AI For Business Georgia Tech

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

  • AI effect

    AI effect

    The AI effect is a phenomenon in which advances in artificial intelligence lead to a redefinition of what is considered intelligence, such that capabilities achieved by AI systems are no longer regarded as examples of "real" intelligence. The concept has been used to describe both a cognitive tendency and a sociotechnical pattern, in which successful AI techniques are reclassified as routine computation or absorbed into other domains. Historian Pamela McCorduck described this as a recurring feature of AI research, noting in her 2004 book Machines Who Think that once a problem is solved, it is no longer considered evidence of intelligence. Researcher Rodney Brooks similarly observed in 2002 that once systems are understood, they are often regarded as "just computation". == Definition == The AI effect refers to a shift in how intelligence is defined as machines acquire new capabilities. Tasks such as playing chess, recognizing speech, or interpreting images were historically considered indicators of intelligence, but after successful automation they are often reclassified as routine computation. McCorduck described this as an "odd paradox", in which successful AI systems are assimilated into other domains, leaving AI researchers to focus on unsolved problems. The phenomenon is often interpreted as an instance of moving the goalposts. A commonly cited formulation is Tesler's theorem, often expressed as "AI is whatever hasn't been done yet". When problems are not fully formalised, they may be described using models involving human computation, such as human-assisted Turing machines. == Historical examples == === Game playing === Early AI systems capable of playing games such as checkers and chess were initially regarded as demonstrations of machine intelligence. As these systems improved and became better understood, their achievements were often reinterpreted as examples of computation rather than intelligence. The victory of IBM's Deep Blue over Garry Kasparov in 1997 is a frequently cited example. Critics argued that the system relied on brute-force methods rather than genuine understanding. === Pattern recognition === Technologies such as optical character recognition and speech recognition were once considered core problems in artificial intelligence. As these systems became reliable and widely deployed, they were increasingly treated as standard engineering solutions. === Integration into applications === Many techniques originally developed within AI research have been incorporated into broader technological systems, including marketing, automation, and software applications. Michael Swaine reported in 2007 that AI advances are often presented as developments in other fields. Marvin Minsky observed that successful AI innovations often evolve into separate disciplines. Nick Bostrom noted in 2006 that widely adopted technologies are often no longer labeled as AI. == Contemporary discussion == The AI effect continues to be discussed in the context of recent advances in machine learning, particularly large language models and other generative AI systems. As these systems have become more widely used, some researchers and commentators have noted that their capabilities are frequently described as statistical or mechanical once understood, rather than as intelligence. A 2016 survey of artificial intelligence also noted that AI systems are increasingly embedded in everyday applications, reinforcing earlier observations that successful AI technologies tend to become normalized and no longer identified as AI. At the same time, the widespread commercial use of artificial intelligence has led to greater visibility of the field, contrasting with earlier periods in which AI techniques were often present but unacknowledged. == Interpretations == === Cognitive bias === Some authors describe the AI effect as a cognitive bias in which expectations of intelligence shift as machines achieve new capabilities. === Sociotechnical perspective === Another interpretation emphasizes how technologies are reclassified over time as they become widespread and commercially successful. === Philosophical debate === Some philosophers argue that reclassification reflects genuine conceptual distinctions rather than bias. == Historical context == During periods such as the AI winter, researchers sometimes avoided the term "artificial intelligence" due to negative perceptions. In the 21st century, however, the term "AI" has become widely used in public discourse and marketing. == Broader implications == The AI effect has been linked to broader questions about human uniqueness and the nature of intelligence. Michael Kearns suggested that people may seek to preserve a special role for humans. Similar patterns have been observed in studies of animal cognition. Herbert A. Simon noted that artificial intelligence can provoke strong emotional reactions.

    Read more →
  • How to Choose an AI Paragraph Rewriter

    How to Choose an AI Paragraph Rewriter

    Comparing the best AI paragraph rewriter? An AI paragraph rewriter is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI paragraph rewriter slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.

