot called the Bard, whose sole purpose is to tell stories, which ends with the words: "the little computer knew then that computers would always grow wiser and more powerful until someday—someday—someday—…"

  Read more →
• 

  Your AI Slop Bores Me

  Your AI Slop Bores Me (stylized in all lowercase) is a website and social experiment created by programmer Mihir Maroju. Serving as a parody of large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT and Claude, all questions and image prompts posed by users are answered by other, randomly-selected human users of the site. As of March 2026, the site has reached 50 million hits and sits at 16,000 concurrent users. == Background == In an interview with Fast Company, Maroju said he was inspired to create the site by his frustration with AI proliferating the internet with AI generated content, saying the site came from "a frustration for AI art and its proliferation, making artists' lives worse and also just filling the internet with low-effort generic slop". == Overview == The site has a credit system, in which a first-time user will be given 1 credit for free. Every 10 minutes, if a user has 0 credits, they will receive 2 credits. Once the credits are used up, the user can no longer do prompts unless the user earns them. The user can earn credits by responding to other user's prompts by "larping as AI" while given a 75-second time limit. Prompts can either be for a written response, or a drawing for the other user to fulfill the prompt. The maximum amount of credits a user can have is 6 credits, and cannot exceed the maximum limit. If the prompting user activates "thinking mode", the countdown is extended to 150 seconds for the cost of 2 credits. == Reception == The site has garnered attention and praise from X users, and across many online communities. The Daily Dot's Rachel Kiley wrote that "the best part about the game is that there's really no right or wrong way to do it. Humans aren't LLMs trained on copyrighted material and the whole of the free internet, but we do retain a certain amount of the information we've learned from those things over the course of our lives, while also being capable of creativity". Chris Taylor of Mashable called the site "amateurish and charming". Aftermath's Nicole Carpenter wrote that the site reminded her of "the human touch of chaos".

