AI Email Helper

AI Email Helper — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Realization (linguistics)

In linguistics, realization is the process by which some kind of surface representation is derived from its underlying representation; that is, the way in which some abstract object of linguistic analysis comes to be produced in actual language. Phonemes are often said to be realized by speech sounds. The different sounds that can realize a particular phoneme are called its allophones. Realization is also a subtask of natural language generation, which involves creating an actual text in a human language (English, French, etc.) from a syntactic representation. There are a number of software packages available for realization, most of which have been developed by academic research groups in NLG. The remainder of this article concerns realization of this kind. == Example == For example, the following Java code causes the simplenlg system [2] to print out the text The women do not smoke.: In this example, the computer program has specified the linguistic constituents of the sentence (verb, subject), and also linguistic features (plural subject, negated), and from this information the realiser has constructed the actual sentence. == Processing == Realisation involves three kinds of processing: Syntactic realisation: Using grammatical knowledge to choose inflections, add function words and also to decide the order of components. For example, in English the subject usually precedes the verb, and the negated form of smoke is do not smoke. Morphological realisation: Computing inflected forms, for example the plural form of woman is women (not womans). Orthographic realisation: Dealing with casing, punctuation, and formatting. For example, capitalising The because it is the first word of the sentence. The above examples are very basic, most realisers are capable of considerably more complex processing. == Systems == A number of realisers have been developed over the past 20 years. These systems differ in terms of complexity and sophistication of their processing, robustness in dealing with unusual cases, and whether they are accessed programmatically via an API or whether they take a textual representation of a syntactic structure as their input. There are also major differences in pragmatic factors such as documentation, support, licensing terms, speed and memory usage, etc. It is not possible to describe all realisers here, but a few of the emerging areas are: Simplenlg [3]: a document realizing engine with an api which intended to be simple to learn and use, focused on limiting scope to only finding the surface area of a document. KPML [4]: this is the oldest realiser, which has been under development under different guises since the 1980s. It comes with grammars for ten different languages. FUF/SURGE [5]: a realiser which was widely used in the 1990s, and is still used in some projects today OpenCCG [6]: an open-source realiser which has a number of nice features, such as the ability to use statistical language models to make realisation decisions.
Read more →
Generative literature

Generative literature is poetry or fiction that is automatically generated, often using computers. It is a genre of electronic literature, and also related to generative art. John Clark's Latin Verse Machine (1830–1843) is probably the first example of mechanised generative literature, while Christopher Strachey's love letter generator (1952) is the first digital example. With the large language models (LLMs) of the 2020s, generative literature is becoming increasingly common. == Definitions == Hannes Bajohr defines generative literature as literature involving "the automatic production of text according to predetermined parameters, usually following a combinatory, sometimes aleatory logic, and it emphasizes the production rather than the reception of the work (unlike, say, hypertext)." In his book Electronic Literature, Scott Rettberg connects generative literature to avant-garde literary movements like Dada, Surrealism, Oulipo and Fluxus. Bajohr argues that conceptual art is also an important reference. == Paradigms of generative literature == Bajohr describes two main paradigms of generative literature: the sequential paradigm, where the text generation is "executed as a sequence of rule-steps" and employs linear algorithms, and the connectionist paradigm, which is based on neural nets. The latter leads to what Bajohr calls a algorithmic empathy: "a non-anthropocentric empathy aimed not at the psychological states of the artists but at understanding the process of the work’s material production." == Poetry generation == The first examples of automated generative literature are poetry: John Clark's mechanical Latin Verse Machine (1830–1843) produced lines of hexameter verse in Latin, and Christopher Strachey's love letter generator (1952), programmed on the Manchester Mark 1 computer, generated short, satirical love letters. Examples of generative poetry using artificial neural networks include David Jhave Johnston's ReRites. == Narrative generation == Story generators have often followed specific narratological theories of how stories are constructed. An early example is Grimes' Fairy Tales, the "first to take a grammar-based approach and the first to operationalize Propp's famous model." Mike Sharples and Rafael Peréz y Peréz's book Story Machines gives a detailed history of story generation. Storyland by Nanette Wylde is an example of generative narrative. Jonathan Baillehache compares Storyland to Surrealist writing. Baillehache states, "When compared to earlier uses of chance operation in literature, a piece like this one resembles some of the automatic writings produced by André Breton and Philippe Soupault in their collective work The Magnetic Fields. . . The difference between Nanette Wylde’s Storyland and Breton and Soupault’s Magnetic Fields is that the former is produced according to a computational algorithm involving randomizers and user interaction, and the latter by two free-wheeling human subjects."
Read more →
AI@50

