AI Detector Zero Chatgpt

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

• 

  Application enablement

  Application enablement is an approach which brings telecommunications network providers and developers together to combine their network and web abilities in creating and delivering high demand advanced services and new intelligent applications. Network providers, in addition to bandwidth, provide abilities such as billing, location, presence, and security, which have allowed them to establish long-term relationships with end-users. By offering these select abilities as application programming interfaces (APIs), providers give developers access to a set of tools to create (mashup) new applications and services to run on provider networks. Unifying the strengths of providers and developers facilitates the creation of mash-up applications, and in turn, a better end user quality of experience (QoE) for improved profit margins. Apple's iOS with App Store, and Google's Android with Android Market exemplify this approach. Both have introduced mobile platforms that are supported by a comprehensive ecosystem in order to perpetuate innovation in product design, content and service offerings, and overall consumer behavior. By the end of April 2010, downloadable applications numbered over 200,000 for iPhone and over 50,000 for Android. == Background == Historically, telecommunication providers primarily based their business models on network performance, emphasizing connectivity, availability, and quality of service (QoS) as key sources of revenue and customer value. With the increasing demand for bandwidth-intensive data and video applications, maintaining service continuity has required substantial infrastructure investments. To address rising operational costs and declining average revenue per user (ARPU), providers have increasingly adopted customer-oriented strategies and diversified business models to expand their roles within the telecommunications value chain. Application enablement supports providers in making this transition by providing an environment, or ecosystem, where providers and developers can collaborate to build, test, manage, and distribute applications across networks including television, broadband, Internet, and mobile. This cooperative effort produces mutually beneficial results for all parties, opening up new revenue streams while enhancing value and rate of return (ROI). The following are some examples of key network abilities which function as application enablers in the telecommunications market: Billing systems Security for private transactions Network-based storage of digital content End-to-end bandwidth for high-quality transmissions Scoring abilities to identify end-user preferences and behaviors Subscriber data to customize the end-user experience Context information, such as location and presence, to localize services. == New business models == As network providers work toward effective collaboration with application and content developers, several new business models are emerging to help facilitate the business relationships: === Vendor-led === A type of business model driven by telecommunications vendors, who assist network providers in building relationships with application and content developers to lower the cost and complexity of managing third parties. Examples of this model include: Forum Nokia IBM Technology Partner Ecosystem Ng Connect Huawei Intouch program === Operator-led === Characterized by network providers who want to maintain a high degree of flexibility and control over applications created for their end-consumers, this model lets them create and manage their own developer program, development platform, and application store. Under this arrangement, independent developers provide their own branding, marketing communications, pricing and customer care. Network providers pursuing this model will often seek to partner with a large number of third parties using standardized on-boarding processes. Examples of this model include: o2 Litmus Orange Partner Joint Innovation Lab === Aggregator === Network providers who choose not to create/manage their own developer relationships will partner with one or multiple aggregators, to administer a portion of or their entire application strategy. Examples of this model include: Ovi Operator Partnership Blackberry Operator Partnership Cellmania Buongiorno === Mass wholesale === Select network providers also participate in wholesale models that exist primarily for applications (BT's Ribbit- an Internet Protocol (IP) based calling and messaging platform) and devices (Verizon's Open Device initiative). This business-to-business approach reduces a large portion of the potential costs of third party application enablement (marketing, acquisition and support). Examples of this model include: BT's Ribbit Verizon Wireless ODI AT&T Synaptic Hosting === The enterprise customer === Some network providers are focusing on enabling applications in the enterprise space. In this model, the network provider establishes a platform for their large enterprise customers who want to blend custom software with enhanced abilities, and will provide standardized processes around mobilizing enterprise applications, and exposing core back-office abilities to allow for dynamic customer interaction. Examples of this model include: Vodafone Applications Service Verizon Private Network Sprint Solution Launchpad === Trusted partner === In this model, the network provider builds one-on-one relationships with trusted third-party developers by exposing customized network abilities, bringing a greater variety of brands to the network provider's portfolio. Network providers using this model tend to only have a few partners (in contrast to the operator led model). Under this scenario, network providers benefit from a pre-established customer base and the developer's marketing resources. Examples of this model include: 3/Skype Partnership (UK) Virgin Media and BBC iPlayer == Network operator developer resources == Operator led model o2 Litmus Orange Partner Joint Innovations Lab Aggregator model Ovi Operator Partnership Cellmania Buongiorno Mass wholesale model BT Ribbit Verizon Wireless ODI AT&T Synaptic Hosting Enterprise customer model Vodafone Applications Service Verizon Private Network Sprint Solution Launchpad == Rerencesfe ==