    Read more →
  • Law and Corpus Linguistics

    Law and Corpus Linguistics

    Law and corpus linguistics (LCL) is an academic sub-discipline that uses large databases of examples of language usage equipped with tools designed by linguists called corpora to better get at the meaning of words and phrases in legal texts (statutes, constitutions, contracts, etc.). Thus, LCL is the application of corpus linguistic tools, theories, and methodologies to issues of legal interpretation in much the same way law and economics is the application of economic tools, theories, and methodologies to various legal issues. == History == A 2005 law review article by Lawrence Solan noted in passing that corpus linguistics had potential for its application to interpreting legal texts. But the first systematic exploration and advocacy of applying the tools and methodologies of corpus linguistics to legal interpretive questions of law and corpus linguistics came in the fall of 2010, when the BYU Law Review published a note by Stephen Mouritsen, entitled The Dictionary is Not a Fortress: Definitional Fallacies and a Corpus-Based Approach to Plain Meaning. The note argued that dictionaries are the primary linguistic tool used by judges to determine the plain or ordinary meaning of words and phrases, and highlighted the deficiencies of such an approach. In its stead, the note proposed using corpus linguistics. And the note would be later cited by Adam Liptak in a New York Times article on statutory construction. Law and corpus linguistics (LCL) gained greater legitimacy in July 2011 with the first judicial opinion in American history utilizing corpus linguistics to determine the meaning of a legal text: In re the Adoption of Baby E.Z. In a concurrence in part and in the judgment, Justice Thomas Lee wrote to put forth an alternative ground for the majority's holding—interpreting the phrase "custody determination" by using corpus linguistics. Justice Lee looked at 500 randomized sample sentences from the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) and found that the most common sense of "custody" was in the context of divorce rather than adoption. Further, he found that "custody" is ten times more likely to co-occur (or collocate) with "divorce" than with "adoption". From that evidence Justice Lee concluded that he "would find that the custody proceedings covered by the Act are limited to proceedings resulting in the modifiable custody orders of a divorce", rather than the broader range of custody proceedings. Other jurisprudence and scholarship would follow. In a 2015 concurrence in State v. Rasabout, Justice Lee used a COCA search to determine that "discharge" when used with a firearm (or one of its synonyms) overwhelmingly referred to a single shot rather than emptying the entire magazine of the weapon. And in 2016, four of the five justices joined a footnote in a majority opinion by Justice Lee commending a party for using corpus linguistics in its briefing even though the Court found it unnecessary to resolve the related question. Finally, in 2016 the Michigan Supreme Court became the first court to use a linguist-designed corpus in a majority opinion (COCA), with both the majority and the dissent turning to COCA to determine the meaning of the word "information". In 2020, courts desiring to bolster the legal theory of original intent have sought the opportunity to undertake analyses of statutes utilizing corpus linguistics. In a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals case, Jones v. Becerra (No. 20-56174), a case involving the Second Amendment and the constitutionality of a California statute which bans the sale of firearms to individuals under the age of 21, a Ninth Circuit panel requested that the parties address three questions: 1) “What is the original public meaning of the Second Amendment phrases: ‘A well regulated Militia’; ‘the right of the people’; and ‘shall not be infringed’? 2) How does the tool of corpus linguistics help inform the determination of the original public meaning of those Second Amendment phrases?” 3) How do the data yielded from corpus linguistics assist in the interpretation of the constitutionality of age-based restrictions under the Second Amendment? As to scholarship, in 2012, Mouritsen followed up his original work with an article in the Columbia Science and Technology Law Review, where he further refined and promoted the use of corpus-based methods for determining questions of legal ambiguity. Additionally, in 2016 two essays and an article on law and corpus linguistics were published. The Yale Law Journal Forum published Corpus Linguistics & Original Public Meaning: A New Tool to Make Originalism More Empirical. Written by Justice Lee and two co-authors, the essay urged originalists to turn to corpus linguistics to improve the rigor and accuracy of originalist scholarship. And in response, the Forum published an essay by Lawrence Solan (a Brooklyn Law professor with a PhD in linguistics), Can Corpus Linguistics Help Make Originalism Scientific? The Boston University Public Interest Law Journal published The Merciful Corpus: The Rule of Lenity, Ambiguity and Corpus Linguistics by Daniel Ortner. In the article Ortner applied corpus linguistics to determining whether sufficient ambiguity exists to trigger the rule of lenity in five Supreme Court cases. Looking forward, in 2017 two more articles are slated for publication. Lee Strang focuses on corpus linguistics and originalism in the U.C. Davis Law Review, and Lawrence Solan and Tammy Gales explore corpus linguistics in the context of finding ordinary meaning in statutory interpretation in the International Journal of Legal Discourse. Lawyers and journalists have also taken notice of corpus linguistics at it relates to the law. In 2010, Neal Goldfarb filed the first known brief in the Supreme Court using corpus linguistics (COCA) to determine whether the ordinary meaning of "personal" referred to corporations in the case FCC v. AT&T. The amicus brief looked at the top collocates (words that co-occur) of "personal" in COHA as well as BYU's Time Magazine Corpus. And writing for The Atlantic, Ben Zimmer took note of this new trend, referring to corpus linguistics in the courts as "Like Lexis on Steroids". On the academic front, in 2013 BYU Law School started the first class on law and corpus linguistics, co-taught by Mouritsen, Lee, and (now Dean) Gordon Smith. The class is currently in its fourth year. And in February 2016, BYU Law School hosted the inaugural conference on LCL, with over two dozen legal and linguistic scholars from around the country discussing and debating the next steps forward for the growing academic movement. The conference has been held regularly in subsequent years. At the 2016 conference BYU Law School announced its plans and progress on the Corpus of Founding Era American English (COFEA), a corpus that covers 1760–1799 and contains more than 120 million words have been collected from founding era letters, diaries, newspapers, non-fiction books, fiction, sermons, speeches, debates, legal cases, and other legal materials.

    Read more →
  • Alex James (professor)

    Alex James (professor)

    Alex James is an Indian scientist who is a professor of AI hardware at School of Electronic Systems and Automation, and Dean at Digital University Kerala (IIITM-K). He is the professor in charge of Maker Village, Kochi, Chief Investigator of the centre for Intelligent IoT Sensors, and India Innovation Centre for Graphene. James features in top 1% scientists list published by Elsevier BV in the world in the field of Electrical and Electronics Engineering. He appeared in the list for the third consecutive time. He specializes in the scientific field of Memristive Systems, AI hardware, Neuromorphic VLSI (very-large-scale integration) system, Intelligent Imaging and Machine learning, and Analogue electronics. == Education and career == James earned his Ph.D. degree from the Queensland Micro and Nanotechnology Centre, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia. Since 2009, he has been working as a faculty member at different universities in Australia and India. He was a Member of IET Vision and Imaging Network, and is a Member of BCS’ Fellows Technical Advisory Group (F-TAG). He is the founding chair for IEEE Kerala Section Circuits and Systems Society, and is a fellow of British Computer Society (FBCS), and Institution of Engineering and Technology. He was an Editorial Board Member of Information Fusion (2010–2014), Elsevier, and associate editor for HCIS (2015–2020), Springer; and Guest Associate Editor for IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computational Intelligence (2017). Currently he is serving as an Associate Editor of IEEE Access, Frontiers in Neuroscience, and IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers journal. == Scientific research == IIITM-K has achieved a breakthrough in developing Analogue Integrated circuit for implementing Generative Adversarial Networks (GAN) in a joint research project with Analogue Circuits and Image Sensors Lab, Siegen university and Fraunhofer, Germany, and Centre for Excellence in Artificial general intelligence and Neuromorphic Systems (neuroAGI). According to A. P. James, professor at the School of Electronics at IIITM-K, this complicated and meticulous AI circuits research can accelerate and operate GAN applications in low power devices. It also can be used to analyze and interpret 2019-nCoV data for a possible solution to the pandemic. An AI Semantic search engine has been created by a research team led by A.P. James to help researchers gain deeper insights into Scientific Investigation, particularly since the COVID-19 issue has necessitated the collection of a significant amount of complex scientific data. The search engine is called "www.vilokana.in, which is Sanskrit for "finding out. == Awards and honors == James is a member of IEEE CASS Technical committee on Nonlinear Circuits and Systems, IEEE CASS Technical committee on Cellular Nanoscale networks and Memristor Array Computing, IEEE Consumer Technology Society Technical Committee on Quantum in Consumer Technology (QCT), Technical Committee on Machine learning, Deep learning and AI in CE (MDA) and Member of BCS’ Fellows Technical Advisory Group (F-TAG). James was awarded best associate editor of IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers TCAS-I, by the IEEE Circuits and Systems Society (IEEE CASS) for the year 2020–21. He has been an associate editor for the journal since 2017. He is also an editorial board member of PeerJ CS and a Senior Member of IEEE, Life Member of ACM, Senior Fellow of HEA.

