AI For Business Georgia Tech

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

TowIt

"TowIt" is a free, global, cross-platform mobile app, website, and Web API that allows civilians to report parking violations and dangerous driving in real-time. The mission is to remove the barriers required to make cities effectively fight and deter bad parking and dangerous driving habits. The company ultimately aims to better existing social controls in order to drive necessary behavioral change through increased education, real-time reporting, optimized enforcement, as well as the resulting reactivity. == User base and adoption == The application has users reporting vehicular infractions in upwards of 30 countries. The top reporting countries are: Portugal, Canada, United States of America and Australia. Users have adopted TowIt for a variety of reasons, usually central to their geographical location and the prominent offences in those specific areas. For instance, the majority of Portuguese reports are cars parked on sidewalks, footpaths and pedestrian crossings, Australian reports are largely focused on the abuse of disabled parking spaces, and in Toronto or San Francisco users generally capture cars parked in bicycle lanes. == Functions == === Data collection === TowIt gathers data on individual parking offences, the prominence of various offence types, as well as recurring offenders. This allows the company to identify trends and hotspots in order to take action against problem vehicles, as well as to help improve urban planning, traffic congestion and gridlock management. Individuals modify or improve an aspect of their behavior in response to their awareness of being observed, theoretically more so when demonstrating selfishness, egocentrism, narcissism and anti-social behavior. The company states that by becoming a user, one can "help TowIt relieve congestion, reduce collisions, open up economies, improve the environment and enhance the lives of urban residents and suburban commuters alike". The company has acknowledged that there are numerous legislative changes that would be required to integrate with governments at any level in many countries. A simple three-step process allows users to take a photo of an offending vehicle and subsequently verifying the offending vehicle's license plate information before submitting by tapping the TowIt (submit) button. Photographical evidence can only be captured with the camera from within the TowIt application. An Internet connection is required. The company has stated that this was purposefully done for quality control and report validation purposes. Users may only submit and view their own report history on either the iOS or Android applications. Globally submitted reports are displayed uncensored and in aggregate only on the Android application and the TowIt website. The "Global Feed" feature was removed from iOS (see iTunes Connect Acceptance Issues). TowIt's back-end automatically geotags the report and compares it to local parking by-law data, including by-law types, locations, times, side(s) of street, etc.- where available. Valid reports are posted to the global feed, to the TowIt website, and passed on to municipalities and police for enforcement (where connected). === Technologies used under license === TowIt currently utilizes the following software or software libraries under license: AngularJS, Apache Cordova, Apple iTunes Store EULA, Chart.js, Google Play Distribution Agreement, Ionic Framework, MongoDB, Moment.js, Python 2.7, Python Flask, and jQuery. == Company history == The TowIt application was conceived by Michael Duncan McArthur on December 5, 2014, as a response to Toronto Mayor John Tory's election mandate to "get this city moving". The application was announced via TowIt's official Twitter page on January 6, 2015. After the initial public announcement, Michael & Gregory were contacted by members of John Tory's staff on January 8, 2015, and invited to demo a prototype at Toronto City Hall on January 12, 2015. The two were also invited to meet with Toronto Councillor Norm Kelly, in his City Hall office, for a subsequent demo of the live Android application on January 28, 2015. A similar meeting and demo took place with members of the Traffic Services department of Toronto Police Service on February 2, 2015. Michael & Gregory teamed up with friends and Toronto-based developers Dae-Seon Moon, Jesse Malone, and Marcus Veres to complete the prototype in time to meet the city's imposed demo deadline and to launch the initial Android version of the application. TowIt officially launched on the Android platform on January 16, 2015. A subsequent iOS launch took place on March 19, 2015. === iTunes connect acceptance issues === The iOS version of the application was delayed for approximately two months, only after significant deliberation with Apple's iTunes Connect review board around (as then stated) rule: "14.1 - Any App that is defamatory, offensive, mean-spirited, or likely to place the targeted individual or group in harm's way will be rejected." The result was having to remove the "Global Feed" feature from the iOS platform, in which civilian users could view all recent reports from within the application. This feature still exists on the Android platform. === Business and legal === TowIt engaged Wildeboer Dellelce, one of Canada's leading business law and transactional corporate finance law firms, on January 17, 2015. The company filed for incorporation as "TowIt Solutions Inc." by both Michael & Gregory in the Canadian province of Ontario on January 22, 2015. TowIt continues to operate under a Freemium business model. The company is 100% bootstrapped and has received no outside investment to date. TowIt was accepted into the MaRS Discovery District's Venture Services program on March 4, 2015. === Lobbyist registration === After receiving initial press coverage in January and February 2015, an unknown entity reported Michael & Gregory's initial communications with city staff to the City of Toronto's Lobbyist Registrar. This complaint resulted in legal threats of fines received on February 10, 2015, for apparently and unknowingly breaking municipal lobbying by-laws. These fines (of up to $100,000) were eventually withdrawn after Michael & Gregory immediately provided all records of communication with city officials and registered as lobbyists in the City of Toronto on the subjects of By-law / Regulation, Parking, and Technology. Their registration was accepted by the Lobbyist Registrar on March 6, 2015. However, communication with Toronto city staff was reduced greatly as a result, which the company believes may have been the desired intent of the original complaint. === Outreach and activism === TowIt encourages its global user base to reach out to their local government representatives to promote the app at the users' own will. This tactic is used not only to demonstrate grassroots support, but also to avoid future lobbying issues. On June 2, 2015, the company officially partnered with Australian campaign "No Permit No Park" who advocate for the creation of inclusive communities. == Reception == The Best Planning Apps for 2016 by Planetizen, 5 Toronto apps you should be using by Indie88, 12 Best Apps Made In Canada by TechVibes.
Read more →
PropBank

