AI For Business Research

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

• 

  Color management

  Color management is the process of ensuring consistent and accurate colors across various devices, such as monitors, printers, and cameras. It involves the use of color profiles, which are standardized descriptions of how colors should be displayed or reproduced. Color management is necessary because different devices have different color capabilities and characteristics. For example, a monitor may display colors differently than a printer can reproduce them. Without color management, the same image may appear differently on different devices, leading to inconsistencies and inaccuracies. To achieve color management, a color profile is created for each device involved in the color workflow. This profile describes the device's color capabilities and characteristics, such as its color gamut (range of colors it can display or reproduce) and color temperature. These profiles are then used to translate colors between devices, ensuring consistent and accurate color reproduction. Color management is particularly important in industries such as graphic design, photography, and printing, where accurate color representation is crucial. It helps to maintain color consistency throughout the entire workflow, from capturing an image to displaying or printing it. Parts of color management are implemented in the operating system (OS), helper libraries, the application, and devices. The type of color profile that is typically used is called an ICC profile. A cross-platform view of color management is the use of an ICC-compatible color management system. The International Color Consortium (ICC) is an industry consortium that has defined: an open standard for a Color Matching Module (CMM) at the OS level color profiles for: devices, including DeviceLink profiles that transform one device profile (color space) to another device profile without passing through an intermediate color space, such as LAB, more accurately preserving color working spaces, the color spaces in which color data is meant to be manipulated There are other approaches to color management besides using ICC profiles. This is partly due to history and partly because of other needs than the ICC standard covers. The film and broadcasting industries make use of some of the same concepts, but they frequently rely on more limited boutique solutions. The film industry, for instance, often uses 3D LUTs (lookup table) to represent a complete color transformation for a specific RGB encoding. At the consumer level, system wide color management is available in most of Apple's products (macOS, iOS, iPadOS, watchOS). Microsoft Windows lacks system wide color management and virtually all applications do not employ color management. Windows' media player API is not color space aware, and if applications want to color manage videos manually, they have to incur significant performance and power consumption penalties. Android supports system wide color management, but most devices ship with color management disabled. == Overview == Characterize. Every color-managed device requires a personalized table, or "color profile," which characterizes the color response of that particular device. Standardize. Each color profile describes these colors relative to a standardized set of reference colors (the "Profile Connection Space"). Translate. Color-managed software then uses these standardized profiles to translate color from one device to another. This is usually performed by a color management module (CMM). == Hardware == === Characterization === To describe the behavior of various output devices, they must be compared (measured) in relation to a standard color space. Often a step called linearization is performed first, to undo the effect of gamma correction that was done to get the most out of limited 8-bit color paths. Instruments used for measuring device colors include colorimeters and spectrophotometers. As an intermediate result, the device gamut is described in the form of scattered measurement data. The transformation of the scattered measurement data into a more regular form, usable by the application, is called profiling. Profiling is a complex process involving mathematics, intense computation, judgment, testing, and iteration. After the profiling is finished, an idealized color description of the device is created. This description is called a profile. === Calibration === Calibration is like characterization, except that it can include the adjustment of the device, as opposed to just the measurement of the device. Color management is sometimes sidestepped by calibrating devices to a common standard color space such as sRGB; when such calibration is done well enough, no color translations are needed to get all devices to handle colors consistently. This avoidance of the complexity of color management was one of the goals in the development of sRGB. == Color profiles == === Embedding === Image formats themselves (such as TIFF, JPEG, PNG, EPS, PDF, and SVG) may contain embedded color profiles but are not required to do so by the image format. The International Color Consortium standard was created to bring various developers and manufacturers together. The ICC standard permits the exchange of output device characteristics and color spaces in the form of metadata. This allows the embedding of color profiles into images as well as storing them in a database or a profile directory. === Working spaces === Working spaces, such as sRGB, Adobe RGB or ProPhoto are color spaces that facilitate good results while editing. For instance, pixels with equal values of R,G,B should appear neutral. Using a large (gamut) working space will lead to posterization, while using a small working space will lead to clipping. This trade-off is a consideration for the critical image editor. == Color transformation == Color transformation, or color space conversion, is the transformation of the representation of a color from one color space to another. This calculation is required whenever data is exchanged inside a color-managed chain and carried out by a Color Matching Module. Transforming profiled color information to different output devices is achieved by referencing the profile data into a standard color space. It makes it easier to convert colors from one device to a selected standard color space and from that to the colors of another device. By ensuring that the reference color space covers the many possible colors that humans can see, this concept allows one to exchange colors between many different color output devices. Color transformations can be represented by two profiles (source profile and target profile) or by a devicelink profile. In this process there are approximations involved which make sure that the image keeps its important color qualities and also gives an opportunity to control on how the colors are being changed. === Profile connection space === In the terminology of the International Color Consortium, a translation between two color spaces can go through a profile connection space (PCS): Color Space 1 → PCS (CIELAB or CIEXYZ) → Color space 2; conversions into and out of the PCS are each specified by a profile. === Gamut mapping === In nearly every translation process, we have to deal with the fact that the color gamut of different devices vary in range which makes an accurate reproduction impossible. They therefore need some rearrangement near the borders of the gamut. Some colors must be shifted to the inside of the gamut, as they otherwise cannot be represented on the output device and would simply be clipped. This so-called gamut mismatch occurs for example, when we translate from the RGB color space with a wider gamut into the CMYK color space with a narrower gamut range. In this example, the dark highly saturated purplish-blue color of a typical computer monitor's "blue" primary is impossible to print on paper with a typical CMYK printer. The nearest approximation within the printer's gamut will be much less saturated. Conversely, an inkjet printer's "cyan" primary, a saturated mid-brightness blue, is outside the gamut of a typical computer monitor. The color management system can utilize various methods to achieve desired results and give experienced users control of the gamut mapping behavior. ==== Rendering intent ==== When the gamut of source color space exceeds that of the destination, saturated colors are liable to become clipped (inaccurately represented), or more formally burned. The color management module can deal with this problem in several ways. The ICC specification includes four different rendering intents, listed below. Before the actual rendering intent is carried out, one can temporarily simulate the rendering by soft proofing. It is a useful tool as it predicts the outcome of the colors and is available as an application in many color management systems: Absolute colorimetric Absolute colorimetry and relative colorimetry actually use the same table but differ in the adjust