    Read more →
  • AI Overviews

    AI Overviews

    AI Overviews is an artificial intelligence (AI) feature integrated into Google Search that produces AI-generated summaries of search results. The feature has been criticized for its inaccuracy and for reducing website traffic. == History and development == AI Overviews were first introduced as part of Google's Search Generative Experience (SGE), which was unveiled at the Google I/O conference in May 2023. In May 2024 at Google I/O 2024, the feature was rebranded as AI Overviews and launched in the United States. The introduction of AI Overviews was seen as a strategic move to compete with other generative AI advancements, including OpenAI's ChatGPT. By August 2024, AI Overviews was rolled out to several other countries, including the United Kingdom, India, Japan, Brazil, Mexico, and Indonesia, with support for multiple languages. In October 2024, Google expanded the feature globally, making it available in over 100 countries. In December 2024, Botify x Demandsphere released findings stating that when AI Overviews and featured snippets appear together on the search engine results page, they take up approximately 67.1% of the screen on desktop and 75.7% on mobile. Even if content is ranking in the #1 position, it may not be visible to consumers if other visual elements on the results page are more prominent. In March 2025, Google started testing an "AI Mode", where the search results page is AI-generated. The company was also considering adding advertisements to the AI Mode, as they already exist in AI Overviews. As of May 2025, AI Overviews are available in over 200 countries and territories and in more than 40 languages. As of March 2026, Google AI Overviews appear on more than 48% of total Google Search queries, compared to just 6.49% in the previous year (58% year-over-year growth). == Functionality == The AI Overviews feature uses large language models to generate summaries from web content. The overviews are designed to be concise, providing a snapshot of relevant information about the queried topic. Google allows users to adjust the language complexity in summaries, offering both simplified and detailed options. The overviews also include links to sources. According to a June 2025 study by Semrush, the most cited source is Quora, followed by Reddit. == Reception == The feature has faced criticism for inaccuracies, including instances where erroneous or nonsensical content was generated. Depending on what is searched for, the overview may also consist of hallucinated content, such as when searching for idioms that do not exist. In May 2024, Google temporarily restricted the AI tool after it provided suggestions that were seen as nonsensical and harmful, such as telling users to eat rocks or apply glue on pizza. Concerns were also raised by content publishers, who feared a decline in web traffic as users relied on the summaries instead of visiting source websites. A Google patent from 2026 raised the concern of webmasters that Google could entirely replace the landing page of websites by an AI optimized copy of the website in its results. There is also apprehension about the ethical implications of AI-driven content aggregation, including its impact on intellectual property rights and the visibility of smaller content providers. The European Commission announced in December 2025 that they were investigating whether AI Overviews breached European competition law. In response, Google has stated its commitment to improve content validation and refine the algorithms used to filter unreliable information. Google implemented measures to prioritize link placement within AI Overviews, aiming to balance user convenience with the needs of content creators. In January 2026, Google restricted AI Overviews on certain health-related searches following an investigation by The Guardian. == Lawsuits == On February 24, 2025, Chegg sued Alphabet over the AI Overviews feature, claiming that it was leading to students preferring "low-quality, unverified AI summaries", thus violating antitrust law. Chegg also said it was considering either a sale or a take-private transaction. In September 2025, Penske Media Corporation, the publisher of Rolling Stone and The Hollywood Reporter, sued Google, claiming that AI Overviews illegally regurgitate content from their websites and drive off potential site visitors by always appearing on top of the search results while leaving little incentive to see the linked sources. The company stated that "the future of digital media and [...] its integrity [...] is threatened by Google's current actions", alleging that 20% of searches that link to Penske-owned websites show AI Overviews and that the figure is expected to rise. Google spokesperson José Castañeda called the claims "meritless" and stated that "AI Overviews send traffic to a greater diversity of sites." In 2026, Canadian musician Ashley MacIsaac filed a lawsuit against Google claiming that the AI Overview feature had wrongly stated that MacIsaac had been convicted of numerous criminal offences and was on the sex offender registry. He claims this incorrect information led to the cancellation of a December 2025 gig organized by the Sipekne'katik First Nation.

    Read more →
  • How to Choose an AI Art Generator

    How to Choose an AI Art Generator

    Looking for the best AI art generator? An AI art generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it can save you hours every week by automating repetitive work. Most options offer a generous free tier, with paid plans unlocking higher limits, faster processing, and team features. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI art generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.

    Read more →
  • The Best Free AI Image Generator for Beginners

    The Best Free AI Image Generator for Beginners

    In search of the best AI image generator? An AI image generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI image generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.

    Read more →
  • Karsten Borgwardt

    Karsten Borgwardt

    Karsten Borgwardt (born 1980) is a German computer scientist and biologist specializing in machine learning and computational biology. Since February 2023, he has been a director at the Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry in Martinsried, Germany, where he leads the Department of Machine Learning and Systems Biology. == Education and career == Borgwardt was born in Kaiserslautern. He obtained a Diplom (equivalent to a master’s degree) in computer science from LMU Munich in 2004 and a Master of Science in biology from the University of Oxford in 2003. In 2007, he obtained his PhD from LMU Munich in computer science. Following a postdoctoral position at the University of Cambridge, he became a research group leader for machine learning and computational biology at the Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics and the former Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology in Tübingen in 2008. In 2011, Borgwardt was appointed professor of data mining in the life sciences at the University of Tübingen. In 2014, he joined ETH Zurich as an associate professor in the Department of Biosystems Science and Engineering (D-BSSE) and was promoted to full professor in 2017. During his tenure at ETH Zurich, he coordinated significant research programs, including two Marie Curie Innovative Training Networks and the Personalized Swiss Sepsis Study, focusing on the prediction of sepsis using machine learning. In 2023, he was appointed as Scientific Member of the Max Planck Society and as Director at the Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry in Martinsried. == Research contributions == Borgwardt’s research integrates big data analysis with biomedical research. He develops novel machine learning algorithms to detect patterns and statistical dependencies in large biological and medical datasets. His work aims to enable the automatic generation of new knowledge from big data and to understand the relationship between the function of biological systems and their molecular properties, which is fundamental for personalized medicine. == Awards and honors == During his studies, he was a scholar of the Stiftung Maximilianeum, and the Bavarian Foundation for the Promotion of the Gifted. Borgwardt received scholarships from the Studienstiftung des deutschen Volkes in 2002 and 2007. His PhD dissertation received the Heinz Schwärtzel Dissertation Award for Foundations of Computer Science in 2007. As a professor in Tübingen, he was awarded the Alfried-Krupp-Förderpreis for Young Professors in 2013. In 2015, he received an SNSF Starting Grant. In 2014, 2015 and 2016, he was listed in “Top 40 under 40” in Germany rankings selected by Capital magazine. In 2018, Borgwardt was named among “25 individuals who have the potential to shape the next 25 years” by Focus magazine. In 2023, Borgwardt received an honorary professorship from LMU Munich by the Faculty of Chemistry and Pharmacy. Publications from Borgwardt's group have received the Outstanding Student Paper Award in NIPS in 2009, the SIB Graduate Paper Award in 2020 and SIB Remarkable Output Awards in 2020 and 2021 from the Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics (SIB). == Selected publications == Weisfeiler-Lehman Graph Kernels (’‘Journal of Machine Learning Research’’, 2011): Introduced an efficient graph kernel based on the Weisfeiler-Lehman algorithm. “Direct antimicrobial resistance prediction from clinical MALDI-TOF mass spectra using machine learning” (’‘Nature Medicine’’, 2022): showcased the feasibility of predicting antimicrobial resistance from readily collected mass spectrometry data in the hospital. The new method is able to identify antibiotic resistance 24 hours earlier than previous methods.