AI@50, formally known as the "Dartmouth Artificial Intelligence Conference: The Next Fifty Years" (July 13–15, 2006), was a conference organized by James H. Moor, commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Dartmouth workshop which effectively inaugurated the history of artificial intelligence. Five of the original ten attendees were present: Marvin Minsky, Ray Solomonoff, Oliver Selfridge, Trenchard More, and John McCarthy. While sponsored by Dartmouth College, General Electric, and the Frederick Whittemore Foundation, a $200,000 grant from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) called for a report of the proceedings that would: Analyze progress on AI's original challenges during the first 50 years, and assess whether the challenges were "easier" or "harder" than originally thought and why Document what the AI@50 participants believe are the major research and development challenges facing this field over the next 50 years, and identify what breakthroughs will be needed to meet those challenges Relate those challenges and breakthroughs against developments and trends in other areas such as control theory, signal processing, information theory, statistics, and optimization theory. A summary report by the conference director, James H. Moor, was published in AI Magazine. == Conference Program and links to published papers == James H. Moor, conference Director, Introduction Carol Folt and Barry Scherr, Welcome Carey Heckman, Tonypandy and the Origins of Science === AI: Past, Present, Future === John McCarthy, What Was Expected, What We Did, and AI Today Marvin Minsky, The Emotion Machine === The Future Model of Thinking === Ron Brachman and Hector Levesque, A Large Part of Human Thought David Mumford, What is the Right Model for 'Thought'? Stuart Russell, The Approach of Modern AI === The Future of Network Models === Geoffrey Hinton & Simon Osindero, From Pandemonium to Graphical Models and Back Again Rick Granger, From Brain Circuits to Mind Manufacture === The Future of Learning & Search === Oliver Selfridge, Learning and Education for Software: New Approaches in Machine Learning Ray Solomonoff, Machine Learning — Past and Future Leslie Pack Kaelbling, Learning to be Intelligent Peter Norvig, Web Search as a Product of and Catalyst for AI === The Future of AI === Rod Brooks, Intelligence and Bodies Nils Nilsson, Routes to the Summit Eric Horvitz, In Pursuit of Artificial Intelligence: Reflections on Challenges and Trajectories === The Future of Vision === Eric Grimson, Intelligent Medical Image Analysis: Computer Assisted Surgery and Disease Monitoring Takeo Kanade, Artificial Intelligence Vision: Progress and Non-Progress Terry Sejnowski, A Critique of Pure Vision === The Future of Reasoning === Alan Bundy, Constructing, Selecting and Repairing Representations of Knowledge Edwina Rissland, The Exquisite Centrality of Examples Bart Selman, The Challenge and Promise of Automated Reasoning === The Future of Language and Cognition === Trenchard More The Birth of Array Theory and Nial Eugene Charniak, Why Natural Language Processing is Now Statistical Natural Language Processing Pat Langley, Intelligent Behavior in Humans and Machines === The Future of the Future === Ray Kurzweil, Why We Can Be Confident of Turing Test Capability Within a Quarter Century George Cybenko, The Future Trajectory of AI Charles J. Holland, DARPA's Perspective === AI and Games === Jonathan Schaeffer, Games as a Test-bed for Artificial Intelligence Research Danny Kopec, Chess and AI Shay Bushinsky, Principle Positions in Deep Junior's Development === Future Interactions with Intelligent Machines === Daniela Rus, Making Bodies Smart Sherry Turkle, From Building Intelligences to Nurturing Sensibilities === Selected Submitted Papers: Future Strategies for AI === J. Storrs Hall, Self-improving AI: An Analysis Selmer Bringsjord, The Logicist Manifesto Vincent C. Müller, Is There a Future for AI Without Representation? Kristinn R. Thórisson, Integrated A.I. Systems === Selected Submitted Papers: Future Possibilities for AI === Eric Steinhart, Survival as a Digital Ghost Colin T. A. Schmidt, Did You Leave That 'Contraption' Alone With Your Little Sister? Michael Anderson & Susan Leigh Anderson, The Status of Machine Ethics Marcello Guarini, Computation, Coherence, and Ethical Reasoning
Read more →
The Machine That Won the War (short story)

"The Machine That Won the War" is a science fiction short story by American writer Isaac Asimov. The story first appeared in the October 1961 issue of The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, and was reprinted in the collections Nightfall and Other Stories (1969) and Robot Dreams (1986). It was also printed in a contemporary edition of Reader's Digest, illustrated. It is one of a loosely connected series of such stories concerning a fictional supercomputer called Multivac. == Plot summary == Three influential leaders of the human race meet in the aftermath of a successful war against the Denebians. Discussing how the vast and powerful Multivac computer was a decisive factor in the war, each of the men admits that in fact, he falsified his part of the decision process because he felt that the situation was too complex to follow normal procedures. John Henderson, Multivac's Chief Programmer, admits that he altered the data being fed to Multivac, since the populace could not be trusted to report accurate information in the current situation. Max Jablonski then admits that he altered the data that Multivac produced, since he knew that Multivac was not in good working order due to manpower and spare parts shortage. Finally, Lamar Swift, executive director of the Solar Federation, reveals that he had not trusted the reports produced by Multivac, and had made the final decisions purely on the toss of a coin.
Read more →
Deep learning

