AI Essay Writer

AI Essay Writer — hands-on reviews, top picks, pricing, pros and cons and a practical how-to guide on Aizhi.

• 

  Hallucination (artificial intelligence)

  In the field of artificial intelligence (AI), a hallucination or artificial hallucination (also called bullshitting, confabulation, or delusion) is a response generated by AI that contains false or misleading information presented as fact. This term draws a loose analogy with human psychology, where a hallucination typically involves false percepts. For example, a chatbot powered by large language models (LLMs), like ChatGPT, may embed plausible-sounding random falsehoods within its generated content. Detecting and mitigating errors and hallucinations pose significant challenges for practical deployment and reliability of LLMs in high-stakes scenarios, such as chip design, supply chain logistics, and medical diagnostics. Some software engineers and statisticians have criticized the specific term "AI hallucination" for unreasonably anthropomorphizing computers. Symbolic artificial intelligence models generally do not produce hallucinations, unlike large language models. == Term == === Origin === Since the 1980s, the term "hallucination" has been used in computer vision with a positive connotation to describe the process of adding detail to an image. For example, the task of generating high-resolution face images from low-resolution inputs is called face hallucination. The first documented use of the term "hallucination" in this sense is in the PhD thesis of Eric Mjolsness in 1986. A notable work is the face hallucination algorithm by Simon Baker and Takeo Kanade published in 1999. In the 2000s, hallucinations were described in statistical machine translation as a failure mode. Since the 2010s, the term has undergone a semantic shift to signify the generation of factually incorrect or misleading outputs by AI systems in tasks like machine translation and object detection. In 2015, hallucinations were identified in visual semantic role labeling tasks by Saurabh Gupta and Jitendra Malik. In 2015, computer scientist Andrej Karpathy used the term "hallucinated" in a blog post to describe his recurrent neural network (RNN) language model generating an incorrect citation link. In 2017, Google researchers used the term to describe the responses generated by neural machine translation (NMT) models when they are not related to the source text, and in 2018, the term was used in computer vision to describe instances where non-existent objects are erroneously detected because of adversarial attacks. In July 2021, Meta warned during its release of BlenderBot 2 that the system is prone to "hallucinations", which Meta defined as "confident statements that are not true". Following OpenAI's ChatGPT release in beta version in November 2022, some users complained that such chatbots often seem to pointlessly embed plausible-sounding random falsehoods within their generated content. Many news outlets, including The New York Times, started to use the term "hallucinations" to describe these models' frequently incorrect or inconsistent responses. In 2023, the Cambridge dictionary updated its definition of hallucination to include this new sense specific to the field of AI. Some researchers have highlighted a lack of consistency in how the term is used, but also identified several alternative terms in the literature, such as confabulations, fabrications, and factual errors. === Definitions and alternatives === Uses, definitions and characterizations of the term "hallucination" in the context of LLMs include: "a tendency to invent facts in moments of uncertainty" (OpenAI, May 2023) "a model's logical mistakes" (OpenAI, May 2023) "fabricating information entirely, but behaving as if spouting facts" (CNBC, May 2023) "making up information" (The Verge, February 2023) "probability distributions" (in scientific contexts) Journalist Benj Edwards, in Ars Technica, writes that the term "hallucination" is controversial, but that some form of metaphor remains necessary; Edwards suggests "confabulation" as an analogy for processes that involve "creative gap-filling". In July 2024, a White House report on fostering public trust in AI research mentioned hallucinations only in the context of reducing them. Notably, when acknowledging David Baker's Nobel Prize-winning work with AI-generated proteins, the Nobel committee avoided the term entirely, instead referring to "imaginative protein creation". Hicks, Humphries, and Slater, in their article in Ethics and Information Technology, argue that the output of LLMs is "bullshit" under Harry Frankfurt's definition of the term, and that the models are "in an important way indifferent to the truth of their outputs", with true statements only accidentally true, and false ones accidentally false. Some researchers also use the derogatory term "botshit", often referring to uncritical use of AI. === Criticism === In the scientific community, some researchers avoid the term "hallucination", seeing it as potentially misleading. It has been criticized by Usama Fayyad, executive director of the Institute for Experimental Artificial Intelligence at Northeastern University, on the grounds that it misleadingly personifies large language models and is vague. Mary Shaw said, "The current fashion for calling generative AI's errors 'hallucinations' is appalling. It anthropomorphizes the software, and it spins actual errors as somehow being idiosyncratic quirks of the system even when they're objectively incorrect." In Salon, statistician Gary Smith argues that LLMs "do not understand what words mean" and consequently that the term "hallucination" unreasonably anthropomorphizes the machine. Murray Shanahan argues that anthropomorphic framing of LLM capabilities, including terms like "hallucination", encourages users and researchers to attribute cognitive processes to systems that operate through statistical pattern completion, and advocates for more careful linguistic practices when discussing LLM behavior. Kristina Šekrst argues that applying psychological vocabulary to LLM outputs obscures the difference between the appearance of mental properties and their genuine presence. Förster & Skop assert that tech companies use the hallucination metaphor to anthropomorphize models and deflect responsibility for non-factual outputs. Some see the AI outputs not as illusory but as prospective—that is, having some chance of being true, similar to early-stage scientific conjectures. The term has also been criticized for its association with psychedelic drug experiences. == In natural language generation == In natural language generation, there are several reasons why natural language models hallucinate: === Hallucination from data === Hallucinations can stem from incomplete, inaccurate or unrepresentative data sets. === Modeling-related causes === The pre-training of generative pretrained transformers (GPT) involves predicting the next word. It incentivizes GPT models to "give a guess" about what the next word is, even when they lack information. Some researchers take an anthropomorphic perspective and posit that hallucinations arise from a tension between novelty and usefulness. For instance, Amabile and Pratt define human creativity as the production of novel and useful ideas. By extension, a focus on novelty in machine creativity can lead to the production of original but inaccurate responses—that is, falsehoods—whereas a focus on usefulness may result in memorized content lacking originality. By 2022, newspapers such as The New York Times expressed concern that, as the adoption of bots based on large language models continued to grow, unwarranted user confidence in bot output could lead to problems. === Interpretability research === In 2025, interpretability research by Anthropic on the LLM Claude identified internal circuits that cause it to decline to answer questions unless it knows the answer. By default, the circuit is active and the LLM doesn't answer. When the LLM has sufficient information, these circuits are inhibited and the LLM answers the question. Hallucinations were found to occur when this inhibition happens incorrectly, such as when Claude recognizes a name but lacks sufficient information about that person, causing it to generate plausible but untrue responses. === Examples === On 15 November 2022, researchers from Meta AI published Galactica, designed to "store, combine and reason about scientific knowledge". Content generated by Galactica came with the warning: "Outputs may be unreliable! Language Models are prone to hallucinate text." In one case, when asked to draft a paper on creating avatars, Galactica cited a fictitious paper from a real author who works in the relevant area. Meta withdrew Galactica on 17 November due to offensiveness and inaccuracy. OpenAI's ChatGPT, released in beta version to the public on November 30, 2022, was based on the foundation model GPT-3.5 (a revision of GPT-3). Professor Ethan Mollick of Wharton called it an "omniscient, eager-to-please intern who sometimes lies to you". Data scientist Teresa Kuba

  Read more →
• 

  Best AI Paraphrasing Tools in 2026

  Curious about the best AI paraphrasing tool? An AI paraphrasing 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 paraphrasing tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.

