AI For Kids Dubai

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

• 

  National Parking Platform

  The National Parking Platform is a digital platform in the United Kingdom providing interoperability between car park operators, parking apps, and other service providers. It enables all parking apps that support the system: RingGo, JustPark, PayByPhone, Apcoa Connect, AppyParking, and Caura to work at all participating car parks. It has been rolled out in 13 local authorities so far. It was first developed by the Department for Transport starting in 2019, and since May 2025 is controlled by the British Parking Association on a not-for-profit basis. == Participating local authorities == Buckinghamshire Cheshire West and Chester Coventry City East Hertfordshire East Suffolk Liverpool City Manchester City Oxfordshire County Peterborough City Stevenage Sutton Walsall Welwyn Hatfield

  Read more →
• 

  Sarvam AI

  Sarvam AI is an Indian artificial intelligence company headquartered in Bengaluru, Karnataka. Founded in 2023, the company develops large language models (LLMs) and multimodal AI systems with a focus on Indian languages and region-specific use cases. The company has received venture capital backing and has participated in government-supported AI initiatives, including India's sovereign large language model programme under the IndiaAI Mission. == History == Sarvam AI was founded in August 2023 by Vivek Raghavan and Pratyush Kumar, who were previously associated with AI4Bharat at the Indian Institute of Technology Madras. In December 2023, the company announced a combined seed and Series A funding round of approximately US$41 million. The round was led by Lightspeed Venture Partners, with participation from Peak XV Partners and Khosla Ventures. In April 2025, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) selected Sarvam AI as one of the companies to develop an indigenous foundational model under the IndiaAI Mission. As part of the initiative, the company received access to government-supported computing infrastructure, including GPUs allocated for model training over a specified period. In February 2026, Sarvam AI introduced two large language models at the AI Impact Summit held at Bharat Mandapam, New Delhi. == Products and technology == Sarvam AI develops language models trained on datasets that include multiple Indian languages and code-mixed text. The company uses mixture-of-experts (MoE) architectures in some of its models. === Foundational language models === On 18 February 2026, the company announced the release of two foundational models: Sarvam-30B – A 30-billion parameter model based on a mixture-of-experts design. According to company disclosures reported by the media, the model activates approximately 1 billion parameters per token and supports a 32,000-token context window. Sarvam-105B – A 105-billion parameter model activating approximately 9 billion parameters per token, with a 128,000-token context window. The model is positioned for complex reasoning and enterprise applications. On 20th February 2026, the company released a beta version of the Sarvam-105B model which is named Indus. It is available on the Apple App Store, Google Play Store and the web. === Speech and vision systems === Sarvam AI has also developed multimodal systems including speech-to-text and vision-language models. Its speech model, referred to as Saaras V3 in company materials, supports multiple Indian languages. The company has also introduced a vision-language model known as Sarvam Vision, intended for document understanding and optical character recognition (OCR) in Indian scripts. === Devices === 'Sarvam Kaze' is an indigenous AI-powered wearable glass that listens, understands, and captures what users see the world through their eyes in real time. The device supports more than 10 Indian languages, enabling voice-based interaction and potentially real-time translation. The company plans to launch the device in May 2026. == Startup support == In March 2026, Sarvam AI launched the Sarvam Startup Program, an initiative providing selected early-stage companies with 6–12 months of API credits scaled to their needs, priority engineering support, and access to production infrastructure for developing multilingual AI applications in areas such as speech, translation, and large language models. == Open-source release == In February 2026, Sarvam AI announced and open-sourced two large language models: Sarvam 30B (30 billion parameters) and Sarvam 105B (105 billion parameters, using a Mixture-of-Experts architecture with 10.3 billion active parameters). Both models were trained from scratch on datasets focused on Indian languages and support advanced reasoning, multilingual tasks, mathematics, and coding. The models are hosted on Hugging Face under the Apache License and are intended for enterprise and developer applications in Indian languages. The models were subsequently released as open source under the Apache License 2.0, with model weights made available on Hugging Face (sarvamai/sarvam-30b and sarvamai/sarvam-105b) and AIKosh in early March 2026. == Government and institutional collaborations == In 2025, Sarvam AI was selected to contribute to India's sovereign AI model initiative under the IndiaAI Mission. The initiative aims to support domestic AI infrastructure and model development. In March 2025, the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) announced a collaboration with Sarvam AI to integrate AI-based voice interactions and multilingual support into Aadhaar-related services. Sarvam AI has also worked with AI4Bharat and academic institutions on language datasets and speech research projects. == Industry participation == Sarvam AI presented its foundational models at the India AI Impact Summit 2026 in New Delhi. The company has also been listed among Indian members of the AI Alliance, a consortium focused on open-source artificial intelligence initiatives. == List of models ==

  Read more →
• 

  Ashish Vaswani

  Ashish Vaswani is an Indian computer scientist and entrepreneur. He conducted research at Google Brain, co-founded Adept AI, and, as of 2025, was co-founder and chief executive officer of Essential AI. Vaswani is a co-author of the 2017 paper "Attention Is All You Need", which introduced the Transformer neural network architecture. The Transformer model has been used in the development of subsequent NLP models BERT, ChatGPT, and their successors. == Career == Vaswani completed his engineering in Computer Science from Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra (BIT Mesra) in 2002. In 2004, he enrolled at the University of Southern California for graduate studies. He earned his PhD in Computer Science at the University of Southern California supervised by David Chiang. During his research career at Google, Vaswani was part of the Google Brain team, where he conducted the work leading to the 'Attention Is All You Need' publication. Prior to joining Google, he was affiliated with the Information Sciences Institute at the University of Southern California. After Google, Vaswani co-founded Adept AI, a machine learning-focused startup that developed AI agents and tools for software automation. He has since left the company. He later co-founded Essential AI with Niki Parmar. As of 2025, he was chief executive officer of Essential AI. == Notable works == Vaswani's most notable paper, "Attention Is All You Need", was published in 2017. The paper introduced the Transformer model, which uses self-attention mechanisms instead of recurrence for sequence-to-sequence tasks. The Transformer architecture has become foundational to modern language models and NLP systems, including BERT (2018), GPT-2, GPT-3 (2019–2020) and many more recent models. The "Attention Is All You Need" paper is among the most cited papers in machine learning.

  Read more →
• 

  IRCF360

  Infrared Control Freak 360 (IRCF360) is a 360-degree proximity sensor and a motion sensing devices, developed by ROBOTmaker. The sensor is in BETA developers release as a low cost (software configurable) sensor for use within research, technical and hobby projects. == Overview == The 360-degree sensor was originally designed as a short range micro robot proximity sensor and mainly intended for Swarm robotics, Ant robotics, Swarm intelligence, autonomous Qaudcopter, Drone, UAV, multi-robot simulations e.g. Jasmine Project where 360 proximity sensing is required to avoid collision with other robots and for simple IR inter-robot communications. To overcome certain limitation with Infra-red (IR) proximity sensing (e.g. detection of dark surfaces) the sensing module includes ambient light sensing and basic tactile sensing functionality during forward movement sensing/probing providing photovore and photophobe robot swarm behaviours and characteristics. A project named Sensorium Project was started aimed at broadening the Sensors audience beyond its typical robot sensor usage. To demonstrate the sensor's functionality, opensource Java based Integrated Development Environments (IDE) are used, such as Arduino and Processing (programming language).