In machine learning, deep learning (DL) focuses on utilizing multilayered neural networks to perform tasks such as classification, regression, and representation learning. The field takes inspiration from biological neuroscience and revolves around stacking artificial neurons into layers and "training" them to process data. The adjective "deep" refers to the use of multiple layers (ranging from three to several hundred or thousands) in the network. Methods used can be supervised, semi-supervised or unsupervised. Some common deep learning network architectures include fully connected networks, deep belief networks, recurrent neural networks, convolutional neural networks, generative adversarial networks, transformers, and neural radiance fields. These architectures have been applied to fields including computer vision, speech recognition, natural language processing, machine translation, bioinformatics, drug design, medical image analysis, climate science, material inspection and board game programs, where they have produced results comparable to and in some cases surpassing human expert performance. Early forms of neural networks were inspired by information processing and distributed communication nodes in biological systems, particularly the human brain. However, current neural networks do not intend to model the brain function of organisms, and are generally seen as low-quality models for that purpose. == Overview == Most modern deep learning models are based on multi-layered neural networks such as convolutional neural networks and transformers, although they can also include propositional formulas or latent variables organized layer-wise in deep generative models such as the nodes in deep belief networks and deep Boltzmann machines. Fundamentally, deep learning refers to a class of machine learning algorithms in which a hierarchy of layers is used to transform input data into a progressively more abstract and composite representation. For example, in an image recognition model, the raw input may be an image (represented as a tensor of pixels). The first representational layer may attempt to identify basic shapes such as lines and circles, the second layer may compose and encode arrangements of edges, the third layer may encode a nose and eyes, and the fourth layer may recognize that the image contains a face. Importantly, a deep learning process can learn which features to optimally place at which level on its own. Prior to deep learning, machine learning techniques often involved hand-crafted feature engineering to transform the data into a more suitable representation for a classification algorithm to operate on. In the deep learning approach, features are not hand-crafted and the model discovers useful feature representations from the data automatically. This does not eliminate the need for hand-tuning; for example, varying numbers of layers and layer sizes can provide different degrees of abstraction. The word "deep" in "deep learning" refers to the number of layers through which the data is transformed. More precisely, deep learning systems have a substantial credit assignment path (CAP) depth. The CAP is the chain of transformations from input to output. CAPs describe potentially causal connections between input and output. For a feedforward neural network, the depth of the CAPs is that of the network and is the number of hidden layers plus one (as the output layer is also parameterized). For recurrent neural networks, in which a signal may propagate through a layer more than once, the CAP depth is potentially unlimited. No universally agreed-upon threshold of depth divides shallow learning from deep learning, but most researchers agree that deep learning involves CAP depth higher than two. CAP of depth two has been shown to be a universal approximator in the sense that it can emulate any function. Beyond that, more layers do not add to the function approximator ability of the network. Deep models (CAP > two) are able to extract better features than shallow models and hence, extra layers help in learning the features effectively. Deep learning architectures can be constructed with a greedy layer-by-layer method. Deep learning helps to disentangle these abstractions and pick out which features improve performance. Deep learning algorithms can be applied to unsupervised learning tasks. This is an important benefit because unlabeled data is more abundant than labeled data. Examples of deep structures that can be trained in an unsupervised manner are deep belief networks. The term deep learning was introduced to the machine learning community by Rina Dechter in 1986, and to artificial neural networks by Igor Aizenberg and colleagues in 2000, in the context of Boolean threshold neurons. The etymology of the term is more complicated. == Interpretations == Deep neural networks are generally interpreted in terms of the universal approximation theorem or probabilistic inference. The classic universal approximation theorem concerns the capacity of feedforward neural networks with a single hidden layer of finite size to approximate continuous functions. In 1989, the first proof was published by George Cybenko for sigmoid activation functions and was generalised to feed-forward multi-layer architectures in 1991 by Kurt Hornik. Recent work also showed that universal approximation also holds for non-bounded activation functions such as Kunihiko Fukushima's rectified linear unit. The universal approximation theorem for deep neural networks concerns the capacity of networks with bounded width but the depth is allowed to grow. Lu et al. proved that if the width of a deep neural network with ReLU activation is strictly larger than the input dimension, then the network can approximate any Lebesgue integrable function; if the width is smaller or equal to the input dimension, then a deep neural network is not a universal approximator. The probabilistic interpretation derives from the field of machine learning. It features inference, as well as the optimization concepts of training and testing, related to fitting and generalization, respectively. More specifically, the probabilistic interpretation considers the activation nonlinearity as a cumulative distribution function. The probabilistic interpretation led to the introduction of dropout as regularizer in neural networks. The probabilistic interpretation was introduced by researchers including Hopfield, Widrow and Narendra and popularized in surveys such as the one by Bishop. == History == === Before 1980 === There are two types of artificial neural network (ANN): feedforward neural network (FNN) or multilayer perceptron (MLP) and recurrent neural networks (RNN). RNNs have cycles in their connectivity structure, whereas FNNs do not. In the 1920s, Wilhelm Lenz and Ernst Ising created the Ising model which is essentially a non-learning RNN architecture consisting of neuron-like threshold elements. In 1972, Shun'ichi Amari made this architecture adaptive. His learning RNN was republished by John Hopfield in 1982. Other early recurrent neural networks were published by Kaoru Nakano in 1971. Already in 1948, Alan Turing produced work on "Intelligent Machinery" that was not published in his lifetime, containing "ideas related to artificial evolution and learning RNNs". Frank Rosenblatt (1958) proposed the perceptron, an MLP with 3 layers: an input layer, a hidden layer with randomized weights that did not learn, and an output layer. He later published a 1962 book that also introduced variants and computer experiments, including a version with four-layer perceptrons "with adaptive preterminal networks" where the last two layers have learned weights (here he credits H. D. Block and B. W. Knight). The book cites an earlier network by R. D. Joseph (1960) "functionally equivalent to a variation of" this four-layer system (the book mentions Joseph over 30 times). Should Joseph therefore be considered the originator of proper adaptive multilayer perceptrons with learning hidden units? Unfortunately, the learning algorithm was not a functional one, and fell into oblivion. The first working deep learning algorithm was the Group method of data handling, a method to train arbitrarily deep neural networks, published by Alexey Ivakhnenko and Lapa in 1965. They regarded it as a form of polynomial regression, or a generalization of Rosenblatt's perceptron to handle more complex, nonlinear, and hierarchical relationships. A 1971 paper described a deep network with eight layers trained by this method, which is based on layer by layer training through regression analysis. Superfluous hidden units are pruned using a separate validation set. Since the activation functions of the nodes are Kolmogorov-Gabor polynomials, these were also the first deep networks with multiplicative units or "gates". The first deep learning multilayer perceptron trained by stochastic gradient descent was published in 1967 by Shun'ichi
Read more →
Futuresport

