AI For Business Analytics

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

  • Marq (company)

    Marq (company)

    Marq (formerly Lucidpress) is a cloud-based software platform for brand management and templated content creation. The platform integrates with digital asset management (DAM) systems—including Aprimo and Bynder and customer relationship management (CRM) tools such as Salesforce and HubSpot. Marq also includes AI-assisted features for brand compliance and content automation. Trade publications have described the product as a brand templating and creative automation platform. == History == In October 2013, Lucid Software, Inc. announced Lucidpress as a public beta version. Following its release, Lucidpress was featured in TechCrunch, VentureBeat and PC World, with TechCrunch noting: "I had a chance to test the app before its launch and it is indeed very easy to use. If you've ever used a desktop publishing app in the past, you'll feel right at home with Marq, as it features the same kind of standard top-bar menu and layout options as most other publishing apps. In terms of features, it can also hold its own against similar desktop-based apps." In May 2021, Lucidpress announced that it had been acquired by Charles Thayne Capital ("CTC"), a growth-oriented and technology-focused private investment firm. In May 2021, following its acquisition by Charles Thayne Capital, Lucidpress became fully independent. Owen Fuller, who had served as General Manager since 2017, was appointed Chief Executive Officer. In 2022, Lucidpress was rebranded as Marq to reflect the company’s shift toward brand templating and creative automation tools, while continuing to support its publishing features. == Features == Marq integrates with customer relationship management (CRM) platforms such as Salesforce and HubSpot, enabling the creation of personalized, on-brand sales and marketing materials. The platform also connects with multiple digital asset management (DAM) systems, including Bynder, Aprimo, MediaValet, PhotoShelter, Acquia, and Canto. == Investment == Lucid Software raised $1 million in Seed in 2011, led by Google Ventures. In May 2014, the company received a $5 million investment. The round was led by Salt Lake-based Kickstart Seed Fund. In September 2016, the company received a $36 million investment from Spectrum Equity.

    Read more →
  • Imagen (text-to-image model)

    Imagen (text-to-image model)

    Imagen is a series of text-to-image models developed by Google DeepMind. They were developed by Google Brain until the company's merger with DeepMind in April 2023. Imagen is primarily used to generate images from text prompts, similar to Stability AI's Stable Diffusion, OpenAI's DALL-E, or Midjourney. The original version of the model was first discussed in a paper from May 2022. The tool produces high-quality images and is available to all users with a Google account through services including Gemini, ImageFX, and Vertex AI. == History == Imagen's original version was first presented in a paper published in May 2022. It featured the ability to generate high-fidelity images from natural language. The second version, Imagen 2 was released in December 2023. The standout feature was text and logo generation. Imagen 3 was released in August 2024. Google claims that the newest version provides better detail and lighting on generated images. On 20 May 2025 at Google I/O 2025 the company released an improved model, Imagen 4. == Technology == Imagen uses two key technologies. The first is the use of transformer-based large language models, notably T5, to understand text and subsequently encode text for image synthesis. The second is the use of cascaded diffusion models providing high-fidelity image generation. Imagen generates image in three stages, starting from a base of 64x64, then upsampled to 256x256 and 1024x1024. Imagen 4 generates image up to 2k. == Capabilities == Imagen can generate photorealistic images from text prompts. It can also create various styles, such as cinematic, 35mm film, illustration, and surreal. Like most text-to-image generative AI models, Imagen has difficulty rendering human fingers, text, ambigrams and other forms of typography. The model can generate images in five aspect ratios, namely 9:16, 3:4, 1:1, 4:3, and 16:9. Imagen can also refine already generated images by editing existing text prompts.

    Read more →
  • Fuzzy classification

    Fuzzy classification

    Fuzzy classification is the process of grouping elements into fuzzy sets whose membership functions are defined by the truth value of a fuzzy propositional function. A fuzzy propositional function is analogous to an expression containing one or more variables, such that when values are assigned to these variables, the expression becomes a fuzzy proposition. Accordingly, fuzzy classification is the process of grouping individuals having the same characteristics into a fuzzy set. A fuzzy classification corresponds to a membership function μ C ~ : P F ~ × U → T ~ {\textstyle \mu _{\tilde {C}}:{\tilde {PF}}\times U\to {\tilde {T}}} that indicates the degree to which an individual i ∈ U {\textstyle i\in U} is a member of the fuzzy class C ~ {\textstyle {\tilde {C}}} , given its fuzzy classification predicate Π ~ C ~ ∈ P F ~ {\textstyle {\tilde {\Pi }}_{\tilde {C}}\in {\tilde {PF}}} . Here, T ~ {\textstyle {\tilde {T}}} is the set of fuzzy truth values, i.e., the unit interval [ 0 , 1 ] {\textstyle [0,1]} . The fuzzy classification predicate Π ~ C ~ ( i ) {\textstyle {\tilde {\Pi }}_{\tilde {C}}(i)} corresponds to the fuzzy restriction " i {\textstyle i} is a member of C ~ {\textstyle {\tilde {C}}} ". == Classification == Intuitively, a class is a set that is defined by a certain property, and all objects having that property are elements of that class. The process of classification evaluates for a given set of objects whether they fulfill the classification property, and consequentially are a member of the corresponding class. However, this intuitive concept has some logical subtleties that need clarification. A class logic is a logical system which supports set construction using logical predicates with the class operator { ⋅ | ⋅ } {\textstyle \{\cdot |\cdot \}} . A class C = { i | Π ( i ) } {\displaystyle C=\{i|\Pi (i)\}} is defined as a set C of individuals i satisfying a classification predicate Π which is a propositional function. The domain of the class operator { .| .} is the set of variables V and the set of propositional functions PF, and the range is the powerset of this universe P(U) that is, the set of possible subsets: { ⋅ | ⋅ } : V × P F → P ( U ) {\displaystyle \{\cdot |\cdot \}:V\times PF\rightarrow P(U)} Here is an explanation of the logical elements that constitute this definition: An individual is a real object of reference. A universe of discourse is the set of all possible individuals considered. A variable V :→ R {\textstyle V:\rightarrow R} is a function which maps into a predefined range R without any given function arguments: a zero-place function. A propositional function is "an expression containing one or more undetermined constituents, such that, when values are assigned to these constituents, the expression becomes a proposition". In contrast, classification is the process of grouping individuals having the same characteristics into a set. A classification corresponds to a membership function μ that indicates whether an individual is a member of a class, given its classification predicate Π. μ : P F × U → T {\displaystyle \mu :PF\times U\rightarrow T} The membership function maps from the set of propositional functions PF and the universe of discourse U into the set of truth values T. The membership μ of individual i in Class C is defined by the truth value τ of the classification predicate Π. μ C ( i ) := τ ( Π ( i ) ) {\displaystyle \mu C(i):=\tau (\Pi (i))} In classical logic the truth values are certain. Therefore a classification is crisp, since the truth values are either exactly true or exactly false.