  Read more →
• 

  Type-1 OWA operators

  Type-1 OWA operators are a set of aggregation operators that generalise the Yager's OWA (ordered weighted averaging) operators in the interest of aggregating fuzzy sets rather than crisp values in soft decision making and data mining. These operators provide a mathematical technique for directly aggregating uncertain information with uncertain weights via OWA mechanism in soft decision making and data mining, where these uncertain objects are modelled by fuzzy sets. The two definitions for type-1 OWA operators are based on Zadeh's Extension Principle and α {\displaystyle \alpha } -cuts of fuzzy sets. The two definitions lead to equivalent results. == Definitions == === Definition 1 === Let F ( X ) {\displaystyle F(X)} be the set of fuzzy sets with domain of discourse X {\displaystyle X} , a type-1 OWA operator is defined as follows: Given n linguistic weights { W i } i = 1 n {\displaystyle \left\{{W^{i}}\right\}_{i=1}^{n}} in the form of fuzzy sets defined on the domain of discourse U = [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle U=[0,1]} , a type-1 OWA operator is a mapping, Φ {\displaystyle \Phi } , Φ : F ( X ) × ⋯ × F ( X ) ⟶ F ( X ) {\displaystyle \Phi \colon F(X)\times \cdots \times F(X)\longrightarrow F(X)} ( A 1 , ⋯ , A n ) ↦ Y {\displaystyle (A^{1},\cdots ,A^{n})\mapsto Y} such that μ Y ( y ) = sup ∑ k = 1 n w ¯ i a σ ( i ) = y ( μ W 1 ( w 1 ) ∧ ⋯ ∧ μ W n ( w n ) ∧ μ A 1 ( a 1 ) ∧ ⋯ ∧ μ A n ( a n ) ) {\displaystyle \mu _{Y}(y)=\displaystyle \sup _{\displaystyle \sum _{k=1}^{n}{\bar {w}}_{i}a_{\sigma (i)}=y}\left({\begin{array}{{1}l}\mu _{W^{1}}(w_{1})\wedge \cdots \wedge \mu _{W^{n}}(w_{n})\wedge \mu _{A^{1}}(a_{1})\wedge \cdots \wedge \mu _{A^{n}}(a_{n})\end{array}}\right)} where w ¯ i = w i ∑ i = 1 n w i {\displaystyle {\bar {w}}_{i}={\frac {w_{i}}{\sum _{i=1}^{n}{w_{i}}}}} , and σ : { 1 , ⋯ , n } ⟶ { 1 , ⋯ , n } {\displaystyle \sigma \colon \{1,\cdots ,n\}\longrightarrow \{1,\cdots ,n\}} is a permutation function such that a σ ( i ) ≥ a σ ( i + 1 ) , ∀ i = 1 , ⋯ , n − 1 {\displaystyle a_{\sigma (i)}\geq a_{\sigma (i+1)},\ \forall i=1,\cdots ,n-1} , i.e., a σ ( i ) {\displaystyle a_{\sigma (i)}} is the i {\displaystyle i} th highest element in the set { a 1 , ⋯ , a n } {\displaystyle \left\{{a_{1},\cdots ,a_{n}}\right\}} . === Definition 2 === Using the alpha-cuts of fuzzy sets: Given the n linguistic weights { W i } i = 1 n {\displaystyle \left\{{W^{i}}\right\}_{i=1}^{n}} in the form of fuzzy sets defined on the domain of discourse U = [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle U=[0,\;\;1]} , then for each α ∈ [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle \alpha \in [0,\;1]} , an α {\displaystyle \alpha } -level type-1 OWA operator with α {\displaystyle \alpha } -level sets { W α i } i = 1 n {\displaystyle \left\{{W_{\alpha }^{i}}\right\}_{i=1}^{n}} to aggregate the α {\displaystyle \alpha } -cuts of fuzzy sets { A i } i = 1 n {\displaystyle \left\{{A^{i}}\right\}_{i=1}^{n}} is: Φ α ( A α 1 , … , A α n ) = { ∑ i = 1 n w i a σ ( i ) ∑ i = 1 n w i | w i ∈ W α i , a i ∈ A α i , i = 1 , … , n } {\displaystyle \Phi _{\alpha }\left({A_{\alpha }^{1},\ldots ,A_{\alpha }^{n}}\right)=\left\{{{\frac {\sum \limits _{i=1}^{n}{w_{i}a_{\sigma (i)}}}{\sum \limits _{i=1}^{n}{w_{i}}}}\left|{w_{i}\in W_{\alpha }^{i},\;a_{i}}\right.\in A_{\alpha }^{i},\;i=1,\ldots ,n}\right\}} where W α i = { w | μ W i ( w ) ≥ α } , A α i = { x | μ A i ( x ) ≥ α } {\displaystyle W_{\alpha }^{i}=\{w|\mu _{W_{i}}(w)\geq \alpha \},A_{\alpha }^{i}=\{x|\mu _{A_{i}}(x)\geq \alpha \}} , and σ : { 1 , ⋯ , n } → { 1 , ⋯ , n } {\displaystyle \sigma :\{\;1,\cdots ,n\;\}\to \{\;1,\cdots ,n\;\}} is a permutation function such that a σ ( i ) ≥ a σ ( i + 1 ) , ∀ i = 1 , ⋯ , n − 1 {\displaystyle a_{\sigma (i)}\geq a_{\sigma (i+1)},\;\forall \;i=1,\cdots ,n-1} , i.e., a σ ( i ) {\displaystyle a_{\sigma (i)}} is the i {\displaystyle i} th largest element in the set { a 1 , ⋯ , a n } {\displaystyle \left\{{a_{1},\cdots ,a_{n}}\right\}} . == Representation theorem of Type-1 OWA operators == Given the n linguistic weights { W i } i = 1 n {\displaystyle \left\{{W^{i}}\right\}_{i=1}^{n}} in the form of fuzzy sets defined on the domain of discourse U = [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle U=[0,\;\;1]} , and the fuzzy sets A 1 , ⋯ , A n {\displaystyle A^{1},\cdots ,A^{n}} , then we have that Y = G {\displaystyle Y=G} where Y {\displaystyle Y} is the aggregation result obtained by Definition 1, and G {\displaystyle G} is the result obtained by in Definition 2. == Programming problems for Type-1 OWA operators == According to the Representation Theorem of Type-1 OWA Operators, a general type-1 OWA operator can be decomposed into a series of α {\displaystyle \alpha } -level type-1 OWA operators. In practice, this series of α {\displaystyle \alpha } -level type-1 OWA operators is used to construct the resulting aggregation fuzzy set. So we only need to compute the left end-points and right end-points of the intervals Φ α ( A α 1 , ⋯ , A α n ) {\displaystyle \Phi _{\alpha }\left({A_{\alpha }^{1},\cdots ,A_{\alpha }^{n}}\right)} . Then, the resulting aggregation fuzzy set is constructed with the membership function as follows: μ G ( x ) = ⋁ α : x ∈ Φ α ( A α 1 , ⋯ , A α n ) α ⁡ α {\displaystyle \mu _{G}(x)=\operatorname {\bigvee } \limits _{\alpha :x\in \Phi _{\alpha }\left({A_{\alpha }^{1},\cdots ,A_{\alpha }^{n}}\right)_{\alpha }}\alpha } For the left end-points, we need to solve the following programming problem: Φ α ( A α 1 , ⋯ , A α n ) − = min W α − i ≤ w i ≤ W α + i A α − i ≤ a i ≤ A α + i ⁡ ∑ i = 1 n w i a σ ( i ) / ∑ i = 1 n w i {\displaystyle \Phi _{\alpha }\left({A_{\alpha }^{1},\cdots ,A_{\alpha }^{n}}\right)_{-}=\operatorname {\min } \limits _{\begin{array}{l}W_{\alpha -}^{i}\leq w_{i}\leq W_{\alpha +}^{i}A_{\alpha -}^{i}\leq a_{i}\leq A_{\alpha +}^{i}\end{array}}\sum \limits _{i=1}^{n}{w_{i}a_{\sigma (i)}/\sum \limits _{i=1}^{n}{w_{i}}}} while for the right end-points, we need to solve the following programming problem: Φ α ( A α 1 , ⋯ , A α n ) + = max W α − i ≤ w i ≤ W α + i A α − i ≤ a i ≤ A α + i ⁡ ∑ i = 1 n w i a σ ( i ) / ∑ i = 1 n w i {\displaystyle \Phi _{\alpha }\left({A_{\alpha }^{1},\cdots ,A_{\alpha }^{n}}\right)_{+}=\operatorname {\max } \limits _{\begin{array}{l}W_{\alpha -}^{i}\leq w_{i}\leq W_{\alpha +}^{i}A_{\alpha -}^{i}\leq a_{i}\leq A_{\alpha +}^{i}\end{array}}\sum \limits _{i=1}^{n}{w_{i}a_{\sigma (i)}/\sum \limits _{i=1}^{n}{w_{i}}}} A fast method has been presented to solve two programming problem so that the type-1 OWA aggregation operation can be performed efficiently, for details, please see the paper. == Alpha-level approach to Type-1 OWA operation == Three-step process: Step 1—To set up the α {\displaystyle \alpha } - level resolution in [0, 1]. Step 2—For each α ∈ [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle \alpha \in [0,1]} , Step 2.1—To calculate ρ α + i 0 ∗ {\displaystyle \rho _{\alpha +}^{i_{0}^{\ast }}} Let i 0 = 1 {\displaystyle i_{0}=1} ; If ρ α + i 0 ≥ A α + σ ( i 0 ) {\displaystyle \rho _{\alpha +}^{i_{0}}\geq A_{\alpha +}^{\sigma (i_{0})}} , stop, ρ α + i 0 {\displaystyle \rho _{\alpha +}^{i_{0}}} is the solution; otherwise go to Step 2.1-3. i 0 ← i 0 + 1 {\displaystyle i_{0}\leftarrow i_{0}+1} , go to Step 2.1-2. Step 2.2 To calculate ρ α − i 0 ∗ {\displaystyle \rho _{\alpha -}^{i_{0}^{\ast }}} Let i 0 = 1 {\displaystyle i_{0}=1} ; If ρ α − i 0 ≥ A α − σ ( i 0 ) {\displaystyle \rho _{\alpha -}^{i_{0}}\geq A_{\alpha -}^{\sigma (i_{0})}} , stop, ρ α − i 0 {\displaystyle \rho _{\alpha -}^{i_{0}}} is the solution; otherwise go to Step 2.2-3. i 0 ← i 0 + 1 {\displaystyle i_{0}\leftarrow i_{0}+1} , go to step Step 2.2-2. Step 3—To construct the aggregation resulting fuzzy set G {\displaystyle G} based on all the available intervals [ ρ α − i 0 ∗ , ρ α + i 0 ∗ ] {\displaystyle \left[{\rho _{\alpha -}^{i_{0}^{\ast }},\;\rho _{\alpha +}^{i_{0}^{\ast }}}\right]} : μ G ( x ) = ⋁ α : x ∈ [ ρ α − i 0 ∗ , ρ α + i 0 ∗ ] ⁡ α {\displaystyle \mu _{G}(x)=\operatorname {\bigvee } \limits _{\alpha :x\in \left[{\rho _{\alpha -}^{i_{0}^{\ast }},\;\rho _{\alpha +}^{i_{0}^{\ast }}}\right]}\alpha } == Some Examples == The type-1 OWA operator with the weights shown in the top figure is used to aggregate the fuzzy sets (solide lines) in the bottom figure, and the dashed line is the aggregation result. == Special cases == Any OWA operators, like maximum, minimum, mean operators; Join operators of (type-1) fuzzy sets, i.e., fuzzy maximum operators; Meet operators of (type-1) fuzzy sets, i.e., fuzzy minimum operators; Join-like operators of (type-1) fuzzy sets; Meet-like operators of (type-1) fuzzy sets. == Generalizations == Type-2 OWA operators have been suggested to aggregate the type-2 fuzzy sets for soft decision making. == Applications == Type-1 OWA operators have been applied to different domains for soft decision making. Improved efficiency of computing approach ; Type reduction of type-2 fuzzy sets ; Group decision making ; Credit risk evaluation ; Information fusion ; Linguistic expressions and symbolic translation ; Sentiment analysis ; Ro

  Read more →
• 

  Supper (Spotify)