PropBank is a corpus that is annotated with verbal propositions and their arguments—a "proposition bank". Although "PropBank" refers to a specific corpus produced by Martha Palmer et al., the term propbank is also coming to be used as a common noun referring to any corpus that has been annotated with propositions and their arguments. The PropBank project has played a role in research in natural language processing, and has been used in semantic role labelling. == Comparison == PropBank differs from FrameNet, the resource to which it is most frequently compared, in several ways. PropBank is a verb-oriented resource, while FrameNet is centered on the more abstract notion of frames, which generalizes descriptions across similar verbs (e.g. "describe" and "characterize") as well as nouns and other words (e.g. "description"). PropBank does not annotate events or states of affairs described using nouns. PropBank commits to annotating all verbs in a corpus, whereas the FrameNet project chooses sets of example sentences from a large corpus and only in a few cases has annotated longer continuous stretches of text. PropBank-style annotations often remain close to the syntactic level, while FrameNet-style annotations are sometimes more semantically motivated. From the start, PropBank was developed with the idea of serving as training data for machine learning-based semantic role labeling systems in mind. It requires that all arguments to a verb be syntactic constituents and different senses of a word are only distinguished if the differences bear on the arguments. Due to such differences, semantic role labeling with respect to PropBank is often a somewhat easier task than producing FrameNet-style annotations.
Read more →
Ugly duckling theorem

The ugly duckling theorem is an argument showing that classification is not really possible without some sort of bias. More particularly, it assumes finitely many properties combinable by logical connectives, and finitely many objects; it asserts that any two different objects share the same number of (extensional) properties. The theorem is named after Hans Christian Andersen's 1843 story "The Ugly Duckling", because it shows that a duckling is just as similar to a swan as two swans are to each other. It was derived by Satosi Watanabe in 1969. == Mathematical formula == Suppose there are n things in the universe, and one wants to put them into classes or categories. One has no preconceived ideas or biases about what sorts of categories are "natural" or "normal" and what are not. So one has to consider all the possible classes that could be, all the possible ways of making a set out of the n objects. There are 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} such ways, the size of the power set of n objects. One can use that to measure the similarity between two objects, and one would see how many sets they have in common. However, one cannot. Any two objects have exactly the same number of classes in common if we can form any possible class, namely 2 n − 1 {\displaystyle 2^{n-1}} (half the total number of classes there are). To see this is so, one may imagine each class is represented by an n-bit string (or binary encoded integer), with a zero for each element not in the class and a one for each element in the class. As one finds, there are 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} such strings. As all possible choices of zeros and ones are there, any two bit-positions will agree exactly half the time. One may pick two elements and reorder the bits so they are the first two, and imagine the numbers sorted lexicographically. The first 2 n / 2 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/2} numbers will have bit #1 set to zero, and the second 2 n / 2 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/2} will have it set to one. Within each of those blocks, the top 2 n / 4 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/4} will have bit #2 set to zero and the other 2 n / 4 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/4} will have it as one, so they agree on two blocks of 2 n / 4 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/4} or on half of all the cases, no matter which two elements one picks. So if we have no preconceived bias about which categories are better, everything is then equally similar (or equally dissimilar). The number of predicates simultaneously satisfied by two non-identical elements is constant over all such pairs. Thus, some kind of inductive bias is needed to make judgements to prefer certain categories over others. === Boolean functions === Let x 1 , x 2 , … , x n {\displaystyle x_{1},x_{2},\dots ,x_{n}} be a set of vectors of k {\displaystyle k} booleans each. The ugly duckling is the vector which is least like the others. Given the booleans, this can be computed using Hamming distance. However, the choice of boolean features to consider could have been somewhat arbitrary. Perhaps there were features derivable from the original features that were important for identifying the ugly duckling. The set of booleans in the vector can be extended with new features computed as boolean functions of the k {\displaystyle k} original features. The only canonical way to do this is to extend it with all possible Boolean functions. The resulting completed vectors have 2 k {\displaystyle 2^{k}} features. The ugly duckling theorem states that there is no ugly duckling because any two completed vectors will either be equal or differ in exactly half of the features. Proof. Let x and y be two vectors. If they are the same, then their completed vectors must also be the same because any Boolean function of x will agree with the same Boolean function of y. If x and y are different, then there exists a coordinate i {\displaystyle i} where the i {\displaystyle i} -th coordinate of x {\displaystyle x} differs from the i {\displaystyle i} -th coordinate of y {\displaystyle y} . Now the completed features contain every Boolean function on k {\displaystyle k} Boolean variables, with each one exactly once. Viewing these Boolean functions as polynomials in k {\displaystyle k} variables over GF(2), segregate the functions into pairs ( f , g ) {\displaystyle (f,g)} where f {\displaystyle f} contains the i {\displaystyle i} -th coordinate as a linear term and g {\displaystyle g} is f {\displaystyle f} without that linear term. Now, for every such pair ( f , g ) {\displaystyle (f,g)} , x {\displaystyle x} and y {\displaystyle y} will agree on exactly one of the two functions. If they agree on one, they must disagree on the other and vice versa. (This proof is believed to be due to Watanabe.) == Discussion == A possible way around the ugly duckling theorem would be to introduce a constraint on how similarity is measured by limiting the properties involved in classification, for instance, between A and B. However Medin et al. (1993) point out that this does not actually resolve the arbitrariness or bias problem since in what respects A is similar to B: "varies with the stimulus context and task, so that there is no unique answer, to the question of how similar is one object to another". For example, "a barberpole and a zebra would be more similar than a horse and a zebra if the feature striped had sufficient weight. Of course, if these feature weights were fixed, then these similarity relations would be constrained". Yet the property "striped" as a weight 'fix' or constraint is arbitrary itself, meaning: "unless one can specify such criteria, then the claim that categorization is based on attribute matching is almost entirely vacuous". Stamos (2003) remarked that some judgments of overall similarity are non-arbitrary in the sense they are useful: "Presumably, people's perceptual and conceptual processes have evolved that information that matters to human needs and goals can be roughly approximated by a similarity heuristic... If you are in the jungle and you see a tiger but you decide not to stereotype (perhaps because you believe that similarity is a false friend), then you will probably be eaten. In other words, in the biological world stereotyping based on veridical judgments of overall similarity statistically results in greater survival and reproductive success." Unless some properties are considered more salient, or 'weighted' more important than others, everything will appear equally similar, hence Watanabe (1986) wrote: "any objects, in so far as they are distinguishable, are equally similar". In a weaker setting that assumes infinitely many properties, Murphy and Medin (1985) give an example of two putative classified things, plums and lawnmowers: "Suppose that one is to list the attributes that plums and lawnmowers have in common in order to judge their similarity. It is easy to see that the list could be infinite: Both weigh less than 10,000 kg (and less than 10,001 kg), both did not exist 10,000,000 years ago (and 10,000,001 years ago), both cannot hear well, both can be dropped, both take up space, and so on. Likewise, the list of differences could be infinite… any two entities can be arbitrarily similar or dissimilar by changing the criterion of what counts as a relevant attribute." According to Woodward, the ugly duckling theorem is related to Schaffer's Conservation Law for Generalization Performance, which states that all algorithms for learning of boolean functions from input/output examples have the same overall generalization performance as random guessing. The latter result is generalized by Woodward to functions on countably infinite domains.
Read more →
SimSimi