  Read more →
• 

  Ann Copestake

  Ann Alicia Copestake is professor of computational linguistics and head of the Department of Computer Science and Technology at the University of Cambridge and a fellow of Wolfson College, Cambridge. == Education == Copestake was educated at the University of Cambridge where she was awarded a Bachelor of Arts degree in Natural Sciences. After two years working for Unilever Research she completed the Cambridge Diploma in Computer Science. She went on to study at the University of Sussex where she was awarded a PhD in 1992 for research on lexical semantics supervised by Gerald Gazdar. == Career and research == Copestake started doing research in Natural language processing and Computational Linguistics at the University of Cambridge in 1985. Since then she has been a visiting researcher at Xerox PARC (1993/4) and the University of Stuttgart (1994/5). From July 1994 to October 2000 she worked at the Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI) at Stanford University, as a Senior Researcher. Copestake was appointed a University Lecturer at Cambridge in October 2000. In the UK, her research has been funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) and Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC). According to Google Scholar and Scopus her most cited publications include papers on minimal recursion semantics, multiword expressions, polysemy, named-entity recognition and feature structure grammars.

  Read more →
• 

  Raymond J. Mooney

  Raymond J. Mooney is an American computer scientist, professor of computer science, and director of the Artificial Intelligence laboratory at the University of Texas at Austin. His research focuses on machine learning and natural language processing. He was educated at O'Fallon Township High School in O'Fallon, Illinois and earned a BS, MS, and Ph.D. in computer science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, where he was advised by Gerald DeJong. He is a fellow of the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), and Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI).

  Read more →
• 

  Thompson's construction

  In computer science, Thompson's construction algorithm, also called the McNaughton–Yamada–Thompson algorithm, is a method of transforming a regular expression into an equivalent nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA). This NFA can be used to match strings against the regular expression. This algorithm is credited to Ken Thompson. Regular expressions and nondeterministic finite automata are two representations of formal languages. For instance, text processing utilities use regular expressions to describe advanced search patterns, but NFAs are better suited for execution on a computer. Hence, this algorithm is of practical interest, since it can compile regular expressions into NFAs. From a theoretical point of view, this algorithm is a part of the proof that they both accept exactly the same languages, that is, the regular languages. An NFA can be made deterministic by the powerset construction and then be minimized to get an optimal automaton corresponding to the given regular expression. However, an NFA may also be interpreted directly. To decide whether two given regular expressions describe the same language, each can be converted into an equivalent minimal deterministic finite automaton via Thompson's construction, powerset construction, and DFA minimization. If, and only if, the resulting automata agree up to renaming of states, the regular expressions' languages agree. == The algorithm == The algorithm works recursively by splitting an expression into its constituent subexpressions, from which the NFA will be constructed using a set of rules. More precisely, from a regular expression E, the obtained automaton A with the transition function Δ respects the following properties: A has exactly one initial state q0, which is not accessible from any other state. That is, for any state q and any letter a, Δ ( q , a ) {\displaystyle \Delta (q,a)} does not contain q0. A has exactly one final state qf, which is not co-accessible from any other state. That is, for any letter a, Δ ( q f , a ) = ∅ {\displaystyle \Delta (q_{f},a)=\emptyset } . Let c be the number of concatenation of the regular expression E and let s be the number of symbols apart from parentheses — that is, |, , a and ε. Then, the number of states of A is 2s − c (linear in the size of E). The number of transitions leaving any state is at most two. Since an NFA of m states and at most e transitions from each state can match a string of length n in time O(emn), a Thompson NFA can do pattern matching in linear time, assuming a fixed-size alphabet. === Rules === The following rules are depicted according to Aho et al. (2007), p. 122. In what follows, N(s) and N(t) are the NFA of the subexpressions s and t, respectively. The empty-expression ε is converted to A symbol a of the input alphabet is converted to The union expression s|t is converted to State q goes via ε either to the initial state of N(s) or N(t). Their final states become intermediate states of the whole NFA and merge via two ε-transitions into the final state of the NFA. The concatenation expression st is converted to The initial state of N(s) is the initial state of the whole NFA. The final state of N(s) becomes the initial state of N(t). The final state of N(t) is the final state of the whole NFA. The Kleene star expression s is converted to An ε-transition connects initial and final state of the NFA with the sub-NFA N(s) in between. Another ε-transition from the inner final to the inner initial state of N(s) allows for repetition of expression s according to the star operator. The parenthesized expression (s) is converted to N(s) itself. With these rules, using the empty expression and symbol rules as base cases, it is possible to prove with structural induction that any regular expression may be converted into an equivalent NFA. == Example == Two examples are now given, a small informal one with the result, and a bigger with a step by step application of the algorithm. === Small Example === The picture below shows the result of Thompson's construction on (ε|ab). The purple oval corresponds to a, the teal oval corresponds to a, the green oval corresponds to b, the orange oval corresponds to ab, and the blue oval corresponds to ε. === Application of the algorithm === As an example, the picture shows the result of Thompson's construction algorithm on the regular expression (0|(1(01(00)0)1)) that denotes the set of binary numbers that are multiples of 3: { ε, "0", "00", "11", "000", "011", "110", "0000", "0011", "0110", "1001", "1100", "1111", "00000", ... }. The upper right part shows the logical structure (syntax tree) of the expression, with "." denoting concatenation (assumed to have variable arity); subexpressions are named a-q for reference purposes. The left part shows the nondeterministic finite automaton resulting from Thompson's algorithm, with the entry and exit state of each subexpression colored in magenta and cyan, respectively. An ε as transition label is omitted for clarity — unlabelled transitions are in fact ε transitions. The entry and exit state corresponding to the root expression q is the start and accept state of the automaton, respectively. The algorithm's steps are as follows: An equivalent minimal deterministic automaton is shown below. == Relation to other algorithms == Thompson's is one of several algorithms for constructing NFAs from regular expressions; an earlier algorithm was given by McNaughton and Yamada. Converse to Thompson's construction, Kleene's algorithm transforms a finite automaton into a regular expression. Glushkov's construction algorithm is similar to Thompson's construction, once the ε-transitions are removed. == Use in string pattern matching == Regular expressions are often used to specify patterns that software is then asked to match. Generating an NFA by Thompson's construction, and using an appropriate algorithm to simulate it, it is possible to create pattern-matching software with performance that is ⁠ O ( m n ) {\displaystyle O(mn)} ⁠, where m is the length of the regular expression and n is the length of the string being matched. This is much better than is achieved by many popular programming-language implementations; however, it is restricted to purely regular expressions and does not support patterns for non-regular languages like backreferences.