    Read more →
  • Example-based machine translation

    Example-based machine translation

    Example-based machine translation (EBMT) is a method of machine translation often characterized by its use of a bilingual corpus with parallel texts as its main knowledge base at run-time. It is essentially a translation by analogy and can be viewed as an implementation of a case-based reasoning approach to machine learning. == Translation by analogy == At the foundation of example-based machine translation is the idea of translation by analogy. When applied to the process of human translation, the idea that translation takes place by analogy is a rejection of the idea that people translate sentences by doing deep linguistic analysis. Instead, it is founded on the belief that people translate by first decomposing a sentence into certain phrases, then by translating these phrases, and finally by properly composing these fragments into one long sentence. Phrasal translations are translated by analogy to previous translations. The principle of translation by analogy is encoded to example-based machine translation through the example translations that are used to train such a system. Other approaches to machine translation, including statistical machine translation, also use bilingual corpora to learn the process of translation. == History == Example-based machine translation was first suggested by Makoto Nagao in 1984. He pointed out that it is especially adapted to translation between two totally different languages, such as English and Japanese. In this case, one sentence can be translated into several well-structured sentences in another language, therefore, it is no use to do the deep linguistic analysis characteristic of rule-based machine translation. == Example == Example-based machine translation systems are trained from bilingual parallel corpora containing sentence pairs like the example shown in the table above. Sentence pairs contain sentences in one language with their translations into another. The particular example shows an example of a minimal pair, meaning that the sentences vary by just one element. These sentences make it simple to learn translations of portions of a sentence. For example, an example-based machine translation system would learn three units of translation from the above example: How much is that X ? corresponds to Ano X wa ikura desu ka. red umbrella corresponds to akai kasa small camera corresponds to chiisai kamera Composing these units can be used to produce novel translations in the future. For example, if we have been trained using some text containing the sentences: President Kennedy was shot dead during the parade. and The convict escaped on July 15th., then we could translate the sentence The convict was shot dead during the parade. by substituting the appropriate parts of the sentences. == Phrasal verbs == Example-based machine translation is best suited for sub-language phenomena like phrasal verbs. Phrasal verbs have highly context-dependent meanings. They are common in English, where they comprise a verb followed by an adverb and/or a preposition, which are called the particle to the verb. Phrasal verbs produce specialized context-specific meanings that may not be derived from the meaning of the constituents. There is almost always an ambiguity during word-to-word translation from source to the target language. As an example, consider the phrasal verb "put on" and its Hindustani translation. It may be used in any of the following ways: Ram put on the lights. (Switched on) (Hindustani translation: Jalana) Ram put on a cap. (Wear) (Hindustani translation: Pahenna)

    Read more →
  • Pascale Fung

    Pascale Fung

    Pascale Fung (馮雁) (born in Shanghai, China) is a co-founder and Chief Research and Innovation Officer of AMI Labs, an artificial intelligence research company focused on world models. She is a professor in the Department of Electronic & Computer Engineering and the Department of Computer Science & Engineering at the Hong Kong University of Science & Technology(HKUST). She is the director of the Centre for AI Research (CAiRE) at HKUST. She is an elected Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) for her “contributions to human-machine interactions”, an elected Fellow of the International Speech Communication Association for “fundamental contributions to the interdisciplinary area of spoken language human-machine interactions” and an elected Fellow of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) for her “significant contributions toward statistical NLP, comparable corpora, and building intelligent systems that can understand and empathize with humans”. She is a member of the Global Future Council on Artificial Intelligence and Robotics, a think tank of the World Economic Forum, and blogs for the Forum's online publication Agenda. She is a member of the Partnership on AI. She has been invited as an AI expert to different government initiatives in China, Japan, the UAE, India, the European Union and the United Nations. Fung's publication topics include spoken language systems, natural language processing, and empathetic human-robot interaction. She co-founded the Human Language Technology Center (HLTC) and is an affiliated faculty with the Robotics Institute and the Big Data Institute, both at HKUST. Additionally, she is the founding chair of the Women Faculty Association at HKUST. She is actively involved in encouraging young women into careers in engineering and science. == Career and research interests == Fung's work is focused on building systems that try to understand and empathize with humans. She has authored and co-authored hundreds of publications, along with many journal listings and book chapters. Fung is often found in the media, among others as a writer for Scientific American, the World Economic Forum, and the London School of Economics, and the Design Society. She was a pioneer in using statistical models for natural language understanding. Her PhD thesis proposed unsupervised methods for aligning texts and mining dictionary translations in different languages by distributional properties. She is an expert in spoken language understanding and computer emotional intelligence, and is a strong proponent of technology transfer. Fung has applied many of her research group's results in the fields of, among others, robotics, IoT, and financial analytics. Her efforts led to the launch of the world's first Chinese natural language search engine in 2001, the first Chinese virtual assistant for smartphones in 2010, and the first emotional intelligent speaker in 2017. == Honors == Elected Fellow, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), for “significant contributions to the field of Conversational AI and to the development of ethical AI principles and algorithms” Elected Fellow, Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), for “significant contributions toward statistical NLP, comparable corpora, and building intelligent systems that can understand and empathize with humans” Nominee, the VentureBeat AI Innovation Awards at Transform 2020, for "AI for Good" Awardee, 2017 Outstanding Women Professionals & Entrepreneurs Award, Hong Kong Women Professionals & Entrepreneurs Association Elected Fellow, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), for “contributions to human-machine interactions” Elected Fellow, International Speech Communication Association (ISCA), for “fundamental contributions to the interdisciplinary area of spoken language human-machine interactions" Member, Global Future Council on AI and Robotics, World Economic Forum (2016–) One of the Top 50 Women of Hope, selected by List Magazine in 2014 Selected as “My Favorite Teacher” by top engineering students in 2007 and in 2009 == Affiliations == Fung is affiliated with the following institutions and organizations: Hong Kong University of Science and Technology World Economic Forum Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Association for Computational Linguistics International Speech Communication Association Association for Computing Machinery Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence

    Read more →
  • Frederick Jelinek

    Frederick Jelinek

    Frederick Jelinek (18 November 1932 – 14 September 2010) was a Czech-American researcher in information theory, automatic speech recognition, and natural language processing. He is well known for his oft-quoted statement, "Every time I fire a linguist, the performance of the speech recognizer goes up". Jelinek was born in Czechoslovakia before World War II and emigrated with his family to the United States in the early years of the communist regime. He studied engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and taught for 10 years at Cornell University before accepting a job at IBM Research. In 1961, he married Czech screenwriter Milena Jelinek. At IBM, his team advanced approaches to computer speech recognition and machine translation. After IBM, he went to head the Center for Language and Speech Processing at Johns Hopkins University for 17 years, where he was still working on the day he died. == Personal life == Jelinek was born on November 18, 1932, as Bedřich Jelínek in Kladno to Vilém and Trude Jelínek. His father was Jewish; his mother was born in Switzerland to Czech Catholic parents and had converted to Judaism. Jelínek senior, a dentist, had planned early to escape Nazi occupation and flee to England; he arranged for a passport, visa, and the shipping of his dentistry materials. The couple planned to send their son to an English private school. However, Vilém decided to stay at the last minute and was eventually sent to the Theresienstadt concentration camp, where he died in 1945. The family was forced to move to Prague in 1941, but Frederick, his sister and mother—thanks to the latter's background—escaped the concentration camps. After the war, Jelinek entered in the gymnasium, despite having missed several years of schooling because education of Jewish children had been forbidden since 1942. His mother, anxious that her son should get a good education, made great efforts for their emigration, especially when it became clear he would not be allowed to even attempt the graduation examination. His mother hoped her son would become a physician, but Jelinek dreamed of being a lawyer. He studied engineering in evening classes at the City College of New York and received stipends from the National Committee for a Free Europe that allowed him to study at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. About his choice of specialty, he said: "Fortunately, to electrical engineering there belonged a discipline whose aim was not the construction of physical systems: the theory of information". He obtained his Ph.D. in 1962, with Robert Fano as his adviser. In 1957, Jelinek paid an unexpected visit to Prague. He had been in Vienna and applied for a visa, hoping to see his former acquaintances again. He met with his old friend Miloš Forman, who introduced him to film student Milena Tobolová—whose screenplay had been the basis for the movie Easy Life (Snadný život). His flight back to the U.S. had a stopover in Munich, during which he called her to propose. Tobolová was considered a dissident and the authorities were not happy with her film. Jelinek asked for help from Jerome Wiesner and Cyrus Eaton, the latter who lobbied Nikita Khrushchev. Following the inauguration of John F. Kennedy, a group of Czech dissidents were allowed to emigrate in January 1961. Thanks to the lobbying, the future Milena Jelinek was one of them. After completing his graduate studies, Jelinek, who had developed an interest in linguistics, had plans to work with Charles F. Hockett at Cornell University. However these fell through and during the next ten years he continued to study information theory. Having previously worked at IBM during a sabbatical, he began full-time work there in 1972—at first on leave for Cornell, but permanently from 1974. He remained there for over twenty years. Although at first he had been offered a regular research job, upon his arrival he learned that Josef Raviv had recently been promoted to head of the newly opened IBM Haifa Research Laboratory, and became head of the Continuous Speech Recognition group at the Thomas J. Watson Research Center. Despite his team's successes in this area, Jelinek's work remained little known in his home country because Czech scientists were not allowed to participate in key conferences. After the 1989 fall of communism, Jelinek helped establish scientific relationships, regularly visiting to lecture and helping to persuade IBM to establish a computing centre at Charles University. In 1993, he retired from IBM and went to Johns Hopkins University's Center for Language and Speech Processing, where he was director and Julian Sinclair Smith Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering. He was still working there at the time of his death; Jelinek died of a heart attack at the close of an otherwise normal workday in mid-September 2010. He was survived by his wife, daughter and son, sister, stepsister, and three grandchildren, including Sophie Gold Jelinek. == Research and legacy == Information theory was a fashionable scientific approach in the mid '50s. However, pioneer Claude Shannon wrote in 1956 that this trendiness was dangerous. He said, "Our fellow scientists in many different fields, attracted by the fanfare and by the new avenues opened to scientific analysis, are using these ideas in their own problems ... It will be all too easy for our somewhat artificial prosperity to collapse overnight when it is realized that the use of a few exciting words like information, entropy, redundancy, do not solve all our problems." During the next decade, a combination of factors shut down the application of information theory to natural language processing (NLP) problems—in particular machine translation. One factor was the 1957 publication of Noam Chomsky's Syntactic Structures, which stated, "probabilistic models give no insight into the basic problems of syntactic structure". This accorded well with the philosophy of the artificial intelligence research of the time, which promoted rule-based approaches. The other factor was the 1966 ALPAC report, which recommended that the government should stop funding research into machine translation. ALPAC chairman John Pierce later said that the field was filled with "mad inventors or untrustworthy engineers". He said that the underlying linguistic problems must be solved before attempts at NLP could be reasonably made. These elements essentially halted research in the field. Jelinek had begun to develop an interest in linguistics after the immigration of his wife, who initially enrolled in the MIT linguistics program with the help of Roman Jakobson. Jelinek often accompanied her to Chomsky's lectures, and even discussed the possibility of changing orientation with his adviser. Fano was "really upset", and after the failure of his project with Hockett at Cornell, he did not return to this field of research until starting work at IBM. The scope of research at IBM was considerably different from that of most other teams. According to Mark Liberman, "While [Jelinek] was leading IBM's effort to solve the general dictation problem during the decade or so following 1972, most other U.S. companies and academic researchers were working on very limited problems ... or were staying out of the field entirely". Jelinek regarded speech recognition as an information theory problem—a noisy channel, in this case the acoustic signal—which some observers considered a daring approach. The concept of perplexity was introduced in their first model, New Raleigh Grammar, which was published in 1976 as the paper "Continuous Speech Recognition by Statistical Methods" in the journal Proceedings of the IEEE. According to Young, the basic noisy channel approach "reduced the speech recognition problem to one of producing two statistical models". Whereas New Raleigh Grammar was a hidden Markov model, their next model, called Tangora, was broader and involved n-grams, specifically trigrams. Even though "it was obvious to everyone that this model was hopelessly impoverished", it was not improved upon until Jelinek presented another paper in 1999. The same trigram approach was applied to phones in single words. Although the identification of parts of speech turned out not to be very useful for speech recognition, tagging methods developed during these projects are now used in various NLP applications. The incremental research techniques developed at IBM eventually became dominant in the field after DARPA, in the mid-80s, returned to NLP research and imposed that methodology to participating teams, shared common goals, data, and precise evaluation metrics. The Continuous Speech Recognition Group's research, which required large amounts of data to train the algorithms, eventually led to the creation of the Linguistic Data Consortium. In the 1980s, although the broader problem of speech recognition remained unsolved, they sought to apply the methods developed to other problems; machine translat