SimSimi is an artificial intelligence conversation program created in 2002 by ISMaker. It grows its artificial intelligence day by day assisted by a feature that allows users to teach it to respond correctly. SimSimi, pronounced as "shim-shimi", is from a Korean word simsim (심심) which means "bored". It has an application designed for Android, Windows Phone and iOS. The application was banned in Thailand in 2012 after users taught it to make responses containing profanity, and to criticise leading politicians. In April 2018, SimSimi was suspended in Brazil due to accusations of sending inappropriate messages, such as sexual language, bullying and even death threats, being labeled as "dangerous" mainly due to its popularity among children, and according to its developer, the suspension of the app in the country "was inevitable because the SimSimi app, at least in the last few days, had a significant negative social impact in Brazil.”
Read more →
Supermind AI

Supermind is a state-funded Chinese artificial intelligence platform that tracks scientists and researchers internationally. The platform is the flagship project of Shenzhen's International Science and Technology Information Center. It mines data from science and technology databases such as Springer, Wiley, Clarivate and Elsevier. It is intended to detect technological breakthroughs and to identify possible sources of talent as part of China's efforts to advance technologically. The platform also uses government data security and security intelligence organizations such as Peng Cheng Laboratory, the China National GeneBank, BGI Group and the Key Laboratory of New Technologies of Security Intelligence. According to Hong Kong-based Asia Times, the platform, "While not an overt espionage tool...may be used to identify key personnel who could be bribed, deceived or manipulated into divulging classified information". The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) flagged the project as an incident, meaning it may be of interest to policymakers and other stakeholders. US technology group American Edge Project criticized the project as a global risk of China's security services using the platform to place agents in jobs with access to important information, recruit technical personnel, and identify targets for hacking operations.
Read more →
Flok (company)

Flok (formerly Loyalblocks) was an American tech startup based in New York City that provides marketing services such as chatbots/AI, customer loyalty programs, mobile apps and CRM services to local businesses. In January 2017, the company was acquired by Wix.com. Around March 2017, Flok ceased regular communication. At some point in 2019 Flok communicated to its customers that it would shut down in March 2020. == Background == Flok was founded in 2011 by Ido Gaver and Eran Kirshenboim and has offices in Tel Aviv, Israel. In May 2013, Flok secured a $9 million Series A Round from General Catalyst Partners with participation from Founder Collective and existing investor Gemini Israel Ventures. In total, Flok has raised over $18 million in venture capital in three rounds. In May 2014, Flok announced a self-service loyalty platform for SMBs to build their own programs with beacon integration. At that time, approximately 40,000 businesses were using the service. In 2016, Flok released a turnkey chatbot service for local businesses, and was featured in AdWeek for developing the first weed bot chatbot for a California cannabis business. == Services == Flok offered an eponymous customer-facing app, that consumers use to receive rewards and deals from partner businesses, and a Flok business app for merchants to manage the platform.
Read more →
Saliency map