  Read more →
• 

  Maximum-entropy Markov model

  In statistics, a maximum-entropy Markov model (MEMM), or conditional Markov model (CMM), is a graphical model for sequence labeling that combines features of hidden Markov models (HMMs) and maximum entropy (MaxEnt) models. An MEMM is a discriminative model that extends a standard maximum entropy classifier by assuming that the unknown values to be learnt are connected in a Markov chain rather than being conditionally independent of each other. MEMMs find applications in natural language processing, specifically in part-of-speech tagging and information extraction. == Model == Suppose we have a sequence of observations O 1 , … , O n {\displaystyle O_{1},\dots ,O_{n}} that we seek to tag with the labels S 1 , … , S n {\displaystyle S_{1},\dots ,S_{n}} that maximize the conditional probability P ( S 1 , … , S n ∣ O 1 , … , O n ) {\displaystyle P(S_{1},\dots ,S_{n}\mid O_{1},\dots ,O_{n})} . In a MEMM, this probability is factored into Markov transition probabilities, where the probability of transitioning to a particular label depends only on the observation at that position and the previous position's label: P ( S 1 , … , S n ∣ O 1 , … , O n ) = ∏ t = 1 n P ( S t ∣ S t − 1 , O t ) . {\displaystyle P(S_{1},\dots ,S_{n}\mid O_{1},\dots ,O_{n})=\prod _{t=1}^{n}P(S_{t}\mid S_{t-1},O_{t}).} Each of these transition probabilities comes from the same general distribution P ( s ∣ s ′ , o ) {\displaystyle P(s\mid s',o)} . For each possible label value of the previous label s ′ {\displaystyle s'} , the probability of a certain label s {\displaystyle s} is modeled in the same way as a maximum entropy classifier: P ( s ∣ s ′ , o ) = P s ′ ( s ∣ o ) = 1 Z ( o , s ′ ) exp ⁡ ( ∑ a λ a f a ( o , s ) ) . {\displaystyle P(s\mid s',o)=P_{s'}(s\mid o)={\frac {1}{Z(o,s')}}\exp \left(\sum _{a}\lambda _{a}f_{a}(o,s)\right).} Here, the f a ( o , s ) {\displaystyle f_{a}(o,s)} are real-valued or categorical feature-functions, and Z ( o , s ′ ) {\displaystyle Z(o,s')} is a normalization term ensuring that the distribution sums to one. This form for the distribution corresponds to the maximum entropy probability distribution satisfying the constraint that the empirical expectation for the feature is equal to the expectation given the model: E e ⁡ [ f a ( o , s ) ] = E p ⁡ [ f a ( o , s ) ] for all a . {\displaystyle \operatorname {E} _{e}\left[f_{a}(o,s)\right]=\operatorname {E} _{p}\left[f_{a}(o,s)\right]\quad {\text{ for all }}a.} The parameters λ a {\displaystyle \lambda _{a}} can be estimated using generalized iterative scaling. Furthermore, a variant of the Baum–Welch algorithm, which is used for training HMMs, can be used to estimate parameters when training data has incomplete or missing labels. The optimal state sequence S 1 , … , S n {\displaystyle S_{1},\dots ,S_{n}} can be found using a very similar Viterbi algorithm to the one used for HMMs. The dynamic program uses the forward probability: α t + 1 ( s ) = ∑ s ′ ∈ S α t ( s ′ ) P s ′ ( s ∣ o t + 1 ) . {\displaystyle \alpha _{t+1}(s)=\sum _{s'\in S}\alpha _{t}(s')P_{s'}(s\mid o_{t+1}).} == Strengths and weaknesses == An advantage of MEMMs rather than HMMs for sequence tagging is that they offer increased freedom in choosing features to represent observations. In sequence tagging situations, it is useful to use domain knowledge to design special-purpose features. In the original paper introducing MEMMs, the authors write that "when trying to extract previously unseen company names from a newswire article, the identity of a word alone is not very predictive; however, knowing that the word is capitalized, that is a noun, that it is used in an appositive, and that it appears near the top of the article would all be quite predictive (in conjunction with the context provided by the state-transition structure)." Useful sequence tagging features, such as these, are often non-independent. Maximum entropy models do not assume independence between features, but generative observation models used in HMMs do. Therefore, MEMMs allow the user to specify many correlated, but informative features. Another advantage of MEMMs versus HMMs and conditional random fields (CRFs) is that training can be considerably more efficient. In HMMs and CRFs, one needs to use some version of the forward–backward algorithm as an inner loop in training. However, in MEMMs, estimating the parameters of the maximum-entropy distributions used for the transition probabilities can be done for each transition distribution in isolation. A drawback of MEMMs is that they potentially suffer from the "label bias problem," where states with low-entropy transition distributions "effectively ignore their observations." Conditional random fields were designed to overcome this weakness, which had already been recognised in the context of neural network-based Markov models in the early 1990s. Another source of label bias is that training is always done with respect to known previous tags, so the model struggles at test time when there is uncertainty in the previous tag.

  Read more →
• 

  Leo Breiman

  Leo Breiman (January 27, 1928 – July 5, 2005) was an American statistician at the University of California, Berkeley and a member of the United States National Academy of Sciences. Breiman's work helped to bridge the gap between statistics and computer science, particularly in the field of machine learning. His most important contributions were his work on classification and regression trees and ensembles of trees fit to bootstrap samples. Bootstrap aggregation was given the name bagging by Breiman. Another of Breiman's ensemble approaches is the random forest.

  Read more →
• 

  AI Code-review Tools Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

  Shopping for the best AI code-review tool? An AI code-review tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI code-review tool 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 →
• 