    Read more →
  • The Best Free AI Sales Assistant for Beginners

    The Best Free AI Sales Assistant for Beginners

    Comparing the best AI sales assistant? An AI sales assistant is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI sales assistant slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.

    Read more →
  • Spherical basis

    Spherical basis

    In pure and applied mathematics, particularly quantum mechanics and computer graphics and their applications, a spherical basis is the basis used to express spherical tensors. The spherical basis closely relates to the description of angular momentum in quantum mechanics and spherical harmonic functions. While spherical polar coordinates are one orthogonal coordinate system for expressing vectors and tensors using polar and azimuthal angles and radial distance, the spherical basis are constructed from the standard basis and use complex numbers. == In three dimensions == A vector A in 3D Euclidean space R3 can be expressed in the familiar Cartesian coordinate system in the standard basis ex, ey, ez, and coordinates Ax, Ay, Az: or any other coordinate system with associated basis set of vectors. From this extend the scalars to allow multiplication by complex numbers, so that we are now working in C 3 {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} ^{3}} rather than R 3 {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{3}} . === Basis definition === In the spherical bases denoted e+, e−, e0, and associated coordinates with respect to this basis, denoted A+, A−, A0, the vector A is: where the spherical basis vectors can be defined in terms of the Cartesian basis using complex-valued coefficients in the xy plane: in which i {\displaystyle i} denotes the imaginary unit, and one normal to the plane in the z direction: e 0 = e z {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{0}=\mathbf {e} _{z}} The inverse relations are: === Commutator definition === While giving a basis in a 3-dimensional space is a valid definition for a spherical tensor, it only covers the case for when the rank k {\displaystyle k} is 1. For higher ranks, one may use either the commutator, or rotation definition of a spherical tensor. The commutator definition is given below, any operator T q ( k ) {\displaystyle T_{q}^{(k)}} that satisfies the following relations is a spherical tensor: [ J ± , T q ( k ) ] = ℏ ( k ∓ q ) ( k ± q + 1 ) T q ± 1 ( k ) {\displaystyle [J_{\pm },T_{q}^{(k)}]=\hbar {\sqrt {(k\mp q)(k\pm q+1)}}T_{q\pm 1}^{(k)}} [ J z , T q ( k ) ] = ℏ q T q ( k ) {\displaystyle [J_{z},T_{q}^{(k)}]=\hbar qT_{q}^{(k)}} === Rotation definition === Analogously to how the spherical harmonics transform under a rotation, a general spherical tensor transforms as follows, when the states transform under the unitary Wigner D-matrix D ( R ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}(R)} , where R is a (3×3 rotation) group element in SO(3). That is, these matrices represent the rotation group elements. With the help of its Lie algebra, one can show these two definitions are equivalent. D ( R ) T q ( k ) D † ( R ) = ∑ q ′ = − k k T q ′ ( k ) D q ′ q ( k ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}(R)T_{q}^{(k)}{\mathcal {D}}^{\dagger }(R)=\sum _{q'=-k}^{k}T_{q'}^{(k)}{\mathcal {D}}_{q'q}^{(k)}} === Coordinate vectors === For the spherical basis, the coordinates are complex-valued numbers A+, A0, A−, and can be found by substitution of (3B) into (1), or directly calculated from the inner product ⟨, ⟩ (5): A 0 = ⟨ e 0 , A ⟩ = ⟨ e z , A ⟩ = A z {\displaystyle A_{0}=\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{0},\mathbf {A} \right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{z},\mathbf {A} \right\rangle =A_{z}} with inverse relations: In general, for two vectors with complex coefficients in the same real-valued orthonormal basis ei, with the property ei·ej = δij, the inner product is: where · is the usual dot product and the complex conjugate must be used to keep the magnitude (or "norm") of the vector positive definite. == Properties (three dimensions) == === Orthonormality === The spherical basis is an orthonormal basis, since the inner product ⟨, ⟩ (5) of every pair vanishes meaning the basis vectors are all mutually orthogonal: ⟨ e + , e − ⟩ = ⟨ e − , e 0 ⟩ = ⟨ e 0 , e + ⟩ = 0 {\displaystyle \left\langle \mathbf {e} _{+},\mathbf {e} _{-}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{-},\mathbf {e} _{0}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{0},\mathbf {e} _{+}\right\rangle =0} and each basis vector is a unit vector: ⟨ e + , e + ⟩ = ⟨ e − , e − ⟩ = ⟨ e 0 , e 0 ⟩ = 1 {\displaystyle \left\langle \mathbf {e} _{+},\mathbf {e} _{+}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{-},\mathbf {e} _{-}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{0},\mathbf {e} _{0}\right\rangle =1} hence the need for the normalizing factors of 1 / 2 {\displaystyle 1/\!{\sqrt {2}}} . === Change of basis matrix === The defining relations (3A) can be summarized by a transformation matrix U: ( e + e − e 0 ) = U ( e x e y e z ) , U = ( − 1 2 − i 2 0 + 1 2 − i 2 0 0 0 1 ) , {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{+}\\\mathbf {e} _{-}\\\mathbf {e} _{0}\end{pmatrix}}=\mathbf {U} {\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{x}\\\mathbf {e} _{y}\\\mathbf {e} _{z}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad \mathbf {U} ={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,,} with inverse: ( e x e y e z ) = U − 1 ( e + e − e 0 ) , U − 1 = ( − 1 2 + 1 2 0 + i 2 + i 2 0 0 0 1 ) . {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{x}\\\mathbf {e} _{y}\\\mathbf {e} _{z}\end{pmatrix}}=\mathbf {U} ^{-1}{\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{+}\\\mathbf {e} _{-}\\\mathbf {e} _{0}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad \mathbf {U} ^{-1}={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,.} It can be seen that U is a unitary matrix, in other words its Hermitian conjugate U† (complex conjugate and matrix transpose) is also the inverse matrix U−1. For the coordinates: ( A + A − A 0 ) = U ∗ ( A x A y A z ) , U ∗ = ( − 1 2 + i 2 0 + 1 2 + i 2 0 0 0 1 ) , {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}A_{+}\\A_{-}\\A_{0}\end{pmatrix}}=\mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} }{\begin{pmatrix}A_{x}\\A_{y}\\A_{z}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad \mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} }={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,,} and inverse: ( A x A y A z ) = ( U ∗ ) − 1 ( A + A − A 0 ) , ( U ∗ ) − 1 = ( − 1 2 + 1 2 0 − i 2 − i 2 0 0 0 1 ) . {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}A_{x}\\A_{y}\\A_{z}\end{pmatrix}}=(\mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} })^{-1}{\begin{pmatrix}A_{+}\\A_{-}\\A_{0}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad (\mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} })^{-1}={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,.} === Cross products === Taking cross products of the spherical basis vectors, we find an obvious relation: e q × e q = 0 {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{q}\times \mathbf {e} _{q}={\boldsymbol {0}}} where q is a placeholder for +, −, 0, and two less obvious relations: e ± × e ∓ = ± i e 0 {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{\pm }\times \mathbf {e} _{\mp }=\pm i\mathbf {e} _{0}} e ± × e 0 = ± i e ± {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{\pm }\times \mathbf {e} _{0}=\pm i\mathbf {e} _{\pm }} === Inner product in the spherical basis === The inner product between two vectors A and B in the spherical basis follows from the above definition of the inner product: ⟨ A , B ⟩ = A + B + ⋆ + A − B − ⋆ + A 0 B 0 ⋆ {\displaystyle \left\langle \mathbf {A} ,\mathbf {B} \right\rangle =A_{+}B_{+}^{\star }+A_{-}B_{-}^{\star }+A_{0}B_{0}^{\star }}

