AI Email Response Generator Free

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

  • Local coordinates

    Local coordinates

    Local coordinates are the ones used in a local coordinate system or a local coordinate space. Simple examples: Houses. In order to work in a house construction, the measurements are referred to a control arbitrary point that will allow to check it: stick/sticks on the ground, steel bar, nails... Addresses. Using house numbers to locate a house on a street; the street is a local coordinate system within a larger system composed of city townships, states, countries, postal codes, etc. Local systems exist for convenience. On ancient times, every work was made on relative bases as there was no conception of global systems. Practically, it is better to use local systems for small works as houses, buildings... For most of the applications, it is desired the position of one element relative to one building or location, and in a more local way, relative to one furniture or person. In a regular way, you will not give your position by geographical coordinates rather than "I am 15 meters away of the entry to the building". So it is a pretty common way to locate things. It is possible to bring latitude and longitude for all terrestrial locations, but unless one has a highly precise GPS device or you make astronomical observations, this is impractical. It is much simpler to use a tape, a rope, a chain... The position information (global) should be transformed into a location. Position refers to a numeric or symbolic description within a spatial reference system, whereas location refers to information about surrounding objects and their interrelationships. (Topological space) == Use == In computer graphics and computer animation, local coordinate spaces are also useful for their ability to model independently transformable aspects of geometrical scene graphs. When modeling a car, for example, it is desirable to describe the center of each wheel with respect to the car's coordinate system, but then specify the shape of each wheel in separate local spaces centered about these points. This way, the information describing each wheel can be simply duplicated four times, and independent transformations (e.g., steering rotation) can be similarly effected. Bounding volumes of objects may be described more accurately using extents in the local coordinates, (i.e. an object oriented bounding box, contrasted with the simpler axis aligned bounding box). The trade-off for this flexibility is additional computational cost: the rendering system must access the higher-level coordinate system of the car and combine it with the space of each wheel in order to draw everything in its proper place. Local coordinates also afford digital designers a means around the finite limits of numerical representation. The tread marks on a tire, for example, can be described using millimeters by allowing the whole tire to occupy the entire range of numeric precision available. The larger aspects of the car, such as its frame, might be described in centimeters, and the terrain that the car travels on could be specified in meters. In differential topology, local coordinates on a manifold are defined by means of an atlas of charts. The basic idea behind coordinate charts is that each small patch of a manifold can be endowed with a set of local coordinates. These are collected together into an atlas, and stitched together in such a way that they are self-consistent on the manifold. In Cartography and Maps, the traditional way of works are local datum. With a local datum the land can be mapped on relative small areas as a country. With the need of global systems, the transformations on between datum became a problem, so geodetic datum have been created. More than 150 local datum have been used in the world.