  Read more →
• 

  AlternativeTo

  AlternativeTo is a website which lists alternatives to web-based software, desktop computer software, and mobile apps, and sorts the alternatives by various criteria, including the number of registered users who have "Liked" each of them on AlternativeTo. Users can search the site to find better alternatives to an application they are using or previously have used, including free alternatives such as free web applications (cloud computing) which don't require any installation and can be accessed from any browser. == Differences == Unlike a number of other software directory websites, the software is not arranged into categories, but each individual piece of software has its own list of alternatives. However, users can also search by tag to find software, which offers an alternative way of finding related software. Users can also narrow their search by focusing on particular platforms and license types (such as "free for non-commercial use"). AlternativeTo lists basic information such as platform and license type at the top of each entry, but does not have comparison tables listing software features side by side. AlternativeTo does not host software for download but it provides links to official websites to where you can download or buy them. AlternativeTo allows anyone to register and suggest new alternatives, or to update the information held about existing entries. Suggestions and alterations are reviewed before being made publicly visible. Users can register using either email and password or OpenID. Login with Facebook has been discontinued. As AlternativeTo is itself a web application, it even has a page for alternatives to itself. == Features == Tweets from anyone mentioning particular pieces of software are also pulled in dynamically from Twitter. Each application has an RSS feed for notifying users of newly listed alternatives to that application. After a user has clicked the Like button next to an application, they are offered the opportunity to tell their friends on Facebook or their followers on Twitter that they liked it. The site also has a forum. For software developers, a JSON API used to be available, but has been taken down indefinitely.

  Read more →
• 

  Edward Stabler

  Edward Stabler is a Professor of Linguistics at the University of California, Los Angeles. His primary areas of research are (1) Natural Language Processing (NLP), (2) Parsing and formal language theory, and (3) Philosophy of Logic and Language. He was a member of the faculty at UCLA from 1984 to 2016. His work involves the production of software for minimalist grammars (MGs) and related systems. == Early life and education == Stabler received his Ph.D. from the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy at MIT in 1981. == Recent publications == Edward Stabler (2011) Computational perspectives on minimalism. Revised version in C. Boeckx, ed, Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Minimalism, pp. 617–642. Edward Stabler (2010) A defense of this perspective against the Evans&Levinson critique appears here, with revised version in Lingua 120(12): 2680-2685. Edward Stabler (2010) After GB. Revised version in J. van Benthem & A. ter Meulen, eds, Handbook of Logic and Language, pp. 395–414. Edward Stabler (2010) Recursion in grammar and performance. Presented at the 2009 UMass recursion conference. Edward Stabler (2009) Computational models of language universals. Revised version appears in M. H. Christiansen, C. Collins, and S. Edelman, eds., Language Universals, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pages 200-223. Edward Stabler (2008) Tupled pregroup grammars. Revised version appears in P. Casadio and J. Lambek, eds., Computational Algebraic Approaches to Natural Language, Milan: Polimetrica, pages 23–52. Edward Stabler (2006) Sidewards without copying. Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Formal Grammar, edited by P. Monachesi, G. Penn, G. Satta, and S. Wintner. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 2006, pages 133-146.