  Read more →
• 

  Curvelet

  Curvelets are a non-adaptive technique for multi-scale object representation. Being an extension of the wavelet concept, they are becoming popular in similar fields, namely in image processing and scientific computing. Wavelets generalize the Fourier transform by using a basis that represents both location and spatial frequency. For 2D or 3D signals, directional wavelet transforms go further, by using basis functions that are also localized in orientation. A curvelet transform differs from other directional wavelet transforms in that the degree of localisation in orientation varies with scale. In particular, fine-scale basis functions are long ridges; the shape of the basis functions at scale j is 2 − j {\displaystyle 2^{-j}} by 2 − j / 2 {\displaystyle 2^{-j/2}} so the fine-scale bases are skinny ridges with a precisely determined orientation. Curvelets are an appropriate basis for representing images (or other functions) which are smooth apart from singularities along smooth curves, where the curves have bounded curvature, i.e. where objects in the image have a minimum length scale. This property holds for cartoons, geometrical diagrams, and text. As one zooms in on such images, the edges they contain appear increasingly straight. Curvelets take advantage of this property, by defining the higher resolution curvelets to be more elongated than the lower resolution curvelets. However, natural images (photographs) do not have this property; they have detail at every scale. Therefore, for natural images, it is preferable to use some sort of directional wavelet transform whose wavelets have the same aspect ratio at every scale. When the image is of the right type, curvelets provide a representation that is considerably sparser than other wavelet transforms. This can be quantified by considering the best approximation of a geometrical test image that can be represented using only n {\displaystyle n} wavelets, and analysing the approximation error as a function of n {\displaystyle n} . For a Fourier transform, the squared error decreases only as O ( 1 / n ) {\displaystyle O(1/{\sqrt {n}})} . For a wide variety of wavelet transforms, including both directional and non-directional variants, the squared error decreases as O ( 1 / n ) {\displaystyle O(1/n)} . The extra assumption underlying the curvelet transform allows it to achieve O ( ( log ⁡ n ) 3 / n 2 ) {\displaystyle O({(\log n)}^{3}/{n^{2}})} . Efficient numerical algorithms exist for computing the curvelet transform of discrete data. The computational cost of the discrete curvelet transforms proposed by Candès et al. (Discrete curvelet transform based on unequally-spaced fast Fourier transforms and based on the wrapping of specially selected Fourier samples) is approximately 6–10 times that of an FFT, and has the same dependence of O ( n 2 log ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle O(n^{2}\log n)} for an image of size n × n {\displaystyle n\times n} . == Curvelet construction == To construct a basic curvelet ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } and provide a tiling of the 2-D frequency space, two main ideas should be followed: Consider polar coordinates in frequency domain Construct curvelet elements being locally supported near wedges The number of wedges is N j = 4 ⋅ 2 ⌈ j 2 ⌉ {\displaystyle N_{j}=4\cdot 2^{\left\lceil {\frac {j}{2}}\right\rceil }} at the scale 2 − j {\displaystyle 2^{-j}} , i.e., it doubles in each second circular ring. Let ξ = ( ξ 1 , ξ 2 ) T {\displaystyle {\boldsymbol {\xi }}=\left(\xi _{1},\xi _{2}\right)^{T}} be the variable in frequency domain, and r = ξ 1 2 + ξ 2 2 , ω = arctan ⁡ ξ 1 ξ 2 {\displaystyle r={\sqrt {\xi _{1}^{2}+\xi _{2}^{2}}},\omega =\arctan {\frac {\xi _{1}}{\xi _{2}}}} be the polar coordinates in the frequency domain. We use the ansatz for the dilated basic curvelets in polar coordinates: ϕ ^ j , 0 , 0 := 2 − 3 j 4 W ( 2 − j r ) V ~ N j ( ω ) , r ≥ 0 , ω ∈ [ 0 , 2 π ) , j ∈ N 0 {\displaystyle {\hat {\phi }}_{j,0,0}:=2^{\frac {-3j}{4}}W(2^{-j}r){\tilde {V}}_{N_{j}}(\omega ),r\geq 0,\omega \in [0,2\pi ),j\in N_{0}} To construct a basic curvelet with compact support near a ″basic wedge″, the two windows W {\displaystyle W} and V ~ N j {\displaystyle {\tilde {V}}_{N_{j}}} need to have compact support. Here, we can simply take W ( r ) {\displaystyle W(r)} to cover ( 0 , ∞ ) {\displaystyle (0,\infty )} with dilated curvelets and V ~ N j {\displaystyle {\tilde {V}}_{N_{j}}} such that each circular ring is covered by the translations of V ~ N j {\displaystyle {\tilde {V}}_{N_{j}}} . Then the admissibility yields ∑ j = − ∞ ∞ | W ( 2 − j r ) | 2 = 1 , r ∈ ( 0 , ∞ ) . {\displaystyle \sum _{j=-\infty }^{\infty }\left|W(2^{-j}r)\right|^{2}=1,r\in (0,\infty ).} see Window Functions for more information For tiling a circular ring into N {\displaystyle N} wedges, where N {\displaystyle N} is an arbitrary positive integer, we need a 2 π {\displaystyle 2\pi } -periodic nonnegative window V ~ N {\displaystyle {\tilde {V}}_{N}} with support inside [ − 2 π N , 2 π N ] {\displaystyle \left[{\frac {-2\pi }{N}},{\frac {2\pi }{N}}\right]} such that ∑ l = 0 N − 1 V ~ N 2 ( ω − 2 π l N ) = 1 {\displaystyle \sum _{l=0}^{N-1}{\tilde {V}}_{N}^{2}\left(\omega -{\frac {2\pi l}{N}}\right)=1} , for all ω ∈ [ 0 , 2 π ) {\displaystyle \omega \in \left[0,2\pi \right)} , V ~ N {\displaystyle {\tilde {V}}_{N}} can be simply constructed as 2 π {\displaystyle 2\pi } -periodizations of a scaled window V ( N ω 2 π ) {\displaystyle V\left({\frac {N\omega }{2\pi }}\right)} . Then, it follows that ∑ l = 0 N j − 1 | 2 3 j 4 ϕ ^ j , 0 , 0 ( r , ω − 2 π l N j ) | 2 = | W ( 2 − j r ) | 2 ∑ l = 0 N j − 1 V ~ N j 2 ( ω − 2 π l N ) = | W ( 2 − j r ) | 2 {\displaystyle \sum _{l=0}^{N_{j}-1}\left|2^{\frac {3j}{4}}{\hat {\phi }}_{j,0,0}\left(r,\omega -{\frac {2\pi l}{N_{j}}}\right)\right|^{2}=\left|W(2^{-j}r)\right|^{2}\sum _{l=0}^{N_{j}-1}{\tilde {V}}_{N_{j}}^{2}\left(\omega -{\frac {2\pi l}{N}}\right)=\left|W(2^{-j}r)\right|^{2}} For a complete covering of the frequency plane including the region around zero, we need to define a low pass element ϕ ^ − 1 := W 0 ( | ξ | ) {\displaystyle {\hat {\phi }}_{-1}:=W_{0}(\left|\xi \right|)} with W 0 2 ( r ) 2 := 1 − ∑ j = 0 ∞ W ( 2 − j r ) 2 {\displaystyle W_{0}^{2}(r)^{2}:=1-\sum _{j=0}^{\infty }W(2^{-j}r)^{2}} that is supported on the unit circle, and where we do not consider any rotation. == Applications == Image processing Seismic exploration Fluid mechanics PDEs solving Compressed sensing