    Read more →
  • Isolation forest

    Isolation forest

    Isolation forest is an unsupervised learning algorithm for anomaly detection that works on the principle of isolating anomalies, instead of the most common techniques of profiling normal points. In statistics, an anomaly (a.k.a. outlier) is an observation or event that deviates so much from other events to arouse suspicion it was generated by a different mean. For example, the graph in Fig.1 represents ingress traffic to a web server, expressed as the number of requests in 3-hours intervals, for a period of one month. It is quite evident by simply looking at the picture that some points (marked with a red circle) are unusually high, to the point of inducing suspect that the web server might have been under attack at that time. On the other hand, the flat segment indicated by the red arrow also seems unusual and might possibly be a sign that the server was down during that time period. Anomalies in a big dataset may follow very complicated patterns, which are difficult to detect "by eye" in the great majority of cases. This is the reason why the field of anomaly detection is well suited for the application of machine learning techniques. The most common techniques employed for anomaly detection are based on the construction of a profile of what is "normal": anomalies are reported as those instances in the dataset that do not conform to the normal profile. Isolation Forest uses a different approach: instead of trying to build a model of normal instances, it explicitly isolates anomalous points in the dataset. The main advantage of this approach is the possibility of exploiting sampling techniques to an extent that is not allowed to the profile-based methods, creating a very fast algorithm with a low memory demand. == History == The Isolation Forest (iForest) algorithm was initially proposed by Fei Tony Liu, Kai Ming Ting and Zhi-Hua Zhou in 2008. The authors took advantage of two quantitative properties of anomalous data points in a sample, that is: they are the minority consisting of fewer instances and they have attribute-values that are very different from those of normal instances Since anomalies are typically few and very different from the other points in the sample, they must be easier to "isolate" compared to normal points. On the basis of this principle, Isolation Forest builds an ensemble of "Isolation Trees" (iTrees) for the data set and marks as anomalies the points that have short average path lengths on the iTrees. In a later paper, published in 2012 the same authors described a set of experiments to prove that iForest: has a low linear time complexity and a small memory requirement is able to deal with high dimensional data with irrelevant attributes can be trained with or without anomalies in the training set can provide detection results with different levels of granularity without re-training In 2013 Zhiguo Ding and Minrui Fei proposed a framework based on iForest to resolve the problem of detecting anomalies in streaming data. More application of iForest to streaming data are described in papers by Swee Chuan Tan et al., G. A. Susto et al. and Yu Weng et al. One of the main problems of the application of iForest to anomaly detection was not with the model itself, but rather in the way the "anomaly score" was computed. This problem was highlighted by Sahand Hariri, Matias Carrasco Kind and Robert J. Brunner in a 2018 paper, wherein they proposed an improved iForest model named Extended Isolation Forest (EIF). In the same paper the authors describe the improvements made to the original model and how they are able to enhance the consistency and reliability of the anomaly score produced for a given data point. == Algorithm == At the basis of the Isolation Forest algorithm there is the tendency of anomalous instances in a dataset to be easier to separate from the rest of the sample (isolate), compared to normal points. In order to isolate a data point the algorithm recursively generates partitions on the sample by randomly selecting an attribute and then randomly selecting a split value for the attribute, between the minimum and maximum values allowed for that attribute. An example of random partitioning in a 2D dataset of normally distributed points is given in Fig. 2 for a non-anomalous point and Fig. 3 for a point that's more likely to be an anomaly. It is apparent from the pictures how anomalies require fewer random partitions to be isolated, compared to normal points. From a mathematical point of view, recursive partitioning can be represented by a tree structure named Isolation Tree, while the number of partitions required to isolate a point can be interpreted as the length of the path, within the tree, to reach a terminating node starting from the root. For example, the path length of point xi in Fig. 2 is greater than the path length of xj in Fig. 3. More formally, let X = { x1, ..., xn } be a set of d-dimensional points and X' ⊂ X a subset of X. An Isolation Tree (iTree) is defined as a data structure with the following properties: for each node T in the Tree, T is either an external-node with no child, or an internal-node with one "test" and exactly two daughter nodes (Tl, Tr) a test at node T consists of an attribute q and a split value p such that the test q < p determines the traversal of a data point to either Tl or Tr. In order to build an iTree, the algorithm recursively divides X' by randomly selecting an attribute q and a split value p, until either (i) the node has only one instance or (ii) all data at the node have the same values. When the iTree is fully grown, each point in X is isolated at one of the external nodes. Intuitively, the anomalous points are those (easier to isolate, hence) with the smaller path length in the tree, where the path length h(xi) of point x i ∈ X {\displaystyle x_{i}\in X} is defined as the number of edges xi traverses from the root node to get to an external node. A probabilistic explanation of iTree is provided in the iForest original paper. == Properties of Isolation Forest == Sub-sampling: since iForest does not need to isolate all of normal instances, it can frequently ignore the big majority of the training sample. As a consequence, iForest works very well when the sampling size is kept small, a property that is in contrast with the great majority of existing methods, where large sampling size is usually desirable. Swamping: when normal instances are too close to anomalies, the number of partitions required to separate anomalies increases, a phenomena known as swamping, which makes it more difficult for iForest to discriminate between anomalies and normal points. One of the main reasons for swamping is the presence of too many data for the purpose of anomaly detection, which implies one possible solution to the problem is sub-sampling. Since iForest respond very well to sub-sampling in terms of performance, the reduction of the number of points in the sample is also a good way to reduce the effect of swamping. Masking: when the number of anomalies is high it is possible that some of those aggregate in a dense and large cluster, making it more difficult to separate the single anomalies and, in turn, to detect such points as anomalous. Similarly to swamping, this phenomena (known as "masking") is also more likely when the number of points in the sample is big, and can be alleviated through sub-sampling. High Dimensional Data: one of the main limitation to standard, distance-based methods is their inefficiency in dealing with high dimensional datasets:. The main reason for that is, in a high dimensional space every point is equally sparse, so using a distance-based measure of separation is pretty ineffective. Unfortunately, high-dimensional data also affects the detection performance of iForest, but the performance can be vastly improved by adding a features selection test like Kurtosis to reduce the dimensionality of the sample space. Normal Instances Only: iForest performs well even if the training set does not contain any anomalous point, the reason being that iForest describes data distributions in such a way that high values of the path length h(xi) correspond to the presence of data points. As a consequence, the presence of anomalies is pretty irrelevant to iForest's detection performance. == Anomaly Detection with Isolation Forest == Anomaly detection with Isolation Forest is a process composed of two main stages: in the first stage, a training dataset is used to build iTrees as described in previous sections. in the second stage, each instance in test set is passed through the iTrees build in the previous stage, and a proper "anomaly score" is assigned to the instance using the algorithm described below Once all the instances in the test set have been assigned an anomaly score, it is possible to mark as "anomaly" any point whose score is greater than a predefined threshold, which depends on the domain the analysis is being applied to. === Anomaly Score === Th