    Read more →
  • The Murderbot Diaries

    The Murderbot Diaries

    The Murderbot Diaries is a science fiction series by American author Martha Wells, published by Tor Books. The series is told from the perspective of the titular cyborg guard, a "SecUnit" owned by a futuristic megacorporation. SecUnits include "governor" modules that control and punish the constructs if they take any actions not approved by the company. The ironically self-named "Murderbot" hacked and disabled the module but pretends to be a normal SecUnit, staving off the boredom of security work by watching media. As it spends more time with a series of caring entities (both humans and artificial intelligences), it develops genuine friendships and emotional connections, which it finds inconvenient. The TV series Murderbot is based on the novels by Martha Wells. == Books == === Setting === In an advanced largely hyper-capitalist space-faring society, travel between star systems is routine due to now-stable wormhole technology. Initially, wormhole travel was unreliable, but has since improved to the point where "lost" colonies are being found. People reside on planets, some of which have been terraformed, or on space habitats which have full life support and artificial gravity. Most people who can afford it have technology that allows them to tap into ubiquitous data feeds supplying all kinds of information, including entertainment. This technology can be worn, or be implanted into the body. Sentient and semi-sentient artificial intelligences perform tasks such as operating starships, mining, controlling habitats, moving cargo, waging corporate warfare, providing physical pleasure and comfort, or security. Most of these purposes are fulfilled by "bots" of varying complexity and intelligence, but the last three are respectively performed by CombatUnits, ComfortUnits, and SecUnits. The characters and narrator of the book call these conscious entities "constructs", but they are functionally cyborgs (cybernetic organisms): part machine, part organic. A significant distinction, however, is that they are manufactured entities, not born and later modified. The Corporation Rim is a profit-oriented, cutthroat part of this society that indulges in espionage, assassination, indentured slavery, and ruthless exploitation of resources. One particular target of the corporations is illegal "alien remnant" exploitation. These remnants are often extremely dangerous to people and machines. The laws are enforced by other corporations. Outside the Corporation Rim are colonies, such as Preservation, that have established their right to exist under various laws that, at least for the time being, the corporations are unwilling to test. Wells noted in 2017 that All Systems Red, Artificial Condition, Rogue Protocol, and Exit Strategy "have an overarching story, with the fourth one bringing the arc to a conclusion". === Story chronology === "Compulsory" All Systems Red Artificial Condition Rogue Protocol Exit Strategy "Rapport" "Home" Fugitive Telemetry Network Effect System Collapse Platform Decay === All Systems Red (2017) === A scientific expedition on an alien planet goes awry when one of its members is attacked by a giant native creature. She is saved by the expedition's SecUnit (Security Unit), a security construct with a mixture of robot and human features. The SecUnit has secretly hacked the governor module allowing it to be controlled by humans and has named itself Murderbot, as it is heavily armed and designed for combat. However, it prefers to spend its time watching space operas and is uncomfortable interacting with humans. The SecUnit has a vested interest in keeping its human clients safe and alive, since it wants to avoid discovery of its autonomy and has an especially grisly expedition on its record. Murderbot soon discovers information regarding hazardous fauna has been deleted from their survey packet of the planet. Further investigation reveals some sections on their maps are missing as well. Meanwhile, the PreservationAux survey team, led by Dr. Mensah, navigate their mixed feelings about the part machine, part human nature of their SecUnit. As members of an egalitarian, independent planet outside of the Corporation Rim, the survey team struggles with the system of indentured servitude (and in many cases de facto slavery) the rim operates under. When they lose contact with the only other known expedition on the planet, the DeltFall Group, Mensah leads a team to the opposite side of the planet to investigate. At the DeltFall habitat, Murderbot discovers everyone there has been brutally murdered, and one of their three SecUnits has been destroyed. Murderbot disables the remaining two as they attack it but is surprised when two additional SecUnits appear. Murderbot destroys one, and Mensah takes the other. During these encounters, Murderbot is seriously injured. It also realizes one of the rogue SecUnits has installed a combat override module into its neck. The Preservation scientists are able to remove it before it completes the data upload which would put Murderbot under the control of whoever has command over the other SecUnits. The team discovers Murderbot is autonomous, and had once malfunctioned and murdered 57 people. The Preservation scientists mostly agree, based on its protective behavior thus far, the SecUnit can be trusted. Remembering small incidents which appear to be attempted sabotage, Murderbot and the group determine there must be a third expedition on the planet, whose members are trying to eliminate DeltFall and Preservation for some reason. The Preservation scientists confirm their HubSystem has been hacked. They flee their habitat before the mystery expedition they have dubbed EvilSurvey comes to kill them. The EvilSurvey team—GrayCris—leaves a message in the Preservation habitat inviting its scientists to meet at a rendezvous point to negotiate terms for their survival. Murderbot knows GrayCris will never let them live, so the SecUnit formulates a plan. It makes an overture to GrayCris to negotiate for its own freedom, but this is a distraction while the Preservation scientists access the GrayCris HubSystem to activate their emergency beacon. The plan works, but Murderbot is injured protecting Mensah from the explosion of the launch. Later, the SecUnit finds itself repaired retaining its memories and disabled governor module. Mensah has bought its contract, and she plans to bring it back to Preservation's home base where it can legally live autonomously. Though grateful, Murderbot is reluctant to have its decisions made for it, and it slips away on a cargo ship. === Artificial Condition (2018) === Murderbot makes deals with bots piloting unmanned cargo ships to travel toward the mining facility where it once malfunctioned—resulting in the death of 57 people. It hopes to learn more about the initial incident in which it went rogue, of which it has little memory. Murderbot boards the final ship and discovers the bot pilot is an unexpectedly powerful, intrusive artificial intelligence. They come to a tentative truce and watch media together during the final leg of the journey to RaviHyral, the station where the incident occurred. Murderbot learns the ship is a deep-space research vessel assigned to cargo runs during downtime, which explains why the bot pilot is so sophisticated. Murderbot reluctantly allows this artificial intelligence—which it has dubbed ART (Asshole Research Transport) due to its sarcastic personality—to make physical modifications to the SecUnit's body to allow it to pass for an augmented human, and to disconnect the data port at the back of its neck which had been used to insert a combat override module in the previous book. To gain access to the RaviHyral facility, Murderbot takes a contract as a security consultant for three scientists who are meeting with their former employer, the head and namesake of Tlacey Excavations, to negotiate the return of their research, which they believe was illegally seized by the company. Their transport craft is sabotaged, but with ART's help, Murderbot is able to land it safely. Now aware Tlacey is actively trying to kill the scientists rather than comply with their demands, Murderbot guides them through their meeting with Tlacey and thwarts another assassination attempt. Murderbot returns to the site of the massacre and learns it was the result of another mining operation's sabotage attempt using malware, which made all of the facility's SecUnits go berserk. The facility's ComfortUnits—weaponless, anatomically correct constructs sometimes disparagingly called "sexbots"—died attempting to stop the massacre. Tlacey's ComfortUnit voices its desire for freedom and willingness to help Murderbot thwart Tlacey. While the SecUnit meets with a Tlacey employee to secretly retrieve a copy of the research, Tlacey abducts one of the scientists, Tapan. Murderbot goes after her, accepting a combat override module intended to control the SecUnit but actually has no effect, due

    Read more →
  • Local ternary patterns

    Local ternary patterns

    Local ternary patterns (LTP) are an extension of local binary patterns (LBP). Unlike LBP, it does not threshold the pixels into 0 and 1, rather it uses a threshold constant to threshold pixels into three values. Considering k as the threshold constant, c as the value of the center pixel, a neighboring pixel p, the result of threshold is: { 1 , if p > c + k 0 , if p > c − k and p < c + k − 1 if p < c − k {\displaystyle {\begin{cases}1,&{\text{if }}p>c+k\\0,&{\text{if }}p>c-k{\text{ and }}p Read more →

  • Legal expert system

    Legal expert system

    A legal expert system is a domain-specific expert system that uses artificial intelligence to emulate the decision-making abilities of a human expert in the field of law. Legal expert systems employ a rule base or knowledge base and an inference engine to accumulate, reference and produce expert knowledge on specific subjects within the legal domain. == Purpose == It has been suggested that legal expert systems could help to manage the rapid expansion of legal information and decisions that began to intensify in the late 1960s. Many of the first legal expert systems were created in the 1970s and 1980s. Lawyers were originally identified as primary target users of legal expert systems. Potential motivations for this work included: quicker delivery of legal advice; reduced time spent in repetitive, labour-intensive legal tasks; development of knowledge management techniques that were not dependent on staff; reduced overhead and labour costs and higher profitability for law firms; and reduced fees for clients. Some early development work was oriented toward the creation of automated judges. One of the first use cases was the encoding of the British Nationality Act at Imperial College carried out under the supervision of Marek Sergot and Robert Kowalski. Lance Elliot wrote: "The British Nationality Act was passed in 1981 and shortly thereafter was used as a means of showcasing the efficacy of using Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques and technologies, doing so to explore how the at-the-time newly enacted statutory law might be encoded into a computerized logic-based formalization." The authors’ seminal article, "The British Nationality Act as a Logic Program," published in 1986 in the Communications of the ACM journal, is one of the first and best-known works in computational law, and one of the most widely cited papers in the field. In 2021, the Inaugural CodeX Prize was awarded to Robert Kowalski, Fariba Sadri, and Marek Sergot in acknowledgment of their groundbreaking work on the application of logic programming to the formalization and analysis of the British Nationality Act. Later work on legal expert systems has identified potential benefits to non-lawyers as a means to increase access to legal knowledge. Legal expert systems can also support administrative processes, facilitate decision-making processes, automate rule-based analyses, and exchange information directly with citizen-users. == Types == === Architectural variations === Rule-based expert systems rely on a model of deductive reasoning that utilizes "If A, then B" rules. In a rule-based legal expert system, information is represented in the form of deductive rules within the knowledge base. In rule-based legal expert systems, logic programming has historically been applied to automate complex compliance paperwork. A notable early example designed for high-volume regulatory filings was the 1999 Intelligent Filing Manager (INTELLIFM), which utilized Prolog rules as its core inference engine to automate the generation, publishing, and population of structured forms via distributed COM interfaces. Case-based reasoning models, which store and manipulate examples or cases, hold the potential to emulate an analogical reasoning process thought to be well-suited for the legal domain. This model effectively draws on known experiences our outcomes for similar problems. A neural net relies on a computer model that mimics that structure of a human brain, and operates in a very similar way to the case-based reasoning model. This expert system model is capable of recognizing and classifying patterns within the realm of legal knowledge and dealing with imprecise inputs. Fuzzy logic models attempt to create 'fuzzy' concepts or objects that can then be converted into quantitative terms or rules that are indexed and retrieved by the system. In the legal domain, fuzzy logic can be used for rule-based and case-based reasoning models. === Theoretical variations === Some legal expert system architects have adopted a very practical approach, employing scientific modes of reasoning within a given set of rules or cases. Others have opted for a broader philosophical approach inspired by jurisprudential reasoning modes emanating from established legal theoreticians. === Functional variations === Some legal expert systems aim to arrive at a particular conclusion in law, while others are designed to predict a particular outcome. An example of a predictive system is one that predicts the outcome of judicial decisions, the value of a case, or the outcome of litigation. == Reception == Many forms of legal expert systems have become widely used and accepted by both the legal community and the users of legal services. == Challenges == === Domain-related problems === The inherent complexity of law as a discipline raises immediate challenges for legal expert system knowledge engineers. Legal matters often involve interrelated facts and issues, which further compound the complexity. Factual uncertainty may also arise when there are disputed versions of factual representations that must be input into an expert system to begin the reasoning process. === Computerized problem solving === The limitations of most computerized problem solving techniques inhibit the success of many expert systems in the legal domain. Expert systems typically rely on deductive reasoning models that have difficulty according degrees of weight to certain principles of law or importance to previously decided cases that may or may not influence a decision in an immediate case or context. === Representation of legal knowledge === Expert legal knowledge can be difficult to represent or formalize within the structure of an expert system. For knowledge engineers, challenges include: Open texture: Law is rarely applied in an exact way to specific facts, and exact outcomes are rarely a certainty. Statutes may be interpreted according to different linguistic interpretations, reliance on precedent cases or other contextual factors including a particular judge's conception of fairness. The balancing of reasons: Many arguments involve considerations or reasons that are not easily represented in a logical way. For instance, many constitutional legal issues are said to balance independently well-established considerations for state interests against individual rights. Such balancing may draw on extra-legal considerations that would be difficult to represent logically in an expert system. Indeterminacy of legal reasoning: In the adversarial arena of law, it is common to have two strong arguments on a single point. Determining the 'right' answer may depend on a majority vote among expert judges, as in the case of an appeal. === Time and cost effectiveness === Creating a functioning expert system requires significant investments in software architecture, subject matter expertise and knowledge engineering. Faced with these challenges, many system architects restrict the domain in terms of subject matter and jurisdiction. The consequence of this approach is the creation of narrowly focused and geographically restricted legal expert systems that are difficult to justify on a cost-benefit basis. Current applications of AI in the legal field utilize machines to review documents, particularly when a high level of completeness and confidence in the quality of document analysis is depended upon, such as in instances of litigation and where due diligence play a role. Among the numerically most quantifiable advantages of AI in the legal field are the time and money saving impact by freeing lawyers from having to spend inordinate amounts of their valuable time on routine tasks, aiding in setting free lawyers’ creative energy by reducing stress. This in turn increases the rate of case load reduction by accomplishing better results in less time, which unlocks potential additional revenue per unit of time spend on a case. The cost of setting up and maintaining AI systems in law is more than offset by the attained savings through increased efficacy; unbalanced cost can be assigned to clients. === Lack of correctness in results or decisions === Legal expert systems may lead non-expert users to incorrect or inaccurate results and decisions. This problem could be compounded by the fact that users may rely heavily on the correctness or trustworthiness of results or decisions generated by these systems. == Examples == ASHSD-II is a hybrid legal expert system that blends rule-based and case-based reasoning models in the area of matrimonial property disputes under English law. CHIRON is a hybrid legal expert system that blends rule-based and case-based reasoning models to support tax planning activities under United States tax law and codes. JUDGE is a rule-based legal expert system that deals with sentencing in the criminal legal domain for offences relating to murder, assault and manslaughter. Legislate is a knowledge graph powered contract management platform whi