  Read more →
• 

  The Best Free AI Sales Assistant for Beginners

  Comparing the best AI sales assistant? An AI sales assistant is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI sales assistant slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.

  Read more →
• 

  Ayanna Howard

  Ayanna MacCalla Howard (born January 24, 1972) is an American roboticist, entrepreneur, and educator currently serving as the dean of the College of Engineering at Ohio State University. Assuming this role in March 2021, Howard became the first woman to lead the Ohio State College of Engineering. Howard previously served as the chair of the School of Interactive Computing in the Georgia Tech College of Computing, the Linda J. and Mark C. Smith Endowed Chair in Bioengineering in the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, and the director of the Human-Automation Systems (Humans) Lab. == Early life and education == As a little girl, Howard was interested in aliens and robots. Her favorite TV show was The Bionic Woman. Howard received her B.S. in engineering from Brown University in 1993 and her M.S. and Ph.D. in electrical engineering from the University of Southern California in 1994 and 1999, respectively. Her thesis, Recursive Learning for Deformable Object Manipulation, was advised by George A. Bekey. In addition, Howard's Doctoral thesis was triggered by the AIDS epidemic with focus on sorting hospital waste by using robots. Howard has also received an MBA from Claremont Graduate University. == Career == Howard's early interest in artificial intelligence led her to pursue a senior position at Seattle-based Axcelis Inc, where she helped develop Evolver, the first commercial genetic algorithm, and Brainsheet, a neural network developed in partnership with Microsoft. From 1993 to 2005, she worked at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, holding multiple roles such as senior robotics researcher and deputy manager in the Office of the Chief Scientist. In 2005, she joined Georgia Tech as an associate professor and founder of the Human-Automation Systems (Humans) lab. She has also served as the associate director of research for Georgia Tech's Institute for Robotics and Intelligent Machines and as chair of the multidisciplinary robotics Ph.D. program at Georgia Tech. In 2017, she became the chair of the School of Interactive Computing at Georgia Tech. In 2008, Howard received worldwide attention for her SnoMote robots, designed to study the impact of global warming on the Antarctic ice shelves. In 2013, she founded Zyrobotics, which has released their first suite of therapy and educational products for children with special needs. Howard has authored 250 publications in reputable journals and conferences, including serving as co-editor/co-author of more than a dozen books and book chapters. She has also received four patents and given over 140 invited talks and keynotes. She is a fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Among her many honors, Howard received the Computer Research Association's A. Nico Habermann Award and the Richard A. Tapia Achievement Award. In a 2020 interview on Marketplace, Howard outlined how companion robots could alleviate the effects of social distancing caused by the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. On November 30, 2020, the Columbus Dispatch reported that Howard would become the next dean of the College of Engineering at Ohio State University on March 1, pending approval by the board of trustees. On March 1, 2021, she assumed this role, becoming the first woman to hold the position. In 2021, Howard received the Athena Lecturer Award from Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) for her Contributions to Robotics, AI and Broadening Participation in Computing. In June 2022, Howard was elected a trustee of Brown University. == Research == Howard's research interests include human-robot interaction, assistive/rehabilitation robotics, science-driven/field robotics, and perception, learning, and reasoning. Howard's research and published works span across various topics in robotics and AI, including intelligent learning, virtual reality for rehabilitation and robotics in the role of pediatric therapy. Her research is highlighted by her focus on technology development for intelligent agents that must interact with and in a human-centered world. Her work, which addresses issues of human-robot interaction, learning, and autonomous control, has resulted in more than 200 peer-reviewed publications. == Honors and awards == Howard's numerous accomplishments have been documented in more than a dozen featured articles. In 2003, she was named to the MIT Technology Review TR100 as one of the top 100 innovators in the world under the age of 35. She was featured in Time magazine's "Rise of the Machines" article in 2004. She was also featured in a USA Today Science & Space article. Some of Howard's notable awards include: Lew Allen Award for Excellence (formerly the Director's Research Achievement Award of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory) for significant technical contributions, 2001 MIT Technology Review Top 100 Young Innovators of the Year, 2003 NAE Gilbreth Lectureship, 2010 A. Richard Newton Educator ABIE Award, Anita Borg Institute, 2014 Computer Research Association's A. Nico Habermann Award, 2016 Brown Engineering Alumni Medal (BEAM), 2016 AAAS-Lemelson Invention Ambassador, 2016-2017 Atlanta magazine's Women Making a Mark, 2017 Walker's Legacy #WLPower25 Atlanta Award, 2017 Forbes America's Top 50 Women In Tech, 2018 ACM Athena Lecturer Award, 2021 2021 class of Fellows of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. IEEE Fellow, 2021, "for contributions to human-robot interaction systems" 2023 AAAI/EAAI Patrick Henry Winston Outstanding Educator Award