    Read more →
  • Eugene Charniak

    Eugene Charniak

    Eugene Charniak (June 2, 1946 – June 13, 2023) was a professor of computer Science and cognitive Science at Brown University. He held an A.B. in Physics from the University of Chicago and a Ph.D. from M.I.T. in Computer Science. His research was in the area of language understanding or technologies which relate to it, such as knowledge representation, reasoning under uncertainty, and learning. Since the early 1990s he was interested in statistical techniques for language understanding. His research in this area included work in the subareas of part-of-speech tagging, probabilistic context-free grammar induction, and, more recently, syntactic disambiguation through word statistics, efficient syntactic parsing, and lexical resource acquisition through statistical means. He was a Fellow of the American Association of Artificial Intelligence and was previously a Councilor of the organization. He was also honored with the 2011 Association for Computational Linguistics Lifetime Achievement Award and awarded the 2011 Calvin & Rose G Hoffman Prize. In 2011, he was named a fellow of the Association for Computational Linguistics. In 2015, he won the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) Classic Paper Award for a paper (“Statistical Parsing with a Context-Free Grammar and Word Statistics”) that he presented at the Fourteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence in 1997. == Books == He published six books: Computational Semantics, (with Yorick Wilks), Amsterdam: North-Holland (1976) Artificial Intelligence Programming (now in a second edition) (with Chris Riesbeck, Drew McDermott, and James Meehan), Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (1980, 1987) Introduction to Artificial Intelligence (with Drew McDermott), Reading MA: Addison-Wesley (1985) Statistical Language Learning, Cambridge: MIT Press (1993) Introduction to Deep Learning, Cambridge: MIT Press (2019) AI & I: An Intellectual History of Artificial Intelligence, Cambridge: MIT Press (2024)

    Read more →
  • International Computer Archive of Modern and Medieval English

    International Computer Archive of Modern and Medieval English

    The International Computer Archive of Modern and Medieval English (ICAME) is an international group of linguists and data scientists working in corpus linguistics to digitise English texts. The organisation was founded in Oslo, Norway in 1977 as the International Computer Archive of Modern English, before being renamed to its current title. Its primary objectives were: collecting and distributing information on English language material available for computer processing; and linguistic research completed or in progress on this material; compiling an archive of corpora to be located at the University of Bergen, from where copies of the material can be obtained at cost. The portal to their materials is hosted at the University of Bergen, where they have set out the aim of the organization to "collect and distribute information on English language material available for computer processing and on linguistic research to compile an archive of English text corpora in machine-readable form, and to make material available to research institutions." Creating computer corpora, i.e. collections of texts in machine-readable form, is the most accessible way to study both transcribed spoken language and various genres of written texts for modern scholars, including both "descriptive and more theoretically-minded linguists". The ICAME group hosts academic conferences that focus on corpus linguistic studies of historical changes and contemporary grammatical descriptions of English, and makes corpora of different varieties of English available to scholars, starting with editions of the 1960s Brown Corpus. Their first academic conference was held in Bergen, Norway in 1979, and scholars who were interested in corpus linguistics continued to meet each spring in different European and English-speaking countries. At these meetings, the compilation and distribution of corpora they enabled played a key role in the creation of the field of corpus linguistics in the 20th century, a precursor to current big data analytics. In summarizing the field, Kennedy's Introduction to Corpus Linguistics notes that "for corpus linguists with an interest in the description of English, the International Computer Archive of Modern and Medieval English has been the major resource". The influence of ICAME on the field has also be laid out in Facchinetti's history, Corpus Linguistics Twenty-five Years On. One influential resource that ICAME made available was a CD of 20 different corpora, including those covering different regional Englishes (such as the Australian Corpus of English, the Wellington Corpus of Spoken New Zealand English, the Kolhapur Corpus of Indian English, the Bergen Corpus of London Teenage Language (COLT), the Helsinki Corpus of Older Scots, and the International Corpus of English—East-African component), as well as versions of the Brown Corpus and the Lancaster-Bergen-Oslo (LOB) corpus tagged for part of speech. ICAME also published an annual journal, the ICAME Journal, formerly ICAME News, that contains articles, conference reports, reviews and notices related to corpus linguistics. The current editors of the ICAME Journal are Merja Kytö and Anna-Brita Stenström.I am wearing a tie clip in the shape of a monkey wrench... The story behind this peculiar piece of jewelry goes back to the early 60s when I was assembling the notorious Brown Corpus and others were using computers to make concordances of William Butler Yeats and other poets. One of my colleagues, a specialist in modem Irish literature, was heard to remark that anyone who would use a computer on good literature was nothing but a plumber. Some of my students responded by forming a linguistic plumber's union, the symbol of which was, of course, a monkey wrench.