  Read more →
• 

  Goal node (computer science)

  In computer science, a goal node is a node in a graph that meets defined criteria for success or termination. Heuristical artificial intelligence algorithms, like A and B, attempt to reach such nodes in optimal time by defining the distance to the goal node. When the goal node is reached, A defines the distance to the goal node as 0 and all other nodes' distances as positive values.

  Read more →
• 

  GOFAI

  In the philosophy of artificial intelligence, GOFAI (good old-fashioned artificial intelligence) is classical symbolic AI, as opposed to other approaches, such as neural networks, situated robotics, narrow symbolic AI or neuro-symbolic AI. The term was coined by philosopher John Haugeland in his 1985 book Artificial Intelligence: The Very Idea. Haugeland coined the term to address two questions: Can GOFAI produce human-level artificial intelligence in a machine? Is GOFAI the primary method that brains use to display intelligence? AI founder Herbert A. Simon speculated in 1963 that the answers to both these questions was "yes". His evidence was the performance of programs he had co-written, such as Logic Theorist and the General Problem Solver, and his psychological research on human problem solving. AI research in the 1950s and 60s had an enormous influence on intellectual history: it inspired the cognitive revolution, led to the founding of the academic field of cognitive science, and was the essential example in the philosophical theories of computationalism, functionalism and cognitivism in ethics and the psychological theories of cognitivism and cognitive psychology. The specific aspect of AI research that led to this revolution was what Haugeland called "GOFAI". In AI development and technology, GOFAI is used to refer to programs that are built with deliberate, explicit instructions for a single task. This is in contrast to approaches that use machine learning. Examples of GOFAI applications include AlphaGo and Apple's initial Siri design. == Western rationalism == Haugeland places GOFAI within the rationalist tradition in western philosophy, which holds that abstract reason is the "highest" faculty, that it is what separates man from the animals, and that it is the most essential part of our intelligence. This assumption is present in Plato and Aristotle, in Shakespeare, Hobbes, Hume and Locke, it was central to the Enlightenment, to the logical positivists of the 1930s, and to the computationalists and cognitivists of the 1960s. As Shakespeare wrote: What a piece of work is a man, How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty ... In apprehension how like a god, The beauty of the world, The paragon of animals. Symbolic AI in the 1960s was able to successfully simulate the process of high-level reasoning, including logical deduction, algebra, geometry, spatial reasoning and means-ends analysis, all of them in precise English sentences, just like the ones humans used when they reasoned. Many observers, including philosophers, psychologists and the AI researchers themselves became convinced that they had captured the essential features of intelligence. This was not just hubris or speculation -- this was entailed by rationalism. If it was not true, then it brings into question a large part of the entire Western philosophical tradition. Continental philosophy, which included Nietzsche, Husserl, Heidegger and others, rejected rationalism and argued that our high-level reasoning was limited and prone to error, and that most of our abilities come from our intuitions, culture, and instinctive feel for the situation. Philosophers who were familiar with this tradition were the first to criticize GOFAI and the assertion that it was sufficient for intelligence, such as Hubert Dreyfus and Haugeland. == Haugeland's GOFAI == Critics and supporters of Haugeland's position, from philosophy, psychology, or AI research have found it difficult to define "GOFAI" precisely, and thus the literature contains a variety of interpretations. Drew McDermott, for example, finds Haugeland's description of GOFAI "incoherent" and argues that GOFAI is a "myth". Haugeland coined the term GOFAI in order to examine the philosophical implications of “the claims essential to all GOFAI theories”, which he listed as: 1. our ability to deal with things intelligently is due to our capacity to think about them reasonably (including sub-conscious thinking); and 2. our capacity to think about things reasonably amounts to a faculty for internal “automatic” symbol manipulation This is very similar to the sufficient side of the physical symbol systems hypothesis proposed by Herbert A. Simon and Allen Newell in 1963: "A physical symbol system has the necessary and sufficient means for general intelligent action." It is also similar to Hubert Dreyfus' "psychological assumption": "The mind can be viewed as a device operating on bits of information according to formal rules. " Haugeland's description of GOFAI refers to symbol manipulation governed by a set of instructions for manipulating the symbols. The "symbols" he refers to are discrete physical things that are assigned a definite semantics -- like and . They do not refer to signals, or unidentified numbers, or matrixes of unidentified numbers, or the zeros and ones of digital machinery. Thus, Haugeland's GOFAI does not include "good old fashioned" techniques such as cybernetics, perceptrons, dynamic programming or control theory or modern techniques such as neural networks or support vector machines. These questions ask if GOFAI is sufficient for general intelligence -- they ask if there is nothing else required to create fully intelligent machines. Thus GOFAI, for Haugeland, does not include systems that combine symbolic AI with other techniques, such as neuro-symbolic AI, and also does not include narrow symbolic AI systems that are designed only to solve a specific problem and are not expected to exhibit general intelligence. == Replies == === Replies from AI scientists === Russell and Norvig wrote, in reference to Dreyfus and Haugeland:The technology they criticized came to be called Good Old-Fashioned AI (GOFAI). GOFAI corresponds to the simplest logical agent design ... and we saw ... that it is indeed difficult to capture every contingency of appropriate behavior in a set of necessary and sufficient logical rules; we called that the qualification problem. Later symbolic AI work after the 1980's incorporated more robust approaches to open-ended domains such as probabilistic reasoning, non-monotonic reasoning, and machine learning. Currently, most AI researchers believe deep learning, and more likely, a synthesis of neural and symbolic approaches (neuro-symbolic AI), will be required for general intelligence.

