AI For Students Pros And Cons

AI For Students Pros And Cons — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Corona-Warn-App

  Corona-Warn-App was the official and open-source COVID-19 contact tracing app used for digital contact tracing in Germany made by SAP and Deutsche Telekom subsidiary T-Systems. It had been downloaded 22.8 million times as of 19 November 2020 and 26.2 million times as of 18 March 2021. The app has been promoted by billboard and broadcast advertisements, e.g. in cooperation with the German Football Association (DFB) and other prominent companies. The German government has announced that the app would no longer exchange tracing information as of April 30, 2023 & would enter hibernation as of June 1, 2023. == Effectiveness == Experts believe that time saved by using the app can be critical for improving the effectiveness contact tracing efforts. Some virologists say when at least 60% of people in Germany use it, it would be very effective. == Functioning == The app works with the Exposure Notification Framework (what is implemented in Google Play Services for Android and in iOS) by using Bluetooth to exchange codes with app users that are within 1.5 meters of each other for a period of at least 10 minutes. Anyone who tests positive for COVID-19 can share this information voluntarily with the app. Other app users are then notified about when, how long and at what distance they had contact with the infected person within a 14-day period. Testing is available for persons on a voluntary basis. === Server architecture === Based on the Client–server model five servers are operated within the app backend: the Corona-Warn-App server. It stores the authorized keys of infected users, referred to as diagnosis keys, from the past 14 days in its database. Stored diagnosis keys are grouped into regularly updated blocks which are transmitted to the Content Delivery Network. This interface supplies the keys for the app clients to download and locally compute a potential exposure risk. the Verification server. It is responsible for documenting the approval of the user to share their positive test result with the app and also to verify the test result. the Portal Server. It generates a so-called teleTAN token if the user did not give their consent to share their test result with the app at first but then changed their mind or if the local public health authority or test laboratory is not connected to the app system yet. the Test Result Server. It saves the test results provided by the local public health authorities or test laboratories for further use within the backend. the Federation Gateway Server. It connects to the national Corona-Warn-App servers of participating EU countries to enable transnational key exchange. By the distribution of the data on different servers the decoupling of the data becomes possible and results in an obstructed tracing of the app users. ==== Report of a positive COVID-19 test ==== The app provides a function to warn other app users by uploading their positive test result on a voluntarily and anonymous basis to the Corona-Warn-App server. In case the local public health authority or test laboratory is already connected to the app system, the user receives a QR-Code when the swab specimen is taken that can be scanned in the app. After scanning the QR-Code und the user getting authorized by the Verification server, the app receives an individual Registration token which gets stored locally and with which the status and the result of the test can be checked manually as well as automatically. If the local public health authority or test laboratory is not connected to the app system yet and the user wants to share their positive test result with other app users, it is required to request a teleTAN token by calling the verification hotline of the app. In both cases, the user can upload their diagnosis keys of the last 14 days to the Corona-Warn-App server in case their consent to share the information is given. The Corona-Warn-App server then verifies the uploaded keys by asking the Verification server if the keys are valid and if they are, the Corona-Warn-App server stores them in its database. == Privacy == The use of the app is voluntary. The app implements decentralized data storage to ensure data privacy. Employers can require that Corona-Warn be installed on company phones, but can not compel its use on private phones. == Funding == The open source app, which costs €20 million to develop is intended to supplement human contact tracing efforts, which Germany put in place during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. In August 2022, a spokesperson for the German ministry of health announced that the total costs including all additional developments are now estimated to be closer to €150m. == Interoperability == At its start the app only worked in Germany, and Jens Spahn, than Federal Minister of Health (CDU), has said the development of a Europe-wide system is a future goal. With the update published on 19 October 2020 the app supports key-exchanges with the EU Interoperability Gateway and is therefore able to communicate with contact tracing apps from Ireland and Italy. Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Slovenia, Spain and Switzerland had joined the gateway as well and are also able to exchange keys with Corona-Warn-App. The app can be downloaded in many App stores outside of Germany. However, as of August 2021, the app is still unavailable for those of notable national German minorities like Turks, Russians or Ukrainians, who use App stores of their home countries. == Software variants == An unofficial Corona-Warn-App has been released on F-Droid, making the app available without proprietary components on Android phones. == Literature == Thomas Köllmann: Die Corona-Warn-App – Schnittstelle zwischen Datenschutz- und Arbeitsrecht. In: Neue Zeitschrift für Arbeitsrecht. Nr. 13, 10. Juli 2020, S. 831–836.