In computer vision, a saliency map is an image that highlights either the region on which people's eyes focus first or the most relevant regions for machine learning models. The goal of a saliency map is to reflect the degree of importance of a pixel to the human visual system or an otherwise opaque ML model. For example, in this image, a person first looks at the fort and light clouds, so they should be highlighted on the saliency map. == Application == === Overview === Saliency maps have applications in a variety of different problems. Some general applications: ==== Human eye ==== Image and video compression: The human eye focuses only on a small region of interest in the frame. Therefore, it is not necessary to compress the entire frame with uniform quality. According to the authors, using a salience map reduces the final size of the video with the same visual perception. Image and video quality assessment: The main task for an image or video quality metric is a high correlation with user opinions. Differences in salient regions are given more importance and thus contribute more to the quality score. Image retargeting: It aims at resizing an image by expanding or shrinking the noninformative regions. Therefore, retargeting algorithms rely on the availability of saliency maps that accurately estimate all the salient image details. Object detection and recognition: Instead of applying a computationally complex algorithm to the whole image, we can use it to the most salient regions of an image most likely to contain an object. the primary visual cortex (V1) appears to be responsible for the saliency map, according to the V1 Saliency Hypothesis. ==== Explainable artificial intelligence ==== Saliency maps are a prominent tool in explainable artificial intelligence, providing visual explanations of the decision-making process of machine learning models, particularly deep neural networks. These maps highlight the regions in input data that are most influential on the model's output, effectively indicating where the model is "looking" when making a prediction. In image classification tasks, for example, saliency maps can identify pixels or regions that contribute most to a specific class decision. Developed for convolutional neural networks, saliency mapping techniques range from simply taking the gradient of the class score with respect to the input data to more complex algorithms, such as integrated gradients and class activation mapping. In transformer architecture, attention mechanisms led to analogous saliency maps, such as attention maps, attention rollouts, and class-discriminative attention maps. === Saliency as a segmentation problem === Saliency estimation may be viewed as an instance of image segmentation. In computer vision, image segmentation is the process of partitioning a digital image into multiple segments (sets of pixels, also known as superpixels). The goal of segmentation is to simplify and/or change the representation of an image into something that is more meaningful and easier to analyze. Image segmentation is typically used to locate objects and boundaries (lines, curves, etc.) in images. More precisely, image segmentation is the process of assigning a label to every pixel in an image such that pixels with the same label share certain characteristics. == Algorithms == === Overview === There are three forms of classic saliency estimation algorithms implemented in OpenCV: Static saliency: Relies on image features and statistics to localize the regions of interest of an image. Motion saliency: Relies on motion in a video, detected by optical flow. Objects that move are considered salient. Objectness: Objectness reflects how likely an image window covers an object. These algorithms generate a set of bounding boxes of where an object may lie in an image. In addition to classic approaches, neural-network-based are also popular. There are examples of neural networks for motion saliency estimation: TASED-Net: It consists of two building blocks. First, the encoder network extracts low-resolution spatiotemporal features, and then the following prediction network decodes the spatially encoded features while aggregating all the temporal information. STRA-Net: It emphasizes two essential issues. First, spatiotemporal features integrated via appearance and optical flow coupling, and then multi-scale saliency learned via attention mechanism. STAViS: It combines spatiotemporal visual and auditory information. This approach employs a single network that learns to localize sound sources and to fuse the two saliencies to obtain a final saliency map. There's a new static saliency in the literature with name visual distortion sensitivity. It is based on the idea that the true edges, i.e. object contours, are more salient than the other complex textured regions. It detects edges in a different way from the classic edge detection algorithms. It uses a fairly small threshold for the gradient magnitudes to consider the mere presence of the gradients. So, it obtains 4 binary maps for vertical, horizontal and two diagonal directions. The morphological closing and opening are applied to the binary images to close the small gaps. To clear the blob-like shapes, it utilizes the distance transform. After all, the connected pixel groups are individual edges (or contours). A threshold of size of connected pixel set is used to determine whether an image block contains a perceivable edge (salient region) or not. === Example implementation === First, we should calculate the distance of each pixel to the rest of pixels in the same frame: S A L S ( I k ) = ∑ i = 1 N | I k − I i | {\displaystyle \mathrm {SALS} (I_{k})=\sum _{i=1}^{N}|I_{k}-I_{i}|} I i {\displaystyle I_{i}} is the value of pixel i {\displaystyle i} , in the range of [0,255]. The following equation is the expanded form of this equation. SALS(Ik) = |Ik - I1| + |Ik - I2| + ... + |Ik - IN| Where N is the total number of pixels in the current frame. Then we can further restructure our formula. We put the value that has same I together. SALS(Ik) = Σ Fn × |Ik - In| Where Fn is the frequency of In. And the value of n belongs to [0,255]. The frequencies is expressed in the form of histogram, and the computational time of histogram is ⁠ O ( N ) {\displaystyle O(N)} ⁠ time complexity. ==== Time complexity ==== This saliency map algorithm has ⁠ O ( N ) {\displaystyle O(N)} ⁠ time complexity. Since the computational time of histogram is ⁠ O ( N ) {\displaystyle O(N)} ⁠ time complexity which N is the number of pixel's number of a frame. Besides, the minus part and multiply part of this equation need 256 times operation. Consequently, the time complexity of this algorithm is ⁠ O ( N + 256 ) {\displaystyle O(N+256)} ⁠ which equals to ⁠ O ( N ) {\displaystyle O(N)} ⁠. ==== Pseudocode ==== All of the following code is pseudo MATLAB code. First, read data from video sequences. After we read data, we do superpixel process to each frame. Spnum1 and Spnum2 represent the pixel number of current frame and previous pixel. Then we calculate the color distance of each pixel, this process we call it contract function. After this two process, we will get a saliency map, and then store all of these maps into a new FileFolder. ==== Difference in algorithms ==== The major difference between function one and two is the difference of contract function. If spnum1 and spnum2 both represent the current frame's pixel number, then this contract function is for the first saliency function. If spnum1 is the current frame's pixel number and spnum2 represent the previous frame's pixel number, then this contract function is for second saliency function. If we use the second contract function which using the pixel of the same frame to get center distance to get a saliency map, then we apply this saliency function to each frame and use current frame's saliency map minus previous frame's saliency map to get a new image which is the new saliency result of the third saliency function. == Datasets == The saliency dataset usually contains human eye movements on some image sequences. It is valuable for new saliency algorithm creation or benchmarking the existing one. The most valuable dataset parameters are spatial resolution, size, and eye-tracking equipment. Here is part of the large datasets table from MIT/Tübingen Saliency Benchmark datasets, for example. To collect a saliency dataset, image or video sequences and eye-tracking equipment must be prepared, and observers must be invited. Observers must have normal or corrected to normal vision and must be at the same distance from the screen. At the beginning of each recording session, the eye-tracker recalibrates. To do this, the observer fixates their gaze on the screen center. The session is then started, and saliency data are collected by showing sequences and recording eye gazes. The eye-tracking device is a high-speed camera, capable of recording eye movements at least 250 fr
Read more →
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 →
Shape analysis (digital geometry)

This article describes shape analysis to analyze and process geometric shapes. == Description == Shape analysis is the (mostly) automatic analysis of geometric shapes, for example using a computer to detect similarly shaped objects in a database or parts that fit together. For a computer to automatically analyze and process geometric shapes, the objects have to be represented in a digital form. Most commonly a boundary representation is used to describe the object with its boundary (usually the outer shell, see also 3D model). However, other volume based representations (e.g. constructive solid geometry) or point based representations (point clouds) can be used to represent shape. Once the objects are given, either by modeling (computer-aided design), by scanning (3D scanner) or by extracting shape from 2D or 3D images, they have to be simplified before a comparison can be achieved. The simplified representation is often called a shape descriptor (or fingerprint, signature). These simplified representations try to carry most of the important information, while being easier to handle, to store and to compare than the shapes directly. A complete shape descriptor is a representation that can be used to completely reconstruct the original object (for example the medial axis transform). == Application fields == Shape analysis is used in many application fields: archeology for example, to find similar objects or missing parts architecture for example, to identify objects that spatially fit into a specific space medical imaging to understand shape changes related to illness or aid surgical planning virtual environments or on the 3D model market to identify objects for copyright purposes security applications such as face recognition entertainment industry (movies, games) to construct and process geometric models or animations computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing to process and to compare designs of mechanical parts or design objects. == Shape descriptors == Shape descriptors can be classified by their invariance with respect to the transformations allowed in the associated shape definition. Many descriptors are invariant with respect to congruency, meaning that congruent shapes (shapes that could be translated, rotated and mirrored) will have the same descriptor (for example moment or spherical harmonic based descriptors or Procrustes analysis operating on point clouds). Another class of shape descriptors (called intrinsic shape descriptors) is invariant with respect to isometry. These descriptors do not change with different isometric embeddings of the shape. Their advantage is that they can be applied nicely to deformable objects (e.g. a person in different body postures) as these deformations do not involve much stretching but are in fact near-isometric. Such descriptors are commonly based on geodesic distances measures along the surface of an object or on other isometry invariant characteristics such as the Laplace–Beltrami spectrum (see also spectral shape analysis). There are other shape descriptors, such as graph-based descriptors like the medial axis or the Reeb graph that capture geometric and/or topological information and simplify the shape representation but can not be as easily compared as descriptors that represent shape as a vector of numbers. From this discussion it becomes clear, that different shape descriptors target different aspects of shape and can be used for a specific application. Therefore, depending on the application, it is necessary to analyze how well a descriptor captures the features of interest.
Read more →
Quantexa