Futuresport is a 1998 American made-for-television sports film directed by Ernest Dickerson, starring Dean Cain, Vanessa Williams, and Wesley Snipes. It originally aired on ABC in October 1998, was released on VHS and DVD in March 1999 and then distributed outside of the U.S. by Minerva Pictures. == Plot == The film is set in 2025, and centers on a sport called "Futuresport" (a combination of basketball, baseball and hockey that uses hoverboards and rollerblades) created as a non-lethal way to reduce gang warfare. Tre Ramzey (Dean Cain) along with his ex-girlfriend Alex Torres (Vanessa Williams) and his old coach Obike Fixx (Wesley Snipes) must prevent an all out war between the North American Alliance and the Pan-Pacific Commonwealth (The Com). At stake is who rules over the Hawaiian Islands—which are being terrorized by Eric Sythe (JR Bourne) and his gang the Hawaiian Liberation Organization (Hilo). It takes a revolutionary sport to stop a revolution. == Cast ==
Read more →
Combs method

The Combs method is a rule base reduction method of writing fuzzy logic rules described by William E. Combs in 1997. It is designed to prevent combinatorial explosion in fuzzy logic rules. The Combs method takes advantage of the logical equality ( ( p ∧ q ) ⇒ r ) ⟺ ( ( p ⇒ r ) ∨ ( q ⇒ r ) ) {\displaystyle ((p\land q)\Rightarrow r)\iff ((p\Rightarrow r)\lor (q\Rightarrow r))} . == Equality proof == The simplest proof of given equality involves usage of truth tables: == Combinatorial explosion == Suppose we have a fuzzy system that considers N variables at a time, each of which can fit into at least one of S sets. The number of rules necessary to cover all the cases in a traditional fuzzy system is S N {\displaystyle S^{N}} , whereas the Combs method would need only S × N {\displaystyle S\times N} rules. For example, if we have five sets and five variables to consider to produce one output, covering all the cases would require 3125 rules in a traditional system, while the Combs method would require only 25 rules, taming the combinatorial explosion that occurs when more inputs or more sets are added to the system. This article will focus on the Combs method itself. To learn more about the way rules are traditionally formed, see fuzzy logic and fuzzy associative matrix. == Example == Suppose we were designing an artificial personality system that determined how friendly the personality is supposed to be towards a person in a strategic video game. The personality would consider its own fear, trust, and love in the other person. A set of rules in the Combs system might look like this: The table translates to: [IF Fear IS Unafraid THEN Friendship IS Enemies OR IF Fear IS ModerateFear THEN Friendship IS Neutral OR IF Fear IS Afraid THEN Friendship IS GoodFriends ] OR [IF Trust IS Distrusting THEN Friendship IS Enemies OR IF Trust IS ModerateTrust THEN Friendship IS Neutral OR IF Trust IS Trusting THEN Friendship IS GoodFriends] OR [IF Love IS Unloving THEN Friendship IS Enemies OR IF Love IS ModerateLove THEN Friendship IS Neutral OR IF Love IS Loving THEN Friendship IS GoodFriends] In this case, because the table follows a straightforward pattern in the output, it could be rewritten as: Each column of the table maps to the output provided in the last row. To obtain the output of the system, we just average the outputs of each rule for that output. For example, to calculate how much the computer is Enemies with the player, we take the average of how much the computer is Unafraid, Distrusting, and Unloving of the player. When all three averages are obtained, the result can then be defuzzified by any of the traditional means.
Read more →
Computer-assisted legal research