  Supper is a web-based application on the Spotify digital music streaming platform. The Supper app was born from a group of friends who had backgrounds in the music and gastronomy industries. Digital music solutions company Artisan Council later executed it. The app now sits in the top 40 applications on Spotify. == About == The Supper Spotify application matches recipes for all occasions and skill levels with a playlist for both preparation and presentation, as envisioned by the chefs themselves. Supper is credited with being one of the first apps to pair music with food. Playing on the social nature of music and food culture, users can seamlessly experience both for the first time with real time music streaming. == Supper.mx == In May 2014 Supper was launched outside of the Spotify streaming platform. Though still in partnership with Spotify, supper.mx allows users to view Supper's music + food collaborations on mobile, tablet and desktop, without the need to download Spotify directly. == Curators == All of the recipes and playlists featured on the Supper app come straight from a growing network of tastemakers, including chefs, musicians and institutions around the world. Each month the recipes and playlists are updated in conjunction with current holidays, events and seasons. === Launch === Launching in October 2013 the first edition of Supper featured content from a range of eating institutions and culture makers from the US and Australia. Brooklyn Bowl (Brooklyn) Roberta's Pizza (Brooklyn) Fancy Hanks (Melbourne) The Foresters/Queenies Upstairs (Sydney) Hipstamatic Panama House (Bondi) Sweetwater Inn (Melbourne) Soul Clap (Syd record label) Yellow Birds (Melbourne) === November 2013 === Yardbird (Hong Kong) Sonoma Bakery (Sydney) Do or Dine (Brooklyn) Cameo Gallery (Brooklyn) Hypertrak (Blog) Blue Smoke (NYC) The Crepes of Wrath (Blog) Willin Low // Wild Rocket - Wild Oats - Relish === December 2013 === The Copper Mill (Sydney) Thug Kitchen Mamak (Sydney) Tutu's (Brooklyn) Chin Chin (Melbourne) Flat Iron Steak (London) Greasy Spoon (Copenhagen) === January 2014 === Mexicali Taco & Co. (LA) Church & State (LA) Salts Cure (LA) Nopa (SF) L & E Oyster (LA) 4100 bar (LA) Golden Gopher (LA) The Pie Hole (LA) State Bird Provisions (SF) === Momofuku === In February 2014 Supper teamed up with restaurant heavy weights Momofuku. The recipes featured came from their iconic New York, Toronto and Sydney restaurants. Head office also got involved with an instructional from Brand Director Sue Chan on how to paint Momofuku vibes on to any party. === SXSW === March sees the Supper team migrate to Austin, Texas for SXSW, bringing together the best eateries the city has to offer as well as the music that has influenced them. Restaurants and eateries on board in 2014 included: The Backspace Kelis Swifts Attic Uchi Jackalope Paul Qui/East Side King Thai Kun Wonderland Hole in the Wall Justine's Brasserie The Liberty === Kelis === In April 2014 Kelis presented 5 of her recipes paired with a personal playlist for Supper. Kelis shared her recipes for apple farro, jerk ribs, New York vanilla bean cheesecake and Jerk Ribs. The Kelis/Supper collaboration coincided with the release of Kelis' 2014 album titled 'Food'. === Roberta's Pizza === In May 2014 Bushwick's Roberta's Pizza was guest curator on the Supper app and website. Included in their selections were restaurants and bars from across New York including Bun-ker Vietnamese, Old Stanley's Bar, St. Anselm, Chuko, Frank's Cocktail Lounge, Junior's Cheesecake, Xi'an Famous Foods, Xe Lua, 124 Old Rabbit and Yuji Ramen.

  Read more →
• 

  Blackboard system

  A blackboard system is an artificial intelligence approach based on the blackboard architectural model, where a common knowledge base, the "blackboard", is iteratively updated by a diverse group of specialist knowledge sources, starting with a problem specification and ending with a solution. Each knowledge source updates the blackboard with a partial solution when its internal constraints match the blackboard state. In this way, the specialists work together to solve the problem. The blackboard model was originally designed as a way to handle complex, ill-defined problems, where the solution is the sum of its parts. == Metaphor == The following scenario provides a simple metaphor that gives some insight into how a blackboard functions: A group of specialists are seated in a room with a large blackboard. They work as a team to brainstorm a solution to a problem, using the blackboard as the workplace for cooperatively developing the solution. The session begins when the problem specifications are written onto the blackboard. The specialists all watch the blackboard, looking for an opportunity to apply their expertise to the developing solution. When someone writes something on the blackboard that allows another specialist to apply their expertise, the second specialist records their contribution on the blackboard, hopefully enabling other specialists to then apply their expertise. This process of adding contributions to the blackboard continues until the problem has been solved. == Components == A blackboard-system application consists of three major components The software specialist modules, which are called knowledge sources (KSs). Like the human experts at a blackboard, each knowledge source provides specific expertise needed by the application. The blackboard, a shared repository of problems, partial solutions, suggestions, and contributed information. The blackboard can be thought of as a dynamic "library" of contributions to the current problem that have been recently "published" by other knowledge sources. The control shell, which controls the flow of problem-solving activity in the system. Just as the eager human specialists need a moderator to prevent them from trampling each other in a mad dash to grab the chalk, KSs need a mechanism to organize their use in the most effective and coherent fashion. In a blackboard system, this is provided by the control shell. === Learnable Task Modeling Language === A blackboard system is the central space in a multi-agent system. It's used for describing the world as a communication platform for agents. To realize a blackboard in a computer program, a machine readable notation is needed in which facts can be stored. One attempt in doing so is a SQL database, another option is the Learnable Task Modeling Language (LTML). The syntax of the LTML planning language is similar to PDDL, but adds extra features like control structures and OWL-S models. LTML was developed in 2007 as part of a much larger project called POIROT (Plan Order Induction by Reasoning from One Trial), which is a Learning from demonstrations framework for process mining. In POIROT, Plan traces and hypotheses are stored in the LTML syntax for creating semantic web services. Here is a small example: A human user is executing a workflow in a computer game. The user presses some buttons and interacts with the game engine. While the user interacts with the game, a plan trace is created. That means the user's actions are stored in a logfile. The logfile gets transformed into a machine readable notation which is enriched by semantic attributes. The result is a textfile in the LTML syntax which is put on the blackboard. Agents (software programs in the blackboard system) are able to parse the LTML syntax. == Implementations == We start by discussing two well known early blackboard systems, BB1 and GBB, below and then discuss more recent implementations and applications. The BB1 blackboard architecture was originally inspired by studies of how humans plan to perform multiple tasks in a trip, used task-planning as a simplified example of tactical planning for the Office of Naval Research. Hayes-Roth & Hayes-Roth found that human planning was more closely modeled as an opportunistic process, in contrast to the primarily top-down planners used at the time: While not incompatible with successive-refinement models, our view of planning is somewhat different. We share the assumption that planning processes operate in a two-dimensional planning space defined on time and abstraction dimensions. However, we assume that people's planning activity is largely opportunistic. That is, at each point in the process, the planner's current decisions and observations suggest various opportunities for plan development. The planner's subsequent decisions follow up on selected opportunities. Sometimes, these decision-sequences follow an orderly path and produce a neat top-down expansion as described above. However, some decisions and observations might also suggest less orderly opportunities for plan development. A key innovation of BB1 was that it applied this opportunistic planning model to its own control, using the same blackboard model of incremental, opportunistic, problem-solving that was applied to solve domain problems. Meta-level reasoning with control knowledge sources could then monitor whether planning and problem-solving were proceeding as expected or stalled. If stalled, BB1 could switch from one strategy to another as conditions – such as the goals being considered or the time remaining – changed. BB1 was applied in multiple domains: construction site planning, inferring 3-D protein structures from X-ray crystallography, intelligent tutoring systems, and real-time patient monitoring. BB1 also allowed domain-general language frameworks to be designed for wide classes of problems. For example, the ACCORD language framework defined a particular approach to solving configuration problems. The problem-solving approach was to incrementally assemble a solution by adding objects and constraints, one at a time. Actions in the ACCORD language framework appear as short English-like commands or sentences for specifying preferred actions, events to trigger KSes, preconditions to run a KS action, and obviation conditions to discard a KS action that is no longer relevant. GBB focused on efficiency, in contrast to BB1, which focused more on sophisticated reasoning and opportunistic planning. GBB improves efficiency by allowing blackboards to be multi-dimensional, where dimensions can be either ordered or not, and then by increasing the efficiency of pattern matching. GBB1, one of GBB's control shells implements BB1's style of control while adding efficiency improvements. Other well-known of early academic blackboard systems are the Hearsay II speech recognition system and Douglas Hofstadter's Copycat and Numbo projects. Some more recent examples of deployed real-world applications include: The PLAN component of the Mission Control System for RADARSAT-1, an Earth observation satellite developed by Canada to monitor environmental changes and Earth's natural resources. The GTXImage CAD software by GTX Corporation was developed in the early 1990s using a set of rulebases and neural networks as specialists operating on a blackboard system. Adobe Acrobat Capture (now discontinued), as it used a blackboard system to decompose and recognize image pages to understand the objects, text, and fonts on the page. This function is currently built into the retail version of Adobe Acrobat as "OCR Text Recognition". Details of a similar OCR blackboard for Farsi text are in the public domain. Blackboard systems are used routinely in many military C4ISTAR systems for detecting and tracking objects. Another example of current use is in Game AI, where they are considered a standard AI tool to help with adding AI to video games. == Recent developments == Blackboard-like systems have been constructed within modern Bayesian machine learning settings, using agents to add and remove Bayesian network nodes. In these 'Bayesian Blackboard' systems, the heuristics can acquire more rigorous probabilistic meanings as proposal and acceptances in Metropolis Hastings sampling though the space of possible structures. Conversely, using these mappings, existing Metropolis-Hastings samplers over structural spaces may now thus be viewed as forms of blackboard systems even when not named as such by the authors. Such samplers are commonly found in musical transcription algorithms for example. Blackboard systems have also been used to build large-scale intelligent systems for the annotation of media content, automating parts of traditional social science research. In this domain, the problem of integrating various AI algorithms into a single intelligent system arises spontaneously, with blackboards providing a way for a collection of distributed, modular natural language processing algorithm