Quantexa is a UK-based software company that develops artificial intelligence-based applications for data analytics and decision-making. The company was founded in 2016 and is headquartered in London, with operations in North America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. As of 2025, Quantexa reported a valuation of $2.6 billion and provides services to organizations in over 70 countries. Investors include Warburg Pincus, HSBC, and the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan. == History == Quantexa was founded in London in 2016 by several co-founders, including Jamie Hutton, Richard Seewald, Imam Hoque, Felix Hoddinott, and Vishal Marria, who also serves as the company's chief executive officer. The company was established to develop tools intended to address limitations in traditional data analysis methods, particularly those related to identifying hidden connections across large datasets. The name "Quantexa" is derived from the company's focus on quantitative methods and data analysis. In 2023, Quantexa acquired Dublin-based AI firm Aylien. In April 2023, the company completed a Series E funding round, raising $129 million at a valuation of approximately $1.8 billion, marking its entry into "unicorn" status. In October 2024, the company reported annual recurring revenue (ARR) exceeding $100 million. In early 2025, Quantexa participated in the World Economic Forum's Unicorn Program, which supports high-growth technology companies. In March 2025, Quantexa completed a Series F funding round of $175 million, led by Teachers' Venture Growth, the venture arm of the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan. That August, the company was reported to be considering a 2026 IPO. The company formed a partnership with Zurich in October 2025, the first insurer to add its AI-based Decision Intelligence platform to enhance fraud detection.
Read more →
Aggregation (linguistics)

In linguistics, aggregation is a subtask of natural language generation, which involves merging syntactic constituents (such as sentences and phrases) together. Sometimes aggregation can be done at a conceptual level. == Examples == A simple example of syntactic aggregation is merging the two sentences John went to the shop and John bought an apple into the single sentence John went to the shop and bought an apple. Syntactic aggregation can be much more complex than this. For example, aggregation can embed one of the constituents in the other; e.g., we can aggregate John went to the shop and The shop was closed into the sentence John went to the shop, which was closed. From a pragmatic perspective, aggregating sentences together often suggests to the reader that these sentences are related to each other. If this is not the case, the reader may be confused. For example, someone who reads John went to the shop and bought an apple may infer that the apple was bought in the shop; if this is not the case, then these sentences should not be aggregated. == Algorithms and issues == Aggregation algorithms must do two things: Decide when two constituents should be aggregated Decide how two constituents should be aggregated, and create the aggregated structure The first issue, deciding when to aggregate, is poorly understood. Aggegration decisions certainly depend on the semantic relations between the constituents, as mentioned above; they also depend on the genre (e.g., bureaucratic texts tend to be more aggregated than instruction manuals). They probably should depend on rhetorical and discourse structure. The literacy level of the reader is also probably important (poor readers need shorter sentences). But we have no integrated model which brings all these factors together into a single algorithm. With regard to the second issue, there have been some studies of different types of aggregation, and how they should be carried out. Harbusch and Kempen describe several syntactic aggregation strategies. In their terminology, John went to the shop and bought an apple is an example of forward conjunction Reduction Much less is known about conceptual aggregation. Di Eugenio et al. show how conceptual aggregation can be done in an intelligent tutoring system, and demonstrate that performing such aggregation makes the system more effective (and that conceptual aggregation make a bigger impact than syntactic aggregation). == Software == Unfortunately there is not much software available for performing aggregation. However the SimpleNLG system does include limited support for basic aggregation. For example, the following code causes SimpleNLG to print out The man is hungry and buys an apple.
Read more →
Spell checker