  Read more →
• 

  Divide-and-conquer algorithm

  In computer science, divide and conquer is an algorithm design paradigm. A divide-and-conquer algorithm recursively breaks down a problem into two or more sub-problems of the same or related type, until these become simple enough to be solved directly. The solutions to the sub-problems are then combined to give a solution to the original problem. The divide-and-conquer technique is the basis of efficient algorithms for many problems, such as sorting (e.g., quicksort, merge sort), multiplying large numbers (e.g., the Karatsuba algorithm), finding the closest pair of points, syntactic analysis (e.g., top-down parsers), SAT solving, and computing the discrete Fourier transform (FFT). Designing efficient divide-and-conquer algorithms can be difficult. As in mathematical induction, it is often necessary to generalize the problem to make it amenable to a recursive solution. The correctness of a divide-and-conquer algorithm is usually proved by mathematical induction, and its computational cost is often determined by solving recurrence relations. == Divide and conquer == The divide-and-conquer paradigm is often used to find an optimal solution of a problem. Its basic idea is to decompose a given problem into two or more similar, but simpler, subproblems, to solve them in turn, and to compose their solutions to solve the given problem. Problems of sufficient simplicity are solved directly. For example, to sort a given list of n natural numbers, split it into two lists of about n/2 numbers each, sort each of them in turn, and interleave both results appropriately to obtain the sorted version of the given list (see the picture). This approach is known as the merge sort algorithm. The name "divide and conquer" is sometimes applied to algorithms that reduce each problem to only one sub-problem, such as the binary search algorithm for finding a record in a sorted list (or its analogue in numerical computing, the bisection algorithm for root finding). These algorithms can be implemented more efficiently than general divide-and-conquer algorithms; in particular, if they use tail recursion, they can be converted into simple loops. Under this broad definition, however, every algorithm that uses recursion or loops could be regarded as a "divide-and-conquer algorithm". Therefore, some authors consider that the name "divide and conquer" should be used only when each problem may generate two or more subproblems. The name decrease and conquer has been proposed instead for the single-subproblem class. An important application of divide and conquer is in optimization, where if the search space is reduced ("pruned") by a constant factor at each step, the overall algorithm has the same asymptotic complexity as the pruning step, with the constant depending on the pruning factor (by summing the geometric series); this is known as prune and search. == Early historical examples == Early examples of these algorithms are primarily decrease and conquer – the original problem is successively broken down into single subproblems, and indeed can be solved iteratively. Binary search, a decrease-and-conquer algorithm where the subproblems are of roughly half the original size, has a long history. While a clear description of the algorithm on computers appeared in 1946 in an article by John Mauchly, the idea of using a sorted list of items to facilitate searching dates back at least as far as Babylonia in 200 BC. Another ancient decrease-and-conquer algorithm is the Euclidean algorithm to compute the greatest common divisor of two numbers by reducing the numbers to smaller and smaller equivalent subproblems, which dates to several centuries BC. An early example of a divide-and-conquer algorithm with multiple subproblems is Gauss's 1805 description of what is now called the Cooley–Tukey fast Fourier transform (FFT) algorithm, although he did not analyze its operation count quantitatively, and FFTs did not become widespread until they were rediscovered over a century later. An early two-subproblem D&C algorithm that was specifically developed for computers and properly analyzed is the merge sort algorithm, invented by John von Neumann in 1945. Another notable example is the algorithm invented by Anatolii A. Karatsuba in 1960 that could multiply two n-digit numbers in O ( n log 2 ⁡ 3 ) {\displaystyle O(n^{\log _{2}3})} operations (in Big O notation). This algorithm disproved Andrey Kolmogorov's 1956 conjecture that Ω ( n 2 ) {\displaystyle \Omega (n^{2})} operations would be required for that task. As another example of a divide-and-conquer algorithm that did not originally involve computers, Donald Knuth gives the method a post office typically uses to route mail: letters are sorted into separate bags for different geographical areas, each of these bags is itself sorted into batches for smaller sub-regions, and so on until they are delivered. This is related to a radix sort, described for punch-card sorting machines as early as 1929. == Advantages == === Solving difficult problems === Divide and conquer is a powerful tool for solving conceptually difficult problems: all it requires is a way of breaking the problem into sub-problems, of solving the trivial cases, and of combining sub-problems to the original problem. Similarly, decrease and conquer only requires reducing the problem to a single smaller problem, such as the classic Tower of Hanoi puzzle, which reduces moving a tower of height n {\displaystyle n} to move a tower of height n − 1 {\displaystyle n-1} . === Algorithm efficiency === The divide-and-conquer paradigm often helps in the discovery of efficient algorithms. It was the key, for example, to Karatsuba's fast multiplication method, the quicksort and mergesort algorithms, the Strassen algorithm for matrix multiplication, and fast Fourier transforms. In all these examples, the D&C approach led to an improvement in the asymptotic cost of the solution. For example, if (a) the base cases have constant-bounded size, the work of splitting the problem and combining the partial solutions is proportional to the problem's size n {\displaystyle n} , and (b) there is a bounded number p {\displaystyle p} of sub-problems of size ~ n p {\displaystyle {\frac {n}{p}}} at each stage, then the cost of the divide-and-conquer algorithm will be O ( n log p ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle O(n\log _{p}n)} . For other types of divide-and-conquer approaches, running times can also be generalized. For example, when a) the work of splitting the problem and combining the partial solutions take c n {\displaystyle cn} time, where n {\displaystyle n} is the input size and c {\displaystyle c} is some constant; b) when n < 2 {\displaystyle n<2} , the algorithm takes time upper-bounded by c {\displaystyle c} , and c) there are q {\displaystyle q} subproblems where each subproblem has size ~ n 2 {\displaystyle {\frac {n}{2}}} . Then, the running times are as follows: if the number of subproblems q > 2 {\displaystyle q>2} , then the divide-and-conquer algorithm's running time is bounded by O ( n log 2 ⁡ q ) {\displaystyle O(n^{\log _{2}q})} . if the number of subproblems is exactly one, then the divide-and-conquer algorithm's running time is bounded by O ( n ) {\displaystyle O(n)} . If, instead, the work of splitting the problem and combining the partial solutions take c n 2 {\displaystyle cn^{2}} time, and there are 2 subproblems where each has size n 2 {\displaystyle {\frac {n}{2}}} , then the running time of the divide-and-conquer algorithm is bounded by O ( n 2 ) {\displaystyle O(n^{2})} . === Parallelism === Divide-and-conquer algorithms are naturally adapted for execution in multi-processor machines, especially shared-memory systems where the communication of data between processors does not need to be planned in advance because distinct sub-problems can be executed on different processors. === Memory access === Divide-and-conquer algorithms naturally tend to make efficient use of memory caches. The reason is that once a sub-problem is small enough, it and all its sub-problems can, in principle, be solved within the cache, without accessing the slower main memory. An algorithm designed to exploit the cache in this way is called cache-oblivious, because it does not contain the cache size as an explicit parameter. Moreover, D&C algorithms can be designed for important algorithms (e.g., sorting, FFTs, and matrix multiplication) to be optimal cache-oblivious algorithms–they use the cache in a probably optimal way, in an asymptotic sense, regardless of the cache size. In contrast, the traditional approach to exploiting the cache is blocking, as in loop nest optimization, where the problem is explicitly divided into chunks of the appropriate size—this can also use the cache optimally, but only when the algorithm is tuned for the specific cache sizes of a particular machine. The same advantage exists with regards to other hierarchical storage systems, such as NUMA or virtual memory, as well as for multip