Computer-assisted legal research (CALR) or computer-based legal research is a mode of legal research that uses databases of court opinions, statutes, court documents, and secondary material. Electronic databases make large bodies of case law easily available. Databases also have additional benefits, such as Boolean searches, evaluating case authority, organizing cases by topic, and providing links to cited material. Databases are available through paid subscription or for free. Subscription-based services include Westlaw, LexisNexis, JustCite, HeinOnline, Bloomberg Law, Lex Intell, VLex and LexEur. As of 2015, the commercial market grossed $8 billion. Free services include OpenJurist, Google Scholar, AltLaw, Ravel Law, WIPO Lex, Law Delta and the databases of the Free Access to Law Movement. == Purposes == Computer-assisted legal research is undertaken by a variety of actors. It is taught as a topic in many law degrees and is used extensively by undergraduate and postgraduate law students in meeting the work requirements of their degree courses. Professors of Law rely on the digitization of primary and secondary sources of law when conducting their research and writing the material that they submit for publication. Professional lawyers rely on computer-assisted legal research in order to properly understand the status of the law and so to act effectively in the best interest of their client. They may also consult the text of case judgements and statutes specifically, as well as wider academic comment, in order to form the basis of (or response to) an appeal. The availability of legal information online differs by type, jurisdiction and subject matter. The types of information available include: Texts of statutes, statutory instruments, civil codes, etc. Explanatory notes and government publications relating to statutes and their operation Texts of governing documents such as constitutions and treaties Case judgements Journals on legal matters or legal theory Dictionaries and legal encyclopedia Legal texts and materials in the form of e-books Current affairs and market information Educational information on the law and its operation == Before the Internet == Prior to the advent and popularization of the World Wide Web, access to digital legal information was largely through the use of CD-ROMs, designed and sold by commercial organizations. Dial-up services were also available from the 1970s. As the use of the Internet spread in the early 1990s, companies such as LexisNexis and Westlaw incorporated Internet connectivity into their software packages. Browser-based legal information started to be published by Legal Information Institutes from 1992. == Publicly available information == The first effort to provide free computer access to legal information was made by two academics, Peter Martin and Tom Bruce, in 1992. Today, the Legal Information Institute freely publishes such resources as the text of the United States Constitution, judgements of the United States Supreme Court, and the text of the United States Code. The Australasian Legal Information Institute (AusLII) was established soon after in 1995. Other legal information institutes, such as those of Great Britain and Ireland (BAILII), Canada (CII) and South Africa (SAfLI) soon followed. LIIs were partially formalized in 2002 following the signing of the Declaration of Free Access to the Law, which has been signed by 54 countries. At the time of writing, the World Legal Information Institute contains in excess of 1800 databases from 123 jurisdictions. Many governments also publish legal information online. For example, UK legislation and statutory instruments have been publicly available online since 2010. Depending on the jurisdiction in question, the decisions of higher appellate courts may also be published online, either by the Legal Information Institute or by the court service directly. Sources of European Union Law are published for free by EUR-Lex in 23 languages, including judgments of the European Courts. Similarly, judgements of the European Court of Human Rights are published on its website.
Read more →
Sanchar Saathi

Sanchar Saathi (lit. 'Communication Partner' or 'Communication Companion') is an Indian state-owned app and web portal, operated by the Department of Telecommunications, designed to assist Indian mobile users in tracking and blocking stolen or lost mobile devices. In late 2025, a government order requiring Sanchar Saathi to be pre-installed on all mobile devices sold nationwide, with explicit provisions on preventing users from deleting the app or disabling any of its broad functionalities, triggered widespread backlash. The order was subsequently withdrawn. == Background == The Telecommunications Act 2023 introduced an exceptionally broad definition of the term "telecommunications" and conferred wide-ranging powers on the government. Although the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) assured reporters that this definition would not be used to justify government overreach, a November 2024 amendment to the Telecom Cyber Security Rules expanded it further and introduced the concept of the Telecommunication Identifier User Entity (TIEU), enabling users to be personally identified through their phone numbers. Sanchar Saathi was launched amid a widespread rise in cybercrime and hacking, as part of the Indian government's effort to prevent stolen phones from being used for fraud and to promote a state-backed application. In an official statement, the DoT said, "India has big second-hand mobile device market. Cases have also been observed where stolen or blacklisted devices are being re-sold. It makes the purchaser abettor in crime and causes financial loss to them." == Launch == Sanchar Saathi was originally launched as a web portal in May 2023. It was later launched as a mobile app in January 2025. Describing itself as a "citizen-centric" safety tool, Sanchar Saathi allows users to check a device's IMEI, report and block lost or stolen phones, and flag suspected fraud communications. Under Sanchar Saathi's privacy policy, it can make and manage phone calls, view and send messages, read call logs, access photos and files, access the location and camera of the device in which the app is used, as well as read and write into the device's storage. According to official government data, by December 2025, the Sanchar Saathi app had helped recover more than 700,000 lost and stolen mobile devices across India. Users report around 2,000 fraud incidents through the app each day. == Pre-installation controversy == On 28 November 2025, the Bharatiya Janata Party government, led by prime minister Narendra Modi, privately ordered phone manufacturers, including Apple, Samsung, Xiaomi, Vivo, Oppo, among others, to pre-install the Sanchar Saathi app on new devices sold in the country, alongside mandating that old devices get issued a software update for the installation of the app. The order had a 90-day deadline and further included explicit provisions to ensure that the app is to be "readily visible and accessible to the end users at the time of first use or device setup" and that users should neither be able to delete the app nor disable or restrict any of its broad functionalities. The order caused widespread political backlash. K. C. Venugopal, a general secretary of the main opposition party, the Indian National Congress (or simply the Congress), called the order "beyond unconstitutional" and said, "A pre-loaded government app that cannot be uninstalled is a dystopian tool to monitor every Indian. It is a means to watch over every movement, interaction and decision of each citizen", adding, "Big Brother cannot watch us." Another Congress general secretary, Priyanka Gandhi, termed Sanchar Saathi a "snooping app", and attacked the government for "turning this country into a dictatorship". Uddhav Thackeray, former chief minister of Maharashtra, compared Sanchar Saathi to the Pegasus spyware. Sanjay Hegde, a senior advocate at the Supreme Court of India, said "Here in the garb of security, the intrusion is vast, unfettered, unguided and is totally disproportionate. The app ought to be struck down on that account". The Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF), an Indian digital rights advocacy organisation, said, "Forcing every smartphone to carry a permanent government app for a simple verification task is excessive and violates the Puttaswamy proportionality standard", referring to Puttaswamy v. Union of India, a 2017 landmark decision of the Supreme Court, which asserted that the right to privacy should be protected as a fundamental right. The IFF further said, "For this to work in practice, the app will almost certainly need system level or root level access, similar to carrier or OEM system apps, so that it cannot be disabled. That design choice erodes the protections that normally prevent one app from peering into the data of others, and turns Sanchar Saathi into a permanent, non-consensual point of access sitting inside the operating system of every Indian smartphone user." Moreover, the organisation said that while the app was being "framed as a benign IMEI checker", a server-side update could allow the app to engage in "client side scanning for 'banned' applications, flag VPN usage, correlate SIM activity, or trawl SMS logs in the name of fraud detection. Nothing in the order constrains these possibilities." In reaction to the controversy, Jyotiraditya Scindia, the union minister of communications, said, "There is no snooping or call monitoring", adding, "Obviously you can delete it. There is no problem. This is a matter of customer protection. It is not mandatory. If you don't want to register, and don't want to use the app, don't use it; don't register, and it will lay dormant." Scindia compared the app to other pre-installed mobile apps such as Google Maps, which he said could be deleted if users wished so. However, contrary to Scindia's statement, on many phone brands, such pre-installed apps cannot be deleted, although users can disable them. Furthermore, upon enquiry, Scindia did not clarify whether his remarks applied to the app after the order took effect, making no comment on the provision in the order that would prevent users from deleting the app. When Congress member Renuka Chowdhury submitted an adjournment motion notice in the Rajya Sabha seeking the suspension of all other matters to discuss the Sanchar Saathi issue, Kiren Rijiju, the union minister of parliamentary affairs, accused the opposition of "manufacturing issues" to stall session proceedings. By 2 December, it had been reported that Apple did not plan to comply with the order, citing privacy and security concerns for the iOS ecosystem and the fact that the order would violate its internal policy against the pre-installation of third-party software in iPhones. Although it was clarified that Apple did not intend to take the matter to court or publicly oppose the government, it was said that Apple "can't do this. Period." The order would have also required Google to create a custom version of Android solely for India which would include the Sanchar Saathi app, a requirement described to "not be acceptable to the company". Following the backlash, the order was revoked on 3 December 2025. In a press release, the government said, "Given Sanchar Saathi's increasing acceptance, Government has decided not to make the pre-installation mandatory for mobile manufacturers".
Read more →
House of Suns