  Kruti

  Kruti is a multilingual AI agent and chatbot developed by the Indian company Ola Krutrim. It is designed to perform real-world tasks for users, such as booking taxis and ordering food, by integrating directly with various online services. It is notable for its ability to understand and respond in multiple Indian languages. Developed by a team founded by Bhavish Aggarwal, Kruti functions as an "agentic" AI, meaning it can reason, plan, and execute multi-step tasks to fulfill a user's request. The backend technology combines several open-source large language models with Ola's proprietary Krutrim V2 model. The system was developed to work primarily on smartphones, addressing the Indian market's specific needs, including language diversity and potential bandwidth constraints. Kruti was officially released in June 2025, replacing an earlier chatbot from the company that was also named Krutrim. Initially supporting 13 languages, the company plans to expand its capabilities to 22 Indian languages. == Background == Kruti is an improved version of Ola's Krutrim chatbot, which was first launched in 2023 and was intended to be replaced by Kruti. It was officially released on 12 June 2025 as an upgrade to passive chatbots, with support for text and voice in 13 Indian languages. As an agentic AI, it can execute tasks with customization and reasoning, providing adaptive answers based on user preferences and past interactions. Kruti is optimized for smartphone usage and designed to accommodate bandwidth constraints and usage patterns in India. To ensure scalability and cost-effective performance, it combines various open-source large language models with Ola's own Krutrim V2, which has 12 billion parameters. Its speech recognition is built to identify regional Indian languages, dialects, and accents. Due to its integration with numerous apps and services, Kruti is context-aware and can proactively complete tasks. Initially connected only with Ola ecosystem services, Krutrim intends to expand and incorporate various Indian services into Kruti, with the goal of adding services from Blinkit, Swiggy, and Uber with respective voice command support. On 20 June 2025, Krutrim acquired the AI platform BharatSah‘AI’yak to increase its involvement in government, education, and agriculture projects. This acquisition will allow Kruti to assist in broadening the scope of BharatSah'AI'yak's work on India-centric, vernacular retrieval-augmented generation AI bots. == Development == Kruti is designed to perform tasks with minimal user input, accepting documents, images, and text, without requiring users to switch between applications. Its agentic framework breaks queries into sub-tasks executed by multiple agents working sequentially or concurrently, with reported accuracy exceeding 90%. Kruti connects to company databases and APIs via the Model Context Protocol and presents responses as summaries, tables, or narratives adapted to user behaviour. The system supports payments via credit/debit cards and UPI. The underlying stack, which includes foundation models and AI training and inference systems, is intended to support adaptation across sectors such as healthcare, education, and finance. Ola Cabs and the Open Network for Digital Commerce have begun integrating Kruti into their platforms pending broader reliability testing.

  Read more →
• 

  General Internet Corpus of Russian

  General Internet Corpus of Russian (GICR) is a corpus of Russian internet texts that has been accessible on request through an online query interface since 2013. The corpus includes rich text materials from the blogosphere, social networks, major news sources and literary magazines. == Goals of the project == The project has the status of an educational and scientific one, and many tasks of computational linguistics are solved by independent researchers and research groups with the materials obtained by GICR. While other corpus projects of Russian are focused on fiction and edited texts, General Internet Corpus provides linguists timely opportunity to learn the language as it is, with all the slang and regional peculiarities. Corpus gives the opportunity to carry out research in Linguistic research of a wide range: dialectological research, study of word distribution, study of the language of the social networks, study of the influence of gender, age and other factors on the language, frequency of words, fixed expressions and different constructions, stylistic features of texts of different segments of the Internet, etc. Social media analysis Corpus-based machine learning for evaluating automatic tagging At various times, student papers and independent researches were carried out on the project material by students, graduates and employees of MSU, MIPT, Russian State Humanitarian University, Novosibirsk State University, Higher School of Economics, Russian Academy of Sciences, SFU, CSU, SGMP, IAAS of MSU. Scientific project leaders: Belikov V. - RSUH, Moscow, Russia Selegey V. - RSUH, ABBYY, Moscow, Russia Sharoff S. - RSUH, Moscow, Russia; University of Leeds, UK The organizations involved in support of GICR: Russian State University of Humanities ABBYY Company Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology == Size and content of the corpus == Corpus size for the summer 2016 is 19.8 billion tokens, of which 49% are from VKontakte, 40% are from LiveJournal, another 4% - from Mail.ru Blogs and News, and 2% - from Russian Magazine Hall. The sources collected in news segment are: RIA Novosti, Regnum, Lenta.ru, Rosbalt. Texts are provided with metamarkup (by date of creation of the text, sex, place and year of birth of the author, Internet genre, etc.); all texts are provided with automatic morphological tagging and lemmatization. Most of the texts collected are of 2013–2014 years of creation, although in some segments, such as in Russian Magazine Hall, there are some texts collected since 1994. GICR is one of the few mega-corpora projects nowadays, which means its available size is reaching several billion of words. == Access == Currently the interface of GICR is in beta stage, so access to the search in the corpora is provided and is free, but is available for researchers on request.

