AI Essentials For Business Jhu

AI Essentials For Business Jhu — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Plumbr

  Plumbr was an Estonian software product company founded in late 2011 that developed performance monitoring software. The Plumbr product was built on top of a proprietary algorithm that automatically detected the root causes of performance issues by interpreting application performance data. In October 2020, Plumbr was acquired by Splunk. == Products == Plumbr monitored customers' JVM applications for memory leaks, garbage collection pauses and locked threads. Plumbr problem detection algorithms were based on analysis of performance data of thousands of applications. Plumbr consisted of an agent and a portal. Plumbr Agent was attached to application runtime and sent memory usage and garbage collection information to Plumbr Portal. On Plumbr Portal one could see information such as heap and permgen memory usage, garbage collection pauses' and lock contention duration. Clients that were not able to send data to third parties could order a self-hosted portal and have a full solution in-house. In case of performance incidents Plumbr provided its users with information on problem severity and problem's root cause location in source code or runtime configuration, and listed the steps needed to take to remediate the problem. Clients included NASA, NATO, Dell, HBO, Experian, EMC Corporation.

  Read more →
• 

  HAKMEM

  HAKMEM, alternatively known as AI Memo 239, is a February 1972 "memo" (technical report) of the MIT AI Lab containing a wide variety of hacks, including useful and clever algorithms for mathematical computation, some number theory and schematic diagrams for hardware – in Guy L. Steele's words, "a bizarre and eclectic potpourri of technical trivia". Contributors included about two dozen members and associates of the AI Lab. The title of the report is short for "hacks memo", abbreviated to six upper case characters that would fit in a single PDP-10 machine word (using a six-bit character set). == History == HAKMEM is notable as an early compendium of algorithmic technique, particularly for its practical bent, and as an illustration of the wide-ranging interests of AI Lab people of the time, which included almost anything other than AI research. HAKMEM contains original work in some fields, notably continued fractions. == Introduction == Compiled with the hope that a record of the random things people do around here can save some duplication of effort -- except for fun. Here is some little known data which may be of interest to computer hackers. The items and examples are so sketchy that to decipher them may require more sincerity and curiosity than a non-hacker can muster. Doubtless, little of this is new, but nowadays it's hard to tell. So we must be content to give you an insight, or save you some cycles, and to welcome further contributions of items, new or used.

  Read more →
• 

  Gutmann method

  The Gutmann method is an algorithm for securely erasing the contents of computer hard disk drives, such as files. Devised by Peter Gutmann and Colin Plumb and presented in the paper Secure Deletion of Data from Magnetic and Solid-State Memory in July 1996, it involved writing a series of 35 patterns over the region to be erased. The selection of patterns assumes that the user does not know the encoding mechanism used by the drive, so it includes patterns designed specifically for three types of drives. A user who knows which type of encoding the drive uses can choose only those patterns intended for their drive. A drive with a different encoding mechanism would need different patterns. Most of the patterns in the Gutmann method were designed for older MFM/RLL-encoded disks. Gutmann himself has noted that more modern drives no longer use these older encoding techniques, making parts of the method irrelevant. He said "In the time since this paper was published, some people have treated the 35-pass overwrite technique described in it more as a kind of voodoo incantation to banish evil spirits than the result of a technical analysis of drive encoding techniques". Since about 2001, some ATA IDE and SATA hard drive manufacturer designs include support for the ATA Secure Erase standard, obviating the need to apply the Gutmann method when erasing an entire drive. The Gutmann method does not apply to USB sticks: a 2011 study reports that 71.7% of data remained available. On solid state drives it resulted in 0.8–4.3% recovery. == Background == The delete function in most operating systems simply marks the space occupied by the file as reusable (removes the pointer to the file) without immediately removing any of its contents. At this point the file can be fairly easily recovered by numerous recovery applications. However, once the space is overwritten with other data, there is no known way to use software to recover it. It cannot be done with software alone since the storage device only returns its current contents via its normal interface. Gutmann claims that intelligence agencies have sophisticated tools, including magnetic force microscopes, which together with image analysis, can detect the previous values of bits on the affected area of the media (for example hard disk). This claim however seems to be invalid based on the thesis "Data Reconstruction from a Hard Disk Drive using Magnetic Force Microscopy". == Method == An overwrite session consists of a lead-in of four random write patterns, followed by patterns 5 to 31 (see rows of table below), executed in a random order, and a lead-out of four more random patterns. Each of patterns 5 to 31 was designed with a specific magnetic media encoding scheme in mind, which each pattern targets. The drive is written to for all the passes even though the table below only shows the bit patterns for the passes that are specifically targeted at each encoding scheme. The result should obscure any data on the drive so that only the most advanced physical scanning (e.g., using a magnetic force microscope) of the drive is likely to be able to recover any data. The series of patterns is as follows: Encoded bits shown in bold are what should be present in the ideal pattern, although due to the encoding the complementary bit is actually present at the start of the track. == Criticism == Daniel Feenberg of the National Bureau of Economic Research, an American private nonprofit research organization, criticized Gutmann's claim that intelligence agencies are likely to be able to read overwritten data, citing a lack of evidence for such claims. He finds that Gutmann cites one non-existent source and sources that do not actually demonstrate recovery, only partially-successful observations. The definition of "random" is also quite different from the usual one used: Gutmann expects the use of pseudorandom data with sequences known to the recovering side, not an unpredictable one such as a cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generator. Nevertheless, some published government security procedures consider an overwritten disk to still be sensitive. Human factors and potential limitations in the overwriting software create a residual risk that is not considered acceptable at the highest security levels. Gutmann himself has responded to some of these criticisms and also criticized how his algorithm has been abused in an epilogue to his original paper, in which he states: In the time since this paper was published, some people have treated the 35-pass overwrite technique described in it more as a kind of voodoo incantation to banish evil spirits than the result of a technical analysis of drive encoding techniques. As a result, they advocate applying the voodoo to PRML and EPRML drives even though it will have no more effect than a simple scrubbing with random data. In fact performing the full 35-pass overwrite is pointless for any drive since it targets a blend of scenarios involving all types of (normally-used) encoding technology, which covers everything back to 30+-year-old MFM methods (if you don't understand that statement, re-read the paper). If you're using a drive which uses encoding technology X, you only need to perform the passes specific to X, and you never need to perform all 35 passes. For any modern PRML/EPRML drive, a few passes of random scrubbing is the best you can do. As the paper says, "A good scrubbing with random data will do about as well as can be expected". This was true in 1996, and is still true now. Gutmann's statement has been criticized for not recognizing that PRML/EPRML does not replace RLL, with critics claiming PRML/EPRML to be a signal detection method rather than a data encoding method. Polish data recovery service Kaleron has also claimed that Gutmann's publication contains further factual errors and assumptions that do not apply to actual disks.