House of Suns is a 2008 science fiction novel by Welsh author Alastair Reynolds. The novel was shortlisted for the 2009 Arthur C. Clarke Award. == Setting == Approximately six million years in the future, humanity has spread throughout the Milky Way galaxy, which appears devoid of any other organic sentient life. The galaxy is populated by numerous civilizations of humans and posthumans of widely varying levels of development. A civilization of sentient robots known as the Machine People coexists peacefully with humanity. Technologies of the era include anti-gravity, inertia damping, force fields, stellar engineering, and stasis fields. Also of note is the "Absence"—the mysterious disappearance of the Andromeda Galaxy. Large-scale human civilizations almost invariably seem to collapse and disappear within a few millennia (a phenomenon referred to as "turnover"), the limits of sub-lightspeed travel making it too difficult to hold interstellar empires together. Consequently, the most powerful entities in the galaxy are the "Lines"—familial organizations made of cloned "shatterlings". The Lines do not inhabit planets, but instead travel through space, holding reunions after they have performed a "circuit" of the galaxy; something that takes about 200,000 years. House of Suns concerns the Gentian Line, also known as the House of Flowers, composed of Abigail Gentian and her 999 clones (or "shatterlings"), male and female: exactly which of the 1,000 shatterlings is the original Abigail Gentian is unknown. The clones and Abigail travel the Milky Way Galaxy, helping young civilizations, collecting knowledge, and experiencing what the universe has to offer. Members of the Gentian Line are named after flowering plants. == Synopsis == The novel is divided into eight parts, with the first chapter of each part taking the form of a narrative flashback to Abigail Gentian's early life (six million years earlier, in the 31st century), before the cloning and the creation of the Gentian Line. Each subsequent chapter is narrated from the first-person perspective of two shatterlings named Campion and Purslane, alternating between them each chapter. Campion and Purslane are in a relationship, which is frowned upon, even punishable, by the Line. The primary storyline begins as Campion and Purslane are roughly fifty years late to the 32nd Gentian reunion. They take a detour to contact a posthuman known as ‘Ateshga’ in hopes of getting a replacement ship for Campion because his is getting old (several million years old). After being tricked by Ateshga, Campion and Purslane manage to turn the tables on him and leave his planet with a being he had been keeping captive, a golden robot called Hesperus. Hesperus is a member of the "Machine People", an advanced civilization of robots, and supposedly the only non-human sentient society in existence. The two shatterlings hope that the rescue of Hesperus will let them off the hook for their lateness, as returning him to his people (who will be at the reunion as guests of other shatterlings) will put the Gentian Line on good terms with the Machine People. However, before reaching the reunion world, Campion and Purslane encounter an emergency distress signal from Fescue, another Gentian shatterling. There was a vicious attack on the reunion world; an ambush in which the majority of the Gentian Line was wiped out. The identity of the responsible party is unknown, but the attackers used the supposedly long-vanished 'Homunculus' weapons – monstrous spacetime-bending weapons that were created ages ago, but were ordered to be destroyed by another Line. Despite Fescue's warning, Campion and Purslane approach the reunion system to look for survivors. They manage to find the remains of a ship with several Gentian members still alive, and rescue them and the four enemy prisoners they had captured. Hesperus, however, is gravely injured in the process by remaining ambushers. The group escapes and make their way to the Gentian backup meeting planet, Neume, in the hope of re-grouping with any other Gentians who may have survived the ambush. Upon reaching Neume, Campion, Purslane and the other shatterlings they rescued are greeted by the few Gentian survivors of the ambush (numbering only in the forties, compared to the hundreds that existed before the ambush). They also meet two members of the Machine People: Cadence and Cascade, guests of another shatterling. During the next few days, the interrogation of the prisoners commences. Another Gentian, Cyphel, is mysteriously murdered, which fuels the Line's concerns that there is a traitor among them. As a way of punishing Campion for transgressions against the Line, Purslane is made to give up her ship, the Silver Wings of Morning (one of the fastest and most powerful in the Line) to Cadence and Cascade, ostensibly so they can return to the Machine People with news of the ambush, in a bid to gain the Line some assistance. Hesperus, still critically wounded following the rescue of the survivors, is taken to the Neumean "Spirit of the Air", an ancient posthuman machine-intelligence, in the hopes that it will fix him. The Spirit takes Hesperus away and returns him some time later, though apparently still not functioning. The robots Cadence and Cascade make preparations to leave on Purslane's ship. They agree to take him aboard and return him to their people, who they promise may be able to help Hesperus. Purslane accompanies them to her ship, where she must be physically present to give the ship order to transfer control over to the robots. On their way to the bridge, Hesperus suddenly springs to life, grabbing Purslane and hiding her while Cadence and Cascade are whisked along to the bridge. Hersperus quickly explains that Cadence and Cascade are actually planning on hijacking the ship. Bewildered by this sudden change of events, Purslane delays in acting, not sure if she should trust Hesperus, before deciding to ask the ship to detain and eject the robots in the bridge. By then, though, it is too late. Cadence and Cascade hack into the ship's computer, taking it over, and take off from Neume with Hesperus and Purslane still aboard. Campion and several other shatterlings immediately launch a pursuit. Together Hesperus and Purslane find a hideout in a smaller ship in the hold of the Silver Wings of Morning. Using information gained from the other two robots and his own memories, Hesperus (who is now an amalgamation of both Hesperus and the Spirit of the Air) has pieced together what is going on: Cadence and Cascade have discovered that the Line was involved in the accidental extermination of a forgotten earlier race of machine people, dubbed the "First Machines". The Commonality (a confederation of the various Lines), horrified and ashamed of this pointless genocide, erased all knowledge of the event from historical records and their own memories. Unfortunately, Campion, in a previous circuit, unwittingly uncovered information pertaining to the extermination. Hesperus believes that the ambush at the reunion was seeking to destroy this evidence before it could spread, carried out by a shadow Line known as the "House of Suns", tasked with maintaining the conspiracy. Cadence and Cascade, on the other hand, are racing for a wormhole which leads to the Andromeda Galaxy, to where the few survivors of the First Machines are revealed to have retreated. They plan to release the First Machines back into the Milky Way, thus effecting a revenge against the Commonality for the genocide. As Campion and the shatterlings are pursuing Purslane's hijacked ship, transmissions from Neume confirm that a shatterling within their midst, Galingale, is the traitor and a secret member of the House of Suns. The shatterlings open fire on both Galingale's and Purslane's ships, and while they manage to capture Galingale, they are unable to stop Purslane's ship. Unable to get within weapons range, Campion pursues Purslane's ship for sixty thousand light years, during which time he and Purslane, on their separate ships, are suspended in "abeyance", a form of temporal slowdown or stasis. Despite efforts to stop the hijacked ship from reaching the concealed wormhole by local civilisations, the robot Cascade succeeds in opening the "stardam" enclosing the wormhole and travelling through it to the Andromeda Galaxy. On board Silver Wings of Morning, Hesperus reveals to Campion that while he managed to destroy Cadence before they could leave the Neume star system, Cascade survived and he and Cascade had engaged in a marathon battle, several thousand years. Hesperus was ultimately victorious, but Cascade has fused the ship controls before his defeat and they are past the point of no return. Campion, now the only shatterling still in pursuit, enters the wormhole after them and emerges in the Andromeda Galaxy, a place apparently devoid of all sentient life. In his search for Purslane and her ship, he travels to a star enca
Read more →
Generative engine optimization