    Read more →
  • Weak artificial intelligence

    Weak artificial intelligence

    Weak artificial intelligence (weak AI) is artificial intelligence that implements a limited part of the mind, or, as narrow AI, artificial narrow intelligence (ANI), is focused on one narrow task. Weak AI is contrasted with strong AI, which can be interpreted in various ways: Artificial general intelligence (AGI): a machine with the ability to apply intelligence to any problem, rather than just one specific problem. Artificial superintelligence (ASI): a machine with a vastly superior intelligence to the average human being. Artificial consciousness: a machine that has consciousness, sentience and mind (John Searle uses "strong AI" in this sense). Narrow AI can be classified as being "limited to a single, narrowly defined task. Most modern AI systems would be classified in this category." Artificial general intelligence is conversely the opposite. == Applications and risks == Some examples of narrow AI are AlphaGo, self-driving cars, robot systems used in the medical field, and diagnostic doctors. Narrow AI systems are sometimes dangerous if unreliable. And the behavior that it follows can become inconsistent. It could be difficult for the AI to grasp complex patterns and get to a solution that works reliably in various environments. This "brittleness" can cause it to fail in unpredictable ways. Narrow AI failures can sometimes have significant consequences. It could for example cause disruptions in the electric grid, damage nuclear power plants, cause global economic problems, and misdirect autonomous vehicles. Medicines could be incorrectly sorted and distributed. Also, medical diagnoses can ultimately have serious and sometimes deadly consequences if the AI is faulty or biased. Simple AI programs have already worked their way into society, oftentimes unnoticed by the public. Autocorrection for typing, speech recognition for speech-to-text programs, and vast expansions in the data science fields are examples. Narrow AI has also been the subject of some controversy, including resulting in unfair prison sentences, discrimination against women in the workplace for hiring, resulting in death via autonomous driving, among other cases. Despite being "narrow" AI, recommender systems are efficient at predicting user reactions based on their posts, patterns, or trends. For instance, TikTok's "For You" algorithm can determine a user's interests or preferences in less than an hour. Some other social media AI systems are used to detect bots that may be involved in propaganda or other potentially malicious activities. == Weak AI versus strong AI == John Searle contests the possibility of strong AI (by which he means conscious AI). He further believes that the Turing test (created by Alan Turing and originally called the "imitation game", used to assess whether a machine can converse indistinguishably from a human) is not accurate or appropriate for testing whether an AI is "strong". Scholars such as Antonio Lieto have argued that the current research on both AI and cognitive modelling are perfectly aligned with the weak-AI hypothesis (that should not be confused with the "general" vs "narrow" AI distinction) and that the popular assumption that cognitively inspired AI systems espouse the strong AI hypothesis is ill-posed and problematic since "artificial models of brain and mind can be used to understand mental phenomena without pretending that that they are the real phenomena that they are modelling" (as, on the other hand, implied by the strong AI assumption).

    Read more →
  • András Kornai

    András Kornai

    András Kornai (born 1957 in Budapest) is a mathematical linguist. == Education == Kornai is the son of economist János Kornai. He earned two PhDs with the first being in mathematics in 1983 from Eötvös Loránd University in Budapest, where his advisor was Miklós Ajtai. His second was in linguistics in 1991 from Stanford University, where his advisor was Paul Kiparsky. == Career == He is a professor in the Department of Algebra at the Budapest Institute of Technology, where he works on an open source Hungarian morphological analyzer. He was Chief Scientist at MetaCarta, where he worked on information extraction before the company was acquired by Nokia. Prior to MetaCarta, he was Chief Scientist at Northern Light. He is on the board of the journal Grammars and YourAmigo PLC. His research interests include all mathematical aspects of natural language processing, speech recognition, and OCR. As area editor he was responsible for the Mathematical Linguistics area of the Oxford International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, and his joint work with Geoffrey Pullum, "The X-bar Theory of Phrase Structure", formally reconstructed that then-popular linguistic theory. == Awards and honors == 2009: ACM Distinguished Member == Monographs == Semantics. Springer Nature, 2020. ISBN 978-3-319-65644-1 Mathematical Linguistics. Springer Verlag, in the series Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing, November 2007. ISBN 978-1-84628-985-9 Hardbound, approximately 300 pages. See description. Formal Phonology. In the series Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics, Garland Publishing, 1994, ISBN 0-8153-1730-1, hardbound, 240 pages Contents, Preface, Introduction (20 pages) On Hungarian Morphology. In the series Linguistica, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 1994, ISBN 963-8461-73-X, paperbound, 174 pages Contents, Preface, Introduction (10 pages) == Books edited == Oxford International Encyclopedia of Linguistics (Mathematical Linguistics Area Editor under Editor in Chief William Frawley). 4 volumes, Oxford University Press, 2003, ISBN 978-0-19-513977-8. Proceedings of the HLT-NAACL Workshop on the Analysis of Geographic References. Jointly with Beth Sundheim. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2003, ISBN 1-932432-04-3 (WS9), paperbound, vi+81 pages. See related material. Extended Finite State Models of Language (editor). In the series Studies in Natural Language Processing, Cambridge University Press, 1999, ISBN 0-521-63198-X, hardbound, x+278 pages Contents, Introduction (7 pages). == Selected papers == Digital Language Death. PLoS ONE 8(10): e77056, 2012. [1] Hunmorph: open source word analysis (Jointly with V. Tron, Gy. Gyepesi, P. Halacsy, L. Nemeth, and D. Varga). In Proc. ACL 2005 Software Workshop 77-85 [2] Leveraging the open source ispell codebase for minority language analysis (Jointly with P. Halacsy, L. Nemeth, A. Rung, I. Szakadat, and V. Tron). In J. Carson-Berndsen (ed): Proc. SALTMIL 2004 56-59 [3] Explicit Finitism, International Journal of Theoretical Physics 2003/2 301-307 [4] Mathematical Linguistics (Jointly with G.K. Pullum) In W. Frawley (ed): Oxford International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, Oxford University Press 2003, v3 17-20 [5] Optical Character Recognition, In W. Frawley (ed): Oxford International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, Oxford University Press 2003, v3 33-34 [6] How many words are there? Glottometrics 2002/4 61-86 [7] Zipf's law outside the middle range Proc. Sixth Meeting on Mathematics of Language University of Central Florida, 1999 347-356 [8] A Robust, Language-Independent OCR System. (Jointly with Z. Lu, I. Bazzi, J. Makhoul, P. Natarajan, and R. Schwartz) In: Robert J. Mericsko (ed): Proc. 27th AIPR Workshop: Advances in Computer-Assisted Recognition SPIE Proceedings 3584 1999 [9] Quantitative Comparison of Languages. Grammars 1998/2 155-165 [10] The generative power of feature geometry. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 8 1993 37-46 [11] The X-bar Theory of Phrase Structure. (Jointly with G.K. Pullum) Language 66 1990 24-50 [12]

    Read more →
  • How to Choose an AI Marketing Tool

    How to Choose an AI Marketing Tool

    Curious about the best AI marketing tool? An AI marketing tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI marketing tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.