  Read more →
• 

  Stockfish (chess)

  Stockfish is a free and open-source chess engine, available for various desktop and mobile platforms. It can be used in chess software through the Universal Chess Interface. Stockfish has been one of the strongest chess engines in the world for several years. It has won all main events of the Top Chess Engine Championship (TCEC) and the Chess.com Computer Chess Championship (CCC) since 2020 and, as of May 2026, is the strongest CPU chess engine in the world with an estimated Elo rating of 3653 in a time control of 40/15 (15 minutes to make 40 moves), according to CCRL. The Stockfish engine was developed by Tord Romstad, Marco Costalba, and Joona Kiiski, and was derived from Glaurung, an open-source engine by Tord Romstad released in 2004. It is now being developed and maintained by the Stockfish community. Stockfish historically used only a classical hand-crafted function to evaluate board positions, but with the introduction of the efficiently updatable neural network (NNUE) in August 2020, Stockfish 12 adopted a hybrid evaluation system that primarily used the neural network and occasionally relied on the hand-crafted evaluation. In July 2023, Stockfish removed the hand-crafted evaluation and transitioned to a fully neural network-based approach. == Features == Stockfish uses a tree-search algorithm based on alpha–beta search with several hand-designed heuristics. Stockfish represents positions using bitboards. Stockfish supports Chess960, a feature it inherited from Glaurung. Support for Syzygy tablebases, previously available in a fork maintained by Ronald de Man, was integrated into Stockfish in 2014. In 2018, support for the 7-man Syzygy was added, shortly after the tablebase was made available. Stockfish supports an unlimited number of CPU threads in multiprocessor systems, with a maximum transposition table size of 32 TB. Stockfish has been a very popular engine on various platforms. On desktop, it is the default chess engine bundled with the Internet Chess Club interface programs BlitzIn and Dasher. On mobile, it has been bundled with the Stockfish app, SmallFish and Droidfish. Other Stockfish-compatible graphical user interfaces (GUIs) include Fritz, Arena, Stockfish for Mac, and PyChess. Stockfish can be compiled to WebAssembly or JavaScript, allowing it to run in the browser. Both Chess.com and Lichess provide Stockfish in this form in addition to a server-side program. Release versions and development versions are available as C++ source code and as precompiled versions for Microsoft Windows, macOS, Linux 32-bit/64-bit and Android. == History == The program originated from Glaurung, an open-source chess engine created by Tord Romstad and first released in 2004. Four years later, Marco Costalba forked the project, naming it Stockfish because it was "produced in Norway and cooked in Italy" (Romstad is Norwegian and Costalba is Italian). The first version, Stockfish 1.0, was released in November 2008. For a while, new ideas and code changes were transferred between the two programs in both directions, until Romstad decided to discontinue Glaurung in favor of Stockfish, which was the stronger engine at the time. The last Glaurung version (2.2) was released in December 2008. Around 2011, Romstad decided to abandon his involvement with Stockfish in order to spend more time on his new iOS chess app. On 18 June 2014 Marco Costalba announced that he had "decided to step down as Stockfish maintainer" and asked that the community create a fork of the current version and continue its development. An official repository, managed by a volunteer group of core Stockfish developers, was created soon after and currently manages the development of the project. === Fishtest === Since 2013, Stockfish has been developed using a distributed testing framework named Fishtest, where volunteers can donate CPU time for testing improvements to the program. Changes to game-playing code are accepted or rejected based on results of playing of tens of thousands of games on the framework against an older "reference" version of the program, using sequential probability ratio testing. Tests on the framework are verified using the chi-squared test, and only if the results are statistically significant are they deemed reliable and used to revise the software code. After the inception of Fishtest, Stockfish gained 120 Elo points in 12 months, propelling it to the top of all major rating lists. As of May 2026, the framework has used a total of more than 20,100 years of CPU time to play over 10 billion chess games. === NNUE === In June 2020, Stockfish introduced the efficiently updatable neural network (NNUE) approach, based on earlier work by computer shogi programmers. Instead of using manually designed heuristics to evaluate the board, this approach introduced a neural network trained on millions of positions which could be evaluated quickly on CPU. On 2 September 2020, the twelfth version of Stockfish was released, incorporating NNUE, and reportedly winning ten times more game pairs than it loses when matched against version eleven. In July 2023, the classical evaluation was completely removed in favor of the NNUE evaluation. == Competition results == === Top Chess Engine Championship === Stockfish is a TCEC multiple-time champion and the current leader in trophy count. Ever since TCEC restarted in 2013, Stockfish has finished first or second in every season except one. Stockfish finished second in TCEC Season 4 and 5, with scores of 23–25 first against Houdini 3 and later against Komodo 1142 in the Superfinal event. Season 5 was notable for the winning Komodo team as they accepted the award posthumously for the program's creator Don Dailey, who succumbed to an illness during the final stage of the event. In his honor, the version of Stockfish that was released shortly after that season was named "Stockfish DD". On 30 May 2014, Stockfish 170514 (a development version of Stockfish 5 with tablebase support) convincingly won TCEC Season 6, scoring 35.5–28.5 against Komodo 7x in the Superfinal. Stockfish 5 was released the following day. In TCEC Season 7, Stockfish again made the Superfinal, but lost to Komodo with a score of 30.5–33.5. In TCEC Season 8, despite losses on time caused by buggy code, Stockfish nevertheless qualified once more for the Superfinal, but lost 46.5–53.5 to Komodo. In Season 9, Stockfish defeated Houdini 5 with a score of 54.5–45.5. Stockfish finished third during season 10 of TCEC, the only season since 2013 in which Stockfish had failed to qualify for the superfinal. It did not lose a game but was still eliminated because it was unable to score enough wins against lower-rated engines. After this technical elimination, Stockfish went on a long winning streak, winning seasons 11 (59–41 against Houdini 6.03), 12 (60–40 against Komodo 12.1.1), and 13 (55–45 against Komodo 2155.00) convincingly. In Season 14, Stockfish faced a new challenger in Leela Chess Zero, eking out a win by one point (50.5–49.5). Its winning streak was finally ended in Season 15, when Leela qualified again and won 53.5–46.5, but Stockfish promptly won Season 16, defeating AllieStein 54.5–45.5, after Leela failed to qualify for the Superfinal. In Season 17, Stockfish faced Leela again in the superfinal, losing 52.5–47.5. However, Stockfish has won every Superfinal since: beating Leela 53.5–46.5 in Season 18, 54.5–45.5 in Season 19, 53–47 in Season 20, and 56–44 in Season 21. In Season 22, Komodo Dragon beat out Leela to qualify for the Superfinal, losing to Stockfish by a large margin 59.5–40.5. Stockfish did not lose an opening pair in this match. Leela made the Superfinal in Seasons 23 and 24, but was crushed by Stockfish both times (58.5–41.5 and 58–42). In Season 25, Stockfish once again defeated Leela, but this time by a narrower margin of 52–48. Stockfish also took part in the TCEC cup, winning the first edition, but was surprisingly upset by Houdini in the semifinals of the second edition. Stockfish recovered to beat Komodo in the third-place playoff. In the third edition, Stockfish made it to the finals, but was defeated by Leela Chess Zero after blundering in a 7-man endgame tablebase draw. It turned this result around in the fourth edition, defeating Leela in the final 4.5–3.5. In TCEC Cup 6, Stockfish finished third after losing to AllieStein in the semifinals, the first time it had failed to make the finals. Since then, Stockfish has consistently won the tournament, with the exception of the 11th edition which Leela won 8.5–7.5. === Chess.com Computer Chess Championship === Ever since Chess.com hosted its first Chess.com Computer Chess Championship in 2018, Stockfish has been the most successful engine. It dominated the earlier championships, winning six consecutive titles before finishing second in CCC7. Since then, its dominance has come under threat from the neural-network engines Leelenstein and Leela Chess Zero, but it has continued to perform w

  Read more →
• 

  Doubao

  Doubao (Chinese: 豆包) is an artificial intelligence assistant developed by ByteDance. == History == The chatbot was launched in August 2023. By November 2024, it had become China's most popular AI chatbot, with approximately 60 million monthly active users according to industry analytics. == Design == Doubao is powered by Volcano Engine (Volcengine), 120 trillion tokens consumed per day. == Variants == === Dola === The international version of Doubao is Dola which was launched in August 2023 as Cici. Dola is powered by OpenAI's GPT series of large language models and by Google's Gemini.