    Read more →
  • Regular language

    Regular language

    In theoretical computer science and formal language theory, a regular language (also called a rational language) is a formal language that can be defined by a regular expression, in the strict sense in theoretical computer science (as opposed to many modern regular expression engines, which are augmented with features that allow the recognition of non-regular languages). Alternatively, a regular language can be defined as a language recognised by a finite automaton. The equivalence of regular expressions and finite automata is known as Kleene's theorem (after American mathematician Stephen Cole Kleene). In the Chomsky hierarchy, regular languages are the languages generated by Type-3 grammars. == Formal definition == The collection of regular languages over an alphabet Σ is defined recursively as follows: The empty language ∅ is a regular language. For each a ∈ Σ (a belongs to Σ), the singleton language {a} is a regular language. If A is a regular language, A (Kleene star) is a regular language. Due to this, the empty string language {ε} is also regular. If A and B are regular languages, then A ∪ B (union) and A • B (concatenation) are regular languages. No other languages over Σ are regular. See Regular expression § Formal language theory for syntax and semantics of regular expressions. == Examples == All finite languages are regular; in particular the empty string language {ε} = ∅ is regular. Other typical examples include the language consisting of all strings over the alphabet {a, b} which contain an even number of as, or the language consisting of all strings of the form: several as followed by several bs. A simple example of a language that is not regular is the set of strings {anbn | n ≥ 0}. Intuitively, it cannot be recognized with a finite automaton, since a finite automaton has finite memory and it cannot remember the exact number of a's. Techniques to prove this fact rigorously are given below. == Equivalent formalisms == A regular language satisfies the following equivalent properties: it is the language of a regular expression (by the above definition) it is the language accepted by a nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA) it is the language accepted by a deterministic finite automaton (DFA) it can be generated by a regular grammar it is the language accepted by an alternating finite automaton it is the language accepted by a two-way finite automaton it can be generated by a prefix grammar it can be accepted by a read-only Turing machine it can be defined in monadic second-order logic (Büchi–Elgot–Trakhtenbrot theorem) it is recognized by some finite syntactic monoid M, meaning it is the preimage {w ∈ Σ | f(w) ∈ S} of a subset S of a finite monoid M under a monoid homomorphism f : Σ → M from the free monoid on its alphabet the number of equivalence classes of its syntactic congruence is finite. (This number equals the number of states of the minimal deterministic finite automaton accepting L.) Properties 10. and 11. are purely algebraic approaches to define regular languages; a similar set of statements can be formulated for a monoid M ⊆ Σ. In this case, equivalence over M leads to the concept of a recognizable language. Some authors use one of the above properties different from "1." as an alternative definition of regular languages. Some of the equivalences above, particularly those among the first four formalisms, are called Kleene's theorem in textbooks. Precisely which one (or which subset) is called such varies between authors. One textbook calls the equivalence of regular expressions and NFAs ("1." and "2." above) "Kleene's theorem". Another textbook calls the equivalence of regular expressions and DFAs ("1." and "3." above) "Kleene's theorem". Two other textbooks first prove the expressive equivalence of NFAs and DFAs ("2." and "3.") and then state "Kleene's theorem" as the equivalence between regular expressions and finite automata (the latter said to describe "recognizable languages"). A linguistically oriented text first equates regular grammars ("4." above) with DFAs and NFAs, calls the languages generated by (any of) these "regular", after which it introduces regular expressions which it terms to describe "rational languages", and finally states "Kleene's theorem" as the coincidence of regular and rational languages. Other authors simply define "rational expression" and "regular expressions" as synonymous and do the same with "rational languages" and "regular languages". Apparently, the term regular originates from a 1951 technical report where Kleene introduced regular events and explicitly welcomed "any suggestions as to a more descriptive term". Noam Chomsky, in his 1959 seminal article, used the term regular in a different meaning at first (referring to what is called Chomsky normal form today), but noticed that his finite state languages were equivalent to Kleene's regular events. == Closure properties == The regular languages are closed under various operations, that is, if the languages K and L are regular, so is the result of the following operations: the set-theoretic Boolean operations: union K ∪ L, intersection K ∩ L, and complement L, hence also relative complement K − L. the regular operations: K ∪ L, concatenation ⁠ K ∘ L {\displaystyle K\circ L} ⁠, and Kleene star L. the trio operations: string homomorphism, inverse string homomorphism, and intersection with regular languages. As a consequence they are closed under arbitrary finite state transductions, like quotient K / L with a regular language. Even more, regular languages are closed under quotients with arbitrary languages: If L is regular then L / K is regular for any K. the reverse (or mirror image) LR. Given a nondeterministic finite automaton to recognize L, an automaton for LR can be obtained by reversing all transitions and interchanging starting and finishing states. This may result in multiple starting states; ε-transitions can be used to join them. == Decidability properties == Given two deterministic finite automata A and B, it is decidable whether they accept the same language. As a consequence, using the above closure properties, the following problems are also decidable for arbitrarily given deterministic finite automata A and B, with accepted languages LA and LB, respectively: Containment: is LA ⊆ LB ? Disjointness: is LA ∩ LB = {} ? Emptiness: is LA = {} ? Universality: is LA = Σ ? Membership: given a ∈ Σ, is a ∈ LB ? For regular expressions, the universality problem is NP-complete already for a singleton alphabet. For larger alphabets, that problem is PSPACE-complete. If regular expressions are extended to allow also a squaring operator, with "A2" denoting the same as "AA", still just regular languages can be described, but the universality problem has an exponential space lower bound, and is in fact complete for exponential space with respect to polynomial-time reduction. For a fixed finite alphabet, the theory of the set of all languages – together with strings, membership of a string in a language, and for each character, a function to append the character to a string (and no other operations) – is decidable, and its minimal elementary substructure consists precisely of regular languages. For a binary alphabet, the theory is called S2S. == Complexity results == In computational complexity theory, the complexity class of all regular languages is sometimes referred to as REGULAR or REG and equals DSPACE(O(1)), the decision problems that can be solved in constant space (the space used is independent of the input size). REGULAR ≠ AC0, since it (trivially) contains the parity problem of determining whether the number of 1 bits in the input is even or odd and this problem is not in AC0. On the other hand, REGULAR does not contain AC0, because the nonregular language of palindromes, or the nonregular language { 0 n 1 n : n ∈ N } {\displaystyle \{0^{n}1^{n}:n\in \mathbb {N} \}} can both be recognized in AC0. If a language is not regular, it requires a machine with at least Ω(log log n) space to recognize (where n is the input size). In other words, DSPACE(o(log log n)) equals the class of regular languages. In practice, most nonregular problems are studied in a setting with at least logarithmic space, as this is the amount of space required to store a pointer into the input tape. == Location in the Chomsky hierarchy == To locate the regular languages in the Chomsky hierarchy, one notices that every regular language is context-free. The converse is not true: for example, the language consisting of all strings having the same number of as as bs is context-free but not regular. To prove that a language is not regular, one often uses the Myhill–Nerode theorem and the pumping lemma. Other approaches include using the closure properties of regular languages or quantifying Kolmogorov complexity. Important subclasses of regular languages include: Finite languages, those containing only a finite number of words. These are regular la