  Read more →
• 

  BL (logic)

  In mathematical logic, basic fuzzy logic (or shortly BL), the logic of the continuous t-norms, is one of the t-norm fuzzy logics. It belongs to the broader class of substructural logics, or logics of residuated lattices; it extends the logic MTL of all left-continuous t-norms. == Syntax == === Language === The language of the propositional logic BL consists of countably many propositional variables and the following primitive logical connectives: Implication → {\displaystyle \rightarrow } (binary) Strong conjunction ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } (binary). The sign & is a more traditional notation for strong conjunction in the literature on fuzzy logic, while the notation ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } follows the tradition of substructural logics. Bottom ⊥ {\displaystyle \bot } (nullary — a propositional constant); 0 {\displaystyle 0} or 0 ¯ {\displaystyle {\overline {0}}} are common alternative signs and zero a common alternative name for the propositional constant (as the constants bottom and zero of substructural logics coincide in MTL). The following are the most common defined logical connectives: Weak conjunction ∧ {\displaystyle \wedge } (binary), also called lattice conjunction (as it is always realized by the lattice operation of meet in algebraic semantics). Unlike MTL and weaker substructural logics, weak conjunction is definable in BL as A ∧ B ≡ A ⊗ ( A → B ) {\displaystyle A\wedge B\equiv A\otimes (A\rightarrow B)} Negation ¬ {\displaystyle \neg } (unary), defined as ¬ A ≡ A → ⊥ {\displaystyle \neg A\equiv A\rightarrow \bot } Equivalence ↔ {\displaystyle \leftrightarrow } (binary), defined as A ↔ B ≡ ( A → B ) ∧ ( B → A ) {\displaystyle A\leftrightarrow B\equiv (A\rightarrow B)\wedge (B\rightarrow A)} As in MTL, the definition is equivalent to ( A → B ) ⊗ ( B → A ) . {\displaystyle (A\rightarrow B)\otimes (B\rightarrow A).} (Weak) disjunction ∨ {\displaystyle \vee } (binary), also called lattice disjunction (as it is always realized by the lattice operation of join in algebraic semantics), defined as A ∨ B ≡ ( ( A → B ) → B ) ∧ ( ( B → A ) → A ) {\displaystyle A\vee B\equiv ((A\rightarrow B)\rightarrow B)\wedge ((B\rightarrow A)\rightarrow A)} Top ⊤ {\displaystyle \top } (nullary), also called one and denoted by 1 {\displaystyle 1} or 1 ¯ {\displaystyle {\overline {1}}} (as the constants top and zero of substructural logics coincide in MTL), defined as ⊤ ≡ ⊥ → ⊥ {\displaystyle \top \equiv \bot \rightarrow \bot } Well-formed formulae of BL are defined as usual in propositional logics. In order to save parentheses, it is common to use the following order of precedence: Unary connectives (bind most closely) Binary connectives other than implication and equivalence Implication and equivalence (bind most loosely) === Axioms === A Hilbert-style deduction system for BL has been introduced by Petr Hájek (1998). Its single derivation rule is modus ponens: from A {\displaystyle A} and A → B {\displaystyle A\rightarrow B} derive B . {\displaystyle B.} The following are its axiom schemata: ( B L 1 ) : ( A → B ) → ( ( B → C ) → ( A → C ) ) ( B L 2 ) : A ⊗ B → A ( B L 3 ) : A ⊗ B → B ⊗ A ( B L 4 ) : A ⊗ ( A → B ) → B ⊗ ( B → A ) ( B L 5 a ) : ( A → ( B → C ) ) → ( A ⊗ B → C ) ( B L 5 b ) : ( A ⊗ B → C ) → ( A → ( B → C ) ) ( B L 6 ) : ( ( A → B ) → C ) → ( ( ( B → A ) → C ) → C ) ( B L 7 ) : ⊥ → A {\displaystyle {\begin{array}{ll}{\rm {(BL1)}}\colon &(A\rightarrow B)\rightarrow ((B\rightarrow C)\rightarrow (A\rightarrow C))\\{\rm {(BL2)}}\colon &A\otimes B\rightarrow A\\{\rm {(BL3)}}\colon &A\otimes B\rightarrow B\otimes A\\{\rm {(BL4)}}\colon &A\otimes (A\rightarrow B)\rightarrow B\otimes (B\rightarrow A)\\{\rm {(BL5a)}}\colon &(A\rightarrow (B\rightarrow C))\rightarrow (A\otimes B\rightarrow C)\\{\rm {(BL5b)}}\colon &(A\otimes B\rightarrow C)\rightarrow (A\rightarrow (B\rightarrow C))\\{\rm {(BL6)}}\colon &((A\rightarrow B)\rightarrow C)\rightarrow (((B\rightarrow A)\rightarrow C)\rightarrow C)\\{\rm {(BL7)}}\colon &\bot \rightarrow A\end{array}}} The axioms (BL2) and (BL3) of the original axiomatic system were shown to be redundant (Chvalovský, 2012) and (Cintula, 2005). All the other axioms were shown to be independent (Chvalovský, 2012). == Semantics == Like in other propositional t-norm fuzzy logics, algebraic semantics is predominantly used for BL, with three main classes of algebras with respect to which the logic is complete: General semantics, formed of all BL-algebras — that is, all algebras for which the logic is sound Linear semantics, formed of all linear BL-algebras — that is, all BL-algebras whose lattice order is linear Standard semantics, formed of all standard BL-algebras — that is, all BL-algebras whose lattice reduct is the real unit interval [0, 1] with the usual order; they are uniquely determined by the function that interprets strong conjunction, which can be any continuous t-norm.

  Read more →
• 

  Fuzzy finite element

  The fuzzy finite element method combines the well-established finite element method with the concept of fuzzy numbers, the latter being a special case of a fuzzy set. The advantage of using fuzzy numbers instead of real numbers lies in the incorporation of uncertainty (on material properties, parameters, geometry, initial conditions, etc.) in the finite element analysis. One way to establish a fuzzy finite element (FE) analysis is to use existing FE software (in-house or commercial) as an inner-level module to compute a deterministic result, and to add an outer-level loop to handle the fuzziness (uncertainty). This outer-level loop comes down to solving an optimization problem. If the inner-level deterministic module produces monotonic behavior with respect to the input variables, then the outer-level optimization problem is greatly simplified, since in this case the extrema will be located at the vertices of the domain.