    Read more →
  • Argumentation theory

    Argumentation theory

    Argumentation theory is the interdisciplinary study of how conclusions can be supported or undermined by premises through logical reasoning. With historical origins in logic, dialectic, and rhetoric, argumentation theory includes the arts and sciences of civil debate, dialogue, conversation, and persuasion. It studies rules of inference, logic, and procedural rules in both artificial and real-world settings. Argumentation includes various forms of dialogue such as deliberation and negotiation which are concerned with collaborative decision-making procedures. It also encompasses eristic dialogue, the branch of social debate in which victory over an opponent is the primary goal, and didactic dialogue used for teaching. This discipline also studies the means by which people can express and rationally resolve or at least manage their disagreements. Argumentation is a daily occurrence, such as in public debate, science, and law. For example in law, in courts by the judge, the parties and the prosecutor, in presenting and testing the validity of evidences. Also, argumentation scholars study the post hoc rationalizations by which organizational actors try to justify decisions they have made irrationally. Argumentation is one of four rhetorical modes (also known as modes of discourse), along with exposition, description, and narration. == Key components of argumentation == Some key components of argumentation are: Understanding and identifying arguments, either explicit or implied, and the goals of the participants in the different types of dialogue. Identifying the premises from which conclusions are derived. Establishing the "burden of proof" – determining who made the initial claim and is thus responsible for providing evidence why their position merits acceptance. For the one carrying the "burden of proof", the advocate, to marshal evidence for their position in order to convince or force the opponent's acceptance. The method by which this is accomplished is producing valid, sound, and cogent arguments, devoid of weaknesses, and not easily attacked. In a debate, fulfillment of the burden of proof creates a burden of rejoinder. One must try to identify faulty reasoning in the opponent's argument, to attack the reasons/premises of the argument, to provide counterexamples if possible, to identify any fallacies, and to show why a valid conclusion cannot be derived from the reasons provided for their argument. For example, consider the following exchange, illustrating the No true Scotsman fallacy: Argument: "No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge." Reply: "But my friend Angus, who is a Scotsman, likes sugar with his porridge." Rebuttal: "Well perhaps, but no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge." In this dialogue, the proposer first offers a premise, the premise is challenged by the interlocutor, and so the proposer offers a modification of the premise, which is designed only to evade the challenge provided. == Internal structure of arguments == Typically an argument has an internal structure, comprising the following: a set of assumptions or premises, a method of reasoning or deduction, and a conclusion or point. An argument has one or more premises and one conclusion. Often classical logic is used as the method of reasoning so that the conclusion follows logically from the assumptions or support. One challenge is that if the set of assumptions is inconsistent then anything can follow logically from inconsistency. Therefore, it is common to insist that the set of assumptions be consistent. It is also good practice to require the set of assumptions to be the minimal set, with respect to set inclusion, necessary to infer the consequent. Such arguments are called MINCON arguments, short for minimal consistent. Such argumentation has been applied to the fields of law and medicine. A non-classical approach to argumentation investigates abstract arguments, where 'argument' is considered a primitive term, so no internal structure of arguments is taken into account. == Types of dialogue == In its most common form, argumentation involves an individual and an interlocutor or opponent engaged in dialogue, each contending differing positions and trying to persuade each other, but there are various types of dialogue: Persuasion dialogue aims to resolve conflicting points of view of different positions. Negotiation aims to resolve conflicts of interests by cooperation and dealmaking. Inquiry aims to resolve general ignorance by the growth of knowledge. Deliberation aims to resolve a need to take action by reaching a decision. Information seeking aims to reduce one party's ignorance by requesting information from another party that is in a position to know something. Eristic aims to resolve a situation of antagonism through verbal fighting. == Argumentation and the grounds of knowledge == Argumentation theory had its origins in foundationalism, a theory of knowledge (epistemology) in the field of philosophy. It sought to find the grounds for claims in the forms (logic) and materials (factual laws) of a universal system of knowledge. The dialectical method was made famous by Plato and his use of Socrates critically questioning various characters and historical figures. But argument scholars gradually rejected Aristotle's systematic philosophy and the idealism in Plato and Kant. They questioned and ultimately discarded the idea that argument premises take their soundness from formal philosophical systems. The field thus broadened. One of the original contributors to this trend was the philosopher Chaïm Perelman, who together with Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca introduced the French term la nouvelle rhetorique in 1958 to describe an approach to argument which is not reduced to application of formal rules of inference. Perelman's view of argumentation is much closer to a juridical one, in which rules for presenting evidence and rebuttals play an important role. Karl R. Wallace's seminal essay, "The Substance of Rhetoric: Good Reasons" in the Quarterly Journal of Speech (1963) 44, led many scholars to study "marketplace argumentation" – the ordinary arguments of ordinary people. The seminal essay on marketplace argumentation is Ray Lynn Anderson's and C. David Mortensen's "Logic and Marketplace Argumentation" Quarterly Journal of Speech 53 (1967): 143–150. This line of thinking led to a natural alliance with late developments in the sociology of knowledge. Some scholars drew connections with recent developments in philosophy, namely the pragmatism of John Dewey and Richard Rorty. Rorty has called this shift in emphasis "the linguistic turn". In this new hybrid approach argumentation is used with or without empirical evidence to establish convincing conclusions about issues which are moral, scientific, epistemic, or of a nature in which science alone cannot answer. Out of pragmatism and many intellectual developments in the humanities and social sciences, "non-philosophical" argumentation theories grew which located the formal and material grounds of arguments in particular intellectual fields. These theories include informal logic, social epistemology, ethnomethodology, speech acts, the sociology of knowledge, the sociology of science, and social psychology. These new theories are not non-logical or anti-logical. They find logical coherence in most communities of discourse. These theories are thus often labeled "sociological" in that they focus on the social grounds of knowledge. == Kinds of argumentation == === Conversational argumentation === The study of naturally occurring conversation arose from the field of sociolinguistics. It is usually called conversation analysis (CA). Inspired by ethnomethodology, it was developed in the late 1960s and early 1970s principally by the sociologist Harvey Sacks and, among others, his close associates Emanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson. Sacks died early in his career, but his work was championed by others in his field, and CA has now become an established force in sociology, anthropology, linguistics, speech-communication and psychology. It is particularly influential in interactional sociolinguistics, discourse analysis and discursive psychology, as well as being a coherent discipline in its own right. Recently CA techniques of sequential analysis have been employed by phoneticians to explore the fine phonetic details of speech. Empirical studies and theoretical formulations by Sally Jackson and Scott Jacobs, and several generations of their students, have described argumentation as a form of managing conversational disagreement within communication contexts and systems that naturally prefer agreement. === Mathematical argumentation === The basis of mathematical truth has been the subject of long debate. Frege in particular sought to demonstrate (see Gottlob Frege, The Foundations of Arithmetic, 1884, and Begriffsschrift, 1879) that arithmetical truths can be derived from purely logical axioms and therefore are, in th