    Read more →
  • Tamara Broderick

    Tamara Broderick

    Tamara Ann Broderick is an American computer scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. She works on machine learning and Bayesian inference. == Education and early career == Broderick is from Parma Heights, Ohio. She attended Laurel School and graduated in 2003. Whilst at high school she took part in the inaugural Massachusetts Institute of Technology Women's Technology Program. She studied mathematics at Princeton University, earning a bachelor's degree in 2007. She was a Marshall scholar, allowing her to pursue graduate research at the University of Cambridge. She was a runner-up in the Association for Women in Mathematics Alice T. Shafer Prize for Excellence in Mathematics. She was co-president of the Princeton Math Club and organised a competition for high school maths teams. She won the Phi Beta Kappa Prize for the highest academic average at Princeton University. During her undergraduate degree, Broderick worked on dark matter haloes with Rachel Mandelbaum. Broderick moved to the United Kingdom for her graduate studies, earning a Master of Advanced Studies for completing Part III of the Mathematical Tripos at the University of Cambridge in 2009. Her Master's thesis looked at the Nomon selection method, improving the efficiency of communications. She returned to America in 2009, joining University of California, Berkeley for her Master's and PhD. Her graduate research was supported by the Berkeley Fellowship and a National Science Foundation Fellowship. Her PhD thesis Clusters and features from combinatorial stochastic processes looked at clustering and speeding up the analysis of large, streaming data sets. In 2013 she was selected for the Berkeley EECS Rising Stars conference. == Research and career == Broderick joined Massachusetts Institute of Technology as an assistant professor in 2015. She is interested in Bayesian statistics and graphical models. She was the recipient of a Google Faculty Research Grant and International Society for Bayesian Analysis Lifetime Members Junior Researcher Award. She was awarded an Army Research Office young investigator program award to investigate machine-learning to quantify uncertainty in data analysis. Broderick is also Alfred P. Sloan Foundation scholar. === Academic service === In 2018, Broderick spoke at the Harvard University Institute for Applied Computational Science Women in Data Science conference. She spoke about Bayesian inference at the 2018 International Conference on Machine Learning. She led a three-day Masterclass on machine learning at University College London in June 2018. Broderick is a scientific advisor for AI.Reverie and WiML (Women in Machine Learning). She has developed a high-school level introduction to machine learning with the Women's Technology Program (WTP). Software she has developed is available on her website. === Awards and honors === Broderick was awarded the Evelyn Fix Memorial Medal and Citation and the International Society for Bayesian Analysis Savage Award for her doctoral thesis. She was awarded a National Science Foundation CAREER Award to scale her machine learning techniques. She was a 2021 Leadership Academy winner of the Committee of Presidents of Statistical Societies.

    Read more →
  • Zoho Office Suite

    Zoho Office Suite

    Zoho Office Suite is an online office suite developed by Zoho Corporation. == History == Zoho Office Suite was launched in 2005 with a web-based word processor. Additional products, such as those for spreadsheets and presentations, were incorporated later into the suite. The applications are distributed as software as a service (SaaS). == Products == Zoho uses an open API for its Writer, Sheet, Show, Creator, Meeting, and Planner products. It also has plugins into Microsoft Word and Excel, an OpenOffice.org plugin, and a plugin for Firefox. Zoho Office Suite is free for individuals but offers a plan for teams, which includes Zoho WorkDrive, Zoho Workplace and other Zoho apps. In October 2009, Zoho integrated some of their applications with the Google Apps online suite.

    Read more →
  • AI Pair Programmers: Free vs Paid (2026)

    AI Pair Programmers: Free vs Paid (2026)

    Trying to pick the best AI pair programmer? An AI pair programmer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI pair programmer slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.