  Read more →
• 

  Terminology extraction

  Terminology extraction (also known as term extraction, glossary extraction, term recognition, or terminology mining) is a subtask of information extraction. The goal of terminology extraction is to automatically extract relevant terms from a given corpus. In the semantic web era, a growing number of communities and networked enterprises started to access and interoperate through the internet. Modeling these communities and their information needs is important for several web applications, like topic-driven web crawlers, web services, recommender systems, etc. The development of terminology extraction is also essential to the language industry. One of the first steps to model a knowledge domain is to collect a vocabulary of domain-relevant terms, constituting the linguistic surface manifestation of domain concepts. Several methods to automatically extract technical terms from domain-specific document warehouses have been described in the literature. Typically, approaches to automatic term extraction make use of linguistic processors (part of speech tagging, phrase chunking) to extract terminological candidates, i.e. syntactically plausible terminological noun phrases. Noun phrases include compounds (e.g. "credit card"), adjective noun phrases (e.g. "local tourist information office"), and prepositional noun phrases (e.g. "board of directors"). In English, the first two (compounds and adjective noun phrases) are the most frequent. Terminological entries are then filtered from the candidate list using statistical and machine learning methods. Once filtered, because of their low ambiguity and high specificity, these terms are particularly useful for conceptualizing a knowledge domain or for supporting the creation of a domain ontology or a terminology base. Furthermore, terminology extraction is a very useful starting point for semantic similarity, knowledge management, human translation and machine translation, etc. == Bilingual terminology extraction == The methods for terminology extraction can be applied to parallel corpora. Combined with e.g. co-occurrence statistics, candidates for term translations can be obtained. Bilingual terminology can be extracted also from comparable corpora (corpora containing texts within the same text type, domain but not translations of documents between each other).

  Read more →
• 

  Depth peeling

  In computer graphics, depth peeling is an exact multipass method of order-independent transparency that extracts transparent fragments into depth layers and composites those layers in depth order. Depth peeling has the advantage of being able to generate correct results even for complex images containing intersecting transparent objects. == Method == Depth peeling works by rendering the image multiple times. Depth peeling uses two Z buffers, one that works conventionally, and one that is not modified, and sets the minimum distance at which a fragment can be drawn without being discarded. For each pass, the previous pass' conventional Z-buffer is used as the minimal Z-buffer, so each pass removes already-captured nearer fragments and draws the next depth layer behind them. The resulting images can then be composited in depth order to form a single image. A major drawback of classical depth peeling is performance: it requires one geometry pass per peeled layer, so scenes with high depth complexity require many passes that each re-rasterize the transparent geometry. Later variants reduce the number of passes by peeling multiple layers or both front and back layers in a pass. Dual depth peeling reduces the geometry-pass count from N to N/2+1 by peeling one layer from the front and one from the back in each pass, while multi-layer depth peeling peels several layers per pass and reported up to an 8x speed-up in RGBA8 settings.

  Read more →
• 

  Single source of truth

  In information science and information technology, single source of truth (SSOT) architecture, or single point of truth (SPOT) architecture, for information systems is the practice of structuring information models and associated data schemas such that every data element is mastered (or edited) in only one place, providing data normalization to a canonical form (for example, in database normalization or content transclusion). There are several scenarios with respect to copies and updates: The master data is never copied and instead only references to it are made; this means that all reads and updates go directly to the SSOT. The master data is copied but the copies are only read and only the master data is updated; if requests to read data are only made on copies, this is an instance of CQRS. The master data is copied and the copies are updated; this needs a reconciliation mechanism when there are concurrent updates. Updates on copies can be thrown out whenever a concurrent update is made on the master, so they are not considered fully committed until propagated to the master. (many blockchains work that way.) Concurrent updates are merged. (if an automatic merge fails, it could fall back on another strategy, which could be the previous strategy or something else like manual intervention, which most source version control systems do.) The advantages of SSOT architectures include easier prevention of mistaken inconsistencies (such as a duplicate value/copy somewhere being forgotten), and greatly simplified version control. Without a SSOT, dealing with inconsistencies implies either complex and error-prone consensus algorithms, or using a simpler architecture that's liable to lose data in the face of inconsistency (the latter may seem unacceptable but it is sometimes a very good choice; it is how most blockchains operate: a transaction is actually final only if it was included in the next block that is mined). Ideally, SSOT systems provide data that are authentic (and authenticatable), relevant, and referable. Deployment of an SSOT architecture is becoming increasingly important in enterprise settings where incorrectly linked duplicate or de-normalized data elements (a direct consequence of intentional or unintentional denormalization of any explicit data model) pose a risk for retrieval of outdated, and therefore incorrect, information. Common examples (i.e., example classes of implementation) are as follows: In electronic health records (EHRs), it is imperative to accurately validate patient identity against a single referential repository, which serves as the SSOT. Duplicate representations of data within the enterprise would be implemented by the use of pointers rather than duplicate database tables, rows, or cells. This ensures that data updates to elements in the authoritative location are comprehensively distributed to all federated database constituencies in the larger overall enterprise architecture. EHRs are an excellent class for exemplifying how SSOT architecture is both poignantly necessary and challenging to achieve: it is challenging because inter-organization health information exchange is inherently a cybersecurity competence hurdle, and nonetheless it is necessary, to prevent medical errors, to prevent the wasted costs of inefficiency (such as duplicated work or rework), and to make the primary care and medical home concepts feasible (to achieve competent care transitions). Single-source publishing as a general principle or ideal in content management relies on having SSOTs, via transclusion or (otherwise, at least) substitution. Substitution happens via libraries of objects that can be propagated as static copies which are later refreshed when necessary (that is, when refreshing of the copy-paste or import is triggered by a larger updating event). Component content management systems are a class of content management systems that aim to provide competence on this level. == Implementation == === Ontologic interactions === An acknowledged prerequisite (of the notion that any given single source of truth can exist) is that it depends on the ontologic condition that no more than a single truth (about any particular fact or idea) exists, an assertion that is ontologic in both the IT sense and the general sense of that word. In many instances, this presents no problem (for example, within particular namespaces, or even across them, as long as naming collisions or broader name conflicts are adequately handled). The broadest contexts (and thus thorniest, regarding ontologic discrepancies) require adequate epistemic regime comparison and reconciliation (or at least negotiation or transactional exchanges). An archetypal example of this class of reconciliation is that two theological seminary libraries, from two different religions (X and Y), could exchange information with an SSOT architecture, but the unification of truth would reside on the level of the statement that "religion X asserts that God is purple whereas religion Y asserts that God is green", rather than on the level of "God is purple" or "God is green". === Architectures or architectural features === An ideal implementation of SSOT is rarely possible in most enterprises. This is because many organisations have multiple information systems, each of which needs access to data relating to the same entities (e.g., customer). Often these systems are purchased as commercial off-the-shelf products from vendors and cannot be modified in trivial ways. Each of these various systems therefore needs to store its own version of common data or entities, and therefore each system must retain its own copy of a record (hence immediately violating the SSOT approach defined above). For example, an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system (such as SAP or Oracle e-Business Suite) may store a customer record; the customer relationship management (CRM) system also needs a copy of the customer record (or part of it) and the warehouse dispatch system might also need a copy of some or all of the customer data (e.g., shipping address). In cases where vendors do not support such modifications, it is not always possible to replace these records with pointers to the SSOT. For organisations (with more than one information system) wishing to implement a Single Source of Truth (without modifying all but one master system to store pointers to other systems for all entities), some supporting architectures are: Master data management (MDM) Event store and event sourcing (ES) ==== Master data management (MDM) ==== A master data management system typically serves as the source of truth for an organization's metadata, helping to ensure accuracy and consistency throughout that organizations multiple data sources. Typically the MDM acts as a hub for multiple systems, many of which could allow (be the source of truth for) updates to different aspects of information on a given entity. For example, the CRM system may be the "source of truth" for most aspects of the customer, and is updated by a call centre operator. However, a customer may (for example) also update their address via a customer service web site, with a different back-end database from the CRM system. The MDM application receives updates from multiple sources, acts as a broker to determine which updates are to be regarded as authoritative (the golden record) and then syndicates this updated data to all subscribing systems. The MDM application normally requires an ESB to syndicate its data to multiple subscribing systems. ==== Event store and event sourcing (ES) ==== In event oriented architectures, it has become increasingly common to find an implementation of the Event Sourcing pattern which stores the system state as an ordered sequence of state changes. To do this, you need an Event Store, a particular type of database designed to hold all the events that change the state of the system. The event store in an Event Sourcing + Command Query Responsibility Separation + Domain Driven Design + Messaging architecture is in fact a "single source of truth", with the additional advantage that it can also act as an Enterprise Service Bus as it can listen directly to the event store for status changes as everything passes by. In addition, by saving all the events, it also plays the role of Data Warehouse. One last advantage is that through this system the Shared Database pattern can be implemented, another technique not mentioned to obtain a single source of truth. ==== Data warehouse (DW) ==== While the primary purpose of a data warehouse is to support reporting and analysis of data that has been combined from multiple sources, the fact that such data has been combined (according to business logic embedded in the data transformation and integration processes) means that the data warehouse is often used as a de facto SSOT. Generally, however, the data available from the data warehouse are not used to update other systems; rather the DW becomes