  Read more →
• 

  Application-release automation

  Application-release automation (ARA) refers to the process of packaging and deploying an application or update of an application from development, across various environments, and ultimately to production. ARA solutions must combine the capabilities of deployment automation, environment management and modeling, and release coordination. == Relationship with DevOps == ARA tools help cultivate DevOps best practices by providing a combination of automation, environment modeling and workflow-management capabilities. These practices help teams deliver software rapidly, reliably and responsibly. ARA tools achieve a key DevOps goal of implementing continuous delivery with a large quantity of releases quickly. == Relationship with deployment == ARA is more than just software-deployment automation – it deploys applications using structured release-automation techniques that allow for an increase in visibility for the whole team. It combines workload automation and release-management tools as they relate to release packages, as well as movement through different environments within the DevOps pipeline. ARA tools help regulate deployments, how environments are created and deployed, and how and when releases are deployed. == ARA Solutions == All ARA solutions must include capabilities in automation, environment modeling, and release coordination. Additionally, the solution must provide this functionality without reliance on other tools.

  Read more →
• 

  Model inversion attack

  Model inversion attack is a type of adversarial machine learning attack where an attacker tries to reconstruct or infer sensitive information about a model's training data by analyzing the outputs of a trained machine learning model. Instead of directly querying the underlying dataset, attackers query the model (usually via APIs or prediction interfaces), and leverage patterns in the model responses to infer properties of the original inputs. These attacks leverage the fact that machine learning models encode statistical information about their training data in their parameters and outputs, which can unintentionally leak private or proprietary information. Depending on the access level to the target model, model inversion attacks can be performed in both black-box and white-box settings. In a generic attack, an adversary makes several queries to a model and leverages the responses (e.g. confidence scores, predictions) to train a surrogate or inversion model that learns to approximate the inverse mapping from outputs to inputs. This process may enable the reconstruction of sensitive attributes, e.g., facial features, medical data, or user behavior patterns, from models trained on such data. The technique has been demonstrated against various models like deep neural networks, classification systems etc. The technique has significant privacy risks in areas like healthcare, finance, biometric identification etc. Mitigation strategies include restricting model access, reducing output granularity, using differential privacy and monitoring anomalous query patterns.

  Read more →
• 

  Leslie P. Kaelbling

  Leslie Pack Kaelbling is an American roboticist and the Panasonic Professor of Computer Science and Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. She is widely recognized for adapting partially observable Markov decision processes from operations research for application in artificial intelligence and robotics. Kaelbling received the IJCAI Computers and Thought Award in 1997 for applying reinforcement learning to embedded control systems and developing programming tools for robot navigation. In 2000, she was elected as a Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. == Career == Kaelbling received an A. B. in Philosophy in 1983 and a Ph.D. in Computer Science in 1990, both from Stanford University. During this time she was also affiliated with the Center for the Study of Language and Information. She then worked at SRI International and the affiliated robotics spin-off Teleos Research before joining the faculty at Brown University. She left Brown in 1999 to join the faculty at MIT. Her research focuses on decision-making under uncertainty, machine learning, and sensing with applications to robotics. == Journal of Machine Learning Research == In the spring of 2000, she and two-thirds of the editorial board of the Kluwer-owned journal Machine Learning resigned in protest to its pay-to-access archives with simultaneously limited financial compensation for authors. Kaelbling co-founded and served as the first editor-in-chief of the Journal of Machine Learning Research, a peer-reviewed open access journal on the same topics which allows researchers to publish articles for free and retain copyright with its archives freely available online. In response to the mass resignation, Kluwer changed their publishing policy to allow authors to self-archive their papers online after peer-review. Kaelbling responded that this policy was reasonable and would have made the creation of an alternative journal unnecessary, but the editorial board members had made it clear they wanted such a policy and it was only after the threat of resignations and the actual founding of JMLR that the publishing policy finally changed. == Selected works == Reinforcement Learning: A Survey (LP Kaelbling, ML Littman, AW Moore). Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR) 4 (1996) 237-285. A highly cited survey on the field of reinforcement learning. Planning and acting in partially observable stochastic domains (LP Kaelbling, ML Littman, AR Cassandra). Artificial Intelligence 101 (1), 99-134. Acting under uncertainty: Discrete Bayesian models for mobile-robot navigation (AR Cassandra, LP Kaelbling, JA Kurien). Intelligent Robots and Systems (2) 963-972. The synthesis of digital machines with provable epistemic properties (SJ Rosenschein, LP Kaelbling). Proceedings of the 1986 Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge, 83-98. Practical reinforcement learning in continuous spaces (WD Smart, LP Kaelbling). 2000 International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 903-910. Hierarchical task and motion planning in the now (LP Kaelbling, T Lozano-Pérez). 2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 1470-1477.