  Read more →
• 

  AlphaGo Zero

  AlphaGo Zero is a version of DeepMind's Go software AlphaGo. AlphaGo's team published an article in Nature in October 2017 introducing AlphaGo Zero, a version created without using data from human games, and stronger than any previous version. By playing games against itself, AlphaGo Zero: surpassed the strength of AlphaGo Lee in three days by winning 100 games to 0; reached the level of AlphaGo Master in 21 days; and exceeded all previous versions in 40 days. Training artificial intelligence (AI) without datasets derived from human experts has significant implications for the development of AI with superhuman skills, as expert data is "often expensive, unreliable, or simply unavailable." Demis Hassabis, the co-founder and CEO of DeepMind, said that AlphaGo Zero was so powerful because it was "no longer constrained by the limits of human knowledge". Furthermore, AlphaGo Zero performed better than standard deep reinforcement learning models (such as Deep Q-Network implementations) due to its integration of Monte Carlo tree search. David Silver, one of the first authors of DeepMind's papers published in Nature on AlphaGo, said that it is possible to have generalized AI algorithms by removing the need to learn from humans. Google later developed AlphaZero, a generalized version of AlphaGo Zero that could play chess and shōgi in addition to Go. In December 2017, AlphaZero beat the 3-day version of AlphaGo Zero by winning 60 games to 40, and with 8 hours of training it outperformed AlphaGo Lee on an Elo scale. AlphaZero also defeated a top chess program (Stockfish) and a top Shōgi program (Elmo). == Architecture == The network in AlphaGo Zero is a ResNet with two heads. The stem of the network takes as input a 17x19x19 tensor representation of the Go board. 8 channels are the positions of the current player's stones from the last eight time steps. (1 if there is a stone, 0 otherwise. If the time step go before the beginning of the game, then 0 in all positions.) 8 channels are the positions of the other player's stones from the last eight time steps. 1 channel is all 1 if black is to move, and 0 otherwise. The body is a ResNet with either 20 or 40 residual blocks and 256 channels. There are two heads, a policy head and a value head. Policy head outputs a logit array of size 19 × 19 + 1 {\displaystyle 19\times 19+1} , representing the logit of making a move in one of the points, plus the logit of passing. Value head outputs a number in the range ( − 1 , + 1 ) {\displaystyle (-1,+1)} , representing the expected score for the current player. -1 represents current player losing, and +1 winning. == Training == AlphaGo Zero's neural network was trained using TensorFlow, with 64 GPU workers and 19 CPU parameter servers. Only four TPUs were used for inference. The neural network initially knew nothing about Go beyond the rules. Unlike earlier versions of AlphaGo, Zero only perceived the board's stones, rather than having some rare human-programmed edge cases to help recognize unusual Go board positions. The AI engaged in reinforcement learning, playing against itself until it could anticipate its own moves and how those moves would affect the game's outcome. In the first three days AlphaGo Zero played 4.9 million games against itself in quick succession. It appeared to develop the skills required to beat top humans within just a few days, whereas the earlier AlphaGo took months of training to achieve the same level. According to Epoch.ai, training cost 3e23 FLOPs. For comparison, the researchers also trained a version of AlphaGo Zero using human games, AlphaGo Master, and found that it learned more quickly, but actually performed more poorly in the long run. DeepMind submitted its initial findings in a paper to Nature in April 2017, which was then published in October 2017. == Hardware cost == The hardware cost for a single AlphaGo Zero system in 2017, including the four TPUs, has been quoted as around $25 million. == Applications == According to Hassabis, AlphaGo's algorithms are likely to be of the most benefit to domains that require an intelligent search through an enormous space of possibilities, such as protein folding (see AlphaFold) or accurately simulating chemical reactions. AlphaGo's techniques are probably less useful in domains that are difficult to simulate, such as learning how to drive a car. DeepMind stated in October 2017 that it had already started active work on attempting to use AlphaGo Zero technology for protein folding, and stated it would soon publish new findings. == Reception == AlphaGo Zero was widely regarded as a significant advance, even when compared with its groundbreaking predecessor, AlphaGo. Oren Etzioni of the Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence called AlphaGo Zero "a very impressive technical result" in "both their ability to do it—and their ability to train the system in 40 days, on four TPUs". The Guardian called it a "major breakthrough for artificial intelligence", citing Eleni Vasilaki of Sheffield University and Tom Mitchell of Carnegie Mellon University, who called it an impressive feat and an “outstanding engineering accomplishment" respectively. Mark Pesce of the University of Sydney called AlphaGo Zero "a big technological advance" taking us into "undiscovered territory". Gary Marcus, a psychologist at New York University, has cautioned that for all we know, AlphaGo may contain "implicit knowledge that the programmers have about how to construct machines to play problems like Go" and will need to be tested in other domains before being sure that its base architecture is effective at much more than playing Go. In contrast, DeepMind is "confident that this approach is generalisable to a large number of domains". In response to the reports, South Korean Go professional Lee Sedol said, "The previous version of AlphaGo wasn’t perfect, and I believe that’s why AlphaGo Zero was made." On the potential for AlphaGo's development, Lee said he will have to wait and see but also said it will affect young Go players. Mok Jin-seok, who directs the South Korean national Go team, said the Go world has already been imitating the playing styles of previous versions of AlphaGo and creating new ideas from them, and he is hopeful that new ideas will come out from AlphaGo Zero. Mok also added that general trends in the Go world are now being influenced by AlphaGo's playing style. "At first, it was hard to understand and I almost felt like I was playing against an alien. However, having had a great amount of experience, I’ve become used to it," Mok said. "We are now past the point where we debate the gap between the capability of AlphaGo and humans. It’s now between computers." Mok has reportedly already begun analyzing the playing style of AlphaGo Zero along with players from the national team. "Though having watched only a few matches, we received the impression that AlphaGo Zero plays more like a human than its predecessors," Mok said. Chinese Go professional Ke Jie commented on the remarkable accomplishments of the new program: "A pure self-learning AlphaGo is the strongest. Humans seem redundant in front of its self-improvement." == Comparison with predecessors == == AlphaZero == On 5 December 2017, DeepMind team released a preprint on arXiv, introducing AlphaZero, a program using generalized AlphaGo Zero's approach, which achieved within 24 hours a superhuman level of play in chess, shogi, and Go, defeating world-champion programs, Stockfish, Elmo, and 3-day version of AlphaGo Zero in each case. AlphaZero (AZ) is a more generalized variant of the AlphaGo Zero (AGZ) algorithm, and is able to play shogi and chess as well as Go. Differences between AZ and AGZ include: AZ has hard-coded rules for setting search hyperparameters. The neural network is now updated continually. Chess (unlike Go) can end in a tie; therefore AZ can take into account the possibility of a tie game. An open source program, Leela Zero, based on the ideas from the AlphaGo papers is available. It uses a GPU instead of the TPUs recent versions of AlphaGo rely on.