  Read more →
• 

  Recommender system

  A recommender system, also called a recommendation algorithm, recommendation engine, or recommendation platform, is a type of information filtering system that suggests items most relevant to a particular user. The value of these systems becomes particularly evident in scenarios where users must select from a large number of options, such as products, media, or content. Major social media platforms and streaming services rely on recommender systems that employ machine learning to analyze user behavior and preferences, thereby enabling personalized content feeds. Typically, the suggestions refer to a variety decision-making processes, including the selection of a product, musical selection, or online news source to read. The implementation of recommender systems is pervasive, with commonly recognised examples including the generation of playlist for video and music services, the provision of product recommendations for e-commerce platforms, and the recommendation of content on social media platforms and the open web. These systems can operate using a single type of input, such as music, or multiple inputs from diverse platforms, including news, books and search queries. Additionally, popular recommender systems have been developed for specific topics, such as restaurants and online dating services. Recommender systems have also been developed to explore research articles and experts, collaborators, and financial services. A content discovery platform is a software recommendation platform that employs recommender system tools. It utilizes user metadata in order to identify and suggest relevant content, whilst reducing ongoing maintenance and development costs. A content discovery platform delivers personalized content to websites, mobile devices, and set-top boxes. A large range of content discovery platforms currently exist for various forms of content ranging from news articles and academic journal articles to television. As operators compete to serve as the gateway to home entertainment, personalized television emerges as a key service differentiator. Academic content discovery has recently become another area of interest, the emergence of numerous companies dedicated to assisting academic researchers in keeping up to date with relevant academic content and facilitating serendipitous discovery of new content. == Overview == Recommender systems usually make use of either or both collaborative filtering and content-based filtering, as well as other systems such as knowledge-based systems. Collaborative filtering approaches build a model from a user's past behavior (e.g., items previously purchased or selected and/or numerical ratings given to those items) as well as similar decisions made by other users. This model is then used to predict items (or ratings for items) that the user may have an interest in. Content-based filtering approaches utilize a series of discrete, pre-tagged characteristics of an item in order to recommend additional items with similar properties. === Example === The differences between collaborative and content-based filtering can be demonstrated by comparing two early music recommender systems, Last.fm and Pandora Radio. We can also look at how these methods are applied in e-commerce, for example, on platforms like Amazon. Last.fm creates a "station" of recommended songs by observing what bands and individual tracks the user has listened to on a regular basis and comparing those against the listening behavior of other users. Last.fm will play tracks that do not appear in the user's library, but are often played by other users with similar interests. As this approach leverages the behavior of users, it is an example of a collaborative filtering technique. Pandora uses the properties of a song or artist (a subset of the 450 attributes provided by the Music Genome Project) to seed a "station" that plays music with similar properties. User feedback is used to refine the station's results, deemphasizing certain attributes when a user "dislikes" a particular song and emphasizing other attributes when a user "likes" a song. This is an example of a content-based approach. In e-commerce, Amazon's well-known "customers who bought X also bought Y" feature is a prime example of collaborative filtering. It also uses content-based filtering when it recommends a book by the same author you've previously read or a pair of shoes in a similar style to ones you've viewed. Each type of system has its strengths and weaknesses. In the above example, Last.fm requires a large amount of information about a user to make accurate recommendations. This is an example of the cold start problem, and is common in collaborative filtering systems. Whereas Pandora needs very little information to start, it is far more limited in scope (for example, it can only make recommendations that are similar to the original seed). === Alternative implementations === Recommender systems are a useful alternative to search algorithms since they help users discover items they might not have found otherwise. Of note, recommender systems are often implemented using search engines indexing non-traditional data. In some cases, like in the Gonzalez v. Google Supreme Court case, may argue that search and recommendation algorithms are different technologies. Recommender systems have been the focus of several granted patents, and there are more than 50 software libraries that support the development of recommender systems including LensKit, RecBole, ReChorus and RecPack. == History == Elaine Rich created the first recommender system in 1979, called Grundy. She looked for a way to recommend users books they might like. Her idea was to create a system that asks users specific questions and classifies them into classes of preferences, or "stereotypes", depending on their answers. Depending on users' stereotype membership, they would then get recommendations for books they might like. Another early recommender system, called a "digital bookshelf", was described in a 1990 technical report by Jussi Karlgren at Columbia University, and implemented at scale and worked through in technical reports and publications from 1994 onwards by Jussi Karlgren, then at SICS, and research groups led by Pattie Maes at MIT, Will Hill at Bellcore, and Paul Resnick, also at MIT, whose work with GroupLens was awarded the 2010 ACM Software Systems Award. Montaner provided the first overview of recommender systems from an intelligent agent perspective. Adomavicius provided a new, alternate overview of recommender systems. Herlocker provides an additional overview of evaluation techniques for recommender systems, and Beel et al. discussed the problems of offline evaluations. Beel et al. have also provided literature surveys on available research paper recommender systems and existing challenges. == Approaches == === Collaborative filtering === One approach to the design of recommender systems that has wide use is collaborative filtering. Collaborative filtering is based on the assumption that people who agreed in the past will agree in the future, and that they will like similar kinds of items as they liked in the past. The system generates recommendations using only information about rating profiles for different users or items. By locating peer users/items with a rating history similar to the current user or item, they generate recommendations using this neighborhood. This approach is a cornerstone for e-commerce sites that analyze the purchasing patterns of thousands of users to suggest what you might like. Collaborative filtering methods are classified as memory-based and model-based. A well-known example of memory-based approaches is the user-based algorithm, while that of model-based approaches is matrix factorization (recommender systems). A key advantage of the collaborative filtering approach is that it does not rely on machine analyzable content and therefore it is capable of accurately recommending complex items such as movies without requiring an "understanding" of the item itself. Many algorithms have been used in measuring user similarity or item similarity in recommender systems. For example, the k-nearest neighbor (k-NN) approach and the Pearson Correlation as first implemented by Allen. When building a model from a user's behavior, a distinction is often made between explicit and implicit forms of data collection. Examples of explicit data collection include the following: Asking a user to rate an item on a sliding scale. Asking a user to search. Asking a user to rank a collection of items from favorite to least favorite. Presenting two items to a user and asking him/her to choose the better one of them. Asking a user to create a list of items that he/she likes (see Rocchio classification or other similar techniques). Examples of implicit data collection include the following: Observing the items that a user views in an online store, media library, or other repository of med