    Read more →
  • Sugeno integral

    Sugeno integral

    In mathematics, the Sugeno integral, introduced by Michio Sugeno as a fuzzy integral in work on fuzzy measures at the Tokyo Institute of Technology, is a type of integral with respect to a fuzzy measure. Let ( X , Ω ) {\displaystyle (X,\Omega )} be a measurable space and let h : X → [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle h:X\to [0,1]} be an Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } -measurable function. The Sugeno integral over the crisp set A ⊆ X {\displaystyle A\subseteq X} of the function h {\displaystyle h} with respect to the fuzzy measure g {\displaystyle g} is defined by: ∫ A h ( x ) ∘ g = sup E ⊆ X [ min ( min x ∈ E h ( x ) , g ( A ∩ E ) ) ] = sup α ∈ [ 0 , 1 ] [ min ( α , g ( A ∩ F α ) ) ] {\displaystyle \int _{A}h(x)\circ g={\sup _{E\subseteq X}}\left[\min \left(\min _{x\in E}h(x),g(A\cap E)\right)\right]={\sup _{\alpha \in [0,1]}}\left[\min \left(\alpha ,g(A\cap F_{\alpha })\right)\right]} where F α = { x | h ( x ) ≥ α } {\displaystyle F_{\alpha }=\left\{x|h(x)\geq \alpha \right\}} . The Sugeno integral over the fuzzy set A ~ {\displaystyle {\tilde {A}}} of the function h {\displaystyle h} with respect to the fuzzy measure g {\displaystyle g} is defined by: ∫ A h ( x ) ∘ g = ∫ X [ h A ( x ) ∧ h ( x ) ] ∘ g {\displaystyle \int _{A}h(x)\circ g=\int _{X}\left[h_{A}(x)\wedge h(x)\right]\circ g} where h A ( x ) {\displaystyle h_{A}(x)} is the membership function of the fuzzy set A ~ {\displaystyle {\tilde {A}}} . == Usage and Relationships == Sugeno integral is related to h-index.

    Read more →
  • Template matching

    Template matching

    Template matching is a technique in digital image processing for finding small parts of an image which match a template image. It can be used for quality control in manufacturing, navigation of mobile robots, or edge detection in images. The main challenges in a template matching task are detection of occlusion, when a sought-after object is partly hidden in an image; detection of non-rigid transformations, when an object is distorted or imaged from different angles; sensitivity to illumination and background changes; background clutter; and scale changes. == Feature-based approach == The feature-based approach to template matching relies on the extraction of image features, such as shapes, textures, and colors, that match the target image or frame. This approach is usually achieved using neural networks and deep-learning classifiers such as VGG, AlexNet, and ResNet.Convolutional neural networks (CNNs), which many modern classifiers are based on, process an image by passing it through different hidden layers, producing a vector at each layer with classification information about the image. These vectors are extracted from the network and used as the features of the image. Feature extraction using deep neural networks, like CNNs, has proven extremely effective has become the standard in state-of-the-art template matching algorithms. This feature-based approach is often more robust than the template-based approach described below. As such, it has become the state-of-the-art method for template matching, as it can match templates with non-rigid and out-of-plane transformations, as well as high background clutter and illumination changes. == Template-based approach == For templates without strong features, or for when the bulk of a template image constitutes the matching image as a whole, a template-based approach may be effective. Since template-based matching may require sampling of a large number of data points, it is often desirable to reduce the number of sampling points by reducing the resolution of search and template images by the same factor before performing the operation on the resultant downsized images. This pre-processing method creates a multi-scale, or pyramid, representation of images, providing a reduced search window of data points within a search image so that the template does not have to be compared with every viable data point. Pyramid representations are a method of dimensionality reduction, a common aim of machine learning on data sets that suffer the curse of dimensionality. == Common challenges == In instances where the template may not provide a direct match, it may be useful to implement eigenspaces to create templates that detail the matching object under a number of different conditions, such as varying perspectives, illuminations, color contrasts, or object poses. For example, if an algorithm is looking for a face, its template eigenspaces may consist of images (i.e., templates) of faces in different positions to the camera, in different lighting conditions, or with different expressions (i.e., poses). It is also possible for a matching image to be obscured or occluded by an object. In these cases, it is unreasonable to provide a multitude of templates to cover each possible occlusion. For example, the search object may be a playing card, and in some of the search images, the card is obscured by the fingers of someone holding the card, or by another card on top of it, or by some other object in front of the camera. In cases where the object is malleable or poseable, motion becomes an additional problem, and problems involving both motion and occlusion become ambiguous. In these cases, one possible solution is to divide the template image into multiple sub-images and perform matching on each subdivision. == Deformable templates in computational anatomy == Template matching is a central tool in computational anatomy (CA). In this field, a deformable template model is used to model the space of human anatomies and their orbits under the group of diffeomorphisms, functions which smoothly deform an object. Template matching arises as an approach to finding the unknown diffeomorphism that acts on a template image to match the target image. Template matching algorithms in CA have come to be called large deformation diffeomorphic metric mappings (LDDMMs). Currently, there are LDDMM template matching algorithms for matching anatomical landmark points, curves, surfaces, volumes. == Template-based matching explained using cross correlation or sum of absolute differences == A basic method of template matching sometimes called "Linear Spatial Filtering" uses an image patch (i.e., the "template image" or "filter mask") tailored to a specific feature of search images to detect. This technique can be easily performed on grey images or edge images, where the additional variable of color is either not present or not relevant. Cross correlation techniques compare the similarities of the search and template images. Their outputs should be highest at places where the image structure matches the template structure, i.e., where large search image values get multiplied by large template image values. This method is normally implemented by first picking out a part of a search image to use as a template. Let S ( x , y ) {\displaystyle S(x,y)} represent the value of a search image pixel, where ( x , y ) {\displaystyle (x,y)} represents the coordinates of the pixel in the search image. For simplicity, assume pixel values are scalar, as in a greyscale image. Similarly, let T ( x t , y t ) {\textstyle T(x_{t},y_{t})} represent the value of a template pixel, where ( x t , y t ) {\textstyle (x_{t},y_{t})} represents the coordinates of the pixel in the template image. To apply the filter, simply move the center (or origin) of the template image over each point in the search image and calculate the sum of products, similar to a dot product, between the pixel values in the search and template images over the whole area spanned by the template. More formally, if ( 0 , 0 ) {\displaystyle (0,0)} is the center (or origin) of the template image, then the cross correlation T ⋆ S {\displaystyle T\star S} at each point ( x , y ) {\displaystyle (x,y)} in the search image can be computed as: ( T ⋆ S ) ( x , y ) = ∑ ( x t , y t ) ∈ T T ( x t , y t ) ⋅ S ( x t + x , y t + y ) {\displaystyle (T\star S)(x,y)=\sum _{(x_{t},y_{t})\in T}T(x_{t},y_{t})\cdot S(x_{t}+x,y_{t}+y)} For convenience, T {\displaystyle T} denotes both the pixel values of the template image as well as its domain, the bounds of the template. Note that all possible positions of the template with respect to the search image are considered. Since cross correlation values are greatest when the values of the search and template pixels align, the best matching position ( x m , y m ) {\displaystyle (x_{m},y_{m})} corresponds to the maximum value of T ⋆ S {\displaystyle T\star S} over S {\displaystyle S} . Another way to handle translation problems on images using template matching is to compare the intensities of the pixels, using the sum of absolute differences (SAD) measure. To formulate this, let I S ( x s , y s ) {\displaystyle I_{S}(x_{s},y_{s})} and I T ( x t , y t ) {\displaystyle I_{T}(x_{t},y_{t})} denote the light intensity of pixels in the search and template images with coordinates ( x s , y s ) {\displaystyle (x_{s},y_{s})} and ( x t , y t ) {\displaystyle (x_{t},y_{t})} , respectively. Then by moving the center (or origin) of the template to a point ( x , y ) {\displaystyle (x,y)} in the search image, as before, the sum of absolute differences between the template and search pixel intensities at that point is: S A D ( x , y ) = ∑ ( x t , y t ) ∈ T | I T ( x t , y t ) − I S ( x t + x , y t + y ) | {\displaystyle SAD(x,y)=\sum _{(x_{t},y_{t})\in T}\left\vert I_{T}(x_{t},y_{t})-I_{S}(x_{t}+x,y_{t}+y)\right\vert } With this measure, the lowest SAD gives the best position for the template, rather than the greatest as with cross correlation. SAD tends to be relatively simple to implement and understand, but it also tends to be relatively slow to execute. A simple C++ implementation of SAD template matching is given below. == Implementation == In this simple implementation, it is assumed that the above described method is applied on grey images: This is why Grey is used as pixel intensity. The final position in this implementation gives the top left location for where the template image best matches the search image. One way to perform template matching on color images is to decompose the pixels into their color components and measure the quality of match between the color template and search image using the sum of the SAD computed for each color separately. == Speeding up the process == In the past, this type of spatial filtering was normally only used in dedicated hardware solutions because of the computational complexity of the operation, however we can lessen this complexity b