  Read more →
• 

  Baum–Welch algorithm

  In electrical engineering, statistical computing and bioinformatics, the Baum–Welch algorithm is a special case of the expectation–maximization algorithm used to find the unknown parameters of a hidden Markov model (HMM). It makes use of the forward-backward algorithm to compute the statistics for the expectation step. The Baum–Welch algorithm, the primary method for inference in hidden Markov models, is numerically unstable due to its recursive calculation of joint probabilities. As the number of variables grows, these joint probabilities become increasingly small, leading to the forward recursions rapidly approaching values below machine precision. == History == The Baum–Welch algorithm was named after its inventors Leonard E. Baum and Lloyd R. Welch. The algorithm and the Hidden Markov models were first described in a series of articles by Baum and his peers at the IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton in the late 1960s and early 1970s. One of the first major applications of HMMs was to the field of speech processing. In the 1980s, HMMs were emerging as a useful tool in the analysis of biological systems and information, and in particular genetic information. They have since become an important tool in the probabilistic modeling of genomic sequences. == Description == A hidden Markov model describes the joint probability of a collection of "hidden" and observed discrete random variables. It relies on the assumption that the i-th hidden variable given the (i − 1)-th hidden variable is independent of previous hidden variables, and the current observation variables depend only on the current hidden state. The Baum–Welch algorithm uses the well known EM algorithm to find the maximum likelihood estimate of the parameters of a hidden Markov model given a set of observed feature vectors. Let X t {\displaystyle X_{t}} be a discrete hidden random variable with N {\displaystyle N} possible values (i.e. We assume there are N {\displaystyle N} states in total). We assume the P ( X t ∣ X t − 1 ) {\displaystyle P(X_{t}\mid X_{t-1})} is independent of time t {\displaystyle t} , which leads to the definition of the time-independent stochastic transition matrix A = { a i j } = P ( X t = j ∣ X t − 1 = i ) . {\displaystyle A=\{a_{ij}\}=P(X_{t}=j\mid X_{t-1}=i).} The initial state distribution (i.e. when t = 1 {\displaystyle t=1} ) is given by π i = P ( X 1 = i ) . {\displaystyle \pi _{i}=P(X_{1}=i).} The observation variables Y t {\displaystyle Y_{t}} can take one of K {\displaystyle K} possible values. We also assume the observation given the "hidden" state is time independent. The probability of a certain observation y i {\displaystyle y_{i}} at time t {\displaystyle t} for state X t = j {\displaystyle X_{t}=j} is given by b j ( y i ) = P ( Y t = y i ∣ X t = j ) . {\displaystyle b_{j}(y_{i})=P(Y_{t}=y_{i}\mid X_{t}=j).} Taking into account all the possible values of Y t {\displaystyle Y_{t}} and X t {\displaystyle X_{t}} , we obtain the N × K {\displaystyle N\times K} matrix B = { b j ( y i ) } {\displaystyle B=\{b_{j}(y_{i})\}} where b j {\displaystyle b_{j}} belongs to all the possible states and y i {\displaystyle y_{i}} belongs to all the observations. An observation sequence is given by Y = ( Y 1 = y 1 , Y 2 = y 2 , … , Y T = y T ) {\displaystyle Y=(Y_{1}=y_{1},Y_{2}=y_{2},\ldots ,Y_{T}=y_{T})} . Thus we can describe a hidden Markov chain by θ = ( A , B , π ) {\displaystyle \theta =(A,B,\pi )} . The Baum–Welch algorithm finds a local maximum for θ ∗ = a r g m a x θ ⁡ P ( Y ∣ θ ) {\displaystyle \theta ^{}=\operatorname {arg\,max} _{\theta }P(Y\mid \theta )} (i.e. the HMM parameters θ {\displaystyle \theta } that maximize the probability of the observation). === Algorithm === Set θ = ( A , B , π ) {\displaystyle \theta =(A,B,\pi )} with random initial conditions. They can also be set using prior information about the parameters if it is available; this can speed up the algorithm and also steer it toward the desired local maximum. ==== Forward procedure ==== Let α i ( t ) = P ( Y 1 = y 1 , … , Y t = y t , X t = i ∣ θ ) {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}(t)=P(Y_{1}=y_{1},\ldots ,Y_{t}=y_{t},X_{t}=i\mid \theta )} , the probability of seeing the observations y 1 , y 2 , … , y t {\displaystyle y_{1},y_{2},\ldots ,y_{t}} and being in state i {\displaystyle i} at time t {\displaystyle t} . This is found recursively: α i ( 1 ) = π i b i ( y 1 ) , {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}(1)=\pi _{i}b_{i}(y_{1}),} α i ( t + 1 ) = b i ( y t + 1 ) ∑ j = 1 N α j ( t ) a j i . {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}(t+1)=b_{i}(y_{t+1})\sum _{j=1}^{N}\alpha _{j}(t)a_{ji}.} Since this series converges exponentially to zero, the algorithm will numerically underflow for longer sequences. However, this can be avoided in a slightly modified algorithm by scaling α {\displaystyle \alpha } in the forward and β {\displaystyle \beta } in the backward procedure below. ==== Backward procedure ==== Let β i ( t ) = P ( Y t + 1 = y t + 1 , … , Y T = y T ∣ X t = i , θ ) {\displaystyle \beta _{i}(t)=P(Y_{t+1}=y_{t+1},\ldots ,Y_{T}=y_{T}\mid X_{t}=i,\theta )} that is the probability of the ending partial sequence y t + 1 , … , y T {\displaystyle y_{t+1},\ldots ,y_{T}} given starting state i {\displaystyle i} at time t {\displaystyle t} . We calculate β i ( t ) {\displaystyle \beta _{i}(t)} as, β i ( T ) = 1 , {\displaystyle \beta _{i}(T)=1,} β i ( t ) = ∑ j = 1 N β j ( t + 1 ) a i j b j ( y t + 1 ) . {\displaystyle \beta _{i}(t)=\sum _{j=1}^{N}\beta _{j}(t+1)a_{ij}b_{j}(y_{t+1}).} ==== Update ==== We can now calculate the temporary variables, according to Bayes' theorem: γ i ( t ) = P ( X t = i ∣ Y , θ ) = P ( X t = i , Y ∣ θ ) P ( Y ∣ θ ) = α i ( t ) β i ( t ) ∑ j = 1 N α j ( t ) β j ( t ) , {\displaystyle \gamma _{i}(t)=P(X_{t}=i\mid Y,\theta )={\frac {P(X_{t}=i,Y\mid \theta )}{P(Y\mid \theta )}}={\frac {\alpha _{i}(t)\beta _{i}(t)}{\sum _{j=1}^{N}\alpha _{j}(t)\beta _{j}(t)}},} which is the probability of being in state i {\displaystyle i} at time t {\displaystyle t} given the observed sequence Y {\displaystyle Y} and the parameters θ {\displaystyle \theta } ξ i j ( t ) = P ( X t = i , X t + 1 = j ∣ Y , θ ) = P ( X t = i , X t + 1 = j , Y ∣ θ ) P ( Y ∣ θ ) = α i ( t ) a i j β j ( t + 1 ) b j ( y t + 1 ) ∑ k = 1 N ∑ w = 1 N α k ( t ) a k w β w ( t + 1 ) b w ( y t + 1 ) , {\displaystyle \xi _{ij}(t)=P(X_{t}=i,X_{t+1}=j\mid Y,\theta )={\frac {P(X_{t}=i,X_{t+1}=j,Y\mid \theta )}{P(Y\mid \theta )}}={\frac {\alpha _{i}(t)a_{ij}\beta _{j}(t+1)b_{j}(y_{t+1})}{\sum _{k=1}^{N}\sum _{w=1}^{N}\alpha _{k}(t)a_{kw}\beta _{w}(t+1)b_{w}(y_{t+1})}},} which is the probability of being in state i {\displaystyle i} and j {\displaystyle j} at times t {\displaystyle t} and t + 1 {\displaystyle t+1} respectively given the observed sequence Y {\displaystyle Y} and parameters θ {\displaystyle \theta } . The denominators of γ i ( t ) {\displaystyle \gamma _{i}(t)} and ξ i j ( t ) {\displaystyle \xi _{ij}(t)} are the same ; they represent the probability of making the observation Y {\displaystyle Y} given the parameters θ {\displaystyle \theta } . The parameters of the hidden Markov model θ {\displaystyle \theta } can now be updated: π i ∗ = γ i ( 1 ) , {\displaystyle \pi _{i}^{}=\gamma _{i}(1),} which is the expected frequency spent in state i {\displaystyle i} at time 1 {\displaystyle 1} . a i j ∗ = ∑ t = 1 T − 1 ξ i j ( t ) ∑ t = 1 T − 1 γ i ( t ) , {\displaystyle a_{ij}^{}={\frac {\sum _{t=1}^{T-1}\xi _{ij}(t)}{\sum _{t=1}^{T-1}\gamma _{i}(t)}},} which is the expected number of transitions from state i to state j compared to the expected total number of transitions starting in state i, including from state i to itself. The number of transitions starting in state i is equivalent to the number of times state i is observed in the sequence from t = 1 to t = T − 1. b i ∗ ( v k ) = ∑ t = 1 T 1 y t = v k γ i ( t ) ∑ t = 1 T γ i ( t ) , {\displaystyle b_{i}^{}(v_{k})={\frac {\sum _{t=1}^{T}1_{y_{t}=v_{k}}\gamma _{i}(t)}{\sum _{t=1}^{T}\gamma _{i}(t)}},} where 1 y t = v k = { 1 if y t = v k , 0 otherwise {\displaystyle 1_{y_{t}=v_{k}}={\begin{cases}1&{\text{if }}y_{t}=v_{k},\\0&{\text{otherwise}}\end{cases}}} is an indicator function, and b i ∗ ( v k ) {\displaystyle b_{i}^{}(v_{k})} is the expected number of times the output observations have been equal to v k {\displaystyle v_{k}} while in state i {\displaystyle i} over the expected total number of times in state i {\displaystyle i} . These steps are now repeated iteratively until a desired level of convergence. Note: It is possible to over-fit a particular data set. That is, P ( Y ∣ θ final ) > P ( Y ∣ θ true ) {\displaystyle P(Y\mid \theta _{\text{final}})>P(Y\mid \theta _{\text{true}})} . The algorithm also does not guarantee a global maximum. ==== Multiple sequences ==== The algorithm described thus far assumes a single observed sequence Y = y 1 , … , y T {\displaystyle Y=y_{1},\ldots ,y_{T}} . However, in many situations, there are several sequences observed: Y 1 ,