  Read more →
• 

  Bisection (software engineering)

  Bisection is a method used in software development to identify change sets that result in a specific behavior change. It is mostly employed for finding the patch that introduced a bug. Another application area is finding the patch that indirectly fixed a bug. == Overview == The process of locating the changeset that introduced a specific regression was described as "source change isolation" in 1997 by Brian Ness and Viet Ngo of Cray Research. Regression testing was performed on Cray's compilers in editions comprising one or more changesets. Editions with known regressions could not be validated until developers addressed the problem. Source change isolation narrowed the cause to a single changeset that could then be excluded from editions, unblocking them with respect to this problem, while the author of the change worked on a fix. Ness and Ngo outlined linear search and binary search methods of performing this isolation. Code bisection has the goal of minimizing the effort to find a specific change set. It employs a divide and conquer algorithm that depends on having access to the code history which is usually preserved by revision control in a code repository. == Bisection method == === Code bisection algorithm === Code history has the structure of a directed acyclic graph which can be topologically sorted. This makes it possible to use a divide and conquer search algorithm which: splits up the search space of candidate revisions tests for the behavior in question reduces the search space depending on the test result re-iterates the steps above until a range with at most one bisectable patch candidate remains === Algorithmic complexity === Bisection is in LSPACE having an algorithmic complexity of O ( log ⁡ N ) {\displaystyle O(\log N)} with N {\displaystyle N} denoting the number of revisions in the search space, and is similar to a binary search. === Desirable repository properties === For code bisection it is desirable that each revision in the search space can be built and tested independently. === Monotonicity === For the bisection algorithm to identify a single changeset which caused the behavior being tested to change, the behavior must change monotonically across the search space. For a Boolean function such as a pass/fail test, this means that it only changes once across all changesets between the start and end of the search space. If there are multiple changesets across the search space where the behavior being tested changes between false and true, then the bisection algorithm will find one of them, but it will not necessarily be the root cause of the change in behavior between the start and the end of the search space. The root cause could be a different changeset, or a combination of two or more changesets across the search space. To help deal with this problem, automated tools allow specific changesets to be ignored during a bisection search. == Automation support == Although the bisection method can be completed manually, one of its main advantages is that it can be easily automated. It can thus fit into existing test automation processes: failures in exhaustive automated regression tests can trigger automated bisection to localize faults. Ness and Ngo focused on its potential in Cray's continuous delivery-style environment in which the automatically isolated bad changeset could be automatically excluded from builds. The revision control systems Fossil, Git and Mercurial have built-in functionality for code bisection. The user can start a bisection session with a specified range of revisions from which the revision control system proposes a revision to test, the user tells the system whether the revision tested as "good" or "bad", and the process repeats until the specific "bad" revision has been identified. Other revision control systems, such as Bazaar or Subversion, support bisection through plugins or external scripts. Phoronix Test Suite can do bisection automatically to find performance regressions.

  Read more →
• 

  Mixed raster content

  Mixed raster content (MRC) is a method for compressing images that contain both binary-compressible text and continuous-tone components, using image segmentation methods to improve the level of compression and the quality of the rendered image. By separating the image into components with different compressibility characteristics, the most efficient and accurate compression algorithm for each component can be applied. MRC-compressed images are typically packaged into a hybrid file format such as DjVu and sometimes PDF. This allows for multiple images, and the instructions to properly render and reassemble them, to be stored within a single file. Some image scanners optionally support MRC when scanning to PDF. A typical manual states that without MRC, the image is generated in a single process, with text and graphics not distinguished. With MRC, separate processes are used for text, graphics, and other elements, producing clearer graphics and sharper text, at the price of slightly slower processing. MRC is recommended to optimise the scanning of documents with harder-to-read text or lower-quality graphics. MRC can also reduce the size of the scanned file, though higher compression using JBIG2 can sometimes lead to character substitution errors in scanned documents. == File format == A form of MRC is defined by international standard bodies as ISO/IEC 16485, or ITU recommendation T.44 (accessible free of charge). It defines a file format with bilevel masks and two data layers in each "stripe" of the image. The mask can be encoded in ITU T.4, JBIG1, or JBIG2, while the images can be JPEG, JBIG1, or run-length encoded color. The format is loosely based on JPEG, with a APP13 segment registered for this purpose. It is not known whether this file format is actually used, as formats like DjVu and PDF have their own ways of defining layers and masks.