    Read more →
  • Ganimal

    Ganimal

    A ganimal, also commonly referred to as GANimal, is a hybrid animal created with generative artificial intelligence systems, such as generative adversarial networks (GANs) or diffusion models. The concept was created for a website from the MIT Media Lab in 2020, where users could create ganimal images. 78,210 ganimals were generated from hybrid pairs of animal labels from BigGAN (G1) and 3,058,362,945 ganimals generated from blending G1 ganimals. The term ganimal is a portmanteau between the words GAN and animal. It is typically used to refer to a hybrid animal generated by interpolating between distinct species; the term can also refer to any AI-generated creatures that have not been identified in reality. The ganimal concept is similar to Artbreeder, an online website for blending images with AI. == Meet the Ganimals == Meet the Ganimals was an online platform from the MIT Media Lab that allowed visitors to generate, blend and curate ganimals. By June 2020, 44,791 ganimals had been generated, 8,547 ganimals bred, and 743 ganimals named by a total of 10,657 users. The site also had an educational component where visitors could play with blending and learn about AI. == Evolution and ganimal morphology == Because ganimals exist within an attention economy and evolve based on human preferences, charismatic megafauna (e.g. ganimals with cute, dog-like morphologies) become the most popular. However, social cues can increase the diversity of the ganimals ecosystem and lead to the success of unconventional ganimals, such as those without eyes or that live underwater. == The Barracuda Effect == Although there is typically no human morphology used to synthesize ganimals, creepy humanoid characters would emerge whenever animals were bred with a barracuda. This occurs because many pictures on the internet of barracudas include a human holding the fish up as a prized catch. This highlights a cultural form of algorithmic bias embedded in the training data of AI systems. == In popular culture == Ganimals have appeared in the Artificial Intelligence exhibition at the Vienna Technical Museum. They also appeared in the Ties That Cannot Be Unbound virtual exhibition at New Art City.

    Read more →
  • Yu-Gi-Oh! VRAINS

    Yu-Gi-Oh! VRAINS

    Yu-Gi-Oh! VRAINS (遊☆戯☆王VRAINS, Yū Gi Ō Vureinzu) is a Japanese anime series created and animated by Nihon Ad Systems (NAS) and Gallop. It is the fifth anime spin-off in the Yu-Gi-Oh! franchise. The series aired in Japan on TV Tokyo from May 10, 2017 to September 25, 2019. It was simulcast outside of Asia by Crunchyroll courtesy of Konami Cross Media NY. It premiered in the United States on November 3, 2020 on Pluto TV. The term 'VRAINS' derives from 'Virtual Reality' (VR), 'Artificial Intelligence' (AI), 'Network System' (NS). The series revolves around the exploits of the protagonist Yusaku within the virtual world named VRAINS. In addition to featuring previous summoning mechanics, VRAINS introduces the new "Link Summon" mechanic. The series was succeeded by Yu-Gi-Oh! Sevens, which premiered in Japan on April 4, 2020. == Plot == In a place known as Den City, thousands of duelists take part in a virtual reality space known as LINK VRAINS, created by SOL Technologies, where users can create unique avatars and participate in games of Duel Monsters with each other. As a mysterious hacker organization known as the Knights of Hanoi, led by Varis, threatens this world, a high-school student and hacking genius named Yusaku Fujiki battles against them under the guise of Playmaker. Both the Knights and SOL Technologies are also after a peculiar self-aware artificial intelligence program, who holds the key to a secret area inside the network named the Cyberse World, which the Knights of Hanoi seek to destroy. As the series begins, Yusaku sees the chance to capture this AI, which he names Ai, who sets off a digital maelstrom in LINK VRAINS known as the Data Storm. As the appearance of this storm gives birth to Speed Duels, in which duellists surf the wind as they duel, Yusaku battles against Hanoi in order to uncover the truth concerning an incident that happened to him 10 years ago. With the help of two Charisma Duellists, Go Onizuka (Japanese) and Skye Zaizen, who uses the alias Blue Angel (season 1), and Blue Maiden (season 2 onwards) online, Playmaker is able to defeat Varis, saving the entire network and part ways with Ai who decides to return to his own world, the Cyberse World. Three months after Hanoi's fall, Ai discovers the Cyberse World destroyed and his friends nowhere to be found, prompting him to return to Yusaku. Meanwhile, Yusaku once again fights as Playmaker after the consciousness of the younger brother of his friend, Cal Kolter, is stolen by a mysterious enemy named Bohman. In pursuit of Bohman, Yusaku and Ai are joined by Theodore Hamilton, a victim of the Lost Incident like Yusaku who uses the alias of Soulburner online and Ai's Fire Ignis friend based on Theodore, Flame. Aqua, the Water Ignis, follows soon after by becoming Skye's partner. At the same time, Varis revives Knights of Hanoi to fight against the new enemies. It's revealed that Bohman is a sentient AI created by the Light Ignis, Lightning, who reveals that he's the one who destroyed the Cyberse World and steals Cal's brother's consciousness. Deeming Ignis superior, he decides to destroy humanity. The Wind Ignis, Windy, also assists Lightning after his program was forcefully rewritten. To defeat Lightning's team, Yusaku and his friends join forces with Knights of Hanoi and enter Lightning's stronghold. Both sides fight until only Playmaker, Ai, and Bohman are left with the latter having absorbed all other Ignis. Before perishing, both Flame and Aqua give Ai the last of their powers, allowing him and Playmaker to defeat Bohman. After the fight against Bohman, LINK VRAINS is shut down and Ai disappear together with Yusaku's robot, Roboppi. Replacing LINK VRAINS, SOL Technology develops a humanoid robot SOLtis, which Ai and Roboppi uses to infiltrate SOL Technology and attack its high executive, Queen. Knowing he'll be the next target, Skye's older brother, Akira, enlists the help of Playmaker and his friends as well as Knights of Hanoi once more to protect him. Ai and Roboppi manage to defeat everyone except Playmaker, Soulburner, and Varis, who are forced to fight decoys. After defeating Akira and taking over SOL Technology, Ai reopens LINK VRAINS and delivers a message for Playmaker that tells the whereabout of his location. Yusaku confronts Ai alone, leading the two of them to duel. Ai explains that Lightning left behind a simulation that shows the world will be destroyed if Ai is the only Ignis left. Fearing that he'll become like Lightning and Bohman, Ai decides to end his life either by Playmaker's hand if he loses or by scattering his free will into the SOLtis if he wins. Despite Playmaker's attempt to dissuade Ai, he still refuses to back down, forcing Playmaker to defeat him. In his last moment, Ai reveals that within the simulations, Yusaku always ends up dying protecting him, which is a future that he wishes to avoid. Three months after the final battle, everyone moves on with their lives and Yusaku goes on a journey. Somewhere within the network, Ai is revealed to be alive. == Production == Yu-Gi-Oh! VRAINS was first announced on December 16, 2016. It began airing on TV Tokyo in Japan on May 10, 2017. The series is being directed by Masahiro Hosoda at Studio Gallop with screenplay by Shin Yoshida and character design by Ken'ichi Hara. It would be the final anime series in the franchise to be animated by Gallop; Bridge would animate future instalments beginning with Yu-Gi-Oh! Sevens. The series ended on September 25, 2019. The series is being simulcast with English subtitles outside of Asia by Crunchyroll. This makes it the first series in the Yu-Gi-Oh! franchise to receive an official simulcast alongside its Japanese broadcast. A localized English adaptation was produced by Konami Cross Media NY. The pilot episode was previewed along with a digitally remastered screening of Yu-Gi-Oh! The Movie: Pyramid of Light on March 11, 2018 and March 12, 2018 in the US, and on June 13, 2018 in the UK. The English dub began airing on Teletoon in Canada on September 1, 2018, and on 9Go! in Australia on April 6, 2019. In November 2020, Cinedigm announced that the streaming service Pluto TV has secured exclusive rights in multiple territories, including the United States and Latin America, to VRAINS. Pluto TV would launch a channel dedicated to the Yu-Gi-Oh! franchise, featuring episodes from the entire Yu-Gi-Oh! Duel Monsters metaseries, including VRAINS, available in English and dubbed in multiple languages. == Trading Card Game == Yu-Gi-Oh! VRAINS introduces new gameplay elements to the Yu-Gi-Oh! Trading Card Game. With the release of the "Link Strike Starter Deck", it introduced the New Master Rules (also known as Master Rule 4 in some countries) to the competitive field of play. Now, only one monster can be summoned directly from each player's Extra Deck at a time, which is placed in one of the two new zones in the middle of the field called the "Extra Monster Zone". Complementing this new gameplay element are the new Link Monsters, honey-comb blue colored monsters that go into your Extra Deck. They do not have "Levels" or "Ranks", but instead have a "Link Rating", which indicates the number of arrows on the card and the required number of monsters required to summon them. A Link Monster's Link Rating can also be used as a number of materials for a Link Summon depending on their rating, subtracted from the Link Monster the player wishes to summon. Link Monsters have a number of Link Arrows equal to their Link Rating that point either vertically, horizontally, and/or diagonally. These Link Arrows that point to an empty Main Monster Zone allow the player to summon monsters from the Extra Deck, which include face-up Pendulum Monsters. The two Pendulum Zones have been moved to the far ends of the Spell & Trap Zones, though they also double as regular Spell & Trap Zones should the player wish not to use them. In 2019, a new format exclusive to the TCG was introduced separate from the main game, known as Speed Duels. The rules are similar to the main game and parallel the formatting used in the mobile game Duel Links. A format meant as a beginner's introduction to the basics, both the field and each player's decks have been drastically simplified to reflect that. Decks contain only 20-30 cards, each player gets only three Main Monster zones, and a turn will immediately end following the Battle Phase. Exclusive to Speed Duels, each player is allowed one Skill Card, which a player places face down during the beginning of a duel and can use anytime. == Reception == The series ranked 52 in Tokyo Anime Award Festival in Best 100 TV Anime 2017 category. The series' rank rose up to 8 in the same award in 2020 with 28,369 votes.