In software, a spell checker (or spelling checker or spell check) is a software feature that checks for misspellings in a text. Spell-checking features are often embedded in software or services, such as a word processor, email client, electronic dictionary, or search engine. == Design == A basic spell checker carries out the following processes: It scans the text and extracts the words contained in it. It then compares each word with a known list of correctly spelled words (i.e. a dictionary). This might contain just a list of words, or it might also contain additional information, such as hyphenation points or lexical and grammatical attributes. An additional step is a language-dependent algorithm for handling morphology. Even for a lightly inflected language like English, the spell checker will need to consider different forms of the same word, such as plurals, verbal forms, contractions, and possessives. For many other languages, such as those featuring agglutination and more complex declension and conjugation, this part of the process is more complicated. It is unclear whether morphological analysis—allowing for many forms of a word depending on its grammatical role—provides a significant benefit for English, though its benefits for highly synthetic languages such as German, Hungarian, or Turkish are clear. As an adjunct to these components, the program's user interface allows users to approve or reject replacements and modify the program's operation. Spell checkers can use approximate string matching algorithms such as Levenshtein distance to find correct spellings of misspelled words. An alternative type of spell checker uses solely statistical information, such as n-grams, to recognize errors instead of correctly-spelled words. This approach usually requires a lot of effort to obtain sufficient statistical information. Key advantages include needing less runtime storage and the ability to correct errors in words that are not included in a dictionary. In some cases, spell checkers use a fixed list of misspellings and suggestions for those misspellings; this less flexible approach is often used in paper-based correction methods, such as the see also entries of encyclopedias. Clustering algorithms have also been used for spell checking combined with phonetic information. == History == === Pre-PC === In 1961, Les Earnest, who headed the research on this budding technology, saw it necessary to include the first spell checker that accessed a list of 10,000 acceptable words. Ralph Gorin, a graduate student under Earnest at the time, created the first true spelling checker program written as an applications program (rather than research) for general English text: SPELL for the DEC PDP-10 at Stanford University's Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, in February 1971. Gorin wrote SPELL in assembly language, for faster action; he made the first spelling corrector by searching the word list for plausible correct spellings that differ by a single letter or adjacent letter transpositions and presenting them to the user. Gorin made SPELL publicly accessible, as was done with most SAIL (Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory) programs, and it soon spread around the world via the new ARPAnet, about ten years before personal computers came into general use. SPELL, its algorithms and data structures inspired the Unix ispell program. The first spell checkers were widely available on mainframe computers in the late 1970s. A group of six linguists from Georgetown University developed the first spell-check system for the IBM corporation. Henry Kučera invented one for the VAX machines of Digital Equipment Corp in 1981. === Unix === The International Ispell program commonly used in Unix is based on R. E. Gorin's SPELL. It was converted to C by Pace Willisson at MIT. The GNU project has its spell checker GNU Aspell. Aspell's main improvement is that it can more accurately suggest correct alternatives for misspelled English words. Due to the inability of traditional spell checkers to check words in complex inflected languages, Hungarian László Németh developed Hunspell, a spell checker that supports agglutinative languages and complex compound words. Hunspell also uses Unicode in its dictionaries. Hunspell replaced the previous MySpell in OpenOffice.org in version 2.0.2. Enchant is another general spell checker, derived from AbiWord. Its goal is to combine programs supporting different languages such as Aspell, Hunspell, Nuspell, Hspell (Hebrew), Voikko (Finnish), Zemberek (Turkish) and AppleSpell under one interface. === PCs === The first spell checkers for personal computers appeared in 1980, such as "WordCheck" for Commodore systems which was released in late 1980 in time for advertisements to go to print in January 1981. Developers such as Maria Mariani and Random House rushed OEM packages or end-user products into the rapidly expanding software market. On the pre-Windows PCs, these spell checkers were standalone programs, many of which could be run in terminate-and-stay-resident mode from within word-processing packages on PCs with sufficient memory. However, the market for standalone packages was short-lived, as by the mid-1980s developers of popular word-processing packages like WordStar and WordPerfect had incorporated spell checkers in their packages, mostly licensed from the above companies, who quickly expanded support from just English to many European and eventually even Asian languages. However, this required increasing sophistication in the morphology routines of the software, particularly with regard to heavily-agglutinative languages like Hungarian and Finnish. Although the size of the word-processing market in a country like Iceland might not have justified the investment of implementing a spell checker, companies like WordPerfect nonetheless strove to localize their software for as many national markets as possible as part of their global marketing strategy. When Apple developed "a system-wide spelling checker" for Mac OS X so that "the operating system took over spelling fixes," it was a first: one "didn't have to maintain a separate spelling checker for each" program. Mac OS X's spellcheck coverage includes virtually all bundled and third party applications. Visual Tools' VT Speller, introduced in 1994, was "designed for developers of applications that support Windows." It came with a dictionary but had the ability to build and incorporate use of secondary dictionaries. === Browsers === Web browsers such as Firefox and Google Chrome offer spell checking support, using Hunspell. Prior to using Hunspell, Firefox and Chrome used MySpell and GNU Aspell, respectively. === Specialties === Some spell checkers have separate support for medical dictionaries to help prevent medical errors. == Functionality == The first spell checkers were "verifiers" instead of "correctors." They offered no suggestions for incorrectly spelled words. This was helpful for typos but it was not so helpful for logical or phonetic errors. The challenge the developers faced was the difficulty in offering useful suggestions for misspelled words. This requires reducing words to a skeletal form and applying pattern-matching algorithms. It might seem logical that where spell-checking dictionaries are concerned, "the bigger, the better," so that correct words are not marked as incorrect. In practice, however, an optimal size for English appears to be around 90,000 entries. If there are more than this, incorrectly spelled words may be skipped because they are mistaken for others. For example, a linguist might determine on the basis of corpus linguistics that the word baht is more frequently a misspelling of bath or bat than a reference to the Thai currency. Hence, it would typically be more useful if a few people who write about Thai currency were slightly inconvenienced than if the spelling errors of the many more people who discuss baths were overlooked. The first MS-DOS spell checkers were mostly used in proofing mode from within word processing packages. After preparing a document, a user scanned the text looking for misspellings. Later, however, batch processing was offered in such packages as Oracle's short-lived CoAuthor and allowed a user to view the results after a document was processed and correct only the words that were known to be wrong. When memory and processing power became abundant, spell checking was performed in the background in an interactive way, such as has been the case with the Sector Software produced Spellbound program released in 1987 and Microsoft Word since Word 95. Spell checkers became increasingly sophisticated; now capable of recognizing grammatical errors. However, even at their best, they rarely catch all the errors in a text (such as homophone errors) and will flag neologisms and foreign words as misspellings. Nonetheless, spell checkers can be considered as a type of foreign language writing aid that non-native language lea
Read more →
List of ARM Cortex-M development tools