  Read more →
• 

  AI Clip Makers Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

  In search of the best AI clip maker? An AI clip maker is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI clip maker slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.

  Read more →
• 

  Smart data capture

  Smart data capture (SDC), also known as 'intelligent data capture' or 'automated data capture', describes the branch of technology concerned with using computer vision techniques like optical character recognition (OCR), barcode scanning, object recognition and other similar technologies to extract and process information from semi-structured and unstructured data sources. IDC characterize smart data capture as an integrated hardware, software, and connectivity strategy to help organizations enable the capture of data in an efficient, repeatable, scalable, and future-proof way. Data is captured visually from barcodes, text, IDs and other objects - often from many sources simultaneously - before being converted and prepared for digital use, typically by artificial intelligence-powered software. An important feature of SDC is that it focuses not just on capturing data more efficiently but serving up easy-to-access, actionable insights at the instant of data collection to both frontline and desk-based workers, aiding decision-making and making it a two-way process. Smart data capture automates and accelerates capture, applying insights in real time and automating processes based on extracted input. Smart data capture is designed to be repeatable and scalable to reduce low-level manual tasks and eliminate human error. To achieve this goal, smart data capture solutions are often made available using specialist software installed on commodity hardware such as smartphones. However, some solutions may rely on specialized hardware such as dedicated scanning devices, wearables or shop floor robots. == Differences from OCR == Optical character recognition applications are typically concerned with the actual data capture process; they are intended to faithfully reproduce text, words, letters and symbols from a printed document. Smart data capture is multimodal, capable of extracting data from a wider range of semi-structured and unstructured sources, going beyond basic text recognition to offer a wider scope of applications. By extending functionality to provide actionable insights at the point of capture, SDC is also a two-way process (capture-display), while OCR is more commonly one-way (capture only), primarily used for data input. Smart data capture solutions typically have two parts: Data capture (which includes OCR, barcode scanning, object recognition) Functionality that then uses this data to provide actionable insights at the point of capture. == Applications == Smart data capture can be applied to almost any industry and application that requires visual information capture and interpretation. This may include: Retail Warehouse inventory control Logistics, handling and shipping Manufacturing Field service Healthcare Transport and travel Fraud detection