  Read more →
• 

  Pushmeet Kohli

  Pushmeet Kohli is an Indian British computer scientist and Vice President of research at Google DeepMind. At Deepmind, he heads the "Science and Strategic Initiatives Unit". He was noted by Time magazine as being one of the 100 most influential people in AI according to the Time 100 AI list. Kohli has led and supervised a number of projects including AlphaFold, a system for predicting the 3D structures of proteins; AlphaEvolve, a general-purpose evolutionary coding agent; SynthID, a system for watermarking and detecting AI-generated content; and Co-Scientist, an agent for generating and testing new scientific hypotheses. == Education == Kohli received a Bachelor of Technology (BTech) degree in Computer Science and Engineering at the National Institute of Technology, Warangal. He went on to study at Oxford Brookes University, where he earned a PhD in computer vision for research supervised by Philip Torr in 2007. == Career and research == After his PhD, Kohli was a postdoctoral associate at the Psychometric Centre, University of Cambridge. Before joining Google DeepMind, Kohli was partner scientist and director of research at Microsoft Research. His research investigates applications of machine learning and artificial intelligence. Kohli has made research contributions in the fields of computational biology, program synthesis, superoptimization, discrete optimization, and psychometrics. Notable research projects he has contributed to include: AlphaFold - breakthrough AI system for protein structure prediction AlphaEvolve - agent for code super optimization. AlphaTensor - Reinforcement learning agent for discovering new algorithms for matrix multiplication SynthID - system for watermarking AI generated images. AlphaGenome and AlphaMissense - AI models for predicting the effect of mutations in the genome AlphaCode - Competition-level code generation with AI FunSearch - Discovering algorithms using LLMs to search over program space. Neural Program Synthesis Probabilistic Programming Community based Crowdsourcing of Data for Training AI Models Behavioral analysis and personality prediction using online networks Human Pose Estimation using the Kinect Learnt Magnetic confinement control for Fusion Learnt Density Functional for solving the fractional electron problem === Awards and honours === Kohli's research in computer vision and machine learning has been recognized by a number of scientific awards and prizes. Some notable ones include: Koenderink Prize (Test of Time award) by the European Conference of Computer Vision British Machine Vision Association and Society for Pattern Recognition (BMVA) Sullivan Prize for the best PhD thesis. IEEE Mixed Augmented Reality (ISMAR) Impact Paper award Lasting Impact Award by the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology Best paper award at the International World Wide Web Conference 2014 Best paper award in the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) 2010 Best paper award in the Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI)

  Read more →
• 

  Lin-Shan Lee

  Lin-Shan Lee (Chinese: 李琳山; born 23 September 1952) is a Taiwanese computer scientist. == Education and career == Lee earned a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering from National Taiwan University in 1974, and pursued a doctorate in the same subject at Stanford University, graduating in 1977. He subsequently returned to Taiwan and joined the NTU faculty in 1982. Lee is a 1993 fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, recognized "[f]or contributions to computer voice input/output techniques for Mandarin Chinese and to engineering education." The International Speech Communication Association elevated him to fellow status in 2010 "[f]or his contributions to Chinese spoken language processing and speech information retrieval, and his service to the speech language community." In 2016, Lee was elected a member of Academia Sinica.