  Read more →
• 

  Voiceverse NFT plagiarism scandal

  In January 2022, 15—the pseudonymous Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) artificial intelligence researcher and creator of the non-commercial generative artificial intelligence voice synthesis research project 15.ai—discovered that the blockchain-based technology company Voiceverse had plagiarized from their platform. Voiceverse marketed itself as a service that offered AI voice cloning technology that could be purchased and traded as non-fungible tokens (NFTs). Amid heightened controversy over NFTs in the gaming industry, voice actor Troy Baker (who has been described as one of the most famous voice actors in video games) announced his partnership with Voiceverse on January 14, 2022, triggering immediate backlash over concerns about the environmental impact of NFTs, potential for fraud, predatory monetization in video games, and the potential of AI displacing jobs for human voice actors. Later that same day, 15 revealed through server logs that Voiceverse had generated voice lines using 15's free text-to-speech platform, pitch-shifted the audio to make them unrecognizable, and falsely marketed the samples as their own technology before selling them as NFTs. Within an hour of being confronted with evidence, Voiceverse confessed and stated that their marketing team had used 15.ai without proper attribution while rushing to create a technology demo to coincide with Baker's partnership announcement, further exacerbating the already negative reception to the original announcement. In response, 15 replied "Go fuck yourself"; the interaction went viral and garnered a large amount of support for the developer. News publications universally characterized this incident as Voiceverse having "stolen" from 15.ai. The next day, Baker appeared on a podcast and stated that his motivation had been to help independent creators who were unable to afford professional voice actors. Following continued backlash and the plagiarism revelation, Baker ended his partnership with Voiceverse on January 31, 2022. Subsequently, the incident was documented in multiple AI ethics databases, criticisms of predatory monetization in video games, and retrospectives as one of the earliest instances of plagiarism and theft stemming from artificial intelligence during the AI boom. == Background == === Troy Baker === Troy Baker is a prominent voice actor in the video game industry best known for his performances as Joel Miller in The Last of Us franchise. Baker has been described as "ubiquitous" by Polygon, "one of the most high-profile and prolific voice actors in video games" by Eurogamer, and "arguably the most famous voice actor in the gaming industry" by GameGuru. His other prominent roles include voicing Agent John "Jonesy" Jones in Fortnite, Booker DeWitt in BioShock Infinite, and both Batman and Joker in multiple Batman video games. As of October 2025, Baker holds the record for the most acting nominations at the BAFTA Games Awards, with five between 2013 and 2021. === Voiceverse === Voiceverse is a blockchain-based startup founded by the Bored Ape Yacht Club that marketed itself as offering AI voice cloning technology in the form of NFTs. Prior to the announcement of their partnership with Baker, Voiceverse had partnered with LOVO, Inc., an AI voice platform that, according to LOVO, could generate human-like voices. Voiceverse stated that any user who purchases a voice NFT would have unlimited and perpetual access to the voice model, which could be used to create content such as audiobooks, YouTube videos, podcasts, e-learning materials, in-game voice chat, and Zoom calls. Voiceverse promised that buyers would "OWN [sic] all of the IP" of content they created using these voices. Voiceverse's roadmap included plans to release 8,888 initial voice NFTs, a feature to add emotions to existing voices, and the ability for users to mint their own voices as NFTs. Prior to Baker's partnership, Voiceverse had also partnered with voice actors Charlet Chung, who voices D.Va in Overwatch, and Andy Milonakis of The Andy Milonakis Show. === 15.ai === 15.ai is a free web application launched in 2020 that uses artificial intelligence to generate text-to-speech voices of fictional characters from popular media. Created by a pseudonymous artificial intelligence researcher known as 15, who began developing the technology as a freshman during their undergraduate research at MIT, it was an early example of an application of generative artificial intelligence during the initial stages of the AI boom. The platform showed that deep neural networks could generate emotionally expressive speech with only 15 seconds of speech; the name "15.ai" references the creator's statement that a voice can be convincingly cloned with just 15 seconds of audio, as opposed to the tens of hours of data previously required. 15.ai became an Internet phenomenon in early 2021 when content utilizing it went viral on social media and quickly gained widespread use among various Internet fandoms. 15 has emphasized that it remain free and non-commercial; it only requires users to give proper credit when using the service for content creation. === NFTs in the video game industry === By early 2022, NFTs had become highly controversial within the gaming industry. Critics raised concerns about their environmental impact due to the significant energy consumption of blockchain technology. In addition, the prevalence of scams, fraud, and potential money laundering associated with NFT sales, as well as fears that NFTs were a new form of predatory monetization following the increasing frequency of loot boxes, caused vocal pushback from the gaming community. Several major gaming companies had begun exploring NFT integration into their products, though fan backlash had already forced some projects to be cancelled. On December 16, 2021, the developers of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2: Heart of Chernobyl announced that they would be including NFTs in the game, but cancelled within an hour of the announcement due to immediate universal backlash. Simultaneously, the rise of AI voice technology raised concerns among voice actors about potential job displacement and the devaluation of their work amidst the voice acting industry's ongoing struggles for better compensation and working conditions. == Partnership announcement and backlash == On January 14, 2022, 1:02 a.m. EST, Baker announced on Twitter that he was partnering with Voiceverse "to explore ways where together we might bring new tools to new creators to make new things, and allow everyone a chance to own & invest in the IP's they create." The announcement concluded with the statement "You can hate. Or you can create." Baker's specific role with Voiceverse remained unclear at the time of the announcement. Along with Baker's announcement, Voiceverse promoted their supposed voice AI technology on Twitter by posting animated videos that featured a cat character created by NFT firm Chubbiverse. The videos concluded with text that read "The Voice Powered By Voiceverse"; Voiceverse stated on Twitter that the voices in the animations had been generated using their own AI voice synthesis technology and presented the videos as a technology demonstration of their voice NFT capabilities. The announcement provoked immediate and widespread backlash from the gaming community. Baker's tweet received thousands of replies and quote retweets (the vast majority of which were negative), far more than the number of likes; Michael McWhertor of Polygon described it as a "textbook example of being ratioed" and commented that reactions had been amplified by the final part of Baker's announcement. Michael Beckwith of Metro called Baker's approach "bizarrely aggressive". Later that day, Baker responded to the backlash by apologizing for his choice of words. He said he appreciated people's thoughts and acknowledged that the "hate/create part might have been a bit antagonistic," calling it a "bad attempt to bring levity". Despite the apology, Baker and his fellow voice actors did not distance themselves from Voiceverse at this point. At the same time, Voiceverse attempted to address the criticisms, stating that they were working to move to more environmentally friendly blockchain technology and that voice actors would receive royalties from NFT sales, with actors benefiting from any increase in NFT value. == Plagiarism revelation == On December 13, 2021, amidst the increasingly negative reactions toward NFTs among the general public, the creator of 15.ai (known pseudonymously as 15) announced that they had "no interest in incorporating NFTs into any aspect of [their] work." On January 14, 2022, 11:17 a.m. EST (10 hours after Baker's initial announcement), 15 commented on the Voiceverse venture, stating that it "sounds like a scam". Two hours later, at 1:20 p.m., 15 explicitly accused Voiceverse of "actively attempting to appropriate [15's] work for [Voiceverse's] own benefit." 15 provided evidence through