  Read more →
• 

  Léon Bottou

  Léon-Yves Bottou (French pronunciation: [leɔ̃ bɔtu]; born 1965) is a researcher best known for his work in machine learning and data compression. His work presents stochastic gradient descent as a fundamental learning algorithm. He is also one of the main creators of the DjVu image compression technology (together with Yann LeCun and Patrick Haffner), and the maintainer of DjVuLibre, the open source implementation of DjVu. He is the original developer of the Lush programming language. == Life == Léon Bottou was born in France in 1965. He obtained the Diplôme d'Ingénieur from École Polytechnique in 1987, a Magistère de Mathématiques Fondamentales et Appliquées et d’Informatique from École Normale Supérieure in 1988, a Diplôme d'Études Approndies in Computer Science in 1988, in 1988, and a PhD from Université Paris-Sud in 1991. In 1988, in collaboration with Yann LeCun, he published SN, a software package for simulating artificial neural networks. His master's thesis concerned using Time Delay Neural Networks for speech recognition. He then joined the Adaptive Systems Research Department at AT&T Bell Laboratories in Holmdel, New Jersey, where he collaborated with Vladimir Vapnik on local learning algorithms. in 1992, he returned to France and founded Neuristique S.A., a company that produced machine learning tools and one of the first data mining software packages, including Lush, an object-oriented programming language based on C and Lisp designed for training and using large-scale neural networks. In 1995, he returned to Bell Laboratories, where he developed a number of new machine learning methods, such as Graph Transformer Networks (similar to conditional random field), and applied them to handwriting recognition and OCR. The bank check recognition system that he helped develop was widely deployed by NCR and other companies, reading over 10% of all the checks in the US in the late 1990s and early 2000s. In 1996, he joined AT&T Labs and worked primarily on the DjVu image compression technology, that is used by some websites, notably the Internet Archive, to distribute scanned documents. Between 2002 and 2010, he was a research scientist at NEC Laboratories in Princeton, New Jersey, where he focused on the theory and practice of machine learning with large-scale datasets, on-line learning, and stochastic optimization methods. He developed the open source software LaSVM for fast large-scale support vector machine, and stochastic gradient descent software for training linear SVM and Conditional Random Fields. In 2010 he joined the Microsoft adCenter in Redmond, Washington, and in 2012 became a Principal Researcher at Microsoft Research in New York City. In March 2015 he joined Facebook Artificial Intelligence Research, also in New York City, as a research lead. His work in gradient descent argued that both stochastic gradient descent and batch gradient descent reach similar levels of loss with the same number of training samples, but SGD is faster when running on large datasets. He also argued that second-order gradient descent methods, such as quasi-Newton methods, can be beneficial compared to plain SGD. See (Bottou et al 2018) for a review. He was program chair of the 2013 Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems and the 2009 International Conference on Machine Learning. In 2007, he was received one of the first Blavatnik Awards for Young Scientists from the Blavatnik Family Foundation and the New York Academy of Sciences.