  Read more →
• 

  Samer Hassan

  Samer Hassan is a computer scientist, social scientist, activist and researcher, focused on the study of the collaborative economy, online communities and decentralized technologies. He is an associate professor at Universidad Complutense de Madrid (Spain) and Faculty Associate at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University. He is the recipient of an ERC Grant of 1.5M€ with the P2P Models project, to research blockchain-based decentralized autonomous organizations for the collaborative economy. == Education and career == Hassan is a Spanish/Lebanese scholar with an interdisciplinary background, which combines computer sciences with social sciences and activism. He received a degree in Computer Science and MSc in Artificial Intelligence from the Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM) in Spain. He also studied three years of Political Science at the distance learning university UNED. He then pursued a PhD in Social Simulation at the department of Software Engineering and Artificial Intelligence of UCM, supervised by the computer scientist Juan Pavón and the sociologist Millán Arroyo-Menéndez. He has been researching in several institutions, funded by several scholarships and awards, most notably Harvard's Real Colegio Complutense, and the Spanish postdoctoral grants Juan de la Cierva and José Castillejo. Thus, he was a visiting researcher at the Centre for Research in Social Simulation, in the Department of Sociology at the University of Surrey in the UK, working under the supervision of Nigel Gilbert (2007-2008), and a lecturer at the American University of Science and Technology in Lebanon (2010–11). He was selected as Fellow at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University (2015-2017) and is presently a Faculty Associate at the same structure. Starting in 2024, he joined, as affiliate faculty, the Institute for Digital Cooperative Economy (The New School), part of the Platform Cooperativism Consortium. == Activism and social engagement == As an activist, Hassan has been engaged in both offline (La Tabacalera de Lavapiés, Medialab-Prado) and online (Ourproject.org, Barrapunto, Wikipedia) initiatives. He was accredited as a grassroots facilitator by the Altekio Cooperative. He co-founded the Comunes Nonprofit in 2009 and the Move Commons webtool project in 2010. He has co-organized practitioner-oriented workshops on platform co-ops and free/open source decentralized tools for communities, and has presented his work in non-academic conferences of Mozilla, the Internet Archive, and others. As a privacy advocate, he co-created a course on cyber-ethics which has been teaching since 2013 (as of 2021). He was co-founder of the Sci-Fdi Spanish science-fiction magazine. His gender is non-binary and uses he/they pronouns. == Work == Hassan's interdisciplinary research spans multiple fields, including online communities, online governance, online collaboration, decentralized technologies, blockchain-based decentralized autonomous organizations, free/libre/open source software, Commons-based peer production, agent-based social simulation, social movements and cyberethics. He has published more than 60 works in these fields. Hassan's PhD thesis focused on the methodological challenges for building data-driven social simulation models. The main model built simulated the transition from modern values to postmodern values in Spain. His methodological work also explored the combination of different artificial intelligence technologies, i.e. software agents with fuzzy logic, data mining, natural language processing, and microsimulation. In his postdoctoral period, he focused on experimenting with multiple software systems to facilitate the collaborative economy, e.g. semantic-web labelling for commons-based initiatives, distribution of value in peer production communities, agent-supported online assemblies, decentralized real-time collaborative software, decentralized blockchain based reputation, or blockchain-enabled commons governance. Hassan was Principal Investigator of the UCM partner in the EU-funded P2Pvalue project on building decentralized web-tools for collaborative communities. As such, he led the team that created SwellRT, a federated backend-as-a-service focused to ease development of apps featuring real-time collaboration. Intellectual Property of this project was transferred to the Apache Software Foundation in 2017. As part of this research line, Hassan's team also develop two SwellRT-based apps, "Teem" for management of social collectives and Jetpad, a federated real time editor. He presented the innovations concerning these software at Harvard's Berkman Klein Center and Harvard's Center for Research on Computation and Society. Other research lines offered outcomes beyond publications. "Wikichron", coled by Javier Arroyo, is a web tool to visualize MediaWiki community metrics, currently in production and available for third-parties. "Decentralized Science", led by Hassan's PhD student Ámbar Tenorio-Fornés, is a framework to facilitate decentralized infrastructure and open peer review in the scientific publication process, which has been selected by the European Commission to receive funding as a spin-off social enterprise. His research on blockchain and crowdfunding models awarded him with a commission from Triple Canopy. His team pushed forward a mapping of the ecosystem of blockchain for social good, led by the Joint Research Centre and published by the European Commission. As part of his ERC project P2P Models, Hassan and his team –including Silvia Semenzin– are investigating whether blockchain technology and Decentralized Autonomous Organizations could contribute to improving the governance of commons-oriented communities, both online and offline. Their work has been showcased for tackling the impact of blockchain on governance, proposing alternatives to the current sharing economy, emerging forms of techno-social systems like NFTs or prediction markets, or giving relevance to gender issues in the field. Hassan was invited to present the project achievements in Harvard Kennedy School, MIT Media Lab, Harvard's Data Privacy Lab, Harvard's Center for Research on Computation and Society, and Harvard's SEAS EconCS. British MP and Opposition Leader Ed Miliband showcased his research and its potential impact on policy. The project made public its way of organizing and its core values. In particular, it has shown a commitment to diversity as a core value in hiring, or choosing case studies. == Selected works == Arroyo, Javier; Davó, David; Martínez-Vicente, Elena; Faqir-Rhazoui, Youssef; Hassan, Samer (8 November 2022). "DAO-Analyzer: Exploring Activity and Participation in Blockchain Organizations" (PDF). Companion Publication of the 2022 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing. CSCW'22 Companion. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 193–196. doi:10.1145/3500868.3559707. ISBN 978-1-4503-9190-0. Rozas, David; Tenorio-Fornés, Antonio; Díaz-Molina, Silvia; Hassan, Samer (2021). "When Ostrom Meets Blockchain: Exploring the Potentials of Blockchain for Commons Governance". SAGE Open. 11 (1): 215824402110025. doi:10.1177/21582440211002526. ISSN 2158-2440. Faqir-Rhazoui, Youssef; Ariza-Garzón, Miller-Janny; Arroyo, Javier; Hassan, Samer (8 May 2021). "Effect of the Gas Price Surges on User Activity in the DAOs of the Ethereum Blockchain" (PDF). Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI EA '21. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 1–7. doi:10.1145/3411763.3451755. ISBN 978-1-4503-8095-9. Hassan, Samer; Filippi, Primavera De (20 April 2021). "Decentralized Autonomous Organization". Internet Policy Review. 10 (2). doi:10.14763/2021.2.1556. hdl:10419/235960. ISSN 2197-6775. Joint Research Centre (European Commission); Hassan, Samer; Hakami, Anna; Brekke, Jaya Klara; De Filippi, Primavera; Lopéz Morales, Genoveva; Pólvora, Alexandre; Orgaz Alonso, Christian; Bodó, Balázs (2020). Scanning the European ecosystem of distributed ledger technologies for social and public good: what, why, where, how, and ways to move forward. LU: Publications Office of the European Union. doi:10.2760/300796. ISBN 978-92-76-21578-3. Filippi, Primavera De; Hassan, Samer (14 November 2016). "Blockchain technology as a regulatory technology: From code is law to law is code". First Monday. arXiv:1801.02507. doi:10.5210/fm.v21i12.7113. ISSN 1396-0466.