This is a list of development tools for 32-bit ARM Cortex-M-based microcontrollers, which consists of Cortex-M0, Cortex-M0+, Cortex-M1, Cortex-M3, Cortex-M4, Cortex-M7, Cortex-M23, Cortex-M33, Cortex-M35P, Cortex-M52, Cortex-M55, and Cortex-M85 cores. == Development toolchains == IDE, compiler, linker, debugger, flashing (in alphabetical order): Ac6 System Workbench for STM32 (based on Eclipse and the GNU GCC toolchain with direct support for all ST-provided evaluation boards, Eval, Discovery and Nucleo, debug with ST-LINK) ARM Development Studio 5 by ARM Ltd. Atmel Studio by Atmel (based on Visual Studio and GNU GCC Toolchain) Code Composer Studio by Texas Instruments CoIDE by CooCox (note - website dead since 2018) Crossware Development Suite for ARM by Crossware CrossWorks for ARM by Rowley Dave by Infineon. For XMC processors only. Includes project wizard, detailed register decoding and a code library still under development. DRT by SOMNIUM Technologies. Based on GCC toolchain and proprietary linker technology. Available as a plugin for Atmel Studio and an Eclipse-based IDE. EmBitz (formerly Em::Blocks) – free, fast (non-eclipse) IDE for ST-LINK (live data updates), OpenOCD, including GNU Tools for ARM and project wizards for ST, Atmel, EnergyMicro etc. Embeetle IDE - free, fast (non-eclipse) IDE. Works both on Linux and Windows. emIDE by emide – free Visual Studio Style IDE including GNU Tools for ARM GNU ARM Eclipse – A family of Eclipse CDT extensions and tools for GNU ARM development GNU Tools (aka GCC) for ARM Embedded Processors by ARM Ltd – free GCC for bare metal IAR Embedded Workbench for ARM by IAR Systems ICC by ImageCraft Keil MDK-ARM by Keil LPCXpresso by NXP (formerly Red Suite by Code Red Technologies) MikroC by mikroe – mikroC MULTI by Green Hills Software, for all Arm 7, 9, Cortex-M, Cortex-R, Cortex-A Ride and RKit for ARM by Raisonance SEGGER Embedded Studio for ARM by Segger. SEGGER Ozone by Segger. STM32CubeIDE by STMicroelectronics - Combines STCubeMX with TrueSTUDIO into a single Eclipse style package Sourcery CodeBench by Mentor Graphics TASKING VX-Toolset by Altium TrueSTUDIO by Atollic Visual Studio by Microsoft as IDE, with GNU Tools as compiler/linker – e.g. supported by VisualGDB VXM Design's Buildroot toolchain for Cortex. It integrates GNU toolchain, Nuttx, filesystem and debugger/flasher in one build. winIDEA/winIDEAOpen by iSYSTEM YAGARTO – free GCC (no longer supported) Code::Blocks (EPS edition) (debug with ST-LINK no GDB and no OpenOCD required) IDE for Arduino ARM boards Arduino – IDE for Atmel SAM3X (Arduino Due) Energia – Arduino IDE for Texas Instruments Tiva and CC3200 Notes: == Debugging tools == JTAG and/or SWD debug interface host adapters (in alphabetical order): Black Magic Probe by 1BitSquared. CMSIS-DAP by Mbed. Crossconnect by Rowley Associates. DSTREAM by ARM Holdings Green Hills Probe and SuperTrace Probe by Green Hills Software. iTAG by iSYSTEM. I-jet by IAR Systems. Jaguar by Crossware. J-Link by Segger Supports JTAG and SWD. Supports ARM7, ARM9, ARM11, Cortex-A, Cortex-M, Cortex-R, Renesas RX, Microchip PIC32. Eclipse plug-in available. Supports GDB, RDI, Ozone debuggers. J-Trace by Segger. Supports JTAG, SWD, and ETM trace on Cortex-M. JTAGjet by Signum. LPC-LINK by Embedded Artists (for NXP) This is only embedded on NXP LPCXpresso development boards. LPC-LINK 2 by NXP. This device can be reconfigured to support 3 different protocols: J-LINK by Segger, CMSIS-DAP by ARM, Redlink by Code Red. Multilink debug probes, Cyclone in-system programming/debugging interfaces, and a GDB Server plug-in for Eclipse-based ARM IDEs by PEmicro. OpenOCD open source GDB server supports a variety of JTAG probes OpenOCD Eclipse plug-in available in GNU ARM Eclipse Plug-ins. AK-OPENJTAG by Artekit (Open JTAG-compatible). AK-LINK by Artekit. PEEDI by RONETIX Debug Probe by Raspberry Pi. RLink by Raisonance. ST-LINK/V2 by STMicroelectronics The ST-LINK/V2 debugger embedded on STM32 Nucleo and Discovery development boards can be converted to SEGGER J-LINK protocol. TRACE32 Debugger and ETM/ITM Trace by Lauterbach. ULINK by Keil. Debugging tools and/or debugging plug-ins (in alphabetical order): Memfault Error Analysis for post mortem debugging Percepio Tracealyzer, RTOS trace visualizer (with Eclipse plugin). Segger SystemView, RTOS trace visualizer. == Real-time operating systems == Commonly referred to as RTOS: == C/C++ software libraries == The following are free C/C++ libraries: ARM Cortex libraries: Cortex Microcontroller Software Interface Standard (CMSIS) libopencm3 (formerly called libopenstm32) libmaple for STM32F1 chips LPCOpen for NXP LPC chips Alternate C standard libraries: Bionic libc, dietlibc, EGLIBC, glibc, klibc, musl, Newlib, uClibc FAT file system libraries: EFSL, FatFs, Petit FatFs Fixed-point math libraries: libfixmath, fixedptc, FPMLib Encryption libraries: Comparison of TLS implementations wolfSSL == Non-C/C++ computer languages and software libraries ==
Read more →
Controlled natural language

Controlled natural languages (CNLs) are subsets of natural languages that are obtained by restricting the grammar and vocabulary in order to reduce or eliminate ambiguity and complexity. Traditionally, controlled languages fall into two major types: those that improve readability for human readers (e.g. non-native speakers), and those that enable reliable automatic semantic analysis of the language. The first type of languages (often called "simplified" or "technical" languages), for example ASD Simplified Technical English, Caterpillar Technical English, IBM's Easy English, are used in the industry to increase the quality of technical documentation, and possibly simplify the semi-automatic translation of the documentation. These languages restrict the writer by general rules such as "Keep sentences short", "Avoid the use of pronouns", "Only use dictionary-approved words", and "Use only the active voice". The second type of languages have a formal syntax and formal semantics, and can be mapped to an existing formal language, such as first-order logic. Thus, those languages can be used as knowledge representation languages, and writing of those languages is supported by fully automatic consistency and redundancy checks, query answering, etc. == Languages == Existing controlled natural languages include: == Encoding == IETF has reserved simple as a BCP 47 variant subtag for simplified versions of languages.
Read more →
Referring expression generation