  Read more →
• 

  List of data science software

  This is a list of data science software and platforms used in data science, which includes programming languages, programming environments, machine learning frameworks, data engineering tools, statistical software, data analysis, plotting, MLOps systems, and more. == Programming languages == == Development environments == These interactive notebooks, IDEs, and platforms provide specialised development environments. Apache Zeppelin Architect — Eclipse (software) CoCalc Dataiku Data Science Studio FreeMat GNU Octave Google Colab DataSpell Jupyter Notebook / JupyterLab Kaggle Notebooks MATLAB O-Matrix PyCharm RStudio SAS (software) and SAS Studio Spyder Visual Studio Code == Machine and deep learning software == The Machine learning / deep learning tools support development in those fields. == Data engineering == Examples of Data engineering tools. Apache Airflow Apache Flink Apache Hadoop Apache Kafka Apache NiFi Apache Spark Dask Data build tool (dbt) == Data mining == Examples of Data mining tools. === Free and open-source === === Proprietary === == Database management == === List of RDBMS === ==== Proprietary ==== == Data warehouses == Data warehouse environments include: Amazon Redshift Snowflake Google BigQuery Microsoft Azure Synapse Teradata Vertica == Data lakes == Data lake environments include: Apache Hadoop Cloudera Databricks Delta Lake Amazon S3 Google Cloud Storage Azure Data Lake == Algorithms == Apriori algorithm – frequent itemset mining and association rule learning in market basket analysis Backpropagation – algorithm for training artificial neural networks using gradient descent Decision Trees – tree-based algorithm for classification and regression Expectation–maximization algorithm – iterative procedure for maximum likelihood estimation with latent variables Gradient descent – iterative optimization algorithm for minimizing a loss function ID3 algorithm – used to generate a decision tree from a dataset K-Means – clustering algorithm based on minimizing within-cluster distances K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN) – instance-based learning and classification method Linear regression – estimation method for predicting a dependent variable based on independent variables Logistic regression – classification algorithm for predicting a binary outcome Naive Bayes – probabilistic classifier based on Bayes' theorem Ordinary least squares – estimation method for parameters in linear regression PageRank – graph-based algorithm for link analysis and search ranking Principal component analysis – technique to reduce high-dimensional data while preserving variance Q-learning – reinforcement learning algorithm for learning optimal actions Random forest – ensemble of decision trees for improved classification or regression Sequential minimal optimization – solver for training support vector machines Stochastic gradient descent – randomized variant of gradient descent for large-scale machine learning Support Vector Machines (SVM) – algorithm for finding a hyperplane to separate classes == Statistical software == === Open-source === === Public domain === CSPro Dataplot Epi Map X-13ARIMA-SEATS === Freeware === BV4.1 MINUIT WinBUGS Winpepi === Proprietary === == Data processing == Tools for Data processing and analysis: == Data and information visualization == Software for Data visualization: == Plotting software == Software for plotting data to support processing and visualise results. == Maps and geospatial visualization == ArcGIS Carto Epi Map GeoDA Google Earth Engine Leaflet Mapbox MountainsMap QGIS == Machine learning == MLOps and model deployment: BentoML Data Version Control (DVC) Kubeflow MLflow Seldon Core Streamlit TensorFlow Serving Weights & Biases == Data repositories == Kaggle – platform for data science competitions, datasets, and notebooks. OpenML – collaborative platform for sharing datasets, algorithms, and experiments. University of California, Irvine Machine Learning Repository Zenodo – open-access repository supported by CERN and the EU. == Educational data science software == Kaggle – online platform for data science education, competitions, datasets, and collaborative learning. KNIME – open-source data analytics platform used for teaching data science, machine learning, and workflow-based analysis. RapidMiner – used in academic research and education for data mining and machine learning. Statistics Online Computational Resource (SOCR) – online tools and instructional resources for statistics education. Tanagra (machine learning) – data mining software developed for research and teaching purposes. TinkerPlots – explore and analyze data through visual modeling.

  Read more →
• 

  Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted

  Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted is a 2025 tower defense video game developed by PopCap Seattle, The Lost Pixels, and published by Electronic Arts. It is a remaster of the 2009 game Plants vs. Zombies, introducing upscaled graphics and new additional content. Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted was released for video game consoles and personal computers on October 23, 2025. It received generally positive reviews from critics, but was criticized by the original game's development team for including fabricated concept art and for mishandling the soundtrack. == Gameplay == Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted follows the same gameplay of the original Plants vs. Zombies game with very minor changes. It is a lane-based tower defense game where the player has to defend their home from incoming zombies. The player can place various plants by spending "sun", the game's currency during levels. Sun icons can be collected from the sky during daytime and from sun-producing plants such as sunflowers. Some plants can attack zombies while some can act as defense. If all zombies are defeated in a level, the player wins. If a zombie reaches the left side of the line, a lawn mower—or other similar, relevant object—will activate and clear the row of any zombies, but if the lawn mower has already been used, and another zombie crosses, the game is over. === Replanted features === Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted contains up to 4K upscaled graphics and widescreen support, in comparison to the original game's static 800x600 resolution and 4:3 aspect ratio. Replanted now has full controller support and features local multiplayer modes ported from the original game's seventh generation console ports: co-op, where two players play together with assigned roles; and Versus, where one plays as the plants and the other as the zombies. No online multiplayer is planned, however support for Steam Remote Play was later added in a patch as an alternative for Windows users. Replanted also contains quality-of-life features. Gameplay can now be sped up by the player's will, with a max speed increase of 2.5x. Sun icons can now be mass collected using the "Sun Magnet." On Windows, players can quick-select plants from their seed bank using the number keys as hotkeys. Replanted also introduces two new additional game modes. "Cloudy Day" is a set of non-linear levels in the Adventure campaign. These levels only allow Sunflowers as sun-producing plants. During these levels, the amount of sun dropped from the sky and produced by plants are lowered. At certain times, rain clouds will move over the lawn. While these clouds are present, sun will stop appearing from the sky and from Sunflowers. However, all plants will cost around half their original price and have significantly faster recharge times. "R.I.P. Mode" is a harder difficulty of the Adventure campaign, but the player is forced back to the beginning if they lose a single level. Replanted additionally features "bonus levels" included as non-linear levels in the Adventure campaign. These include 10 new minigames that were previously unused in the original game. In a later update, Replanted added "Survival: Endless" levels to all five areas of the game instead of just the daytime pool. == Development == The existence of a Plants vs. Zombies remaster was revealed in an interview with Janet Robin from The String Revolution, who they did a vinyl collaboration with the franchise in 2025 with Iam8bit. Janet stated that EA commissioned them to record an acoustic composition of the track "Crazy Dave" to be used for an "anniversary edition" of the game. The song would be additionally be a tribute to the song "Bad Guy", which artist Billie Eilish has stated to be somewhat similar to the track. Plants vs. Zombies Replanted was officially announced in a Nintendo Direct presentation in late July 2025. As an incentive, people who pre-ordered the game are given an in-game retro-styled skin of the Peashooter. Replanted was showcased at PAX West on August 25, 2025. A dev diary for Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted was uploaded to YouTube on October 17, 2025. The video features Nick Reinhart, Jake Neri, and Matt Townsend. A developer panel for the game was available during TwitchCon 2025. == Release == Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted was released for Nintendo Switch, Nintendo Switch 2, PlayStation 4, PlayStation 5, Xbox One, Xbox Series X and Series S, and personal computers on October 23, 2025. It was leaked onto the internet on October 17, 2025. Players discovered multiple software bugs, and multiple assets alleged to be upscaled by generative artificial intelligence were found, leading to backlash. Numerous bugs were fixed in a day-one patch on October 23, 2025. == Reception == === Critical response === The versions of Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted for Windows, PlayStation 5, and Nintendo Switch 2 received "generally favorable" reviews from critics, according to review aggregator website Metacritic, while the Xbox Series X version received "mixed or average" reviews. According to OpenCritic, 57% of critics recommended it. IGN's Alessandro Fillari called it "a good way to get re-acquainted with one of the quirkiest puzzle-strategy games of the 2000s", while acknowledging its questionable decisions. Shacknews' David Craddock said it was his favorite version of Plants vs. Zombies, stating, "it packs everything fans loved about the original game, plus lots more" while justifying its US$20 price. The Verge described Replanted as "a time capsule from a simpler, happier time". Kyle Hilliard from Game Informer praised its faithfulness, complimenting the new animations and character designs that did not alter its memorability. Noah Hunter for Final Weapon described the remake as solid, though criticized the lack of certain features and containing bugs that gate it from being excellent. Ben Lyons from Gamereactor stated Replanted is the same as the original overall, despite believing the £18 price is not justified. === Original developers === Rich Werner, the original game's character designer, claims that some concept art contained in the game, speculated to be for Plants vs. Zombies: Garden Warfare (2014), did not originate from the original's development. Werner also stated that concept art for the Disco Zombie is fabricated; the design for the Disco Zombie was created after the estate of Michael Jackson requested the original Dancing Zombie, who resembles Michael Jackson from his Thriller music video, be removed from the game. On October 19, 2026, composer Laura Shigihara expressed her dissatisfaction with the lack of dynamic music in the game. Dynamic music would later be implemented in a later patch. In an interview featuring Rich Werner and user interface designer Matt Holmberg on April 29, 2026, Werner revealed that he and Shigihara were contacted by EA to make a music video to market Replanted. However, after the game was leaked, Werner's response on social media led EA to cancel the collaboration.