  Read more →
• 

  Artificial imagination

  Artificial imagination is a narrow subcomponent of artificial general intelligence which generates, simulates, and facilitates real or possible fiction models to create predictions, inventions, or conscious experiences. The term artificial imagination is also used to describe a property of machines or programs. Some of the traits that researchers hope to simulate include creativity, vision, digital art, humor, and satire. Practitioners in the field are researching various aspects of Artificial imagination, such as Artificial (visual) imagination, Artificial (aural) Imagination, modeling/filtering content based on human emotions and Interactive Search. Some articles on the topic speculate on how artificial imagination may evolve to create an artificial world "people may be comfortable enough to escape from the real world". Some researchers such as G. Schleis and M. Rizki have focused on using artificial neural networks to simulate artificial imagination. Another important project is being led by Hiroharu Kato and Tatsuya Harada at the University of Tokyo in Japan. They have developed a computer capable of translating a description of an object into an image, which could be the easiest way to define what imagination is. Their idea is based on the concept of an image as a series of pixels divided into short sequences that correspond to a specific part of an image. The scientists call this sequences "visual words" and those can be interpreted by the machine using statistical distribution to read an create an image of an object the machine has not encountered. The topic of artificial imagination has garnered interest from scholars outside the computer science domain, such as noted communications scholar Ernest Bormann, who came up with the Symbolic Convergence Theory and worked on a project to develop artificial imagination in computer systems. An interdisciplinary research seminar organized by the artist Grégory Chatonsky on artificial imagination and postdigital art has taken place since 2017 at the Ecole Normale Supérieure in Paris. == Use in interactive search == The typical application of artificial imagination is for an interactive search. Interactive searching has been developed since the mid-1990s, accompanied by the World Wide Web's development and the optimization of search engines. Based on the first query and feedback from a user, the databases to be searched are reorganized to improve the searching results. Artificial imagination allows us to synthesize images and to develop a new image, whether it is in the database, regardless its existence in the real world. For example, the computer shows results that are based on the answer from the initial query. The user selects several relevant images, and then the technology analyzes these selections and reorganizes the images' ranks to fit the query. In this process, artificial imagination is used to synthesize the selected images and to improve the searching result with additional relevant synthesized images. This technique is based on several algorithms, including the Rocchio algorithm and the evolutionary algorithm. The Rocchio algorithm, locating a query point near relevant examples and far away from irrelevant examples, is simple and works well in a small system where the databases are arranged in certain ranks. The evolutionary synthesis is composed of two steps: a standard algorithm and an enhancement of the standard algorithm. Through feedback from the user, there would be additional images synthesized so as to be suited to what the user is looking for. == General artificial imagination == Artificial imagination has a more general definition and wide applications. The traditional fields of artificial imagination include visual imagination and aural imagination. More generally, all the actions to form ideas, images and concepts can be linked to imagination. Thus, artificial imagination means more than only generating graphs. For example, moral imagination is an important research subfield of artificial imagination, although classification of artificial imagination is difficult. Morals are an important part to human beings' logic, while artificial morals are important in artificial imagination and artificial intelligence. A common criticism of artificial intelligence is whether human beings should take responsibility for machines' mistakes or decisions and how to develop well-behaved machines. As nobody can give a clear description of the best moral rules, it is impossible to create machines with commonly accepted moral rules. However, recent research about artificial morals circumvent the definition of moral. Instead, machine learning methods are applied to train machines to imitate human morals. As the data about moral decisions from thousands of different people are considered, the trained moral model can reflect widely accepted rules. Memory is another major field of artificial imagination. Researchers such as Aude Oliva have performed extensive work on artificial memory, especially visual memory. Compared to visual imagination, the visual memory focuses more on how machine understand, analyse and store pictures in a human way. In addition, characters like spatial features are also considered. As this field is based on the brains' biological structures, extensive research on neuroscience has also been performed, which makes it a large intersection between biology and computer science.

  Read more →
• 

  Document capture software

  Document capture software refers to applications that provide the ability and feature set to automate the process of scanning paper documents or importing electronic documents, often for the purposes of feeding advanced document classification and data collection processes. Most scanning hardware, both scanners and copiers, provides the basic ability to scan to any number of image file formats, including: PDF, TIFF, JPG, BMP, etc. This basic functionality is augmented by document capture software, which can add efficiency and standardization to the process. == Typical features == Typical features of Document Capture Software include: Barcode recognition Patch Code recognition Separation Optical Character Recognition (OCR) Optical Mark Recognition (OMR) Quality Assurance Indexing Migration === Goal for implementation of a document capture solution === The goal for implementing a document capture solution is to reduce the amount of time spent scanning, separating, enhancing, organizing, classifying, normalizing, and collecting information from document collections, and to produce metadata along with an image/PDF file, and/or OCR text. This information is then migrated to a file share, FTP site, database, Document Management or Enterprise Content Management system. These systems often provide a search function, allowing search of the assets based on the produced metadata, and then viewed using document imaging software. == General document capture system solutions == === Integration with document management system === ECM (Enterprise Content management) and their DMS component (Document Management System) are being adopted by many organizations as a corporate document management system for all types of electronic files, e.g. MS word, PDF ... However, much of the information held by organisations is on paper and this needs to be integrated within the same document repository. By converting paper documents into digital format through scanning, organizations convert paper into image formats such as TIF, JPG, and PDF, and also extract valuable index information or business data from the document using OCR technology. Digital documents and associated metadata can easily be stored in the ECM in a variety of formats. The most popular of these formats is PDF which not only provides an accurate representation of the document but also allows all the OCR text in the document to be stored behind the PDF image. This format is known as PDF with hidden text or text-searchable PDF. This allows users to search for documents by using keywords in the metadata fields or by searching the content of PDF files across the repository. ==== Advantages of scanning documents into a ECM/DMS ==== Information held on paper is usually just as valuable to organisations as the electronic documents that are generated internally. Often this information represents a large proportion of the day to day correspondence with suppliers and customers. Having the ability to manage and share this information internally through a document management system such as SharePoint or a CMIS-compatible repository improves collaboration between departments or employees and also eliminates the risk of losing this information through disasters such as floods or fire. Organisations adopting an ECM/DMS often implement electronic workflow which allows the information held on paper to be included as part of an electronic business process and incorporated into a customer record file along with other associated office documents and emails. For business critical documents, such as purchase orders and supplier invoices, digitising documents helps speed up business transactions as well as reduce manual effort involved in keying data into business systems, such as CRM, ERP and Accounting. Scanned invoices can also be routed to managers for payment approval via email or an electronic workflow. == Electronic document capture == In the earlier implementations of Document Capture Software, the technology focused solely on the digitization and capture of information from paper documents. Document images were acquired from document scanners via TWAIN/ISIS drivers. Only image-based file formats like TIF, JPG, and BMP were typically compatible with these solutions. But in recent years, as the volume of electronically-created documents and the number of proprietary file formats continues to increase at exponential rates, the need for handling documents existing in electronic formats has grown. The relevant document capture products have adapted to function with non-image file formats with the end-goal of creating a unified processing workflow capable of handling all incoming documents The ability to import files from a variety of sources is one example of such adaptation. Importing documents from ECM/DMS software solutions, email servers, FTP, and EDI is now as much of a requirement of document capture software as is paper capture. The normalization of output files to text-based PDF format is now another critical factor in long-term archival of proprietary electronic file formats. Normalization expands access and usage of files to users throughout the enterprise, rather than only those that created the original electronic file.