Generative engine optimization (GEO) is one of the names given to the practice of structuring digital content and managing online presence to improve visibility in responses generated by generative artificial intelligence (AI) systems. The practice influences the way large language models (LLMs) retrieve, summarize, and present information in response to user queries. Related terms include answer engine optimization (AEO) and artificial intelligence optimization (AIO). The concept of GEO first appeared in response to generative AI technologies being integrated into mainstream search and information retrieval systems. Tools are used to monitor how websites and brands are cited, referenced, or incorporated into responses produced by large language models. == Terminology == Several overlapping terms describe related practices, and usage varies across practitioners, vendors, and publications. No consensus definition distinguishing these terms had been established in the academic literature as of early 2026, and the terms are frequently used interchangeably in trade and practitioner contexts. Other terms for the same concept include answer engine optimization (AEO), large language model optimization (LLMO), artificial intelligence optimization (AIO), and AI SEO. In 2026, Google released documentation entitled "Optimizing your website for generative AI features on Google Search." According to this documentation, "optimizing for generative AI search is optimizing for the search experience, and thus still SEO.” This position had previously been shared at conferences, with 2026 being the first time Google released official documentation stating it. == Factors influencing generative engine optimization == By early 2026, the focus of GEO practitioners shifted from simple keyword placement to "semantic relevance", a metric driven by the integration of advertising into conversational AI. OpenAI and Google began monetizing AI search results, which is not currently considered an aspect of generative engine optimization but is adjacent.
Read more →
Rumelhart Prize