  Read more →
• 

  Laws of Form

  Laws of Form (hereinafter LoF) is a book by G. Spencer-Brown, written by August 1967 and published in 1969. The book straddles the boundary between mathematics and philosophy. LoF describes three distinct logical systems: The primary arithmetic (described in Chapter 4 of LoF), whose models include Boolean arithmetic; The primary algebra (Chapter 6 of LoF), whose models include the two-element Boolean algebra (hereinafter abbreviated 2), Boolean logic, and the classical propositional calculus; Equations of the second degree (Chapter 11), whose interpretations include finite automata and Alonzo Church's Restricted Recursive Arithmetic (RRA). "Boundary algebra" is a Meguire (2011) term for the union of the primary algebra and the primary arithmetic. Laws of Form sometimes loosely refers to the "primary algebra" as well as to LoF. == Contents == The preface states that the work was first explored in 1959, and Spencer Brown cites Bertrand Russell as being supportive of his endeavour. He also thanks J. C. P. Miller of University College London for helping with the proofreading and offering other guidance. In 1963 Spencer Brown was invited by Harry Frost, staff lecturer in the physical sciences at the department of Extra-Mural Studies of the University of London, to deliver a course on the mathematics of logic. LoF emerged from work in electronic engineering its author did around 1960. Key ideas of the LOF were first outlined in his 1961 manuscript Design with the Nor, which remained unpublished until 2021, and further refined during subsequent lectures on mathematical logic he gave under the auspices of the University of London's extension program. LoF has appeared in several editions. The second series of editions appeared in 1972 with the "Preface to the First American Edition", which emphasised the use of self-referential paradoxes, and the most recent being a 1997 German translation. LoF has never gone out of print. LoF's mystical and declamatory prose and its love of paradox make it a challenging read for all. Spencer-Brown was influenced by Ludwig Wittgenstein and R. D. Laing. LoF also echoes a number of themes from the writings of Charles Sanders Peirce, Bertrand Russell, and Alfred North Whitehead. The work has had curious effects on some classes of its readership; for example, on obscure grounds, it has been claimed that the entire book is written in an operational way, giving instructions to the reader instead of telling them what "is", and that in accordance with G. Spencer-Brown's interest in paradoxes, the only sentence that makes a statement that something is, is the statement which says no such statements are used in this book. Furthermore, the claim asserts that except for this one sentence the book can be seen as an example of E-Prime. What prompted such a claim, is obscure, either in terms of incentive, logical merit, or as a matter of fact, because the book routinely and naturally uses the verb to be throughout, and in all its grammatical forms, as may be seen both in the original and in quotes shown below. == Reception == Ostensibly a work of formal mathematics and philosophy, LoF became something of a cult classic: it was praised by Heinz von Foerster when he reviewed it for the Whole Earth Catalog. Those who agree point to LoF as embodying an enigmatic "mathematics of consciousness", its algebraic symbolism capturing an (perhaps even "the") implicit root of cognition: the ability to "distinguish". LoF argues that primary algebra reveals striking connections among logic, Boolean algebra, and arithmetic, and the philosophy of language and mind. Stafford Beer wrote in a review for Nature in 1969, "When one thinks of all that Russell went through sixty years ago, to write the Principia, and all we his readers underwent in wrestling with those three vast volumes, it is almost sad". Banaschewski (1977) argues that the primary algebra is nothing but new notation for Boolean algebra. Indeed, the two-element Boolean algebra 2 can be seen as the intended interpretation of the primary algebra. Yet the notation of the primary algebra: Fully exploits the duality characterizing not just Boolean algebras but all lattices; Highlights how syntactically distinct statements in logic and 2 can have identical semantics; Dramatically simplifies Boolean algebra calculations, and proofs in sentential and syllogistic logic. Moreover, the syntax of the primary algebra can be extended to formal systems other than 2 and sentential logic, resulting in boundary mathematics. LoF has influenced, among others, Heinz von Foerster, Louis Kauffman, Niklas Luhmann, Humberto Maturana, Francisco Varela and William Bricken. Some of these authors have modified the primary algebra in a variety of interesting ways. LoF claimed that certain well-known mathematical conjectures of very long standing, such as the four color theorem, Fermat's Last Theorem, and the Goldbach conjecture, are provable using extensions of the primary algebra. Spencer-Brown eventually circulated a purported proof of the four color theorem, but it was met with skepticism. == The form (Chapter 1) == The symbol: Also called the "mark" or "cross", is the essential feature of the Laws of Form. In Spencer-Brown's inimitable and enigmatic fashion, the Mark symbolizes the root of cognition, i.e., the dualistic Mark indicates the capability of differentiating a "this" from "everything else but this". In LoF, a Cross denotes the drawing of a "distinction", and can be thought of as signifying the following, all at once: The act of drawing a boundary around something, thus separating it from everything else; That which becomes distinct from everything by drawing the boundary; Crossing from one side of the boundary to the other. All three ways imply an action on the part of the cognitive entity (e.g., person) making the distinction. As LoF puts it: "The first command: Draw a distinction can well be expressed in such ways as: Let there be a distinction, Find a distinction, See a distinction, Describe a distinction, Define a distinction, Or: Let a distinction be drawn". (LoF, Notes to chapter 2) The counterpoint to the Marked state is the Unmarked state, which is simply nothing, the void, or the un-expressable infinite represented by a blank space. It is simply the absence of a Cross. No distinction has been made and nothing has been crossed. The Marked state and the void are the two primitive values of the Laws of Form. The Cross can be seen as denoting the distinction between two states, one "considered as a symbol" and another not so considered. From this fact arises a curious resonance with some theories of consciousness and language. Paradoxically, the Form is at once Observer and Observed, and is also the creative act of making an observation. LoF (excluding back matter) closes with the words: ...the first distinction, the Mark and the observer are not only interchangeable, but, in the form, identical. C. S. Peirce came to a related insight in the 1890s; see § Related work. == The primary arithmetic (Chapter 4) == The syntax of the primary arithmetic goes as follows. There are just two atomic expressions: The empty Cross ; All or part of the blank page (the "void"). There are two inductive rules: A Cross may be written over any expression; Any two expressions may be concatenated. The semantics of the primary arithmetic are perhaps nothing more than the sole explicit definition in LoF: "Distinction is perfect continence". Let the "unmarked state" be a synonym for the void. Let an empty Cross denote the "marked state". To cross is to move from one value, the unmarked or marked state, to the other. We can now state the "arithmetical" axioms A1 and A2, which ground the primary arithmetic (and hence all of the Laws of Form): "A1. The law of Calling". Calling twice from a state is indistinguishable from calling once. To make a distinction twice has the same effect as making it once. For example, saying "Let there be light" and then saying "Let there be light" again, is the same as saying it once. Formally: = {\displaystyle \ =} "A2. The law of Crossing". After crossing from the unmarked to the marked state, crossing again ("recrossing") starting from the marked state returns one to the unmarked state. Hence recrossing annuls crossing. Formally: = {\displaystyle \ =} In both A1 and A2, the expression to the right of '=' has fewer symbols than the expression to the left of '='. This suggests that every primary arithmetic expression can, by repeated application of A1 and A2, be simplified to one of two states: the marked or the unmarked state. This is indeed the case, and the result is the expression's "simplification". The two fundamental metatheorems of the primary arithmetic state that: Every finite expression has a unique simplification. (T3 in LoF); Starting from an initial marked or unmarked state, "complicating" an expression by a finite number of repeated application of A1 and A2 cannot yield

  Read more →