  Read more →
• 

  Description logic

  Description logics (DL) are a family of formal knowledge representation languages. Many DLs are more expressive than propositional logic but less expressive than first-order logic. In contrast to the latter, the core reasoning problems for DLs are (usually) decidable, and efficient decision procedures have been designed and implemented for these problems. There are general, spatial, temporal, spatiotemporal, and fuzzy description logics, and each description logic features a different balance between expressive power and reasoning complexity by supporting different sets of mathematical constructors. DLs are used in artificial intelligence to describe and reason about the relevant concepts of an application domain (known as terminological knowledge). It is of particular importance in providing a logical formalism for ontologies and the Semantic Web: the Web Ontology Language (OWL) and its profiles are based on DLs. A major area of application of DLs and OWL is in biomedical informatics, where they assist in the codification of biomedical knowledge. DLs and OWL are also applied in other domains, including defense, climate modeling, and large-scale industrial knowledge graphs. == Introduction == A DL models concepts, roles and individuals, and their relationships. The fundamental modeling concept of a DL is the axiom—a logical statement relating roles and/or concepts. This is a key difference from the frames paradigm where a frame specification declares and completely defines a class. == Nomenclature == === Terminology compared to FOL and OWL === The description logic community uses different terminology than the first-order logic (FOL) community for operationally equivalent notions; some examples are given below. The Web Ontology Language (OWL) uses again a different terminology, also given in the table below. === Naming convention === There are many varieties of description logics and there is an informal naming convention, roughly describing the operators allowed. The expressivity is encoded in the label for a logic starting with one of the following basic logics: Followed by any of the following extensions: ==== Exceptions ==== Some canonical DLs that do not exactly fit this convention are: ==== Examples ==== As an example, A L C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALC}}} is a centrally important description logic from which comparisons with other varieties can be made. A L C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALC}}} is simply A L {\displaystyle {\mathcal {AL}}} with complement of any concept allowed, not just atomic concepts. A L C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALC}}} is used instead of the equivalent A L U E {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALUE}}} . A further example, the description logic S H I Q {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHIQ}}} is the logic A L C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALC}}} plus extended cardinality restrictions, and transitive and inverse roles. The naming conventions aren't purely systematic so that the logic A L C O I N {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALCOIN}}} might be referred to as A L C N I O {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALCNIO}}} and other abbreviations are also made where possible. The Protégé ontology editor supports S H O I N ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHOIN}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} . Three major biomedical informatics terminology bases, SNOMED CT, GALEN, and GO, are expressible in E L {\displaystyle {\mathcal {EL}}} (with additional role properties). OWL 2 provides the expressiveness of S R O I Q ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SROIQ}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} , OWL-DL is based on S H O I N ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHOIN}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} , and for OWL-Lite it is S H I F ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHIF}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} . == History == Description logic was given its current name in the 1980s. Previous to this it was called (chronologically): terminological systems, and concept languages. === Knowledge representation === Frames and semantic networks lack formal (logic-based) semantics. DL was first introduced into knowledge representation (KR) systems to overcome this deficiency. The first DL-based KR system was KL-ONE (by Ronald J. Brachman and Schmolze, 1985). During the '80s other DL-based systems using structural subsumption algorithms were developed including KRYPTON (1983), LOOM (1987), BACK (1988), K-REP (1991) and CLASSIC (1991). This approach featured DL with limited expressiveness but relatively efficient (polynomial time) reasoning. In the early '90s, the introduction of a new tableau based algorithm paradigm allowed efficient reasoning on more expressive DL. DL-based systems using these algorithms — such as KRIS (1991) — show acceptable reasoning performance on typical inference problems even though the worst case complexity is no longer polynomial. From the mid '90s, reasoners were created with good practical performance on very expressive DL with high worst case complexity. Examples from this period include FaCT, RACER (2001), CEL (2005), and KAON 2 (2005). DL reasoners, such as FaCT, FaCT++, RACER, DLP and Pellet, implement the method of analytic tableaux. KAON2 is implemented by algorithms which reduce a SHIQ(D) knowledge base to a disjunctive datalog program. === Semantic web === The DARPA Agent Markup Language (DAML) and Ontology Inference Layer (OIL) ontology languages for the Semantic Web can be viewed as syntactic variants of DL. In particular, the formal semantics and reasoning in OIL use the S H I Q {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHIQ}}} DL. The DAML+OIL DL was developed as a submission to—and formed the starting point of—the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web Ontology Working Group. In 2004, the Web Ontology Working Group completed its work by issuing the OWL recommendation. The design of OWL is based on the S H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SH}}} family of DL with OWL DL and OWL Lite based on S H O I N ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHOIN}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} and S H I F ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHIF}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} respectively. The W3C OWL Working Group began work in 2007 on a refinement of - and extension to - OWL. In 2009, this was completed by the issuance of the OWL2 recommendation. OWL2 is based on the description logic S R O I Q ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SROIQ}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} . Practical experience demonstrated that OWL DL lacked several key features necessary to model complex domains. == Modeling == === TBox vs Abox === In DL, a distinction is drawn between the so-called TBox (terminological box) and the ABox (assertional box). In general, the TBox contains sentences describing concept hierarchies (i.e., relations between concepts) while the ABox contains ground sentences stating where in the hierarchy, individuals belong (i.e., relations between individuals and concepts). For example, the statement: belongs in the TBox, while the statement: belongs in the ABox. Note that the TBox/ABox distinction is not significant, in the same sense that the two "kinds" of sentences are not treated differently in first-order logic (which subsumes most DL). When translated into first-order logic, a subsumption axiom like (1) is simply a conditional restriction to unary predicates (concepts) with only variables appearing in it. Clearly, a sentence of this form is not privileged or special over sentences in which only constants ("grounded" values) appear like (2). === Motivation for having Tbox and Abox === So why was the distinction introduced? The primary reason is that the separation can be useful when describing and formulating decision-procedures for various DL. For example, a reasoner might process the TBox and ABox separately, in part because certain key inference problems are tied to one but not the other one ('classification' is related to the TBox, 'instance checking' to the ABox). Another example is that the complexity of the TBox can greatly affect the performance of a given decision-procedure for a certain DL, independently of the ABox. Thus, it is useful to have a way to talk about that specific part of the knowledge base. The secondary reason is that the distinction can make sense from the knowledge base modeler's perspective. It is plausible to distinguish between our conception of terms/concepts in the world (class axioms in the TBox) and particular manifestations of those terms/concepts (instance assertions in the ABox). In the above example: when the hierarchy within a company is the same in every branch but the assignment to employees is different in every department (because there are other people working there), it makes sense to reuse the TBox for different branches that do not use the same ABox. There are two features of description logic that are not shared by most other data description formalisms: DL does not make the unique name assumption (UNA) or the closed-world assumption (CWA). Not having UNA means that two concepts with different names may be allowed by some inference to be shown to be equivalent. Not having CWA, or rather having the open world assumption (OWA) means that