  Read more →
• 

  Type-2 fuzzy sets and systems

  Type-2 fuzzy sets and systems generalize standard type-1 fuzzy sets and systems so that more uncertainty can be handled. From the beginning of fuzzy sets, criticism was made about the fact that the membership function of a type-1 fuzzy set has no uncertainty associated with it, something that seems to contradict the word fuzzy, since that word has the connotation of much uncertainty. So, what does one do when there is uncertainty about the value of the membership function? The answer to this question was provided in 1975 by the inventor of fuzzy sets, Lotfi A. Zadeh, when he proposed more sophisticated kinds of fuzzy sets, the first of which he called a "type-2 fuzzy set". A type-2 fuzzy set lets us incorporate uncertainty about the membership function into fuzzy set theory, and is a way to address the above criticism of type-1 fuzzy sets head-on. And, if there is no uncertainty, then a type-2 fuzzy set reduces to a type-1 fuzzy set, which is analogous to probability reducing to determinism when unpredictability vanishes. Type1 fuzzy systems are working with a fixed membership function, while in type-2 fuzzy systems the membership function is fluctuating. A fuzzy set determines how input values are converted into fuzzy variables. == Overview == In order to symbolically distinguish between a type-1 fuzzy set and a type-2 fuzzy set, a tilde symbol is put over the symbol for the fuzzy set; so, A denotes a type-1 fuzzy set, whereas à denotes the comparable type-2 fuzzy set. When the latter is done, the resulting type-2 fuzzy set is called a "general type-2 fuzzy set" (to distinguish it from the special interval type-2 fuzzy set). Zadeh didn't stop with type-2 fuzzy sets, because in that 1976 paper he also generalized all of this to type-n fuzzy sets. The present article focuses only on type-2 fuzzy sets because they are the next step in the logical progression from type-1 to type-n fuzzy sets, where n = 1, 2, ... . Although some researchers are beginning to explore higher than type-2 fuzzy sets, as of early 2009, this work is in its infancy. The membership function of a general type-2 fuzzy set, Ã, is three-dimensional (Fig. 1), where the third dimension is the value of the membership function at each point on its two-dimensional domain that is called its "footprint of uncertainty"(FOU). For an interval type-2 fuzzy set that third-dimension value is the same (e.g., 1) everywhere, which means that no new information is contained in the third dimension of an interval type-2 fuzzy set. So, for such a set, the third dimension is ignored, and only the FOU is used to describe it. It is for this reason that an interval type-2 fuzzy set is sometimes called a first-order uncertainty fuzzy set model, whereas a general type-2 fuzzy set (with its useful third-dimension) is sometimes referred to as a second-order uncertainty fuzzy set model. The FOU represents the blurring of a type-1 membership function, and is completely described by its two bounding functions (Fig. 2), a lower membership function (LMF) and an upper membership function (UMF), both of which are type-1 fuzzy sets! Consequently, it is possible to use type-1 fuzzy set mathematics to characterize and work with interval type-2 fuzzy sets. This means that engineers and scientists who already know type-1 fuzzy sets will not have to invest a lot of time learning about general type-2 fuzzy set mathematics in order to understand and use interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Work on type-2 fuzzy sets languished during the 1980s and early-to-mid 1990s, although a small number of articles were published about them. People were still trying to figure out what to do with type-1 fuzzy sets, so even though Zadeh proposed type-2 fuzzy sets in 1976, the time was not right for researchers to drop what they were doing with type-1 fuzzy sets to focus on type-2 fuzzy sets. This changed in the latter part of the 1990s as a result of Jerry Mendel and his student's works on type-2 fuzzy sets and systems. Since then, more researchers around the world are writing articles about type-2 fuzzy sets and systems. == Interval type-2 fuzzy sets == Interval type-2 fuzzy sets have received the most attention because the mathematics that is needed for such sets—primarily Interval arithmetic—is much simpler than the mathematics that is needed for general type-2 fuzzy sets. The literature about interval type-2 fuzzy sets is large, whereas the literature about general type-2 fuzzy sets is much smaller. Both kinds of fuzzy sets are being actively researched by an ever-growing number of researchers around the world and have resulted in successful employment in a variety of domains such as robot control. Formally, the following have already been worked out for interval type-2 fuzzy sets: Fuzzy set operations: union, intersection and complement Centroid (a very widely used operation by practitioners of such sets, and also an important uncertainty measure for them) Other uncertainty measures [fuzziness, cardinality, variance and skewness and uncertainty bounds Similarity Subsethood Embedded fuzzy sets Fuzzy set ranking Fuzzy rule ranking and selection Type-reduction methods Firing intervals for an interval type-2 fuzzy logic system Fuzzy weighted average Linguistic weighted average Synthesizing an FOU from data that are collected from a group of subject == Interval type-2 fuzzy logic systems == Type-2 fuzzy sets are finding very wide applicability in rule-based fuzzy logic systems (FLSs) because they let uncertainties be modeled by them whereas such uncertainties cannot be modeled by type-1 fuzzy sets. A block diagram of a type-2 FLS is depicted in Fig. 3. This kind of FLS is used in fuzzy logic control, fuzzy logic signal processing, rule-based classification, etc., and is sometimes referred to as a function approximation application of fuzzy sets, because the FLS is designed to minimize an error function. The following discussions, about the four components in Fig. 3 rule-based FLS, are given for an interval type-2 FLS, because to-date they are the most popular kind of type-2 FLS; however, most of the discussions are also applicable for a general type-2 FLS. Rules, that are either provided by subject experts or are extracted from numerical data, are expressed as a collection of IF-THEN statements, e.g., IF temperature is moderate and pressure is high, then rotate the valve a bit to the right. Fuzzy sets are associated with the terms that appear in the antecedents (IF-part) or consequents (THEN-part) of rules, and with the inputs to and the outputs of the FLS. Membership functions are used to describe these fuzzy sets, and in a type-1 FLS they are all type-1 fuzzy sets, whereas in an interval type-2 FLS at least one membership function is an interval type-2 fuzzy set. An interval type-2 FLS lets any one or all of the following kinds of uncertainties be quantified: Words that are used in antecedents and consequents of rules—because words can mean different things to different people. Uncertain consequents—because when rules are obtained from a group of experts, consequents will often be different for the same rule, i.e. the experts will not necessarily be in agreement. Membership function parameters—because when those parameters are optimized using uncertain (noisy) training data, the parameters become uncertain. Noisy measurements—because very often it is such measurements that activate the FLS. In Fig. 3, measured (crisp) inputs are first transformed into fuzzy sets in the Fuzzifier block because it is fuzzy sets and not numbers that activate the rules which are described in terms of fuzzy sets and not numbers. Three kinds of fuzzifiers are possible in an interval type-2 FLS. When measurements are: Perfect, they are modeled as a crisp set; Noisy, but the noise is stationary, they are modeled as a type-1 fuzzy set; and, Noisy, but the noise is non-stationary, they are modeled as an interval type-2 fuzzy set (this latter kind of fuzzification cannot be done in a type-1 FLS). In Fig. 3, after measurements are fuzzified, the resulting input fuzzy sets are mapped into fuzzy output sets by the Inference block. This is accomplished by first quantifying each rule using fuzzy set theory, and by then using the mathematics of fuzzy sets to establish the output of each rule, with the help of an inference mechanism. If there are M rules then the fuzzy input sets to the Inference block will activate only a subset of those rules, where the subset contains at least one rule and usually way fewer than M rules. The inference is done one rule at a time. So, at the output of the Inference block, there will be one or more fired-rule fuzzy output sets. In most engineering applications of an FLS, a number (and not a fuzzy set) is needed as its final output, e.g., the consequent of the rule given above is "Rotate the valve a bit to the right." No automatic valve will know what this means because "a bit to the right" is a linguistic expression, and a valv