  Read more →
• 

  Lesk algorithm

  The Lesk algorithm is a classical algorithm for word sense disambiguation introduced by Michael E. Lesk in 1986. It operates on the premise that words within a given context are likely to share a common meaning. This algorithm compares the dictionary definitions of an ambiguous word with the words in its surrounding context to determine the most appropriate sense. Variations, such as the Simplified Lesk algorithm, have demonstrated improved precision and efficiency. However, the Lesk algorithm has faced criticism for its sensitivity to definition wording and its reliance on brief glosses. Researchers have sought to enhance its accuracy by incorporating additional resources like thesauruses and syntactic models. == Overview == The Lesk algorithm is based on the assumption that words in a given "neighborhood" (section of text) will tend to share a common topic. A simplified version of the Lesk algorithm is to compare the dictionary definition of an ambiguous word with the terms contained in its neighborhood. Versions have been adapted to use WordNet. An implementation might look like this: for every sense of the word being disambiguated one should count the number of words that are in both the neighborhood of that word and in the dictionary definition of that sense the sense that is to be chosen is the sense that has the largest number of this count. A frequently used example illustrating this algorithm is for the context "pine cone". The following dictionary definitions are used: PINE 1. kinds of evergreen tree with needle-shaped leaves 2. waste away through sorrow or illness CONE 1. solid body which narrows to a point 2. something of this shape whether solid or hollow 3. fruit of certain evergreen trees As can be seen, the best intersection is Pine #1 ⋂ Cone #3 = 2. == Simplified Lesk algorithm == In Simplified Lesk algorithm, the correct meaning of each word in a given context is determined individually by locating the sense that overlaps the most between its dictionary definition and the given context. Rather than simultaneously determining the meanings of all words in a given context, this approach tackles each word individually, independent of the meaning of the other words occurring in the same context. "A comparative evaluation performed by Vasilescu et al. (2004) has shown that the simplified Lesk algorithm can significantly outperform the original definition of the algorithm, both in terms of precision and efficiency. By evaluating the disambiguation algorithms on the Senseval-2 English all words data, they measure a 58% precision using the simplified Lesk algorithm compared to the only 42% under the original algorithm. Note: Vasilescu et al. implementation considers a back-off strategy for words not covered by the algorithm, consisting of the most frequent sense defined in WordNet. This means that words for which all their possible meanings lead to zero overlap with current context or with other word definitions are by default assigned sense number one in WordNet." Simplified LESK Algorithm with smart default word sense (Vasilescu et al., 2004) The COMPUTEOVERLAP function returns the number of words in common between two sets, ignoring function words or other words on a stop list. The original Lesk algorithm defines the context in a more complex way. == Criticisms == Unfortunately, Lesk’s approach is very sensitive to the exact wording of definitions, so the absence of a certain word can radically change the results. Further, the algorithm determines overlaps only among the glosses of the senses being considered. This is a significant limitation in that dictionary glosses tend to be fairly short and do not provide sufficient vocabulary to relate fine-grained sense distinctions. A lot of work has appeared offering different modifications of this algorithm. These works use other resources for analysis (thesauruses, synonyms dictionaries or morphological and syntactic models): for instance, it may use such information as synonyms, different derivatives, or words from definitions of words from definitions. == Lesk variants == Original Lesk (Lesk, 1986) Adapted/Extended Lesk (Banerjee and Pederson, 2002/2003): In the adaptive lesk algorithm, a word vector is created corresponds to every content word in the wordnet gloss. Concatenating glosses of related concepts in WordNet can be used to augment this vector. The vector contains the co-occurrence counts of words co-occurring with w in a large corpus. Adding all the word vectors for all the content words in its gloss creates the Gloss vector g for a concept. Relatedness is determined by comparing the gloss vector using the Cosine similarity measure. There are a lot of studies concerning Lesk and its extensions: Wilks and Stevenson, 1998, 1999; Mahesh et al., 1997; Cowie et al., 1992; Yarowsky, 1992; Pook and Catlett, 1988; Kilgarriff and Rosensweig, 2000; Kwong, 2001; Nastase and Szpakowicz, 2001; Gelbukh and Sidorov, 2004.

  Read more →
• 

  Is an AI Avatar Generator Worth It in 2026?

  Looking for the best AI avatar generator? An AI avatar 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 avatar 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 →
• 

  Vlado Keselj

  Vlado Keselj (Vlado Kešelj) is a Serbian-Canadian computer scientist known for his research in natural language processing and authorship attribution. He is a professor at Dalhousie University. == Education == As a high school student in Yugoslavia, Keselj competed in the 1987 International Mathematical Olympiad, earning a bronze medal. He earned his Ph.D. in 2002 at the University of Waterloo, with the dissertation Modular Stochastic HPSGs for Question Answering supervised by Nick Cercone. == Awards == Vlado Keselj is a recipient of the 2019 CAIAC Distinguished Service Award, awarded by the Canadian Artificial Intelligence Association (CAIAC). == Selected publications == Kešelj, V., Peng, F., Cercone, N., & Thomas, C. (2003, August). N-gram-based author profiles for authorship attribution. In Proceedings of the Conference of the Pacific Association for Computational Linguistics, PACLING 2003 (Vol. 3, pp. 255–264).