    Read more →
  • Ross Quinlan

    Ross Quinlan

    John Ross Quinlan is a computer science researcher in data mining and decision theory. He has contributed extensively to the development of decision tree algorithms, including inventing the canonical C4.5 and ID3 algorithms. He also contributed to early ILP literature with First Order Inductive Learner (FOIL). He is currently running the company RuleQuest Research which he founded in 1997. == Education == He received his BSc degree in Physics and Computing from the University of Sydney in 1965 and his computer science doctorate at the University of Washington in 1968. He has held positions at the University of New South Wales, University of Sydney, University of Technology Sydney, and RAND Corporation. == Artificial intelligence == Quinlan is a specialist in artificial intelligence, particularly in the aspect involving machine learning and its application to data mining. He is a Founding Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. === ID3 === Ross Quinlan invented the Iterative Dichotomiser 3 (ID3) algorithm which is used to generate decision trees. ID3 follows the principle of Occam's razor in attempting to create the smallest decision tree possible. === C4.5 === He then expanded upon the principles used in ID3 to create C4.5. C4.5 improved: discrete and continuous attributes, missing attribute values, attributes with differing costs, pruning trees (replacing irrelevant branches with leaf nodes). === C5.0 === C5.0, which Quinlan is commercially selling (single-threaded version is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License), is an improvement on C4.5. The advantages are speed (several orders of magnitude faster), memory efficiency, smaller decision trees, boosting (more accuracy), ability to weight different attributes, and winnowing (reducing noise). == Selected works == === Books === 1993. C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. ISBN 1-55860-238-0. === Articles === Quinlan, J. R. (1982) Semi-autonomous acquisition of pattern-based knowledge, In Machine intelligence 10 (eds J. E. Hayes, D. Michie, and Y.-H. Pao). Ellis Norwood,Chichester. Quinlan, J.R. (1985). Decision trees and multi-valued attributes, In J.E. Hayes & D. Michie (Eds.), Machine intelligence 11. Oxford University Press. Quinlan, J. R. (1986). Induction of decision trees. Machine Learning, 1(1):81-106 2008. (with Qiang Yang, Philip S. Yu, Zhou Zhihua, and David Hand et al). Top 10 algorithms in data mining. Knowledge and Information Systems 14.1: 1-37 Quinlan, J. R. (1990). Learning logical definitions from relations. Machine Learning, 5:239-266.

    Read more →
  • Is an AI Pair Programmer Worth It in 2026?

    Is an AI Pair Programmer Worth It in 2026?

    Shopping for the best AI pair programmer? An AI pair programmer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI pair programmer 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 →
  • Cleverbot

    Cleverbot

    Cleverbot is a chatterbot web application. It was created by British AI scientist Rollo Carpenter and launched in October 2008. It was preceded by Jabberwacky, a chatbot project that began in 1988 and went online in 1997. In its first decade, Cleverbot held several thousand conversations with Carpenter and his associates. Since launching on the web, the number of conversations held has exceeded 150 million. Besides the web application, Cleverbot is also available as an iOS, Android, and Windows Phone app. == Operation == Cleverbot's responses are not pre-programmed because it learns from human input: Humans type into the box below the Cleverbot logo and the system finds all keywords or an exact phrase matching the input. After searching through its saved conversations, it responds to the input by finding how a human responded to that input when it was asked, in part or in full, by Cleverbot. Cleverbot participated in a formal Turing test at the 2011 Techniche festival at the Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 3 September 2011. Out of the 1334 votes cast, Cleverbot was judged to be 59.3% human, compared to the rating of 63.3% human achieved by human participants. A score of 50.05% or higher is often considered to be a passing grade. The software running for the event had to handle just 1 or 2 simultaneous requests, whereas online Cleverbot is usually talking to around 10,000 to 50,000 people at once. == Developments == Cleverbot is constantly growing in data size at the rate of 4 to 7 million interactions per day. Updates to the software have been mostly behind the scenes. In 2014, Cleverbot was upgraded to use GPU serving techniques. Unlike Eliza, the program does not respond in a fixed way, instead choosing its responses heuristically using fuzzy logic, the whole of the conversation being compared to the millions that have taken place before. Cleverbot now uses over 279 million interactions, about 3-4% of the data it has already accumulated. The developers of Cleverbot are attempting to build a new version using machine learning techniques. An app that uses the Cleverscript engine to play a game of 20 Questions has been launched under the name Clevernator. Unlike other such games, the player asks the questions and it is the role of the AI to understand, and answer factually. An app that allows owners to create and talk to their own small Cleverbot-like AI has been launched, called Cleverme! for Apple products. == In popular culture == Cleverbot received media attention after being featured in the popular 2010 creepypasta ARG web serial Ben Drowned by Alexander D. Hall. In early 2017, a Twitch stream of two Google Home devices modified to talk to each other using Cleverbot garnered over 700,000 visitors and over 30,000 peak concurrent viewers.