    Read more →
  • Computational law

    Computational law

    Computational law is the branch of legal informatics concerned with the automation of legal reasoning. What distinguishes Computational Law systems from other instances of legal technology is their autonomy, i.e. the ability to answer legal questions without additional input from human legal experts. While there are many possible applications of Computational Law, the primary focus of work in the field today is compliance management, i.e. the development and deployment of computer systems capable of assessing, facilitating, or enforcing compliance with rules and regulations. Some systems of this sort already exist. TurboTax is a good example. And the potential is particularly significant now due to recent technological advances – including the prevalence of the Internet in human interaction and the proliferation of embedded computer systems (such as smart phones, self-driving cars, and robots). There are also applications that do not involve governmental laws. The regulations can just as well be the terms of contracts (e.g. delivery schedules, insurance covenants, real estate transactions, financial agreements). They can be the policies of corporations (e.g. constraints on travel, expenditure reporting, pricing rules). They can even be the rules of games (embodied in computer game playing systems). == History == Speculation about potential benefits to legal practice through applying methods from computational science and AI research to automate parts of the law date back at least to the middle 1940s. Further, AI and law and computational law do not seem easily separable, as perhaps most of AI research focusing on the law and its automation appears to utilize computational methods. The forms that speculation took are multiple and not all related in ways to readily show closeness to one another. This history will sketch them as they were, attempting to show relationships where they can be found to have existed. By 1949, a minor academic field aiming to incorporate electronic and computational methods to legal problems had been founded by American legal scholars, called jurimetrics. Though broadly said to be concerned with the application of the "methods of science" to the law, these methods were actually of a quite specifically defined scope. Jurimetrics was to be "concerned with such matters as the quantitative analysis of judicial behavior, the application of communication and information theory to legal expression, the use of mathematical logic in law, the retrieval of legal data by electronic and mechanical means, and the formulation of a calculus of legal predictability". These interests led in 1959 to the founding a journal, Modern Uses of Logic in Law, as a forum wherein articles would be published about the applications of techniques such as mathematical logic, engineering, statistics, etc. to the legal study and development. In 1966, this Journal was renamed as Jurimetrics. Today, however, the journal and meaning of jurimetrics seems to have broadened far beyond what would fit under the areas of applications of computers and computational methods to law. Today the journal not only publishes articles on such practices as found in computational law, but has broadened jurimetrical concerns to mean also things like the use of social science in law or the "policy implications [of] and legislative and administrative control of science". Independently in 1958, at the Conference for the Mechanization of Thought held at the National Physical Laboratory in Teddington, Middlesex, UK, the French jurist Lucien Mehl presented a paper both on the benefits of using computational methods for law and on the potential means to use such methods to automate law for a discussion that included AI luminaries like Marvin Minsky. Mehl believed that the law could by automated by two basic distinct, though not wholly separable, types of machine. These were the "documentary or information machine", which would provide the legal researcher quick access to relevant case precedents and legal scholarship, and the "consultation machine", which would be "capable of answering any question put to it over a vast field of law". The latter type of machine would be able to basically do much of a lawyer's job by simply giving the "exact answer to a [legal] problem put to it". By 1970, Mehl's first type of machine, one that would be able to retrieve information, had been accomplished but there seems to have been little consideration of further fruitful intersections between AI and legal research. There were, however, still hopes that computers could model the lawyer's thought processes through computational methods and then apply that capacity to solve legal problems, thus automating and improving legal services via increased efficiency as well as shedding light on the nature of legal reasoning. By the late 1970s, computer science and the affordability of computer technology had progressed enough that the retrieval of "legal data by electronic and mechanical means" had been achieved by machines fitting Mehl's first type and were in common use in American law firms. During this time, research focused on improving the goals of the early 1970s occurred, with programs like Taxman being worked on in order to both bring useful computer technology into the law as practical aids and to help specify the exact nature of legal concepts. Nonetheless, progress on the second type of machine, one that would more fully automate the law, remained relatively inert. Research into machines that could answer questions in the way that Mehl's consultation machine would picked up somewhat in the late 1970s and 1980s. A 1979 convention in Swansea, Wales marked the first international effort solely to focus upon applying artificial intelligence research to legal problems in order to "consider how computers can be used to discover and apply the legal norms embedded within the written sources of the law". Considerable progress on the development of the second type of machine was made in the following decade, with the development of a variety of expert systems. According to Thorne McCarty, "these systems all have the following characteristics: They do backward chaining inference from a specified goal; they ask questions to elicit information from the user; and they produce a suggested answer along with a trace of the supporting legal rules." According to Prakken and Sartor the representation of the British Nationality Act as a logic program, which introduced this approach, was "hugely influential for the development of computational representations of legislation, showing how logic programming enables intuitively appealing representations that can be directly deployed to generate automatic inferences". In 2021, this work received the Inaugural CodeX Prize as "one of the first and best-known works in computational law, and one of the most widely cited papers in the field." In a 1988 review of Anne Gardner's book An Artificial Intelligence Approach to Legal Reasoning (1987), the Harvard academic legal scholar and computer scientist Edwina Rissland wrote that "She plays, in part, the role of pioneer; artificial intelligence ("AI") techniques have not yet been widely applied to perform legal tasks. Therefore, Gardner, and this review, first describe and define the field, then demonstrate a working model in the domain of contract offer and acceptance." Eight years after the Swansea conference had passed, and still AI and law researchers merely trying to delineate the field could be described by their own kind as "pioneer[s]". In the 1990s and early 2000s more progress occurred. Computational research generated insights for law. The First International Conference on AI and the Law occurred in 1987, but it is in the 1990s and 2000s that the biannual conference began to build up steam and to delve more deeply into the issues involved with work intersecting computational methods, AI, and law. Classes began to be taught to undergraduates on the uses of computational methods to automating, understanding, and obeying the law. Further, by 2005, a team largely composed of Stanford computer scientists from the Stanford Logic group had devoted themselves to studying the uses of computational techniques to the law. Computational methods in fact advanced enough that members of the legal profession began in the 2000s to both analyze, predict and worry about the potential future of computational law and a new academic field of computational legal studies seems to be now well established. As insight into what such scholars see in the law's future due in part to computational law, here is quote from a recent conference about the "New Normal" for the legal profession: "Over the last 5 years, in the fallout of the Great Recession, the legal profession has entered the era of the New Normal. Notably, a series of forces related to technological change, globalization, and the pressure to do more with less (in both corpo