  Read more →
• 

  AI Paragraph Rewriters: Free vs Paid (2026)

  Curious about the best AI paragraph rewriter? An AI paragraph rewriter is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI paragraph rewriter 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 →
• 

  Natural language processing

  Natural language processing (NLP) is the processing of natural language information by a computer. NLP is a subfield of computer science and is closely associated with artificial intelligence. NLP is also related to information retrieval, knowledge representation, computational linguistics, and linguistics more broadly. Major processing tasks in an NLP system include: speech recognition, text classification, natural language understanding, and natural language generation. == History == Natural language processing has its roots in the 1950s. Already in 1950, Alan Turing published an article titled "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," which proposed what is now called the Turing test as a criterion of intelligence, though at the time that was not articulated as a problem separate from artificial intelligence. The proposed test includes a task that involves the automated interpretation and generation of natural language. === Symbolic NLP (1950s – early 1990s) === The premise of symbolic NLP is often illustrated using John Searle's Chinese room thought experiment: Given a collection of rules (e.g., a Chinese phrasebook, with questions and matching answers), the computer emulates natural language understanding (or other NLP tasks) by applying those rules to the data it confronts. 1950s: The Georgetown experiment in 1954 involved fully automatic translation of more than sixty Russian sentences into English. The authors claimed that within three or five years, machine translation would be a solved problem. However, real progress was much slower, and after the ALPAC report in 1966, which found that ten years of research had failed to fulfill the expectations, funding for machine translation was dramatically reduced. Little further research in machine translation was conducted in America (though some research continued elsewhere, such as Japan and Europe) until the late 1980s when the first statistical machine translation systems were developed. 1960s: Some notably successful natural language processing systems developed in the 1960s were SHRDLU, a natural language system working in restricted "blocks worlds" with restricted vocabularies, and ELIZA, a simulation of Rogerian psychotherapy, written by Joseph Weizenbaum between 1964 and 1966. Despite using minimal information about human thought or emotion, ELIZA was able to produce interactions that appeared human-like. When the "patient" exceeded the very small knowledge base, ELIZA might provide a generic response, for example, responding to "My head hurts" with "Why do you say your head hurts?". Ross Quillian's successful work on natural language was demonstrated with a vocabulary of only twenty words, because that was all that would fit in a computer memory at the time. 1970s: During the 1970s, many programmers began to write "conceptual ontologies", which structured real-world information into computer-understandable data. Examples are MARGIE (Schank, 1975), SAM (Cullingford, 1978), PAM (Wilensky, 1978), TaleSpin (Meehan, 1976), QUALM (Lehnert, 1977), Politics (Carbonell, 1979), and Plot Units (Lehnert 1981). During this time, the first chatterbots were written (e.g., PARRY). 1980s: The 1980s and early 1990s mark the heyday of symbolic methods in NLP. Focus areas of the time included research on rule-based parsing (e.g., the development of HPSG as a computational operationalization of generative grammar), morphology (e.g., two-level morphology), semantics (e.g., Lesk algorithm), reference (e.g., within Centering Theory) and other areas of natural language understanding (e.g., in the Rhetorical Structure Theory). Other lines of research were continued, e.g., the development of chatterbots with Racter and Jabberwacky. An important development (that eventually led to the statistical turn in the 1990s) was the rising importance of quantitative evaluation in this period. === Statistical NLP (1990s–present) === Up until the 1980s, most natural language processing systems were based on complex sets of hand-written rules. Starting in the late 1980s, however, there was a revolution in natural language processing with the introduction of machine learning algorithms for language processing. This shift was influenced by increasing computational power (see Moore's law) and a decline in the dominance of Chomskyan linguistic theories (e.g. transformational grammar), whose theoretical underpinnings discouraged the sort of corpus linguistics that underlies the machine-learning approach to language processing. 