    Read more →
  • Deterministic finite automaton

    Deterministic finite automaton

    In the theory of computation, a branch of theoretical computer science, a deterministic finite automaton (DFA)—also known as deterministic finite acceptor (DFA), deterministic finite-state machine (DFSM), or deterministic finite-state automaton (DFSA)—is a finite-state machine that accepts or rejects a given string of symbols, by running through a state sequence uniquely determined by the string. Deterministic refers to the uniqueness of the computation run. In search of the simplest models to capture finite-state machines, Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts were among the first researchers to introduce a concept similar to finite automata in 1943. The figure illustrates a deterministic finite automaton using a state diagram. In this example automaton, there are three states: S0, S1, and S2 (denoted graphically by circles). The automaton takes a finite sequence of 0s and 1s as input. For each state, there is a transition arrow leading out to a next state for both 0 and 1. Upon reading a symbol, a DFA jumps deterministically from one state to another by following the transition arrow. For example, if the automaton is currently in state S0 and the current input symbol is 1, then it deterministically jumps to state S1. A DFA has a start state (denoted graphically by an arrow coming in from nowhere) where computations begin, and a set of accept states (denoted graphically by a double circle) which help define when a computation is successful. A DFA is defined as an abstract mathematical concept, but is often implemented in hardware and software for solving various specific problems such as lexical analysis and pattern matching. For example, a DFA can model software that decides whether or not online user input such as email addresses are syntactically valid. DFAs have been generalized to nondeterministic finite automata (NFA) which may have several arrows of the same label starting from a state. Using the powerset construction method, every NFA can be translated to a DFA that recognizes the same language. DFAs, and NFAs as well, recognize exactly the set of regular languages. == Formal definition == A deterministic finite automaton M is a 5-tuple, (Q, Σ, δ, q0, F), consisting of a finite set of states Q a finite set of input symbols called the alphabet Σ a transition function δ : Q × Σ → Q an initial (or start) state q 0 ∈ Q {\displaystyle q_{0}\in Q} a set of accepting (or final) states F ⊆ Q {\displaystyle F\subseteq Q} Let w = a1a2...an be a string over the alphabet Σ. The automaton M accepts the string w if a sequence of states, r0, r1, ..., rn, exists in Q with the following conditions: r0 = q0 ri+1 = δ(ri, ai+1), for i = 0, ..., n − 1 r n ∈ F {\displaystyle r_{n}\in F} . In words, the first condition says that the machine starts in the start state q0. The second condition says that given each character of string w, the machine will transition from state to state according to the transition function δ. The last condition says that the machine accepts w if the last input of w causes the machine to halt in one of the accepting states. Otherwise, it is said that the automaton rejects the string. The set of strings that M accepts is the language recognized by M and this language is denoted by L(M). A deterministic finite automaton without accept states and without a starting state is known as a transition system or semiautomaton. For more comprehensive introduction of the formal definition see automata theory. == Example == The following example is of a DFA M, with a binary alphabet, which requires that the input contains an even number of 0s. M = (Q, Σ, δ, q0, F) where Q = {S1, S2} Σ = {0, 1} q0 = S1 F = {S1} and δ is defined by the following state transition table: The state S1 represents that there has been an even number of 0s in the input so far, while S2 signifies an odd number. A 1 in the input does not change the state of the automaton. When the input ends, the state will show whether the input contained an even number of 0s or not. If the input did contain an even number of 0s, M will finish in state S1, an accepting state, so the input string will be accepted. The language recognized by M is the regular language given by the regular expression (1) (0 (1) 0 (1)), where is the Kleene star, e.g., 1 denotes any number (possibly zero) of consecutive ones. == Variations == === Complete and incomplete === According to the above definition, deterministic finite automata are always complete: they define from each state a transition for each input symbol. While this is the most common definition, some authors use the term deterministic finite automaton for a slightly different notion: an automaton that defines at most one transition for each state and each input symbol; the transition function is allowed to be partial. When no transition is defined, such an automaton halts. === Local automata === A local automaton is a DFA, not necessarily complete, for which all edges with the same label lead to a single vertex. Local automata accept the class of local languages, those for which membership of a word in the language is determined by a "sliding window" of length two on the word. A Myhill graph over an alphabet A is a directed graph with vertex set A and subsets of vertices labelled "start" and "finish". The language accepted by a Myhill graph is the set of directed paths from a start vertex to a finish vertex: the graph thus acts as an automaton. The class of languages accepted by Myhill graphs is the class of local languages. === Randomness === When the start state and accept states are ignored, a DFA of n states and an alphabet of size k can be seen as a digraph of n vertices in which all vertices have k out-arcs labeled 1, ..., k (a k-out digraph). It is known that when k ≥ 2 is a fixed integer, with high probability, the largest strongly connected component (SCC) in such a k-out digraph chosen uniformly at random is of linear size and it can be reached by all vertices. It has also been proven that if k is allowed to increase as n increases, then the whole digraph has a phase transition for strong connectivity similar to Erdős–Rényi model for connectivity. In a random DFA, the maximum number of vertices reachable from one vertex is very close to the number of vertices in the largest SCC with high probability. This is also true for the largest induced sub-digraph of minimum in-degree one, which can be seen as a directed version of 1-core. == Closure properties == If DFAs recognize the languages that are obtained by applying an operation on the DFA recognizable languages then DFAs are said to be closed under the operation. The DFAs are closed under the following operations. For each operation, an optimal construction with respect to the number of states has been determined in state complexity research. Since DFAs are equivalent to nondeterministic finite automata (NFA), these closures may also be proved using closure properties of NFA. == As a transition monoid == A run of a given DFA can be seen as a sequence of compositions of a very general formulation of the transition function with itself. Here we construct that function. For a given input symbol a ∈ Σ {\displaystyle a\in \Sigma } , one may construct a transition function δ a : Q → Q {\displaystyle \delta _{a}:Q\rightarrow Q} by defining δ a ( q ) = δ ( q , a ) {\displaystyle \delta _{a}(q)=\delta (q,a)} for all q ∈ Q {\displaystyle q\in Q} . (This trick is called currying.) From this perspective, δ a {\displaystyle \delta _{a}} "acts" on a state in Q to yield another state. One may then consider the result of function composition repeatedly applied to the various functions δ a {\displaystyle \delta _{a}} , δ b {\displaystyle \delta _{b}} , and so on. Given a pair of letters a , b ∈ Σ {\displaystyle a,b\in \Sigma } , one may define a new function δ ^ a b = δ a ∘ δ b {\displaystyle {\widehat {\delta }}_{ab}=\delta _{a}\circ \delta _{b}} , where ∘ {\displaystyle \circ } denotes function composition. Clearly, this process may be recursively continued, giving the following recursive definition of δ ^ : Q × Σ ⋆ → Q {\displaystyle {\widehat {\delta }}:Q\times \Sigma ^{\star }\rightarrow Q} : δ ^ ( q , ϵ ) = q {\displaystyle {\widehat {\delta }}(q,\epsilon )=q} , where ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } is the empty string and δ ^ ( q , w a ) = δ a ( δ ^ ( q , w ) ) {\displaystyle {\widehat {\delta }}(q,wa)=\delta _{a}({\widehat {\delta }}(q,w))} , where w ∈ Σ ∗ , a ∈ Σ {\displaystyle w\in \Sigma ^{},a\in \Sigma } and q ∈ Q {\displaystyle q\in Q} . δ ^ {\displaystyle {\widehat {\delta }}} is defined for all words w ∈ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle w\in \Sigma ^{}} . A run of the DFA is a sequence of compositions of δ ^ {\displaystyle {\widehat {\delta }}} with itself. Repeated function composition forms a monoid. For the transition functions, this monoid is known as the transition monoid, or sometimes the transformation semigroup. The construction can also be reversed: given a δ ^ {\displaystyle {\wide