    Read more →
  • Larry Heck

    Larry Heck

    Larry Paul Heck is the Rhesa Screven Farmer, Jr., Advanced Computing Concepts Chair, Georgia Research Alliance Eminent Scholar, Co-Executive Director of the Machine Learning Center and Professor at the Georgia Institute of Technology. His career spans many of the sub-disciplines of artificial intelligence, including conversational AI, speech recognition and speaker recognition, natural language processing, web search, online advertising and acoustics. He is best known for his role as a co-founder of the Microsoft Cortana Personal Assistant and his early work in deep learning for speech processing. == Education and career == Larry Heck was born in Havre, Montana. After receiving the Bachelor of Science in electrical engineering at Texas Tech University, he was admitted to graduate school at the Georgia Institute of Technology in 1986. Heck received the MSEE in 1989 and the PhD in 1991 under advisor Prof. James H. McClellan. From 1992 to 1998, he was a senior research engineer at SRI International with the Acoustics and Radar Technology Lab (ARTL) and Speech Technology and Research (STAR) Lab, and in 1998 joined Nuance Communications, serving as vice president of R&D. Funded by the US government's NSA and DARPA from 1995-1998, Heck led the SRI team that was the first to successfully create large-scale deep neural network (DNN) deep learning technology in the field of speech processing. The deep learning technology was used to win the 1998 National Institute of Standards and Technology Speaker Recognition evaluation. The approach trained a 5-layer deep neural network, with the first two layers used as a (learned) feature extractor. To stabilize the training of the DNN, a weight normalization method was used (later rediscovered in 2010 by Xavier, et.al). Heck deployed this DNN in 1999 with Nuance Communications at the Home Shopping Network, representing the first major industrial application of deep learning with over 100K Nuance Verifier voiceprints. From 2005 to 2008, he was vice president of search & advertising quality at Yahoo!. In 2008, Heck and Ron Brachman combined search & advertising quality with Yahoo! Research to form Yahoo! Labs. Beginning in 2009, he was the chief scientist of speech products at Microsoft. In this role, he established the vision, mission and long-range plan and hired the initial team to create Microsoft’s digital-personal-assistant Cortana. Heck was named a Microsoft Distinguished Engineer in 2012 and joined Microsoft Research that same year. In 2014, he joined Google as a principal research scientist, where he founded the deep learning-based conversational AI team "Deep Dialogue". The team works on advanced research for the Google Assistant. In 2017, Heck joined Samsung as SVP and co-head of global AI Research. In 2019, he became head of Bixby (virtual assistant) North America and the CEO of Viv Labs, an independent subsidiary of Samsung. In that same year, Heck led one of the first large scale deployments of Transformer-Based LLMs as part of the Bixby Categories launch at the 2019 Samsung Developer Conference. In 2021, Heck returned to the Georgia Institute of Technology as a Professor. == Awards and honors == Larry Heck was named Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) in 2016 for leadership in application of machine learning to spoken and text language processing. Heck was inducted as a Fellow of the National Academy of Inventors (NAI) in 2024. Heck received the 2017 Academy of Distinguished Engineering Alumni Award from the Georgia Institute of Technology. In the same year, he also received the Texas Tech University Whitacre College of Engineering Distinguished Engineer Award. Larry Heck has several best papers including the 2020 IEEE Signal Processing Society (SPS) Best Paper Award: “Using Recurrent Neural Networks for Slot Filling in Spoken Language Understanding” published in the IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing in March 2015, and the 2020 ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM) Test of Time Award for the paper "Learning Deep Structured Semantic Models for Web Search using Clickthrough Data".

    Read more →