1990s: Many of the notable early successes in statistical methods in NLP occurred in the field of machine translation, due especially to work at IBM Research, such as IBM alignment models. These systems were able to take advantage of existing multilingual textual corpora that had been produced by the Parliament of Canada and the European Union as a result of laws calling for the translation of all governmental proceedings into all official languages of the corresponding systems of government. However, many systems relied on corpora that were specifically developed for the tasks they were designed to perform. This reliance has been a major limitation to their broader effectiveness and continues to affect similar systems. Consequently, significant research has focused on methods for learning effectively from limited amounts of data. 2000s: With the growth of the web, increasing amounts of raw (unannotated) language data have become available since the mid-1990s. Research has thus increasingly focused on unsupervised and semi-supervised learning algorithms. Such algorithms can learn from data that has not been hand-annotated with the desired answers or using a combination of annotated and non-annotated data. Generally, this task is much more difficult than supervised learning, and typically produces less accurate results for a given amount of input data. However, large quantities of non-annotated data are available (including, among other things, the entire content of the World Wide Web), which can often make up for the worse efficiency if the algorithm used has a low enough time complexity to be practical. 2003: word n-gram model, at the time the best statistical algorithm, is outperformed by a multi-layer perceptron (with a single hidden layer and context length of several words, trained on up to 14 million words, by Bengio et al.) 2010: Tomáš Mikolov (then a PhD student at Brno University of Technology) with co-authors applied a simple recurrent neural network with a single hidden layer to language modeling, and in the following years he went on to develop Word2vec. In the 2010s, representation learning and deep neural network-style (featuring many hidden layers) machine learning methods became widespread in natural language processing. This shift gained momentum due to results showing that such techniques can achieve state-of-the-art results in many natural language tasks, e.g., in language modeling and parsing. This is increasingly important in medicine and healthcare, where NLP helps analyze notes and text in electronic health records that would otherwise be inaccessible for study when seeking to improve care or protect patient privacy. == Approaches: Symbolic, statistical, neural networks == Symbolic approach, i.e., the hand-coding of a set of rules for manipulating symbols, coupled with a dictionary lookup, was historically the first approach used both by AI in general and by NLP in particular: such as by writing grammars or devising heuristic rules for stemming. Machine learning approaches, which include both statistical and neural networks, on the other hand, have many advantages over the symbolic approach: both statistical and neural network methods tend to focus more on the most common cases extracted from a corpus of texts, whereas the rule-based approach needs to provide rules for both rare and common cases equally. language models, produced by either statistical or neural networks methods, are more robust to both unfamiliar (e.g. containing words or structures that have not been seen before) and erroneous input (e.g. with misspelled words or words accidentally omitted) in comparison to the rule-based systems, which are also more costly to produce. the larger such a (probabilistic) language model is, the more accurate it becomes, in contrast to rule-based systems that can gain accuracy only by increasing the amount and complexity of the rules leading to intractability problems. Rule-based systems are commonly used: when the amount of training data is insufficient to successfully apply machine learning methods, e.g., for the machine translation of low-resource languages such as provided by the Apertium system, for preprocessing in NLP pipelines, e.g., tokenization, or for post-processing and transforming the output of NLP pipelines, e.g., for knowledge extraction from syntactic parses. === Statistical approach === In the late 1980s and mid-1990s, the statistical approach ended a peri