  Read more →
• 

  Computational theory of mind

  In philosophy of mind, the computational theory of mind (CTM), also known as computationalism, is a family of views that hold that the human mind is an information processing system and that cognition and consciousness together are a form of computation. It is closely related to functionalism, a broader theory that defines mental states by what they do rather than what they are made of. == History == Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts (1943) were the first to suggest that neural activity is computational. They argued that neural computations explain cognition. A version of the theory was put forward by Peter Putnam and Robert W. Fuller in 1964. The theory was proposed in its modern form by Hilary Putnam in 1960 and 1961, aided by his then PhD student, philosopher and cognitive scientist Jerry Fodor, who continued the research as a post-doc in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. It was later criticized by Putnam himself, John Searle, and others. == Classical computational theory of mind == The CTM holds that the human mind is a computational system that is realized (i.e., physically implemented) by neural activity in the brain. The theory can be elaborated in many ways and varies largely based on how the term computation is understood. In classical computational theory of mind (CCTM), computation is modeled in terms of Turing machines which manipulate symbols according to a rule, in combination with the internal state of the machine. A Turing machine is an abstract machine with unlimited time and storage. CCTM does not pretend that the mind looks like a Turing machine, but instead uses Turing machines as a formalism. Alan Turing argued that any symbolic algorithm executed by a human brain can in theory be replicated on a Turing machine. The critical aspect of such a computational model is that it allows to abstract away from particular physical details of the machine that is implementing the computation. For example, the appropriate computation could be implemented either by silicon chips or biological neural networks, so long as there is a series of outputs based on manipulations of inputs and internal states, performed according to a rule. Computational theories of mind are often said to require mental representation because 'input' into a computation comes in the form of symbols or representations of other objects. A computer cannot compute an actual object but must interpret and represent the object in some form and then compute the representation. Unlike CTM, the representational theory of mind shifts the focus to the symbols being manipulated. This approach better accounts for systematicity and productivity. In Fodor's view, the mind is a computational system that processes the language of thought. == Variants == Connectionist computationalism models the mind as a neural network. Steven Pinker and Alan Prince distinguish two types of connectionists: eliminative and implementationist. Eliminative connectionists generally reject classical CTMs and the idea of a structured, symbolic mind, whereas implementationists view neural networks and Turing machines as two potentially complementary levels of analysis. It is indeed possible in theory to implement a neural network in a Turing machine, or a Turing machine in a neural network. Building from the tradition of McCulloch and Pitts, the computational theory of cognition (CTC) states that neural computations explain cognition. The computational theory of mind asserts that not only cognition, but also phenomenal consciousness or qualia, are computational. That is to say, CTM entails CTC. While phenomenal consciousness could fulfill some other functional role, computational theory of cognition leaves open the possibility that some aspects of the mind could be non-computational. CTC, therefore, provides an important explanatory framework for understanding neural networks, while avoiding counter-arguments that center around phenomenal consciousness. == "Computer metaphor" == Computational theory of mind is not the same as the computer metaphor, comparing the mind to a modern-day digital computer. While the computer metaphor draws an analogy between the mind as software and the brain as hardware, CTM is the claim that the mind is literally a computational system. "Computational system" is not intended to mean a modern-day electronic computer. == Pancomputationalism == CTM raises a question that remains a subject of debate: what does it take for a physical system (such as a mind, or an artificial computer) to perform computations? A very straightforward account is based on a simple mapping between abstract mathematical computations and physical systems: a system performs computation C if and only if there is a mapping between a sequence of states individuated by C and a sequence of states individuated by a physical description of the system. Putnam (1988) and Searle (1992) argue that this simple mapping account (SMA) trivializes the empirical import of computational descriptions. As Putnam put it, "everything is a Probabilistic Automaton under some Description". Even rocks, walls, and buckets of water—contrary to appearances—are computing systems. Gualtiero Piccinini identifies different versions of pancomputationalism. Searle wrote:the wall behind my back is right now implementing the WordStar program, because there is some pattern of molecule movements that is isomorphic with the formal structure of WordStar. But if the wall is implementing WordStar, if it is a big enough wall it is implementing any program, including any program implemented in the brain.In response to the trivialization criticism, and to restrict SMA, philosophers of mind have offered different accounts of computational systems. These typically include causal account, semantic account, syntactic account, and mechanistic account. Instead of a semantic restriction, the syntactic account imposes a syntactic restriction. The mechanistic account was first introduced by Gualtiero Piccinini in 2007. == Criticism == A range of arguments have been proposed against physicalist conceptions used in computational theories of mind. An early, though indirect, criticism of the computational theory of mind comes from philosopher John Searle. In his thought experiment known as the Chinese room, Searle attempts to refute the claims that artificially intelligent agents can be said to have intentionality and understanding and that these systems, because they can be said to be minds themselves, are sufficient for the study of the human mind. Searle asks us to imagine that there is a man in a room with no way of communicating with anyone or anything outside of the room except for a piece of paper with symbols written on it that is passed under the door. With the paper, the man is to use a series of provided rule books to return paper containing different symbols. Unknown to the man in the room, these symbols are of a Chinese language, and this process generates a conversation that a Chinese speaker outside of the room can actually understand. Searle contends that the man in the room does not understand the Chinese conversation. This was originally written as a repudiation of the idea that computers work like minds. Objections like Searle's might be called insufficiency objections. They claim that computational theories of mind fail because computation is insufficient to account for some capacity of the mind. Arguments from qualia, such as Frank Jackson's knowledge argument, can be understood as objections to computational theories of mind in this way—though they take aim at physicalist conceptions of the mind in general, and not computational theories specifically. Objections have also been put forth that are directly tailored for computational theories of mind. Jerry Fodor himself argues that the mind is still a very long way from having been explained by the computational theory of mind. The main reason for this shortcoming is that most cognition is abductive and global, hence sensitive to all possibly relevant background beliefs to (dis)confirm a belief. This creates, among other problems, the frame problem for the computational theory, because the relevance of a belief is not one of its local, syntactic properties but context-dependent. Putnam himself (see in particular Representation and Reality and the first part of Renewing Philosophy) became a prominent critic of computationalism for a variety of reasons, including ones related to Searle's Chinese room arguments, questions of world-word reference relations, and thoughts about the mind-body problem. Regarding functionalism in particular, Putnam has claimed along lines similar to, but more general than Searle's arguments, that the question of whether the human mind can implement computational states is not relevant to the question of the nature of mind, because "every ordinary open system realizes every abstract finite automaton." Computationalists have responded by aiming to develop criteri