  Read more →
• 

  Sedona Canada Principles

  The Sedona Canada Principles are a set of authoritative guidelines published by The Sedona Conference to aid members of the Canadian legal community involved in the identification, collection, preservation, review and production of electronically stored information (ESI). The principles were drafted by a small group of lawyers, judges and technologists called the Sedona Working Group 7 or Sedona Canada. Sedona Canada is an offshoot of The Sedona Conference which is an American "non-profit ... research and educational institute dedicated to the advanced study of law and policy in the areas of antitrust law, complex litigation, and intellectual property rights". == Background == Civil procedure in Canada is jurisdictional with each province following its own rules of civil procedure. However, each province must address the fact that due to the advancement of technology the discovery process enshrined in the rules of civil procedure can be potentially derailed due to the sheer volume of electronically stored information (ESI). When dealing with litigation matters that involve electronically stored information (ESI), the discovery process is commonly called e-discovery. The problems associated with e-discovery in Canada led to the creation of the Sedona Canada Principles. Rule 29.1.03(4) of the wikibooks:Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure specifically refers to the Sedona Canada Principles in referencing Principles re Electronic Discovery although it has been reported that this rule has been largely ignored in practice. == Summary == The Sedona Canada Principles largely refer to the processes found in the Electronic Discovery Reference Model. The principles urge proportionality due to the potentially enormous volumes of documents that may be discoverable when dealing with ESI. They also encourage good faith in the document preservation stage and regular meetings between parties to discuss the scope of the litigation. Parties are urged to be aware of the potential costs involved in producing relevant ESI but are advised that only reasonably accessible ESI need be produced. The principles stipulate that parties should not be required to search for or collect deleted material unless there is an agreement or court order related to those terms. The use of electronic tools and processes such as data sampling and web harvesting are acceptable practices. Parties are encouraged to agree early in the litigation process on production format required for the exchange of relevant documents as part of the discovery process (native files, pdf, tiff, metadata requirements etc.). Agreements or direction should be sought, if necessary, with respect to privilege or other confidential information related to production of electronic documents and data. Parties should be aware that legal precedents can be formed as a result of e-discovery practices and sanctions can be considered for a party's failure to meet their discovery obligations unless it can be demonstrated that the failure was not intentional. All parties must bear the “reasonable” costs associated with e-discovery but other arrangements can be agreed upon by the parties or by court order. == Caselaw == In Warman v. National Post Company proportionality was at issue in a case where the plaintiff was suing the defendant for libel. A motion was brought by the defendant to have the plaintiff provide a mirror image of his hard drive in an effort to prove an internet article was indeed authored by the plaintiff. Issues of proportionality and the work of the Sedona Conference and Sedona Canada Principles were factored in to the decision to grant the defendant only limited access to the hard drive. In Innovative Health Group Inc. v. Calgary Health Region the plaintiff's legal obligation to produce imaged hard drives is in question. Justice Conrad refers to the advice of Sedona Canada on proportionality and problems associated with time and expense related to the difficulties associated with electronically stored information. In York University v. Michael Markicevic Justice Brown specifically refers to the need for the parties to agree upon a formal e-discovery plan to be drafted in consultation with Sedona Canada Principles. In Friends of Lansdowne v. Ottawa Master MacLeod refers to the need for Sedona Canada principles and states “This is particularly true in the current information age when e-mail is ubiquitous and multiple copies or variants of messages may be held on various kinds of data storage devices including individual hard drives, e-mail and Blackberry servers. Even documents that ultimately exist in paper form normally begin their life on computers and negotiations frequently involve exchanges of electronic drafts. To find every scrap of paper and every electronic trace of relevant information has become a nightmarish task that threatens to render any kind of litigation extravagantly expensive.” == Criticism == Critics of the Sedona Canada Principles believe they should address system integrity and that the true history of any file preserved cannot be identified without proof of the integrity of the electronic record systems management it comes from. Other criticism is more directed to the Sedona Canada working group and complaints that it is insular and irrelevant.

  Read more →
• 

  Webometrics

  The science of webometrics (also referred to as cybermetrics) aims to quantify the World Wide Web to get knowledge about the number and types of hyperlinks, the structure of the World Wide Web, and using patterns. According to Björneborn and Ingwersen, the definition of webometrics is "the study of the quantitative aspects of the construction and use of information resources, structures and technologies on the Web drawing on bibliometric and informetric approaches." The term webometrics was coined by Almind and Ingwersen (1997). A second definition of webometrics has also been introduced, "the study of web-based content with primarily quantitative methods for social science research goals using techniques that are not specific to one field of study", which emphasizes the development of applied methods for use in the wider social sciences. The purpose of this alternative definition was to help publicize appropriate methods outside the information-science discipline rather than to replace the original definition within information science. Similar scientific fields are: bibliometrics, informetrics, scientometrics, virtual ethnography, and web mining. One relatively straightforward measure is the "web impact factor" (WIF) introduced by Ingwersen (1998). The WIF measure may be defined as the number of web pages in a web site receiving links from other web sites, divided by the number of web pages published in the site that are accessible to the crawler. However, the use of WIF has been disregarded due to the mathematical artifacts derived from power law distributions of these variables. Other similar indicators using size of the institution instead of number of webpages have been proved more useful.