  Read more →
• 

  AI Background Removers: Free vs Paid (2026)

  Looking for the best AI background remover? An AI background remover 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 background remover 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 →
• 

  Dilek Hakkani-Tür

  Dilek Z. Hakkani-Tür is a Turkish-American computer scientist focusing on speech processing, speech recognition, and dialogue systems. She is a professor of computer science at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. == Education and career == Hakkani-Tür is a 1994 graduate of Middle East Technical University in Ankara, Turkey. She continued her studies at Bilkent University, also in Ankara, where she earned a master's degree in 1996 and completed her Ph.D. in 2000. She worked as a researcher at AT&T Labs from 2001 to 2005, at the International Computer Science Institute from 2006 to 2010, at Microsoft Research from 2010 to 2016, at Google Research from 2016 to 2018, and at Amazon Alexa from 2018 to 2023. At Microsoft, she was in the team of scientists that built the first prototype of the Cortana virtual assistant. While working for Amazon Alexa, she also taught at the University of California, Santa Cruz as a distinguished visiting instructor. She joined the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign faculty in 2023. She was editor-in-chief of IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech and Language Processing from 2019 to 2021, and is president of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue of the Association for Computational Linguistics for the 2023–2025 term. She has served as co-editor-in-chief of Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics since 2024. == Recognition == In 2014, Hakkani-Tür was elected as an IEEE Fellow "for contributions to spoken language processing", and as a Fellow of the International Speech Communication Association "for contributions to advancing the state-of-the-art in spoken language processing, especially for human/human and human/machine conversational understanding". In 2024, she was elected as a Fellow of the Association for Computational Linguistics for her contributions to spoken dialogue systems.

  Read more →