    Read more →
  • Motor theory of speech perception

    Motor theory of speech perception

    The motor theory of speech perception is the hypothesis that people perceive spoken words by identifying the vocal tract gestures with which they are pronounced rather than by identifying the sound patterns that speech generates. It originally claimed that speech perception is done through a specialized module that is innate and human-specific. Though the idea of a module has been qualified in more recent versions of the theory, the idea remains that the role of the speech motor system is not only to produce speech articulations but also to detect them. The hypothesis has gained more interest outside the field of speech perception than inside. This has increased particularly since the discovery of mirror neurons that link the production and perception of motor movements, including those made by the vocal tract. The theory was initially proposed in the Haskins Laboratories in the 1950s by Alvin Liberman and Franklin S. Cooper, and developed further by Donald Shankweiler, Michael Studdert-Kennedy, Ignatius Mattingly, Carol Fowler and Douglas Whalen. == Origins and development == The hypothesis has its origins in research using pattern playback to create reading machines for the blind that would substitute sounds for orthographic letters. This led to a close examination of how spoken sounds correspond to the acoustic spectrogram of them as a sequence of auditory sounds. This found that successive consonants and vowels overlap in time with one another (a phenomenon known as coarticulation). This suggested that speech is not heard like an acoustic "alphabet" or "cipher," but as a "code" of overlapping speech gestures. === Associationist approach === Initially, the theory was associationist: infants mimic the speech they hear and that this leads to behavioristic associations between articulation and its sensory consequences. Later, this overt mimicry would be short-circuited and become speech perception. This aspect of the theory was dropped, however, with the discovery that prelinguistic infants could already detect most of the phonetic contrasts used to separate different speech sounds. === Cognitivist approach === The behavioristic approach was replaced by a cognitivist one in which there was a speech module. The module detected speech in terms of hidden distal objects rather than at the proximal or immediate level of their input. The evidence for this was the research finding that speech processing was special such as duplex perception. === Changing distal objects === Initially, speech perception was assumed to link to speech objects that were both the invariant movements of speech articulators the invariant motor commands sent to muscles to move the vocal tract articulators This was later revised to include the phonetic gestures rather than motor commands, and then the gestures intended by the speaker at a prevocal, linguistic level, rather than actual movements. === Modern revision === The "speech is special" claim has been dropped, as it was found that speech perception could occur for nonspeech sounds (for example, slamming doors for duplex perception). === Mirror neurons === The discovery of mirror neurons has led to renewed interest in the motor theory of speech perception, and the theory still has its advocates, although there are also critics. == Support == === Nonauditory gesture information === If speech is identified in terms of how it is physically made, then nonauditory information should be incorporated into speech percepts even if it is still subjectively heard as "sounds". This is, in fact, the case. The McGurk effect shows that seeing the production of a spoken syllable that differs from an auditory cue synchronized with it affects the perception of the auditory one. In other words, if someone hears "ba" but sees a video of someone pronouncing "ga", what they hear is different—some people believe they hear "da". People find it easier to hear speech in noise if they can see the speaker. People can hear syllables better when their production can be felt haptically. === Categorical perception === Using a speech synthesizer, speech sounds can be varied in place of articulation along a continuum from /bɑ/ to /dɑ/ to /ɡɑ/, or in voice onset time on a continuum from /dɑ/ to /tɑ/ (for example). When listeners are asked to discriminate between two different sounds, they perceive sounds as belonging to discrete categories, even though the sounds vary continuously. In other words, 10 sounds (with the sound on one extreme being /dɑ/ and the sound on the other extreme being /tɑ/, and the ones in the middle varying on a scale) may all be acoustically different from one another, but the listener will hear all of them as either /dɑ/ or /tɑ/. Likewise, the English consonant /d/ may vary in its acoustic details across different phonetic contexts (the /d/ in /du/ does not technically sound the same as the one in /di/, for example), but all /d/'s as perceived by a listener fall within one category (voiced alveolar plosive) and that is because "linguistic representations are abstract, canonical, phonetic segments or the gestures that underlie these segments." This suggests that humans identify speech using categorical perception, and thus that a specialized module, such as that proposed by the motor theory of speech perception, may be on the right track. === Speech imitation === If people can hear the gestures in speech, then the imitation of speech should be very fast, as in when words are repeated that are heard in headphones as in speech shadowing. People can repeat heard syllables more quickly than they would be able to produce them normally. === Speech production === Hearing speech activates vocal tract muscles, and the motor cortex and premotor cortex. The integration of auditory and visual input in speech perception also involves such areas. Disrupting the premotor cortex disrupts the perception of speech units such as plosives. The activation of the motor areas occurs in terms of the phonemic features which link with the vocal track articulators that create speech gestures. The perception of a speech sound is aided by pre-emptively stimulating the motor representation of the articulators responsible for its pronunciation . Auditory and motor cortical coupling is restricted to a specific range of neuronal firing frequency. === Perception-action meshing === Evidence exists that perception and production are generally coupled in the motor system. This is supported by the existence of mirror neurons that are activated both by seeing (or hearing) an action and when that action is carried out. Another source of evidence is that for common coding theory between the representations used for perception and action. == Criticisms == The motor theory of speech perception is not widely held in the field of speech perception, though it is more popular in other fields, such as theoretical linguistics. As three of its advocates have noted, "it has few proponents within the field of speech perception, and many authors cite it primarily to offer critical commentary".p. 361 Several critiques of it exist. === Multiple sources === Speech perception is affected by nonproduction sources of information, such as context. Individual words are hard to understand in isolation but easy when heard in sentence context. It therefore seems that speech perception uses multiple sources that are integrated together in an optimal way. === Production === The motor theory of speech perception would predict that speech motor abilities in infants predict their speech perception abilities, but in actuality it is the other way around. It would also predict that defects in speech production would impair speech perception, but they do not. However, this only affects the first and already superseded behaviorist version of the theory, where infants were supposed to learn all production-perception patterns by imitation early in childhood. This is no longer the mainstream view of motor-speech theorists. === Speech module === Several sources of evidence for a specialized speech module have failed to be supported. Duplex perception can be observed with door slams. The McGurk effect can also be achieved with nonlinguistic stimuli, such as showing someone a video of a basketball bouncing but playing the sound of a ping-pong ball bouncing. As for categorical perception, listeners can be sensitive to acoustic differences within single phonetic categories. As a result, this part of the theory has been dropped by some researchers. === Sublexical tasks === The evidence provided for the motor theory of speech perception is limited to tasks such as syllable discrimination that use speech units not full spoken words or spoken sentences. As a result, "speech perception is sometimes interpreted as referring to the perception of speech at the sublexical level. However, the ultimate goal of these studies is presumably to understand the neural processes supporting the ability to process spee