  Read more →
• 

  The MANIAC

  The MANIAC is a 2023 novel by Chilean author Benjamín Labatut, written in English. It is a fictionalised biography of polymath John von Neumann, whom Labatut calls "the smartest human being of the 20th century". The book focuses on von Neumann, but is also about physicist Paul Ehrenfest, the history of artificial intelligence, and Lee Sedol's Go match against AlphaGo. The book received mostly positive reviews from critics. == Background == John von Neumann was a Jewish Hungarian-born polymath who was a prodigy from an early childhood. Von Neumann worked in multiple fields of science, theoretical (mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics, game theory, cellular automata) and applied (nuclear weapons research during the Manhattan Project in World War II, computer architecture later named after him, and many other subjects). Labatut calls him "the smartest human being of the 20th century". The title of the book is derived from an early computer based on von Neumann architecture, built after the war at Los Alamos laboratory, called MANIAC I. Benjamín Labatut is a Chilean author known for his 2020 book When We Cease to Understand the World, a collection of fictionalised stories about famous scientists that received positive reviews and was translated into multiple languages from Spanish. The MANIAC is Labatut's first book written in English. In an interview, Labatut said he prefers to write in English: English is my preferred form of thought. ... English is the language I do most if not all my reading it. And it is a far better language than Spanish, in so many ways. Writing "clean" prose in Spanish is almost impossible, because so many of its sounds clash. Borges said that he found English "a far finer language than Spanish" because it's both Germanic and Latin; because of its wonderful vocabulary ("Regal is not exactly the same thing as saying kingly," he explained); because of its physicality; and because you can do almost anything with verbs and prepositions. Labatut was inspired to write The MANIAC by George Dyson's book Turing's Cathedral. == Synopsis == The book has three chapters. The first chapter, "Paul or the Discovery of the Irrational", written in the third person, is about physicist Paul Ehrenfest. The chapter opens with Ehrenfest shooting dead his son Vassily, who suffered from Down syndrome, and then himself. It then recounts Ehrenfest's life story, describing his relationships with his wife Tatyana, his mistress Nelly Meyjes, and his eminent physicist colleagues. It chronicles his descent into despair and depression over his marriage's disintegration, the advent of quantum mechanics, and the direction Europe was heading in with the Nazi Party's rise to power in Germany, looping back to the initial scene of the chapter. The second chapter, "John or the Mad Dreams of Reason", is about John von Neumann, and is written as a series of interviews of his family members, wives, friends, and colleagues, each in a distinctive voice. It is divided into three parts. Part I, "The Limits of Logic", is about his early life, as told by von Neumann's childhood friend Eugene Wigner, mother Margrit Kann, brother Nicholas von Neumann, first wife Mariette Kövesi, and scientists Theodore von Karman, George Polya, and Gábor Szegő. It climaxes with von Neumann's participation in David Hilbert's program to create a logical basis for mathematics based on a consistent set of axioms, a quest ultimately scuppered by Kurt Gödel. Part II, "The Delicate Balance of Terror", discusses von Neumann's role in the Manhattan Project (as told by Richard Feynman); his development of game theory and the doctrine of mutual assured destruction (MAD) (as told by Oskar Morgenstern); and his creation of the MANIAC I computer and the von Neumann architecture (as told by Julian Bigelow). In Part III, "Ghosts in the Machine", Sydney Brenner discusses von Neumann's contributions to biology, his theoretical work on self-replicating and self-repairing machines, and his vision of Von Neumann probes exploring the universe. Nils Aall Barricelli talks about his ideas of digital life and his disagreements with von Neumann. Von Neumann's wife Klára Dán, daughter Marina, and Wigner talk about his final years, personal life, and death. The third chapter, "Lee or The Delusions of Artificial Intelligence", is about Lee Sedol's Go match against AlphaGo. The narrative reverts to the third person. The chapter also tells the story of Demis Hassabis, a chess prodigy in childhood who decided to work on artificial intelligence and founded DeepMind, the company behind AlphaGo. The way is pointed to the future, as artificial intelligence's growing capabilities outpace the human mind. The book ends with Lee Sedol's retirement from Go, and new version of DeepMind's program, AlphaZero, that did not train on human games but nevertheless became the strongest player in Go, chess, and Shogi. == Reception == The book received mostly positive reviews. In his review for The New York Times Tom McCarthy noted the ambiguity of genre: "At its best, as in the stunning opening sequence reconstructing the murder-suicide of the physicist Paul Ehrenfest and his disabled son, or in the final section's gripping account of a computer defeating the world's best human Go player, you just throw up your hands and think, Who cares what discourse label we assign this stuff? It's great." Becca Rothfeld of the Washington Post praised the book, writing that it is "Labatut's latest virtuosic effort, at once a historical novel and a philosophical foray": "The MANIAC is a work of dark, eerie and singular beauty." She noted that the book "can also be difficult to read" because of its unusual narrative structure: "The book is narrated by a cluttered polyphony of characters, among them both of von Neumann's wives and a number of his teachers and colleagues. ... Like von Neumann, The MANIAC strives to adopt the impartial standpoint of the universe." Killian Fox of The Guardian sees the book as "darkly fascinating novel", and notes Labatut's "impressive dexterity, unpicking complex ideas in long, elegant sentences that propel us forward at speed (this is his first book written in English). Even in the more feverish passages, when yet another great mind succumbs to madness, haunted by the spectres they've helped unleash on the world, he feels in full control of his material." Sam Byers of The Guardian praises the book and the author's style: "The opening chapter of Benjamín Labatut's second novel is such a perfect distillation of his technique that it could serve as a manifesto." and "Readers ... will recognise the sense of breathlessness his best writing can evoke. Seemingly loosened from the laws of physics they describe, his sentences range freely through time and space, connecting not only characters and events, but the delicate tissue of intellectual history, often with a lightness of touch that belies their underlying complexity." He writes on the narrative structure: "Through a cascade of staccato chapters, an ensemble of narrators offer their piecemeal insights." Byers adds that "a brilliant novel is not quite what we end up with" and sees the problem in the "diffusion": "Labatut simply spreads himself too thin. Too many years in too few pages; too many voices with far too little to distinguish them. Initially intriguing, the bite-size monologues quickly come to feel inadequate." Some reviewers did not see the book as a biography. In an essay for the Cleveland Review of Books, Ben Cosman juxtaposes the book with Christopher Nolan's biopic Oppenheimer, and writes that it "follows the development of artificial intelligence—first as an idea at the beginning of the twentieth century, and then as a practicality at the beginning of the twenty-first—through the lives of three men who faced it." He also compared the book's structure to "witness testimony". Another reviewer called the book "perfect for anyone thirsting for more nuclear anxiety after watching Oppenheimer". Garrett Biggs of the Chicago Review of Books writes of the book's style: "Labatut writes about scientists the way Roberto Bolaño writes about poets. They are near mythical figures, captured at the corner of the novel's eye. They become historical in the most fraught sense of the term: subject to rumor and speculation and, eventually, the novel's form inflates their personas into something so large they can only be understood as narrative, never known in any objective capacity." Biggs criticises the last chapter: "the story of artificial intelligence has yet to be written. And so when Labatut's narration editorializes about artificial intelligence as 'a future that inspires hope and horror,' The MANIAC disassembles as a novel and starts to sound like a stale thinkpiece. AlphaGo might represent the first glimmer of a true artificial intelligence, as Labatut suggests. It also could one day be considered nothing more than a souped-up cousin to IBM's DeepBlue.

  Read more →
• 

  Security and Privacy in Computer Systems

  Security and Privacy in Computer Systems is a paper by Willis Ware that was first presented to the public at the 1967 Spring Joint Computer Conference. == Significance == Ware's presentation was the first public conference session about information security and privacy in respect of computer systems, especially networked or remotely-accessed ones. The IEEE Annals of the History of Computing said that Ware's 1967 Spring Joint Computer Conference session, together with 1970's Ware report, marked the start of the field of computer security.