  Read more →
• 

  History of machine translation

  Machine translation is a sub-field of computational linguistics that investigates the use of software to translate text or speech from one natural language to another. In the 1950s, machine translation became a reality in research, although references to the subject can be found as early as the 17th century. The Georgetown experiment, which involved successful fully automatic translation of more than sixty Russian sentences into English in 1954, was one of the earliest recorded projects. Researchers of the Georgetown experiment asserted their belief that machine translation would be a solved problem within a few years. In the Soviet Union, similar experiments were performed shortly after. Consequently, the success of the experiment ushered in an era of significant funding for machine translation research in the United States. The achieved progress was much slower than expected; in 1966, the ALPAC report found that ten years of research had not fulfilled the expectations of the Georgetown experiment and resulted in dramatically reduced funding. Interest grew in statistical models for machine translation, which became more common and also less expensive in the 1980s as available computational power increased. Although there exists no autonomous system of "fully automatic high quality translation of unrestricted text," there are many programs now available that are capable of providing useful output within strict constraints. Several of these programs are available online, such as Google Translate and the SYSTRAN system that powers AltaVista's BabelFish (which was replaced by Microsoft Bing translator in May 2012). == The beginning == The origins of machine translation can be traced back to the work of Al-Kindi, a 9th-century Arabic cryptographer who developed techniques for systemic language translation, including cryptanalysis, frequency analysis, and probability and statistics, which are used in modern machine translation. The idea of machine translation later appeared in the 17th century. In 1629, René Descartes proposed a universal language, with equivalent ideas in different tongues sharing one symbol. In the mid-1930s the first patents for "translating machines" were applied for by Georges Artsrouni, for an automatic bilingual dictionary using punched tape. Russian Peter Troyanskii submitted a more detailed proposal that included both the bilingual dictionary and a method for dealing with grammatical roles between languages, based on the grammatical system of Esperanto. This system was separated into three stages: stage one consisted of a native-speaking editor in the source language to organize the words into their logical forms and to exercise the syntactic functions; stage two required the machine to "translate" these forms into the target language; and stage three required a native-speaking editor in the target language to normalize this output. Troyanskii's proposal remained unknown until the late 1950s, by which time computers were well-known and utilized. == The early years == The first set of proposals for computer based machine translation was presented in 1949 by Warren Weaver, a researcher at the Rockefeller Foundation, "Translation memorandum". These proposals were based on information theory, successes in code breaking during the Second World War, and theories about the universal principles underlying natural language. A few years after Weaver submitted his proposals, research began in earnest at many universities in the United States. On 7 January 1954 the Georgetown–IBM experiment was held in New York at the head office of IBM. This was the first public demonstration of a machine translation system. The demonstration was widely reported in the newspapers and garnered public interest. The system itself, however, was no more than a "toy" system. It had only 250 words and translated 49 carefully selected Russian sentences into English – mainly in the field of chemistry. Nevertheless, it encouraged the idea that machine translation was imminent and stimulated the financing of the research, not only in the US but worldwide. Early systems used large bilingual dictionaries and hand-coded rules for fixing the word order in the final output which was eventually considered too restrictive in linguistic developments at the time. For example, generative linguistics and transformational grammar were exploited to improve the quality of translations. During this period operational systems were installed. The United States Air Force used a system produced by IBM and Washington University in St. Louis, while the Atomic Energy Commission and Euratom, in Italy, used a system developed at Georgetown University. While the quality of the output was poor it met many of the customers' needs, particularly in terms of speed. At the end of the 1950s, Yehoshua Bar-Hillel was asked by the US government to look into machine translation, to assess the possibility of fully automatic high-quality translation by machines. Bar-Hillel described the problem of semantic ambiguity or double-meaning, as illustrated in the following sentence: Little John was looking for his toy box. Finally he found it. The box was in the pen. The word pen may have two meanings: the first meaning, something used to write in ink with; the second meaning, a container of some kind. To a human, the meaning is obvious, but Bar-Hillel claimed that without a "universal encyclopedia" a machine would never be able to deal with this problem. At the time, this type of semantic ambiguity could only be solved by writing source texts for machine translation in a controlled language that uses a vocabulary in which each word has exactly one meaning. == The 1960s, the ALPAC report and the seventies == Research in the 1960s in both the Soviet Union and the United States concentrated mainly on the Russian–English language pair. The objects of translation were chiefly scientific and technical documents, such as articles from scientific journals. The rough translations produced were sufficient to get a basic understanding of the articles. If an article discussed a subject deemed to be confidential, it was sent to a human translator for a complete translation; if not, it was discarded. A great blow came to machine-translation research in 1966 with the publication of the ALPAC report. The report was commissioned by the US government and delivered by ALPAC, the Automatic Language Processing Advisory Committee, a group of seven scientists convened by the US government in 1964. The US government was concerned that there was a lack of progress being made despite significant expenditure. The report concluded that machine translation was more expensive, less accurate and slower than human translation, and that despite the expenditures, machine translation was not likely to reach the quality of a human translator in the near future. The report recommended, however, that tools be developed to aid translators – automatic dictionaries, for example – and that some research in computational linguistics should continue to be supported. The publication of the report had a profound impact on research into machine translation in the United States, and to a lesser extent the Soviet Union and United Kingdom. Research, at least in the US, was almost completely abandoned for over a decade. In Canada, France and Germany, however, research continued. In the US the main exceptions were the founders of SYSTRAN (Peter Toma) and Logos (Bernard Scott), who established their companies in 1968 and 1970 respectively and served the US Department of Defense. In 1970, the SYSTRAN system was installed for the United States Air Force, and subsequently by the Commission of the European Communities in 1976. The METEO System, developed at the Université de Montréal, was installed in Canada in 1977 to translate weather forecasts from English to French, and was translating close to 80,000 words per day or 30 million words per year until it was replaced by a competitor's system on 30 September 2001. While research in the 1960s concentrated on limited language pairs and input, demand in the 1970s was for low-cost systems that could translate a range of technical and commercial documents. This demand was spurred by the increase of globalisation and the demand for translation in Canada, Europe, and Japan. == The 1980s and early 1990s == By the 1980s, both the diversity and the number of installed systems for machine translation had increased. A number of systems relying on mainframe technology were in use, such as SYSTRAN, Logos, Ariane-G5, and Metal. As a result of the improved availability of microcomputers, there was a market for lower-end machine translation systems. Many companies took advantage of this in Europe, Japan, and the USA. Systems were also brought onto the market in China, Eastern Europe, Korea, and the Soviet Union. During the 1980s there was a lot of activity in MT in Japan especially. With the fifth-generation co