  Read more →
• 

  Jailbreak (computer science)

  In computer security, jailbreaking is defined as the act of removing limitations that a vendor attempted to hard-code or hard-wire into its hardware and/or software. It is a form of privilege escalation. The term may have originated with the use of toolsets to break out of a chroot or jail in UNIX-like operating systems. This allowed the user to see files outside of the file system that the administrator intended to make available to the application or user in question. The term was first used in its modern meaning in the iPhone/iOS jailbreaking community and has also been used as a term for PlayStation Portable hacking; these devices have repeatedly been subject to jailbreaks, allowing the execution of arbitrary code, and sometimes have had those jailbreaks disabled by vendor updates, especially in the case of iOS devices. == iOS jailbreaking == iOS systems including the iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch have been subject to iOS jailbreaking efforts since they were released, and continuing with each firmware update. iOS jailbreaking tools have included the option to install package frontends such as Cydia and Installer.app, third-party alternatives to the App Store, as a way to find and install system tweaks and binaries. To prevent iOS jailbreaking, Apple has made the device boot ROM execute checks for SHSH blobs in order to disallow uploads of custom kernels and prevent software downgrades to earlier, jailbreakable firmware. In an "untethered" jailbreak, the iBoot environment is changed to execute a boot ROM exploit and allow submission of a patched low level bootloader or hack the kernel to submit the jailbroken kernel after the SHSH check. == Other phones == A similar method of jailbreaking exists for S60 Platform smartphones, where utilities such as HelloOX allow the execution of unsigned code and full access to system files. or edited firmware (similar to the M33 hacked firmware used for the PlayStation Portable) to circumvent restrictions on unsigned code. Nokia has since issued updates to curb unauthorized jailbreaking, in a manner similar to Apple. Rooting is the equivalent concept for Android phones and other devices. == Console jailbreaking == In the case of gaming consoles, jailbreaking is often used to execute homebrew games. In 2011, Sony, with assistance from law firm Kilpatrick Stockton, sued 21-year-old George Hotz and associates of the group fail0verflow for jailbreaking the PlayStation 3 (see Sony Computer Entertainment America v. George Hotz and PlayStation Jailbreak). == AI jailbreaks == Jailbreaking can also occur in systems and software that use generative artificial intelligence models, such as ChatGPT. In jailbreaking attacks on artificial intelligence systems, users are able to manipulate the system to behave differently than it was intended, making it possible to reveal information about how the model was instructed by the vendor (the "system prompt") or to induce it to respond in an anomalous or harmful way. These attacks typically simply require prompting the AIs with specific phrasal templates - no software is typically required, although software could theoretically be used to "industrialise" such exploits, and some research has been done in this direction. In 2024, a consortium of AI firms founded HackAPrompt.com, a competition to encourage users to find new and effective AI jailbreaking techniques. These and other findings from "ethical hackers" have been used by AI model providers to try to improve AI safety.

  Read more →
• 

  Computational photography

  Computational photography refers to digital image capture and processing techniques that use digital computation instead of optical processes. Computational photography can improve the capabilities of a camera, or introduce features that were not possible at all with film-based photography, or reduce the cost or size of camera elements. Examples of computational photography include in-camera computation of digital panoramas, high-dynamic-range images, and light field cameras. Light field cameras use novel optical elements to capture three-dimensional scene information, which can then be used to produce 3D images, enhanced depth-of-field, and selective de-focusing (or "post focus"). Enhanced depth-of-field reduces the need for mechanical focusing systems. All of these features use computational imaging techniques. The definition of computational photography has evolved to cover a number of subject areas in computer graphics, computer vision, and applied optics. These areas are given below, organized according to a taxonomy proposed by Shree K. Nayar. Within each area is a list of techniques, and for each technique, one or two representative papers or books are cited. Deliberately omitted from the taxonomy are image processing (see also digital image processing) techniques applied to traditionally captured images to produce better images. Examples of such techniques are image scaling, dynamic range compression (i.e. tone mapping), color management, image completion (a.k.a. inpainting or hole filling), image compression, digital watermarking, and artistic image effects. Also omitted are techniques that produce range data, volume data, 3D models, 4D light fields, 4D, 6D, or 8D BRDFs, or other high-dimensional image-based representations. Epsilon photography is a sub-field of computational photography. == Effect on photography == Photos taken using computational photography can allow amateurs to produce photographs rivalling the quality of professional photographers, but as of 2019 do not outperform the use of professional-level equipment. == Computational illumination == This is controlling photographic illumination in a structured fashion, then processing the captured images, to create new images. The applications include image-based relighting, image enhancement, image deblurring, geometry/material recovery and so forth. High-dynamic-range imaging uses differently exposed pictures of the same scene to extend dynamic range. Other examples include processing and merging differently illuminated images of the same subject matter ("lightspace"). == Computational optics == This is a capture of optically coded images, followed by computational decoding to produce new images. Coded aperture imaging was mainly applied in astronomy and X-ray imaging to boost the image quality. Instead of a single pin-hole, a pinhole pattern is applied in imaging, and deconvolution is performed to recover the image. In coded exposure imaging, the on/off state of the shutter is coded to modify the kernel of motion blur. In this way, motion deblurring becomes a well-conditioned problem. Similarly, in a lens based coded aperture, the aperture can be modified by inserting a broadband mask. Thus, out of focus deblurring becomes a well-conditioned problem. The coded aperture can also improve the quality in light field acquisition using Hadamard transform optics. Coded aperture patterns can also be designed using color filters, in order to apply different codes at different wavelengths. This allows for increase the amount of light that reaches the camera sensor, compared to binary masks. == Computational imaging == Computational imaging is a set of imaging techniques that combine data acquisition and data processing to create the image of an object through indirect means to yield enhanced resolution, additional information such as optical phase or 3D reconstruction. The information is often recorded without using a conventional optical microscope configuration or with limited datasets. Computational imaging allows going beyond physical limitations of optical systems, such as numerical aperture, or even obliterates the need for optical elements. For parts of the optical spectrum where imaging elements such as objectives are difficult to manufacture or image sensors cannot be miniaturized, computational imaging provides useful alternatives, in fields such as X-ray and THz radiations. === Common techniques === Among common computational imaging techniques are lensless imaging, computational speckle imaging , ptychography and Fourier ptychography. Computational imaging technique often draws on compressive sensing or phase retrieval techniques, where the angular spectrum of the object is reconstructed. Other techniques are related to the field of computational imaging, such as digital holography, computer vision and inverse problems such as tomography. == Computational processing == This is the processing of non-optically-coded images to produce new images. == Computational sensors == These are detectors that combine sensing and processing, typically in hardware, like the oversampled binary image sensor. == Early work in computer vision == Although computational photography is a currently popular buzzword in computer graphics, many of its techniques first appeared in the computer vision literature, either under other names or within papers aimed at 3D shape analysis. == Art history == Computational photography, as an art form, has been practiced by capturing differently exposed pictures of the same subject matter and combining them. This was the inspiration for the development of the wearable computer in the 1970s and early 1980s. Computational photography was inspired by the work of Charles Wyckoff, and thus computational photography datasets (e.g. differently exposed pictures of the same subject matter that are taken in order to make a single composite image) are sometimes referred to as Wyckoff Sets, in his honor. Early work in this area (joint estimation of image projection and exposure value) was undertaken by Mann and Candoccia. Charles Wyckoff devoted much of his life to creating special kinds of 3-layer photographic films that captured different exposures of the same subject matter. A picture of a nuclear explosion, taken on Wyckoff's film, appeared on the cover of Life Magazine and showed the dynamic range from the dark outer areas to the inner core.