    Read more →
  • Smartglasses

    Smartglasses

    Smartglasses or smart glasses are eye or head-worn wearable computers. Many smartglasses include displays that add information alongside or to what the wearer sees. Alternatively, smartglasses are sometimes defined as glasses that are able to change their optical properties, such as smart sunglasses that are programmed to change tint by electronic means. Alternatively, smartglasses are sometimes defined as glasses that include headphone functionality. A pair of smartglasses can be considered an augmented reality device if it performs pose tracking. Superimposing information onto a field of view is achieved through an optical head-mounted display (OHMD) or embedded wireless glasses with transparent heads-up display (HUD) or augmented reality (AR) overlay. These systems have the capability to reflect projected digital images as well as allowing the user to see through it or see better with it. While early models can perform basic tasks, such as serving as a front end display for a remote system, as in the case of smartglasses utilizing cellular technology or Wi-Fi, modern smart glasses are effectively wearable computers which can run self-contained mobile apps. Some are handsfree and can communicate with the Internet via natural language voice commands, while others use touch buttons. Like other computers, smartglasses may collect information from internal or external sensors. It may control or retrieve data from other instruments or computers. In most cases, it supports wireless technologies like Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, and GPS. A small number of models run a mobile operating system and function as portable media players to send audio and video files to the user via a Bluetooth or WiFi headset. Some smartglasses models also feature full lifelogging and activity tracker capability. Smartglasses devices may also have features found on a smartphone. Some have activity tracker functionality features (also known as "fitness tracker") as seen in some GPS watches. == Features and applications == As with other lifelogging and activity tracking devices, the GPS tracking unit and digital camera of some smartglasses can be used to record historical data. For example, after the completion of a workout, data can be uploaded into a computer or online to create a log of exercise activities for analysis. Some smart watches can serve as full GPS navigation devices, displaying maps and current coordinates. Users can "mark" their current location and then edit the entry's name and coordinates, which enables navigation to those new coordinates. Although some smartglasses models manufactured in the 21st century are completely functional as standalone products, most manufacturers recommend or even require that consumers purchase mobile phone handsets that run the same operating system so that the two devices can be synchronized for additional and enhanced functionality. The smartglasses can work as an extension, for head-up display (HUD) or remote control of the phone and alert the user to communication data such as calls, SMS messages, emails, and calendar invites. === Security applications === Smart glasses could be used as a body camera. In 2018, Chinese police in Zhengzhou and Beijing were using smart glasses to take photos which are compared against a government database using facial recognition to identify suspects, retrieve an address, and track people moving beyond their home areas. === Sport applications === Smart glasses are used in sports like cycling, running, skiing, golf, tennis, or sailing, giving athletes real-time, heads-up data without looking down at the screen of a watch or smartphone. In 2025, Meta has announced a new partnership with sports eyewear brand Oakley. === Healthcare applications === Several proofs of concept for Google Glasses have been proposed in healthcare. In July 2013, Lucien Engelen started research on the usability and impact of Google Glass in health care. Engelen, who is based at Singularity University and in Europe at Radboud University Medical Center, is participating in the Glass Explorer program. Key findings of Engelen's research included: The quality of pictures and video are usable for healthcare education, reference, and remote consultation. The camera needs to be tilted to different angle for most of the operative procedures Tele-consultation is possible—depending on the available bandwidth—during operative procedures. A stabilizer should be added to the video function to prevent choppy transmission when a surgeon looks to screens or colleagues. Battery life can be easily extended with the use of an external battery. Controlling the device and/or programs from another device is needed for some features because of a sterile environment. Text-to-speech ("Take a Note" to Evernote) exhibited a correction rate of 60 percent, without the addition of a medical thesaurus. A protocol or checklist displayed on the screen of Google Glass can be helpful during procedures. Dr. Phil Haslam and Dr. Sebastian Mafeld demonstrated the first concept for Google Glass in the field of interventional radiology. They demonstrated the manner in which the concept of Google Glass could assist a liver biopsy and fistulaplasty, and the pair stated that Google Glass has the potential to improve patient safety, operator comfort, and procedure efficiency in the field of interventional radiology. In June 2013, surgeon Dr. Rafael Grossmann was the first person to integrate Google Glass into the operating theater, when he wore the device during a PEG (percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy) procedure. In August 2013, Google Glass was also used at Wexner Medical Center at Ohio State University. Surgeon Dr. Christopher Kaeding used Google Glass to consult with a colleague in a distant part of Columbus, Ohio. A group of students at The Ohio State University College of Medicine also observed the operation on their laptop computers. Following the procedure, Kaeding stated, "To be honest, once we got into the surgery, I often forgot the device was there. It just seemed very intuitive and fit seamlessly." 16 November 2013, in Santiago de Chile, the maxillofacial team led by Dr.gn Antonio Marino conducted the first orthognathic surgery assisted with Google Glass in Latin America, interacting with them and working with simultaneous three-dimensional navigation. The surgical team was interviewed by ADN radio. In January 2014, Indian Orthopedic Surgeon Selene G. Parekh conducted the foot and ankle surgery using Google Glass in Jaipur, which was broadcast live on Google website via the internet. The surgery was held during a three-day annual Indo-US conference attended by a team of experts from the US and co-organized by Ashish Sharma. Sharma said Google Glass allows looking at an X-Ray or MRI without taking the eye off of the patient and allows a doctor to communicate with a patient's family or friends during a procedure. In Australia, during January 2014, Melbourne tech startup Small World Social collaborated with the Australian Breastfeeding Association to create the first hands-free breastfeeding Google Glass application for new mothers. The application, named Google Glass Breastfeeding app trial, allows mothers to nurse their baby while viewing instructions about common breastfeeding issues (latching on, posture etc.) or call a lactation consultant via a secure Google Hangout, who can view the issue through the mother's Google Glass camera. The trial was successfully concluded in Melbourne in April 2014, and 100% of participants were breastfeeding confidently. == Display types == Various techniques have existed for see-through HMDs. Most of these techniques can be summarized into two main families: "Curved Mirror" (or Curved Combiner) based and "Waveguide" or "Light-guide" based. The mirror technique has been used in EyeTaps, by Meta in their Meta 1, by Vuzix in their Star 1200 product, by Olympus, and by Laster Technologies. Various waveguide techniques have existed for some time. These techniques include diffraction optics, holographic optics, polarized optics, reflective optics, and projection: Diffractive waveguide – slanted diffraction grating elements (nanometric 10E-9). Nokia technique now licensed to Vuzix. Holographic waveguide – 3 holographic optical elements (HOE) sandwiched together (RGB). Used by Sony and Konica Minolta. Reflective waveguide – A thick light guide with single semi-reflective mirror is used by Epson in their Moverio product. A curved light guide with partial-reflective segmented mirror array to out-couple the light is used by tooz technologies GmbH. Virtual retinal display (VRD) – Also known as a retinal scan display (RSD) or retinal projector (RP), is a display technology that draws a raster display (like a television) directly onto the retina of the eye - developed by MicroVision, Inc. OLED microdisplays for near-eye applications (outdoor optical equipment, night vision glasses, ocular equipment for medical devices, augme

    Read more →
  • The Future of Truth (Rosenbaum book)

    The Future of Truth (Rosenbaum book)

    The Future of Truth: How AI Reshapes Reality is a 2026 book by American filmmaker and author Steven Rosenbaum about how artificial intelligence affects the concept of truth. It was published by Matt Holt Books on May 12, 2026, to positive media attention; on May 19, in response to an inquiry from The New York Times, Rosenbaum acknowledged that the book itself contains multiple misattributed or false quotes that were hallucinated by AIs. == Synopsis == == Development == Rosenbaum has said that he developed the book using AI chatbots as research tools, indicating in his notes what information came from AI and sending those claims to a fact-checker affiliated with the publisher. He has said that he did not use AI tools to write the book itself. He has described AI tools as "a delightful writing companion ... strangely creative and crafty and unusual in all these ways", while acknowledging that sometimes "then it betrays you in ways that are just really quite horrible". Journalist and Nobel laureate Maria Ressa wrote the book's foreword. Taylor Lorenz, Michael Wolff, and Nicholas Thompson wrote blurbs promoting it. == Release and reception == The Future of Truth was published by Matt Holt Books, an imprint of BenBella Books, and distributed by Simon & Schuster. The book's release on May 12, 2026, was described by Futurism as "buzzy" and by The New York Times as "to great fanfare". On May 14, an excerpt was published in Wired under the title "Gen Z Is Pioneering a New Understanding of Truth". On May 17, the Times contacted Rosenbaum regarding a number of quotes that appeared to be falsified or misattributed; the following evening he confirmed that they were the result of AI hallucinations:As I disclosed in the book's acknowledgments, I used AI tools ChatGPT and Claude during the research, writing and editing process. That does not excuse these errors, of which I take full responsibility. I am now working with the editors to thoroughly review and quickly correct any affected passages; any future editions will be corrected. The Times documented several of the errors, including a quote from Kara Swisher that Swisher described as making it "sound like I have a stick up my butt" and a quote from Lisa Feldman Barrett that Barrett described as misrepresenting her views on the nature of emotions, social signals, and truth. The book also misattributed a quote by Meredith Broussard from an interview with Marketplace Tech as having been from her book Artificial Unintelligence and hallucinated several words in a quote from Lee McIntyre, although according to McIntyre it did not misrepresent his views. Wired's editors, in an addendum to the excerpt they published, said that all quotes included in it had been verified as part of their fact-checking process. Rosenbaum told the Times that the series of errors "serves as a warning about the risks of AI-assisted research and verification, that is why I wrote the book. These AI errors do not, in fact, diminish the larger questions that the book raises about truth, trust and AI and its impact on society, democracy and editorial." Maggie Harrison Dupré in Futurism expressed skepticism, writing "The risk of AI hallucinations ... is well-known. If you're going to literally write the book on post-AI truth, you should probably put some more elbow grease into fact-checking your AI-assisted research." Kyle Orland in Ars Technica, responding to Rosenbaum's statement that his error "demonstrates the problem more vividly than any abstract argument could", was similarly skeptical, writing that "if we accept this take, every avoidably obvious mess in the world might be a disguised good because it really helps illuminate the huge mistake. And that can't be right; sometimes 'negligence' is just that." Subsequent comments by Rosenbaum placed more blame on the chatbots, which he told The Atlantic "fucked up the book". Rosenbaum told Ars Technica that fact-checking occurred "incredibly effectively, but not a hundred percent"; Orland observed that "it's worth noting that most writers manage to include zero made-up quotes when they write a book". Rosenbaum said that he had "learned a lesson" and would be "much more suspicious" of AI in the future, but would continue to use AI in his research. Orland responded to Rosenbaum's characterization of AI as "magical" by comparing it to the One Ring from The Lord of the Rings, in that it "convinces many of those who use it that they can control its power properly" when many cannot. Orland highlighted the limits of traditional fact-checking regarding AI, given that fact-checkers are used to assuming that direct quotes are copied word-for-word from the source. Rosenbaum told Orland that the future of fact-checking for AI-researched works "probably includes mandatory source tracing for quotations, better provenance tracking, clearer standards around AI-assisted research, and potentially (more irony here) AI tools that audit citations against primary materials". Patrick Redford in Defector criticized Rosenbaum, alongside other artists tricked by AI, for failing to recognize AI as "the enemy". Will Oremus in The Atlantic described Redford's approach of stigmatizing AI writing as "reasonable", noting the presence of low-quality, seemingly AI-generated verbiage in The Future of Truth—a claim denied by Rosenbaum—before saying that the greater issue is finding the line at which AI assistance in writing becomes a problem. Oremus concluded, "The scandal can't just be that [Rosenbaum] used AI while working on his book, because he acknowledged that up front. He got in trouble because he had used AI badly, failing to check its work on a task at which it is famously unreliable."

    Read more →