Referring expression generation (REG) is the subtask of natural language generation (NLG) that received most scholarly attention. While NLG is concerned with the conversion of non-linguistic information into natural language, REG focuses only on the creation of referring expressions (noun phrases) that identify specific entities called targets. This task can be split into two sections. The content selection part determines which set of properties distinguish the intended target and the linguistic realization part defines how these properties are translated into natural language. A variety of algorithms have been developed in the NLG community to generate different types of referring expressions. == Types of referring expressions == A referring expression (RE), in linguistics, is any noun phrase, or surrogate for a noun phrase, whose function in discourse is to identify some individual object (thing, being, event...) The technical terminology for identify differs a great deal from one school of linguistics to another. The most widespread term is probably refer, and a thing identified is a referent, as for example in the work of John Lyons. In linguistics, the study of reference relations belongs to pragmatics, the study of language use, though it is also a matter of great interest to philosophers, especially those wishing to understand the nature of knowledge, perception and cognition more generally. Various devices can be used for reference: determiners, pronouns, proper names... Reference relations can be of different kinds; referents can be in a "real" or imaginary world, in discourse itself, and they may be singular, plural, or collective. === Pronouns === The simplest type of referring expressions are pronoun such as he and it. The linguistics and natural language processing communities have developed various models for predicting anaphor referents, such as centering theory, and ideally referring-expression generation would be based on such models. However most NLG systems use much simpler algorithms, for example using a pronoun if the referent was mentioned in the previous sentence (or sentential clause), and no other entity of the same gender was mentioned in this sentence. === Definite noun phrases === There has been a considerable amount of research on generating definite noun phrases, such as the big red book. Much of this builds on the model proposed by Dale and Reiter. This has been extended in various ways, for example Krahmer et al. present a graph-theoretic model of definite NP generation with many nice properties. In recent years a shared-task event has compared different algorithms for definite NP generation, using the TUNA corpus. === Spatial and temporal reference === Recently there has been more research on generating referring expressions for time and space. Such references tend to be imprecise (what is the exact meaning of tonight?), and also to be interpreted in different ways by different people. Hence it may be necessary to explicitly reason about false positive vs false negative tradeoffs, and even calculate the utility of different possible referring expressions in a particular task context. === Criteria for good expressions === Ideally, a good referring expression should satisfy a number of criteria: Referential success: It should unambiguously identify the referent to the reader. Ease of comprehension: The reader should be able to quickly read and understand it. Computational complexity: The generation algorithm should be fast No false inferences: The expression should not confuse or mislead the reader by suggesting false implicatures or other pragmatic inferences. For example, a reader may be confused if he is told Sit by the brown wooden table in a context where there is only one table. == History == === Pre-2000 era === REG goes back to the early days of NLG. One of the first approaches was done by Winograd in 1972 who developed an "incremental" REG algorithm for his SHRDLU program. Afterwards researchers started to model the human abilities to create referring expressions in the 1980s. This new approach to the topic was influenced by the researchers Appelt and Kronfeld who created the programs KAMP and BERTRAND and considered referring expressions as parts of bigger speech acts. Some of their most interesting findings were the fact that referring expressions can be used to add information beyond the identification of the referent as well as the influence of communicative context and the Gricean maxims on referring expressions. Furthermore, its skepticism concerning the naturalness of minimal descriptions made Appelt and Kronfeld's research a foundation of later work on REG. The search for simple, well-defined problems changed the direction of research in the early 1990s. This new approach was led by Dale and Reiter who stressed the identification of the referent as the central goal. Like Appelt they discuss the connection between the Gricean maxims and referring expressions in their culminant paper in which they also propose a formal problem definition. Furthermore, Reiter and Dale discuss the Full Brevity and Greedy Heuristics algorithms as well as their Incremental Algorithm(IA) which became one of the most important algorithms in REG. === Later developments === After 2000 the research began to lift some of the simplifying assumptions, that had been made in early REG research in order to create more simple algorithms. Different research groups concentrated on different limitations creating several expanded algorithms. Often these extend the IA in a single perspective for example in relation to: Reference to Sets like "the t-shirt wearers" or "the green apples and the banana on the left" Relational Descriptions like "the cup on the table" or "the woman who has three children" Context Dependency, Vagueness and Gradeability include statements like "the older man" or "the car on the left" which are often unclear without a context Salience and Generation of Pronouns are highly discourse dependent making for example "she" a reference to "the (most salient) female person" Many simplifying assumptions are still in place or have just begun to be worked on. Also a combination of the different extensions has yet to be done and is called a "non-trivial enterprise" by Krahmer and van Deemter. Another important change after 2000 was the increasing use of empirical studies in order to evaluate algorithms. This development took place due to the emergence of transparent corpora. Although there are still discussions about what the best evaluation metrics are, the use of experimental evaluation has already led to a better comparability of algorithms, a discussion about the goals of REG and more task-oriented research. Furthermore, research has extended its range to related topics such as the choice of Knowledge Representation(KR) Frameworks. In this area the main question, which KR framework is most suitable for the use in REG remains open. The answer to this question depends on how well descriptions can be expressed or found. A lot of the potential of KR frameworks has been left unused so far. Some of the different approaches are the usage of: Graph search which treats relations between targets in the same way as properties. Constraint Satisfaction which allows for a separation between problem specification and the implementation. Modern Knowledge Representation which offers logical inference in for example Description Logic or Conceptual Graphs. == Problem definition == Dale and Reiter (1995) think about referring expressions as distinguishing descriptions. They define: The referent as the entity that should be described The context set as set of salient entities The contrast set or potential distractors as all elements of the context set except the referent A property as a reference to a single attribute–value pair Each entity in the domain can be characterised as a set of attribute–value pairs for example ⟨ {\displaystyle \langle } type, dog ⟩ {\displaystyle \rangle } , ⟨ {\displaystyle \langle } gender, female ⟩ {\displaystyle \rangle } or ⟨ {\displaystyle \langle } age, 10 years ⟩ {\displaystyle \rangle } . The problem then is defined as follows: Let r {\displaystyle r} be the intended referent, and C {\displaystyle C} be the contrast set. Then, a set L {\displaystyle L} of attribute–value pairs will represent a distinguishing description if the following two conditions hold: Every attribute–value pair in L {\displaystyle L} applies to r {\displaystyle r} : that is, every element of L {\displaystyle L} specifies an attribute–value that r {\displaystyle r} possesses. For every member c {\displaystyle c} of C {\displaystyle C} , there is at least one element l {\displaystyle l} of L {\displaystyle L} that does not apply to c {\displaystyle c} : that is, there is an l {\displaystyle l} in L {\displaystyle L} that specifies an attribute–value that c {\displaystyle c} does not possess. l {\displaystyle l} is said
Read more →