  Read more →
• 

  Glushkov's construction algorithm

  In computer science theory – particularly formal language theory – Glushkov's construction algorithm, invented by Victor Mikhailovich Glushkov, transforms a given regular expression into an equivalent nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA). Thus, it forms a bridge between regular expressions and nondeterministic finite automata: two abstract representations of the same class of formal languages. A regular expression may be used to conveniently describe an advanced search pattern in a "find and replace"–like operation of a text processing utility. Glushkov's algorithm can be used to transform it into an NFA, which furthermore is small by nature, as the number of its states equals the number of symbols of the regular expression, plus one. Subsequently, the NFA can be made deterministic by the powerset construction and then be minimized to get an optimal automaton corresponding to the given regular expression. The latter format is best suited for execution on a computer. From another, more theoretical point of view, Glushkov's algorithm is a part of the proof that NFA and regular expressions both accept exactly the same languages; that is, the regular languages. The converse of Glushkov's algorithm is Kleene's algorithm, which transforms a finite automaton into a regular expression. The automaton obtained by Glushkov's construction is the same as the one obtained by Thompson's construction algorithm, once its ε-transitions are removed. Glushkov's construction algorithm is also called The algorithm of Berry-Sethi, named after Gérard Berry and Ravi Sethi who worked on this construction. == Construction == Given a regular expression e, the Glushkov Construction Algorithm creates a non-deterministic automaton that accepts the language L ( e ) {\displaystyle L(e)} accepted by e. The construction uses four steps: === Step 1 === Linearisation of the expression. Each letter of the alphabet appearing in the expression e is renamed, so that each letter occurs at most once in the new expression e ′ {\displaystyle e'} . Glushkov's construction essentially relies on the fact that e ′ {\displaystyle e'} represents a local language L ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle L(e')} . Let A be the old alphabet and let B be the new one. === Step 2a === Computation of the sets P ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle P(e')} , D ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle D(e')} , and F ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle F(e')} . The first, P ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle P(e')} , is the set of letters which occurs as first letter of a word of L ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle L(e')} . The second, D ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle D(e')} , is the set of letters that can end a word of L ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle L(e')} . The last one, F ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle F(e')} , is the set of letter pairs that can occur in words of L ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle L(e')} , i.e. it is the set of factors of length two of the words of L ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle L(e')} . Those sets are mathematically defined by P ( e ′ ) = { x ∈ B ∣ x B ∗ ∩ L ( e ′ ) ≠ ∅ } {\displaystyle P(e')=\{x\in B\mid xB^{}\cap L(e')\neq \emptyset \}} , D ( e ′ ) = { y ∈ B ∣ B ∗ y ∩ L ( e ′ ) ≠ ∅ } {\displaystyle D(e')=\{y\in B\mid B^{}y\cap L(e')\neq \emptyset \}} , F ( e ′ ) = { u ∈ B 2 ∣ B ∗ u B ∗ ∩ L ( e ′ ) ≠ ∅ } {\displaystyle F(e')=\{u\in B^{2}\mid B^{}uB^{}\cap L(e')\neq \emptyset \}} . They are computed by induction over the structure of the expression, as explained below. === Step 2b === Computation of the set Λ ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle \Lambda (e')} which contains the empty word ε {\displaystyle \varepsilon } if this word belongs to L ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle L(e')} , and is the empty set otherwise. Formally, this is Λ ( e ′ ) = { ε } ∩ L ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle \Lambda (e')=\{\varepsilon \}\cap L(e')} . === Step 3 === Computation of automaton recognizing the local language, as defined by P ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle P(e')} , D ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle D(e')} , F ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle F(e')} , and Λ ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle \Lambda (e')} . By definition, the local language defined by the sets P, D, and F is the set of words which begin with a letter of P, end by a letter of D, and whose factors of length 2 belong to F, optionally also including the empty word; that is, it is the language: L ′ = ( P B ∗ ∩ B ∗ D ) ∖ B ∗ ( B 2 ∖ F ) B ∗ ∪ Λ ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle L'=(PB^{}\cap B^{}D)\setminus B^{}(B^{2}\setminus F)B^{}\cup \Lambda (e')} . Strictly speaking, it is the computation of the automaton for the local language denoted by this linearised expression that is Glushkov's construction. === Step 4 === Remove the linearisation, replacing each indexed letter B by the original letter of A. == Example == Consider the regular expression e = ( a ( a b ) ∗ ) ∗ + ( b a ) ∗ {\displaystyle e=(a(ab)^{})^{}+(ba)^{}} . == Computation of the set of letters == The computation of the sets P, D, F, and Λ is done inductively over the regular expression e ′ {\displaystyle e'} . One must give the values for ∅, ε (the symbols for the empty language and the singleton language containing the empty word), the letters, and the results of the operations + , ⋅ , ∗ {\displaystyle +,\cdot ,^{}} . The most costly operations are the cartesian products of sets for the computation of F. == Properties == The obtained automaton is non-deterministic, and it has as many states as the number of letters of the regular expression, plus one. It has been proven that every Thompson's automaton can be transformed into Glushkov's automaton via a ε-transitions elimination method. == Applications and deterministic expressions == The computation of the automaton by the expression occurs often; it has been systematically used in search functions, in particular by the Unix grep command. Similarly, XML's specification also uses such constructions; for more efficiency, regular expressions of a certain kind, called deterministic expressions, have been studied.

  Read more →
• 

  The Best Free AI Essay Writer for Beginners

  In search of the best AI essay writer? An AI essay writer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI essay writer 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 →
• 

  AI Bug Finders Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

  Looking for the best AI bug finder? An AI bug finder is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it can save you hours every week by automating repetitive work. Most options offer a generous free tier, with paid plans unlocking higher limits, faster processing, and team features. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI bug finder 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 →
• 

  Kai's Power Tools

  Kai's Power Tools (KPT) are a set of API plugins created by the German computer scientist Kai Krause in 1992 that were designed for use with Adobe Photoshop and Corel Photo-Paint. Kai's Power Tools were sold to Corel in 2000 when MetaCreations was closed. There are various versions of Kai's Power Tools. KPT 3, 5, 6, and X sets are compilations of different filters. The program interface features a reward-based function in which a bonus function is revealed as the user moves towards more complex aspects of the tool. == Filters == The KPT Convolver is a mathematics based filter; the level of precision and varying effects can be achieved by using numerical values of colour, tint, hue, saturation, contrast, brightness, luminosity, and posterize. The KPT Projector takes the current image or selection and offers a number of interactive perspective warp effects. To a large extent, with its draggable distortion handles and its moving, scaling and rotating options, this simply duplicates Adobe Photoshop's Free Transform capabilities. What is completely different is the ability to rotate the bitmap image in 3D space and to tile the results if desired. It can also animate the distortions by dragging keyframes from the preview window into an animation palette. KPT 6 will then preview the animation and output it to various sizes in avi or mov format. This animation capability is even more useful with the KPT Turbulence filter. This is another distortion filter, but one that treats the image as if it was completely liquid. The preview panel shows the animation in real time. The KPT Goo filter is used to produce a single frame freeform liquid distortion. This filter is available both with KPT 6 and the standalone version. It works by effectively turning a bitmap image into a liquid that can be interactively smeared, smudged, twirled, and pinched with the range of tools on offer. The obvious use is to distort photographic portraits into caricatures. KPT Materializer can create advanced surface textures based on bump maps that define troughs and peaks. It can use any external image for the basis of the bump map or alternatively the user can pick out the hue, saturation, luminance or red, green, or blue channel of the current image. It can then offset, scale and rotate the texture map, control its lighting, and even blend in a reflection map. The filter can be used for anything from providing an oil-painting feel to an entire image, to giving the illusion of depth to a selection. Also producing the impression of depth is the KPT Gel filter which uses various paint tools to synthesize photo-realistic 3D materials such as metals, liquids, or plastics. Gel painting is very different from traditional 2D painting as the brush strokes pool together when they touch and refract the underlying image. It can also manipulate 3D paint—once it has been added—by twirling, pinching, and carving it. The opposite is true of the Equalizer filter, which is used for applying variations on sharpening effects. The filter has three modes. The first mode, Equalizer, looks and works rather like the graphic equalizer on a stereo system, enabling adjustment of the level of pixel contrast within nine bands of different visual frequencies. The second mode, Contrast Sharpen, allows for increasing the contrast between light and dark areas in an image. The third mode, Bounded Sharpen, can sharpen an image without causing oversharpening, which can lead to halo effects. This feature is particularly useful when pulling out the detail in an image softened by resizing. KPT SceneBuilder is used for producing photorealistic 3D scenes by importing and rendering 3DS files. The main image window offers three tabs for editing in 2D and 3D mode and for setting up the object's final texture. Many users regard this filter as being the most impressive because it acts as a standalone 3D rendering tool and provides control over everything from transparency, reflection, refraction, bump mapping through to multiple light sources, and so on but without the ability to create or edit objects. The final filter, KPT SkyEffects, also has its roots in Metacreations' experience with 3D programs such as Bryce and RayDream. This filter is designed to simulate the interaction between the light from the sun or moon with no less than six atmospheric layers of haze, fog and cloud. The filter is typical of the KPT 6 collection as a whole: at times the interface is inspired and offers the ability to create beautiful reddening sunsets simply by interactively dragging the sun toward the horizon, producing realistic sunsets and moonscapes. == Other effects == Kai's Power Tools 6 features a lens flare effect for precisely managing the type of glow, halo, streaks, and reflection. The addition of a library of preset effects helps to overcome this by allowing the user to choose a standard effect and then interactively position the flare in the image preview. KPT 6 provides a new engine in the form of the KPT Reaction, which takes a reaction seed and turns it into a seamlessly tiling pattern based on a reaction diffusion process. It offers random noise, regular dots or reticulated voronoi patterns or a bitmap image itself as the seed. Corel has no plans for any updates.