The David E. Rumelhart Prize for Contributions to the Theoretical Foundations of Human Cognition was founded in 2001 in honor of the cognitive scientist David Rumelhart to introduce the equivalent of a Nobel Prize for cognitive science. It is awarded annually to "an individual or collaborative team making a significant contemporary contribution to the theoretical foundations of human cognition". The annual award is presented at the Cognitive Science Society meeting, where the recipient gives a lecture and receives a check for $100,000. At the conclusion of the ceremony, the next year's award winner is announced. The award is funded by the Robert J. Glushko and Pamela Samuelson Foundation. The Rumelhart Prize committee is independent of the Cognitive Science Society. However, the society provides a large and interested audience for the awards. == Selection Committee == As of 2022, the selection committee for the prize consisted of: Richard Cooper (chair) Dedre Gentner Robert J. Glushko Tania Lombrozo Steven T. Piantadosi Jesse Snedeker == Recipients ==
Read more →
Gerrit (software)

Gerrit ( GERR-it) is a free, web-based team code collaboration tool. Software developers in a team can review each other's modifications on their source code using a Web browser and approve or reject those changes. It integrates closely with Git, a distributed version control system. Gerrit is a fork of Rietveld, a code review tool for Subversion. Both are named after Dutch designer Gerrit Rietveld. == History == Originally written in Python like Rietveld, it is now written in Java (Java EE Servlet) with SQL since version 2 and a custom-made Git-based database (NoteDb) since version 3. In versions 2.0–2.16 Gerrit used Google Web Toolkit for its browser-based front-end. After being developed and used in parallel with GWT for versions 2.14–2.16, a new Polymer web UI replaced the GWT UI in version 3.0.
Read more →
Fuzzy relation

A fuzzy relation is the cartesian product of mathematical fuzzy sets. Two fuzzy sets are taken as input, the fuzzy relation is then equal to the cross product of the sets which is created by vector multiplication. Usually, a rule base is stored in a matrix notation which allows the fuzzy controller to update its internal values. From a historical perspective, the first fuzzy relation was mentioned in the year 1971 by Lotfi A. Zadeh. A practical approach to describe a fuzzy relation is based on a 2d table. At first, a table is created which consists of fuzzy values from 0..1. The next step is to apply the if-then-rules to the values. The resulting numbers are stored in the table as an array. Fuzzy relations can be utilized in fuzzy databases.
Read more →
IJCAI Computers and Thought Award

The IJCAI Computers and Thought Award is presented every two years by the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), recognizing outstanding young scientists in artificial intelligence. It was originally funded with royalties received from the book Computers and Thought (edited by Edward Feigenbaum and Julian Feldman), and is currently funded by IJCAI. It is considered to be "the premier award for artificial intelligence researchers under the age of 35". == Laureates == Terry Winograd (1971) Patrick Winston (1973) Chuck Rieger (1975) Douglas Lenat (1977) David Marr (1979) Gerald Sussman (1981) Tom Mitchell (1983) Hector Levesque (1985) Johan de Kleer (1987) Henry Kautz (1989) Rodney Brooks (1991) Martha E. Pollack (1991) Hiroaki Kitano (1993) Sarit Kraus (1995) Stuart Russell (1995) Leslie Kaelbling (1997) Nicholas Jennings (1999) Daphne Koller (2001) Tuomas Sandholm (2003) Peter Stone (2007) Carlos Guestrin (2009) Andrew Ng (2009) Vincent Conitzer (2011) Malte Helmert (2011) Kristen Grauman (2013) Ariel D. Procaccia (2015) Percy Liang (2016) for his contributions to both the approach of semantic parsing for natural language understanding and better methods for learning latent-variable models, sometimes with weak supervision, in machine learning. Devi Parikh (2017) Stefano Ermon (2018) Guy Van den Broeck (2019) for his contributions to statistical and relational artificial intelligence, and the study of tractability in learning and reasoning. Piotr Skowron (2020) for his contributions to computational social choice, and to the theory of committee elections. Fei Fang (2021) for her contributions to integrating machine learning with game theory and the use of these novel techniques to tackle societal challenges such as more effective deployment of security resources, enhancing environmental sustainability, and reducing food insecurity. Bo Li (2022) for her contributions to uncovering the underlying connections among robustness, privacy, and generalization in AI, showing how different models are vulnerable to malicious attacks, and how to eliminate these vulnerabilities using mathematical tools that provide robustness guarantees for learning models and privacy protection. Pin-Yu Chen (2023) for his contributions to consolidating properties of trust, robustness and safety into rigorous algorithmic procedures and computable metrics for improving AI systems. Nisarg Shah (2024) for his contributions to AI and society, in particular foundational work on the theory of algorithmic fairness using principles from social choice theory. Aditya Grover (2025) for his foundational contributions uniting deep generative models, representation learning, and reinforcement learning, and for their applications in advancing scientific reasoning.
Read more →