  Read more →
• 

  2025 Bilderberg Conference

  The 2025 Bilderberg Conference was held between June 12–June 15, 2025 at the Grand Hôtel in Stockholm, Sweden. The 2025 meeting was the 71st edition of the event. A Bilderberg Group press release listed 121 participants from 23 countries. Established in 1954 by Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, Bilderberg conferences (or meetings) are an annual private gathering of the European and North American political and business elite. Events are attended by between 120 and 150 people each year invited by the Bilderberg Group's steering committee; including prominent politicians, CEOs, national security experts, academics and journalists. Bilderberg conferences operate under the Chatham House Rule, meaning that participants are sworn to secrecy and cannot disclose the identity or affiliation of any particular speaker. As a result, media are not invited and delegates rarely speak about what was discussed. Permits for two public demonstrations against the meeting were requested, one of which, a march from the Norrmalm Square to the Grand Hôtel, was planned for June 14. == Agenda == The key topics for discussion were announced on the Bilderberg website shortly before the meeting. These topics included: == Participants == A list of 121 participants was published on the Bilderberg website. This list may not be complete, as a source connected to the Bilderberg group told The Daily Telegraph in 2013 that some attendees do not have their names publicized. Prime Minister of Sweden Ulf Kristersson attended the meeting despite his name not appearing on the published participant list.

  Read more →
• 

  Computing Machinery and Intelligence

  "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" is a paper written by Alan Turing on the topic of artificial intelligence. The paper, published in 1950 in Mind, was the first to introduce his concept of what is now known as the Turing test to the general public. Turing's paper considers the question "Can machines think?" Turing says that since the words "think" and "machine" cannot clearly be defined, we should "replace the question by another, which is closely related to it and is expressed in relatively unambiguous words." To achieve this objective, Turing proposes a three-step approach. First, he identifies a simple and unambiguous concept to substitute for the term "think." Second, he delineates the specific "machines" under consideration. Third, armed with these tools, he poses a new question related to the first, which he believes he can answer in the affirmative. == Turing's test == Rather than trying to determine if a machine is thinking, Turing suggests we should ask if the machine can win a game, called the "Imitation Game". The original Imitation game, that Turing described, is a simple party game involving three players. Player A is a man, player B is a woman and player C (who plays the role of the interrogator) can be of either sex. In the Imitation Game, player C is unable to see either player A or player B (and knows them only as X and Y), and can communicate with them only through written notes or any other form that does not give away any details about their gender. By asking questions of player A and player B, player C tries to determine which of the two is the man and which is the woman. Player A's role is to trick the interrogator into making the wrong decision, while player B attempts to assist the interrogator in making the right one. Turing proposes a variation of this game that involves the computer: We now ask the question, "What will happen when a machine takes the part of A in this game?" Will the interrogator decide wrongly as often when the game is played like this as he does when the game is played between a man and a woman? These questions replace our original, "Can machines think?" So the modified game becomes one that involves three participants in isolated rooms: a computer (which is being tested), a human, and a (human) judge. The human judge can converse with both the human and the computer by typing into a terminal. Both the computer and the human try to convince the judge that they are the human. If the judge cannot consistently tell which is which, then the computer wins the game. Researchers in the United Kingdom had been exploring "machine intelligence" for up to ten years prior to the founding of the field of artificial intelligence (AI) research in 1956. It was a common topic among the members of the Ratio Club, an informal group of British cybernetics and electronics researchers that included Alan Turing. Turing, in particular, had been running the notion of machine intelligence since at least 1941 and one of the earliest-known mentions of "computer intelligence" was made by him in 1947. As Stevan Harnad notes, the question has become "Can machines do what we (as thinking entities) can do?" In other words, Turing is no longer asking whether a machine can "think"; he is asking whether a machine can act indistinguishably from the way a thinker acts. This question avoids the difficult philosophical problem of pre-defining the verb "to think" and focuses instead on the performance capacities that being able to think makes possible, and how a causal system can generate them. Since Turing introduced his test, it has been both highly influential and widely criticised, and has become an important concept in the philosophy of artificial intelligence. Some of its criticisms, such as John Searle's Chinese room, are themselves controversial. Some have taken Turing's question to have been "Can a computer, communicating over a teleprinter, fool a person into believing it is human?" but it seems clear that Turing was not talking about fooling people but about generating human cognitive capacity. == Digital machines == Turing also notes that we need to determine which "machines" we wish to consider. He points out that a human clone, while man-made, would not provide a very interesting example. Turing suggested that we should focus on the capabilities of digital machinery—machines which manipulate the binary digits of 1 and 0, rewriting them into memory using simple rules. He gave two reasons. First, there is no reason to speculate whether or not they can exist. They already did in 1950. Second, digital machinery is "universal". Turing's research into the foundations of computation had proved that a digital computer can, in theory, simulate the behaviour of any other digital machine, given enough memory and time. (This is the essential insight of the Church–Turing thesis and the universal Turing machine.) Therefore, if any digital machine can "act like it is thinking", then every sufficiently powerful digital machine can. Turing writes, "all digital computers are in a sense equivalent." This allows the original question to be made even more specific. Turing now restates the original question as "Let us fix our attention on one particular digital computer C. Is it true that by modifying this computer to have an adequate storage, suitably increasing its speed of action, and providing it with an appropriate programme, C can be made to play satisfactorily the part of A in the imitation game, the part of B being taken by a man?" Hence, Turing states that the focus is not on "whether all digital computers would do well in the game nor whether the computers that are presently available would do well, but whether there are imaginable computers which would do well". What is more important is to consider the advancements possible in the state of our machines today regardless of whether we have the available resource to create one or not. == Nine common objections == Having clarified the question, Turing turned to answering it: he considered the following nine common objections, which include all the major arguments against artificial intelligence raised in the years since his paper was first published. Religious Objection: This states that thinking is a function of man's immortal soul; therefore, a machine cannot think. "In attempting to construct such machines," wrote Turing, "we should not be irreverently usurping His power of creating souls, any more than we are in the procreation of children: rather we are, in either case, instruments of His will providing mansions for the souls that He creates." 'Heads in the Sand' Objection: "The consequences of machines thinking would be too dreadful. Let us hope and believe that they cannot do so." This thinking is popular among intellectual people, as they believe superiority derives from higher intelligence and the possibility of being overtaken is a threat (as machines have efficient memory capacities and processing speed, machines exceeding the learning and knowledge capabilities are highly probable). This objection is a fallacious appeal to consequences, confusing what should not be with what can or cannot be (Wardrip-Fruin, 56). The Mathematical Objection: This objection uses mathematical theorems, such as Gödel's incompleteness theorem, to show that there are limits to what questions a computer system based on logic can answer. Turing suggests that humans are too often wrong themselves and pleased at the fallibility of a machine. (This argument would be made again by philosopher John Lucas in 1961 and physicist Roger Penrose in 1989, and later would be called Penrose–Lucas argument.) Argument From Consciousness: This argument, suggested by Professor Geoffrey Jefferson in his 1949 Lister Oration (acceptance speech for his 1948 award of Lister Medal) states that "not until a machine can write a sonnet or compose a concerto because of thoughts and emotions felt, and not by the chance fall of symbols, could we agree that machine equals brain." Turing replies by saying that we have no way of knowing that any individual other than ourselves experiences emotions, and that therefore we should accept the test. He adds, "I do not wish to give the impression that I think there is no mystery about consciousness ... [b]ut I do not think these mysteries necessarily need to be solved before we can answer the question [of whether machines can think]." (This argument, that a computer can't have conscious experiences or understanding, would be made in 1980 by philosopher John Searle in his Chinese room argument. Turing's reply is now known as the "other minds reply". See also Can a machine have a mind? in the philosophy of AI.) Arguments from various disabilities. These arguments all have the form "a computer will never do X". Turing offers a selection:Be kind, resourceful, beautiful, friendly, have initiative, have a sense of humour, tell right from wrong, make mistakes, fall in love, enjo

  Read more →