  Read more →
• 

  MemoQ

  memoQ is a computer-assisted translation software suite which runs on Microsoft Windows operating systems. It is developed by the Hungarian software company memoQ Fordítástechnológiai Zrt. (memoQ Translation Technologies), formerly Kilgray, a provider of translation management software established in 2004 and cited as one of the fastest-growing companies in the translation technology sector in 2012, and 2013. memoQ provides translation memory, terminology, machine translation integration and reference information management in desktop, client/server and web application environments. == History == memoQ, a translation environment tool first released in 2006, was the first product created by memoQ Translation Technologies, a company founded in Hungary by the three language technologists Balázs Kis, István Lengyel and Gábor Ugray. In the years since the software was first presented, it has grown in popularity and is now among the most frequent TEnT applications used for translation (it was rated as the third most used CAT tool in a Proz.com study in 2013 and as the second most widely used tool in a June 2010 survey of 458 working translators), after SDL Trados, Wordfast, Déjà Vu, OmegaT and others. Today it is available in desktop versions for translators (Translator Pro edition), and project managers (Project Manager edition), as well as site-installed and hosted server applications offering integration with the desktop versions and a web browser interface. There are currently several active online forums in which users provide each other with independent advice and support on the software's functions, as well as many online tutorials created by professional trainers and active users. Before its commercial debut, a version of memoQ (2.0) was distributed as postcardware.

  Read more →
• 

  Top 10 Conversational AI Platforms Compared (2026)

  In search of the best conversational AI platform? An conversational AI platform is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right conversational AI platform 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 →
• 

  Best AI Text-to-image Tools in 2026

  Trying to pick the best AI text-to-image tool? An AI text-to-image tool 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 text-to-image 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 →
• 

  Metigo

  metigo is a software application that performs image-based modelling and close range photogrammetry. It produces rectified imagery plans, true ortho-projections on planar, cylindric and conic surfaces, 3D photorealistic models, measurements from photography and mappings on a photographic base for uses in the cultural heritage sector, mainly conservation. == Products == The metigo product line currently consists of the mapping software metigo MAP, the stereo-photogrammetry modeling software metigo 3D, the free viewer metigo VIEW. These products are all standalone and are not depending on other software, such as AutoCAD. === metigo MAP === metigo MAP is mainly used to map findings and conservation measured on a uniform metric photographic base. Therefore, photos of planar surfaces can be rectified based on geometrical informations, e.g. height and width of a rectangle, or cartesian coordinates measured by total station. Beside rectified imagery several other metric mapping bases can be imported and used: true ortho-projections; scaled scans of plans and plots; CAD-files; 3D models, such as digital surface models (DSM) produced by stereo-photogrammetry, SfM or 3D scanning. metigo MAP 's strong point is that rectified imagery taken with different techniques (visual light, sided light, IR, UV, UV-fluorescence, X-ray), historic images and photos taken at various stages of the conservation process can be superimposed and evaluated mutually. The user can allocate several attributes, such as different conservation measures and damage classes, to the mapped geometries. The mappings can be analysed by geometries as well as by user-defined attributes at any stage of the project. metigo MAP targets mainly conservators in different cultural heritage fields. Using it no specialist knowledge of surveying and photogrammetric techniques are needed. === metigo 3D === metigo 3D is a stereo-photogrammetric kit that allows to calculate bundle adjustments (axios3D), create high-quality 3D point clouds using multiple stereo photo pairs combined with metric survey data, mesh these point clouds, texture the meshes with high-resolution image data to create photo-realistic models, ortho-project orientated images on digital surface models (DSM) on planes and best-fit cylinders and cones, create unwrappings and developed views of curved surfaces, analyse deformations of 3D surfaces. metigo 3D targets metric survey specialists working in the cultural heritage sector. == Supported file formats == metigo has the ability to read the following formats: images: JPEG (.jpg), Tiff (.tif), Bitmaps (.bmp), CompuServ (.gif), Encapsualated Postscript (.eps), PCX (.pcx), Photo-CD (.pcd), PICT (.pcd), PNG (.png), Targa (.tga), RAW-format of several camera brands. CAD: DBX, DXF, DWG. 3D: many ASCII-formats (.stl, .wrl, etc.) point data: format editor for ASCII files. == Supported languages == Currently, an English and German version of the software is supported. For metigo MAP beside these a French and Polish GUI is offered for sale. == Applications == The main applications of metigo are: conservation in the cultural heritage context, e.g. stone conservation paintings tapestry etc. architecture, archaeology, many other are possible, e.g. forensics. == History == The first public release of metigo was in 2000.