    Read more →
  • Nicholas Carlini

    Nicholas Carlini

    Nicholas Carlini is an American researcher affiliated with Anthropic and previously with Google DeepMind who has published research in the fields of computer security and machine learning. He is known for his work on adversarial machine learning, particularly his work on the Carlini & Wagner attack in 2016. This attack was particularly useful in defeating defensive distillation, a method used to increase model robustness, and has since been effective against other defenses against adversarial input. In 2018, Carlini demonstrated an attack on Mozilla's DeepSpeech model, showing that hidden commands could be embedded in speech inputs, which the model would execute even if they were inaudible to humans. He also led a team at UC Berkeley that successfully broke seven out of nine defenses against adversarial attacks presented at the 2018 International Conference on Learning Representations. In addition to his work on adversarial attacks, Carlini has made significant contributions to understanding the privacy risks of machine learning models. In 2020, he revealed that large language models, like GPT-2, could memorize and output personally identifiable information. His research demonstrated that this issue worsened with larger models, and he later showed similar vulnerabilities in generative image models, such as Stable Diffusion. == Life and career == Nicholas Carlini obtained his Bachelor of Arts in Computer Science and Mathematics from the University of California, Berkeley, in 2013. He then continued his studies at the same university, where he pursued a PhD under the supervision of David Wagner, completing it in 2018. Carlini became known for his work on adversarial machine learning. In 2016, he worked alongside Wagner to develop the Carlini & Wagner attack, a method of generating adversarial examples against machine learning models. The attack was proved to be useful against defensive distillation, a popular mechanism where a student model is trained based on the features of a parent model to increase the robustness and generalizability of student models. The attack gained popularity when it was shown that the methodology was also effective against most other defenses, rendering them ineffective. In 2018, Carlini demonstrated an attack against Mozilla Foundation's DeepSpeech model where he showed that by hiding malicious commands inside normal speech input the speech model would respond to the hidden commands even when the commands were not discernible by humans. In the same year, Carlini and his team at UC Berkeley showed that out of the 11 papers presenting defenses to adversarial attacks accepted in that year's ICLR conference, seven of the defenses could be broken. Since 2021, he and his team have been working on large language models, creating a questionnaire where humans typically scored 35% whereas AI models scored in the 40%, with GPT-3 getting 38% which could be improved to 40% through few shot prompting. The best performer in the test was UnifiedQA, a model developed by Google specifically for answer questions and answer sets. Carlini has also developed methods to cause large language models like ChatGPT to answer harmful questions like how to construct bombs. He is also known for his work studying the privacy of machine learning models. In 2020, he showed for the first time that large language models would memorize some of the text data that they were trained on. For example, he found that GPT-2 could output personally identifiable information. He then led an analysis of larger models and studied how memorization increased with model size. Then, in 2022 he showed the same vulnerability in generative image models, and specifically diffusion models, by showing that Stable Diffusion could output images of people's faces that it was trained on. Following on this, Carlini then showed that ChatGPT would also sometimes output exact copies of webpages it was trained on, including personally identifiable information. Some of these studies have since been referenced by the courts in debating the copyright status of AI models. == Other work == Carlini received the Best of Show award at the 2020 IOCCC for implementing a tic-tac-toe game entirely with calls to printf, expanding on work from a research paper of his from 2015. The judges commented on his submission "This year's Best of Show (carlini) is such a novel way of obfuscation that it would be worth of a special mention in the (future) Best of IOCCC list!". [sic] == Awards == Best Student Paper Award, IEEE S&P 2017 ("Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networks") Best Paper Award, ICML 2018 ("Obfuscated Gradients Give a False Sense of Security: Circumventing Defenses to Adversarial Examples") Distinguished Paper Award, USENIX 2021 ("Poisoning the Unlabeled Dataset of Semi-Supervised Learning") Distinguished Paper Award, USENIX 2023 ("Tight Auditing of Differentially Private Machine Learning") Best Paper Award, ICML 2024 ("Stealing Part of a Production Language Model") Best Paper Award, ICML 2024 ("Considerations for Differentially Private Learning with Large-Scale Public Pretraining")

    Read more →