  Read more →
• 

  AlphaTensor

  AlphaTensor is an artificial intelligence system developed by DeepMind for discovering efficient matrix multiplication algorithms using reinforcement learning. Introduced in 2022, the system was based on AlphaZero and formulated the search for matrix multiplication algorithms as a single-player game called TensorGame. AlphaTensor was designed to search for new ways to multiply matrices with fewer scalar multiplication operations. Matrix multiplication is a fundamental operation in linear algebra, numerical analysis, scientific computing, computer graphics, and machine learning. The system discovered thousands of matrix multiplication algorithms, including algorithms that rediscovered known human-designed methods and others that improved on previously known results for particular matrix sizes and mathematical settings. == Background == Matrix multiplication is one of the basic operations in numerical computing. The standard algorithm for multiplying two square matrices has cubic time complexity, while faster algorithms such as the Strassen algorithm reduce the number of multiplication operations by using more complex algebraic decompositions. Finding optimal matrix multiplication algorithms can be difficult because it involves searching through a large space of possible tensor decompositions. AlphaTensor approached this problem by representing algorithm discovery as TensorGame, in which each move corresponds to an operation that reduces a tensor representing matrix multiplication. The goal of the game is to find a low-rank decomposition of the matrix multiplication tensor, corresponding to an efficient multiplication algorithm. == Development == AlphaTensor was developed by DeepMind and described in a paper published in Nature in October 2022. The system built on the reinforcement-learning approach used in AlphaZero, which had previously been applied to games such as Go, chess, and shogi. Unlike those games, TensorGame involved a very large search space, requiring changes to the AlphaZero-style search method and neural network architecture. DeepMind released source code and discovered algorithms associated with the publication through a public GitHub repository. == Results == AlphaTensor discovered matrix multiplication algorithms over both standard arithmetic and finite fields. One widely reported result was a method for multiplying 4 × 4 matrices over the field with two elements using 47 multiplication operations, improving on the 49 operations required by applying Strassen's algorithm recursively in that setting. The system also found algorithms optimized for particular computer hardware, including algorithms designed for graphics processing units and Tensor Processing Units. DeepMind stated that some of the hardware-specific algorithms improved practical execution time compared with commonly used algorithms on the tested hardware. == Significance == AlphaTensor was described as an example of using machine learning not only to apply existing algorithms, but to assist in discovering new ones. The work was connected to broader research in algorithm discovery, automated machine learning, program synthesis, and computational complexity theory, especially the open problem of determining the optimal complexity of matrix multiplication. AlphaTensor later became part of a broader group of Google DeepMind systems for algorithm and mathematical discovery, alongside systems such as AlphaDev and AlphaEvolve.

  Read more →
• 

  Virtual data room

  A virtual data room (sometimes called a VDR or Deal Room) is an online repository of information that is used for the storing and distribution of documents. In many cases, a virtual data room is used to facilitate the due diligence process during an M&A transaction, loan syndication, or private equity and venture capital transactions. This due diligence process has traditionally used a physical data room to accomplish the disclosure of documents. For reasons of cost, efficiency and security, virtual data rooms have widely replaced the more traditional physical data room. A virtual data room is an extranet to which the bidders and their advisers are given access via the internet. An extranet is essentially a website with limited controlled access, using a secure log-on supplied by the vendor, which can be disabled at any time, by the vendor, if a bidder withdraws. Much of the information released is confidential and restrictions are applied to the viewer's ability to release this to third parties (by means of forwarding, copying or printing). This can be effectively applied to protect the data using digital rights management. The virtual data room provides access to secure documents for authorized users through a dedicated web site, or through secure agent applications. In the process of mergers and acquisitions the data room is set up as part of the central repository of data relating to companies or divisions being acquired or sold. The data room enables the interested parties to view information relating to the business in a controlled environment where confidentiality can be preserved. Conventionally this was achieved by establishing a supervised, physical data room in secure premises with controlled access. In most cases, with a physical data room, only one bidder team can access the room at a time. A virtual data room is designed to have the same advantages as a conventional data room (controlling access, viewing, copying and printing, etc.) with fewer disadvantages. Due to their increased efficiency, many businesses and industries have moved to using virtual data rooms instead of physical data rooms. In 2006, a spokesperson for a company which sets up virtual deal rooms was reported claiming that the process reduced the bidding process by about thirty days compared to physical data rooms. In the process of startup fundraising, a virtual data room is set up to be a central location for key data, documents, and financials. These are shared with venture capital and angel investors and allows them to streamline due diligence. == Application == Any business dealing with private data can apply VDRs when secure transaction processing is required. This includes financial institutions that need to negotiate confidential customer information without involving third parties. VDRs have traditionally been used for IPOs and real estate asset management. Technology companies may use them to exchange and review code or confidential data needed for operations. The same is true for clients, who entrust their valuable code only to the most qualified people in the organisation. The code is not something that can be printed out and brought in a folder. It resides on a computer and must be used together. VDR can find application in any business that manages data in the form of documents, especially law firms, financial advisers or the B2B sector. The latter work with documents that must always be handled and controlled confidentially, and it is difficult to store them securely when they are on a server that other people can access. In addition, in B2B, it is important to close the deal as quickly as possible: the average sales cycle is one to three months. VDR can be compared to a locked filing cabinet where all those folders and documents are kept. It automates the mathematics of pricing to prevent revenue leakage, and initially integrates CRM to ensure accurate synchronisation of all account data, which is important for B2B in particular and sales in general. While virtual data rooms offer many advantages, they are not suitable for every industry. For example, some governments may decide to continue using physical data rooms for highly confidential information sharing. The damage from potential cyberattacks and data breaches exceeds the benefits offered by virtual data rooms. In such cases, the use of VDRs is not considered. Data breaches have particularly affected the US healthcare system from March 2021 to March 2022 - according to IBM Security the cost of the breach was a record high of $10.1 million.

  Read more →