  Read more →
• 

  Baum–Welch algorithm

  In electrical engineering, statistical computing and bioinformatics, the Baum–Welch algorithm is a special case of the expectation–maximization algorithm used to find the unknown parameters of a hidden Markov model (HMM). It makes use of the forward-backward algorithm to compute the statistics for the expectation step. The Baum–Welch algorithm, the primary method for inference in hidden Markov models, is numerically unstable due to its recursive calculation of joint probabilities. As the number of variables grows, these joint probabilities become increasingly small, leading to the forward recursions rapidly approaching values below machine precision. == History == The Baum–Welch algorithm was named after its inventors Leonard E. Baum and Lloyd R. Welch. The algorithm and the Hidden Markov models were first described in a series of articles by Baum and his peers at the IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton in the late 1960s and early 1970s. One of the first major applications of HMMs was to the field of speech processing. In the 1980s, HMMs were emerging as a useful tool in the analysis of biological systems and information, and in particular genetic information. They have since become an important tool in the probabilistic modeling of genomic sequences. == Description == A hidden Markov model describes the joint probability of a collection of "hidden" and observed discrete random variables. It relies on the assumption that the i-th hidden variable given the (i − 1)-th hidden variable is independent of previous hidden variables, and the current observation variables depend only on the current hidden state. The Baum–Welch algorithm uses the well known EM algorithm to find the maximum likelihood estimate of the parameters of a hidden Markov model given a set of observed feature vectors. Let X t {\displaystyle X_{t}} be a discrete hidden random variable with N {\displaystyle N} possible values (i.e. We assume there are N {\displaystyle N} states in total). We assume the P ( X t ∣ X t − 1 ) {\displaystyle P(X_{t}\mid X_{t-1})} is independent of time t {\displaystyle t} , which leads to the definition of the time-independent stochastic transition matrix A = { a i j } = P ( X t = j ∣ X t − 1 = i ) . {\displaystyle A=\{a_{ij}\}=P(X_{t}=j\mid X_{t-1}=i).} The initial state distribution (i.e. when t = 1 {\displaystyle t=1} ) is given by π i = P ( X 1 = i ) . {\displaystyle \pi _{i}=P(X_{1}=i).} The observation variables Y t {\displaystyle Y_{t}} can take one of K {\displaystyle K} possible values. We also assume the observation given the "hidden" state is time independent. The probability of a certain observation y i {\displaystyle y_{i}} at time t {\displaystyle t} for state X t = j {\displaystyle X_{t}=j} is given by b j ( y i ) = P ( Y t = y i ∣ X t = j ) . {\displaystyle b_{j}(y_{i})=P(Y_{t}=y_{i}\mid X_{t}=j).} Taking into account all the possible values of Y t {\displaystyle Y_{t}} and X t {\displaystyle X_{t}} , we obtain the N × K {\displaystyle N\times K} matrix B = { b j ( y i ) } {\displaystyle B=\{b_{j}(y_{i})\}} where b j {\displaystyle b_{j}} belongs to all the possible states and y i {\displaystyle y_{i}} belongs to all the observations. An observation sequence is given by Y = ( Y 1 = y 1 , Y 2 = y 2 , … , Y T = y T ) {\displaystyle Y=(Y_{1}=y_{1},Y_{2}=y_{2},\ldots ,Y_{T}=y_{T})} . Thus we can describe a hidden Markov chain by θ = ( A , B , π ) {\displaystyle \theta =(A,B,\pi )} . The Baum–Welch algorithm finds a local maximum for θ ∗ = a r g m a x θ ⁡ P ( Y ∣ θ ) {\displaystyle \theta ^{}=\operatorname {arg\,max} _{\theta }P(Y\mid \theta )} (i.e. the HMM parameters θ {\displaystyle \theta } that maximize the probability of the observation). === Algorithm === Set θ = ( A , B , π ) {\displaystyle \theta =(A,B,\pi )} with random initial conditions. They can also be set using prior information about the parameters if it is available; this can speed up the algorithm and also steer it toward the desired local maximum. ==== Forward procedure ==== Let α i ( t ) = P ( Y 1 = y 1 , … , Y t = y t , X t = i ∣ θ ) {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}(t)=P(Y_{1}=y_{1},\ldots ,Y_{t}=y_{t},X_{t}=i\mid \theta )} , the probability of seeing the observations y 1 , y 2 , … , y t {\displaystyle y_{1},y_{2},\ldots ,y_{t}} and being in state i {\displaystyle i} at time t {\displaystyle t} . This is found recursively: α i ( 1 ) = π i b i ( y 1 ) , {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}(1)=\pi _{i}b_{i}(y_{1}),} α i ( t + 1 ) = b i ( y t + 1 ) ∑ j = 1 N α j ( t ) a j i . {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}(t+1)=b_{i}(y_{t+1})\sum _{j=1}^{N}\alpha _{j}(t)a_{ji}.} Since this series converges exponentially to zero, the algorithm will numerically underflow for longer sequences. However, this can be avoided in a slightly modified algorithm by scaling α {\displaystyle \alpha } in the forward and β {\displaystyle \beta } in the backward procedure below. ==== Backward procedure ==== Let β i ( t ) = P ( Y t + 1 = y t + 1 , … , Y T = y T ∣ X t = i , θ ) {\displaystyle \beta _{i}(t)=P(Y_{t+1}=y_{t+1},\ldots ,Y_{T}=y_{T}\mid X_{t}=i,\theta )} that is the probability of the ending partial sequence y t + 1 , … , y T {\displaystyle y_{t+1},\ldots ,y_{T}} given starting state i {\displaystyle i} at time t {\displaystyle t} . We calculate β i ( t ) {\displaystyle \beta _{i}(t)} as, β i ( T ) = 1 , {\displaystyle \beta _{i}(T)=1,} β i ( t ) = ∑ j = 1 N β j ( t + 1 ) a i j b j ( y t + 1 ) . {\displaystyle \beta _{i}(t)=\sum _{j=1}^{N}\beta _{j}(t+1)a_{ij}b_{j}(y_{t+1}).} ==== Update ==== We can now calculate the temporary variables, according to Bayes' theorem: γ i ( t ) = P ( X t = i ∣ Y , θ ) = P ( X t = i , Y ∣ θ ) P ( Y ∣ θ ) = α i ( t ) β i ( t ) ∑ j = 1 N α j ( t ) β j ( t ) , {\displaystyle \gamma _{i}(t)=P(X_{t}=i\mid Y,\theta )={\frac {P(X_{t}=i,Y\mid \theta )}{P(Y\mid \theta )}}={\frac {\alpha _{i}(t)\beta _{i}(t)}{\sum _{j=1}^{N}\alpha _{j}(t)\beta _{j}(t)}},} which is the probability of being in state i {\displaystyle i} at time t {\displaystyle t} given the observed sequence Y {\displaystyle Y} and the parameters θ {\displaystyle \theta } ξ i j ( t ) = P ( X t = i , X t + 1 = j ∣ Y , θ ) = P ( X t = i , X t + 1 = j , Y ∣ θ ) P ( Y ∣ θ ) = α i ( t ) a i j β j ( t + 1 ) b j ( y t + 1 ) ∑ k = 1 N ∑ w = 1 N α k ( t ) a k w β w ( t + 1 ) b w ( y t + 1 ) , {\displaystyle \xi _{ij}(t)=P(X_{t}=i,X_{t+1}=j\mid Y,\theta )={\frac {P(X_{t}=i,X_{t+1}=j,Y\mid \theta )}{P(Y\mid \theta )}}={\frac {\alpha _{i}(t)a_{ij}\beta _{j}(t+1)b_{j}(y_{t+1})}{\sum _{k=1}^{N}\sum _{w=1}^{N}\alpha _{k}(t)a_{kw}\beta _{w}(t+1)b_{w}(y_{t+1})}},} which is the probability of being in state i {\displaystyle i} and j {\displaystyle j} at times t {\displaystyle t} and t + 1 {\displaystyle t+1} respectively given the observed sequence Y {\displaystyle Y} and parameters θ {\displaystyle \theta } . The denominators of γ i ( t ) {\displaystyle \gamma _{i}(t)} and ξ i j ( t ) {\displaystyle \xi _{ij}(t)} are the same ; they represent the probability of making the observation Y {\displaystyle Y} given the parameters θ {\displaystyle \theta } . The parameters of the hidden Markov model θ {\displaystyle \theta } can now be updated: π i ∗ = γ i ( 1 ) , {\displaystyle \pi _{i}^{}=\gamma _{i}(1),} which is the expected frequency spent in state i {\displaystyle i} at time 1 {\displaystyle 1} . a i j ∗ = ∑ t = 1 T − 1 ξ i j ( t ) ∑ t = 1 T − 1 γ i ( t ) , {\displaystyle a_{ij}^{}={\frac {\sum _{t=1}^{T-1}\xi _{ij}(t)}{\sum _{t=1}^{T-1}\gamma _{i}(t)}},} which is the expected number of transitions from state i to state j compared to the expected total number of transitions starting in state i, including from state i to itself. The number of transitions starting in state i is equivalent to the number of times state i is observed in the sequence from t = 1 to t = T − 1. b i ∗ ( v k ) = ∑ t = 1 T 1 y t = v k γ i ( t ) ∑ t = 1 T γ i ( t ) , {\displaystyle b_{i}^{}(v_{k})={\frac {\sum _{t=1}^{T}1_{y_{t}=v_{k}}\gamma _{i}(t)}{\sum _{t=1}^{T}\gamma _{i}(t)}},} where 1 y t = v k = { 1 if y t = v k , 0 otherwise {\displaystyle 1_{y_{t}=v_{k}}={\begin{cases}1&{\text{if }}y_{t}=v_{k},\\0&{\text{otherwise}}\end{cases}}} is an indicator function, and b i ∗ ( v k ) {\displaystyle b_{i}^{}(v_{k})} is the expected number of times the output observations have been equal to v k {\displaystyle v_{k}} while in state i {\displaystyle i} over the expected total number of times in state i {\displaystyle i} . These steps are now repeated iteratively until a desired level of convergence. Note: It is possible to over-fit a particular data set. That is, P ( Y ∣ θ final ) > P ( Y ∣ θ true ) {\displaystyle P(Y\mid \theta _{\text{final}})>P(Y\mid \theta _{\text{true}})} . The algorithm also does not guarantee a global maximum. ==== Multiple sequences ==== The algorithm described thus far assumes a single observed sequence Y = y 1 , … , y T {\displaystyle Y=y_{1},\ldots ,y_{T}} . However, in many situations, there are several sequences observed: Y 1 ,