  Read more →
• 

  Moral Machine

  Moral Machine is an online platform, developed by Iyad Rahwan's Scalable Cooperation group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, that generates moral dilemmas and collects information on the decisions that people make between two destructive outcomes. The platform is the idea of Iyad Rahwan and social psychologists Azim Shariff and Jean-François Bonnefon, who conceived of the idea ahead of the publication of their article about the ethics of self-driving cars. The key contributors to building the platform were MIT Media Lab graduate students Edmond Awad and Sohan Dsouza. The presented scenarios are often variations of the trolley problem, and the information collected would be used for further research regarding the decisions that machine intelligence must make in the future. For example, as artificial intelligence plays an increasingly significant role in autonomous driving technology, research projects like Moral Machine help to find solutions for challenging life-and-death decisions that will face self-driving vehicles. Moral Machine was active from January 2016 to July 2020. The Moral Machine continues to be available on their website for people to experience. == The experiment == The Moral Machine was an ambitious project; it was the first attempt at using such an experimental design to test a large number of humans in over 200 countries worldwide. The study was approved by the Institute Review Board (IRB) at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The setup of the experiment asks the viewer to make a decision on a single scenario in which a self-driving car is about to hit pedestrians. The user can decide to have the car either swerve to avoid hitting the pedestrians or keep going straight to preserve the lives it is transporting. Participants can complete as many scenarios as they want to, however the scenarios themselves are generated in groups of thirteen. Within this thirteen, a single scenario is entirely random while the other twelve are generated from a space in a database of 26 million different possibilities. They are chosen with two dilemmas focused on each of six dimensions of moral preferences: character gender, character age, character physical fitness, character social status, character species, and character number. The experiment setup remains the same throughout multiple scenarios but each scenario tests a different set of factors. Most notably, the characters involved in the scenario are different in each one. Characters may include ones such as: Stroller, girl, boy, pregnant, Male Doctor, Female Doctor, Female Athlete, Executive Female, Male Athlete, Executive Male, Large Woman, Large Man, homeless, old man, old woman, dog, criminal, and a cat. Through these different characters researchers were able to understand how a wide variety of people will judge scenarios based on those involved. == Analysis == The Moral Machine collected 40 million moral decisions from 4 million participants in 233 countries, analysis of which revealed trends within individual countries and humanity as a whole. It tested for nine factors: preference for sparing humans versus pets, passengers versus pedestrians, men versus women, young versus elderly, fit versus overweight, higher versus lower social status, jaywalkers versus law abiders, larger versus smaller groups, and inaction (i.e. staying on course) versus swerving. Globally, participants favored human lives over lives of animals like dogs and cats. They preferred to spare more lives if possible, and younger lives as opposed to older. Babies were most often spared with cats being the least spared. In terms of gender variations, people tended to spare men over women for doctors and the elderly. All countries generally shared the preference to spare pedestrians over passengers and law-abiders over criminals. Participants from less wealthy countries showed a higher tendency of sparing pedestrians who crossed illegally compared to those from more wealthy and developed countries. This is most likely due to their experience living in a society where individuals are more likely to deviate from rules due to less stringent enforcement of laws. Countries of higher economic inequality overwhelmingly prefer to save wealthier individuals over poorer ones. === Cultural differences === Researchers subdivided 130 countries with similar results into three ‘cultural clusters’. North America and European countries with significant Christian populations had a higher preference for inaction on the part of the driver and thus had less of a preference for sparing pedestrians as compared to other clusters. East Asian and Islamic countries, together constituting the second cluster, did not have as much preference to spare younger humans compared to the other two clusters and had a higher preference for sparing law-abiding humans. Latin America and Francophone countries had a higher preference for sparing women, the young, the fit, and those of higher status, but a lower preference for sparing humans over pets or other animals. Individualistic cultures tended to spare larger groups, and collectivist cultures had a stronger preference for sparing the lives of older people. For instance, China ranked far below the world average for preference to spare the younger over elderly, while the average respondent from the US exhibited a much higher tendency to save younger lives and larger groups. == Applications of the data == The findings from the moral machine can help decision makers when designing self-driving automotive systems. Designers must make sure that these vehicles are able to solve problems on the road that aligns with the moral values of humans around it. This is a challenge because of the complex nature of humans who may all make different decisions based on their personal values. However, by collecting a large amount of decisions from humans all over the world, researchers can begin to understand patterns in the context of a particular culture, community, and people. == Other features == The Moral Machine was deployed in June 2016. In October 2016, a feature was added that offered users the option to fill a survey about their demographics, political views, and religious beliefs. Between November 2016 and March 2017, the website was progressively translated into nine languages in addition to English (Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish). Overall, the Moral Machine offers four different modes, with the focus being on the data-gathering feature of the website, called the Judge mode. This means that the Moral Machine, in addition to providing their own scenarios for users to judge, also invites users to create their own scenarios to be submitted and approved so that other people may also judge those scenarios. Data is also open sourced for anyone to explore via an interactive map that is featured on the Moral Machine website. == In the literature == Studies and research on the Moral Machine have taken a wide variety of approaches. However, theological examinations of the topic are still scarce where two bodies of work that examine such perspective currently exist in this regard: One is Buddhist while the other is Christian.

  Read more →
• 

  Linguistic value

  In artificial intelligence, fuzzy logic operations research, and related fields, a linguistic value is a natural language term which is derived using quantitative or qualitative reasoning such as with probability and statistics or fuzzy sets and systems. Variables that take linguistic values are called linguistic variables. == Examples of linguistic variables and values == For example, "age" may be a linguistic variable if its values are not numerical, e.g. very young, quite young, not young, old, not very old etc. These values could be derived from the numeric values for age. As another example, if a shuttle heat shield is deemed of having a linguistic value of a "very low" percentage of damage in re-entry, based upon knowledge from experts in the field, that probability would be given a value of say, 5%. From there on out, if it were to be used in an equation, the variable of percentage of damage will be at 5% if it deemed very low percentage.

  Read more →