  Read more →
• 

  Corpus-assisted discourse studies

  Corpus-assisted discourse studies (abbr.: CADS) is related historically and methodologically to the discipline of corpus linguistics. The principal endeavor of corpus-assisted discourse studies is the investigation, and comparison of features of particular discourse types, integrating into the analysis the techniques and tools developed within corpus linguistics. These include the compilation of specialised corpora and analyses of word and word-cluster frequency lists, comparative keyword lists and, above all, concordances. A broader conceptualisation of corpus-assisted discourse studies would include any study that aims to bring together corpus linguistics and discourse analysis. Such research is often labelled as corpus-based or corpus-assisted discourse analysis, with the term CADS coined by a research group in Italy (Partington 2004) for a specific type of corpus-assisted discourse analysis (see the section 'in different countries' below). == Aims == Corpus-assisted discourse studies aim to uncover non-obvious meaning, that is, meaning which might not be readily available to naked-eye perusal. Much of what carries meaning in texts is not open to direct observation: “you cannot understand the world just by looking at it” (Stubbs [after Gellner 1959] 1996: 92). We use language “semi-automatically”, in the sense that speakers and writers make semi-conscious choices within the various complex overlapping systems of which language is composed, including those of transitivity, modality (Michael Halliday 1994), lexical sets (e.g. freedom, liberty, deliverance), modification, and so on. Authors themselves are, famously, generally unaware of all the meanings their texts convey. By combining the quantitative research approach, that is, statistical analysis of large amounts of the discourse in question - more precisely, large numbers of tokens of the discourse type under study contained in a corpus - with the more qualitative research approach typical of discourse analysis, that is, the close, detailed examination of particular stretches of discourse it may be possible to better understand the processes at play in the discourse type and to gain access to non-obvious meanings. Aims can differ in other types of corpus-based or corpus-assisted discourse analysis; but in general such studies combine quantitative and qualitative research and aim to shed light on discourses, registers, discourse patterns, etc., with the help of a corpus linguistic approach. Specific aims and techniques depend on the relevant project. == In different countries == In German-speaking countries: Pioneering work in corpus-based discourse analysis was conducted in Europe, in particular by Hardt-Mautner/Mautner (1995, 2000) and Stubbs (1996, 2001). CADS and other types of corpus-based discourse analysis are inspired by this important early work. In Italy: A considerable body of research has been conducted in Italy either by individual researchers or under the aegis of combined inter-university projects such as Newspool (Partington et al. 2004) and CorDis (Morley and Bayley eds, 2009). It has concentrated on political and media language, mainly because a nucleus of linguists in Italian universities work in Political Science faculties and are increasingly interested in the use of corpus techniques to conduct a particular type of sociopolitical discourse analysis, including the unearthing of noteworthy ideological metaphors and motifs in the language of political figures and institutions. Italian researchers also developed Modern diachronic corpus-assisted discourse studies (MD-CADS). This approach contrasts the language contained in comparable corpora from different but recent points in time in order to track changes in modern language usage but also social, cultural and political changes over modern times, as reflected - and shared among people - in language. It is this Italian body of research that makes most use of the label CADS. In the UK: Linguists in the UK tend to undertake corpus-based critical discourse analysis (CDA). CDA generally adopts a leftist political stance, focusing on the ways that social and political domination is reproduced by text and talk. This type of corpus-based research was originally associated with Lancaster University (Baker et al. 2008), but has spread more widely since. Such work typically studies the discourses around particular groups of people (e.g. Muslims, people with disabilities) or concepts/events (e.g. feminism, same-sex marriage). In Australia: Corpus-based discourse analysis is undertaken by a growing number of Australian researchers, most often on media texts. Some of this work aims to elucidate specific features of discourse types (news, social media, television series, etc.), while other work is rooted in the tradition of corpus-based critical discourse analysis. == Comparison with traditional corpus linguistics == Traditional corpus linguistics has, quite naturally, tended to privilege the quantitative approach. In the drive to produce more authentic dictionaries and grammars of a language, it has been characterised by the compilation of some very large corpora of heterogeneric discourse types in the desire to obtain an overview of the greatest quantity and variety of discourse types possible, in other words, of the chimerical but useful fiction called the “general language” (“general English”, “general Italian”, and so on). This has led to the construction of immensely valuable research tools such as the Bank of English and the British National Corpus. Some branches of corpus linguistics have also promoted an approach that is "corpus-driven", in which we need, grammatically speaking, a mental tabula rasa to free ourselves of the baleful prejudice exerted by traditional models and allow the data to speak entirely for itself. The aim of corpus-assisted discourse studies and related approaches is radically different. Here the aim of the exercise is to acquaint oneself as much as possible with the discourse type(s) in hand. Researchers typically engage with their corpus in a variety of ways. As well as via wordlists and concordancing, intuitions for further research can also arise from reading or watching or listening to parts of the data-set, a process which can help provide a feel for how things are done linguistically in the discourse-type being studied. Corpus-assisted discourse analysis is also typically characterised by the compilation of ad hoc specialised corpora, since very frequently there exists no previously available collection of the discourse type in question. Often, other corpora are utilized in the course of a study for purposes of comparison. These may include pre-existing corpora or may themselves need to be compiled by the researcher. In some sense, all work with corpora – just as all work with discourse - is properly comparative. Even when a single corpus is employed, it is used to test the data it contains against another body of data. This may consist of the researcher's intuitions, or the data found in reference works such as dictionaries and grammars, or it may be statements made by previous authors in the field. == CADS as a specific type of corpus-based discourse analysis == Researchers in Italy have developed CADS as a specific type of corpus-based discourse analysis, creating a standard set of methods: 'A basic, standard methodology in CADS may resemble the following:' Step 1: Decide upon the research question; Step 2: Choose, compile or edit an appropriate corpus; Step 3: Choose, compile or edit an appropriate reference corpus / corpora; Step 4: Make frequency lists and run a keywords comparison of the corpora; Step 5: Determine the existence of sets of key items; Step 6: Concordance interesting key items (with differing quantities of co-text); Step 7: (Possibly) refine the research question and return to Step 2. This basic procedure can of course vary according to individual research circumstances and requirements. A particular way of conceptualising research questions has also been proposed in such CADS projects: Given that P is a discourse participant (or possibly an institution) and G is a goal, often a political goal: How does P achieve G with language? What does this tell us about P? Comparative studies: how do P1 and P2 differ in their use of language? Does this tell us anything about their different principles and objectives? A second general type of CADS research question, which might be asked of interactive discourse data, has been conceptualised as follows: Given that P(x) is a particular participant or set of participants, DT is the discourse type, and R is an observed relationship between or among participants: How do {P(a), P(b)...P(n)} achieve / maintain R in DT [using language]? Another common type of research question has been conceptualised thus: Given that A is an author, Ph(x) is a phenomenon or practice or behaviour, and DT(x) is a particular discourse type. A has said P

  Read more →