  Read more →
• 

  TimeTiger

  TimeTiger is a time and project tracking app developed by Indigo Technologies Ltd. in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Indigo was founded in 1997 and initially released TimeTiger in 1998. == Company == The company was incorporated in 1997 and began operations as a custom software developer. TimeTiger (internally called TaskMaster) was developed as a tool to help with Indigo's own project planning and estimating. After releasing TimeTiger as a commercial product in 1998, Indigo shifted its focus to time and project management solutions. TimeTiger first introduced support for web-based time logging in 2000, to appeal to workers who were not already tracking their time for billing reasons. Subsequent development emphasized project analysis tools. == Features == Web-based electronic time log "To Do" list to monitor project and non-project activities Pivot table report designer Role-based access control == Software integration == Reports can be exported to Microsoft Excel or saved as Excel-compatible HTML files. Microsoft Project files can be imported and exported. A Software Development Kit is available.

  Read more →
• 

  DONE

  The Data-based Online Nonlinear Extremumseeker (DONE) algorithm is a black-box optimization algorithm. DONE models the unknown cost function and attempts to find an optimum of the underlying function. The DONE algorithm is suitable for optimizing costly and noisy functions and does not require derivatives. An advantage of DONE over similar algorithms, such as Bayesian optimization, is that the computational cost per iteration is independent of the number of function evaluations. == Methods == The DONE algorithm was first proposed by Hans Verstraete and Sander Wahls in 2015. The algorithm fits a surrogate model based on random Fourier features and then uses a well-known L-BFGS algorithm to find an optimum of the surrogate model. == Applications == DONE was first demonstrated for maximizing the signal in optical coherence tomography measurements, but has since then been applied to various other applications. For example, it was used to help extending the field of view in light sheet fluorescence microscopy.

  Read more →
• 

  Hall circles

  Hall circles (also known as M-circles and N-circles) are a graphical tool in control theory used to obtain values of a closed-loop transfer function from the Nyquist plot (or the Nichols plot) of the associated open-loop transfer function. Hall circles have been introduced in control theory by Albert C. Hall in his thesis. == Construction == Consider a closed-loop linear control system with open-loop transfer function given by transfer function G ( s ) {\displaystyle G(s)} and with a unit gain in the feedback loop. The closed-loop transfer function is given by T ( s ) = G ( s ) 1 + G ( s ) {\textstyle T(s)={\frac {G(s)}{1+G(s)}}} . To check the stability of T(s), it is possible to use the Nyquist stability criterion with the Nyquist plot of the open-loop transfer function G(s). Note, however, that the Nyquist plot of G(s) does not give the actual values of T(s). To get this information from the G(s)-plane, Hall proposed to construct the locus of points in the G(s)-plane such that T(s) has constant magnitude and also the locus of points in the G(s)-plane such that T(s) has constant phase angle. Given a positive real value M representing a fixed magnitude, and denoting G(s) by z, the points satisfying M = | T ( s ) | = | G ( s ) | | 1 + G ( s ) | = | z | | 1 + z | {\displaystyle M=|T(s)|={\frac {|G(s)|}{|1+G(s)|}}={\frac {|z|}{|1+z|}}} are given by the points z in the G(s)-plane such that the ratio of the distance between z and 0 and the distance between z and -1 is equal to M. The points z satisfying this locus condition are circles of Apollonius, and this locus is known in the context of control systems as M-circles. Given a positive real value N representing a phase angle, the points satisfying N = arg ⁡ [ G ( s ) 1 + G ( s ) ] = arg ⁡ [ G ( s ) ] − arg ⁡ [ 1 + G ( s ) ] = arg ⁡ [ z ] − arg ⁡ [ 1 + z ] {\displaystyle N=\arg \left[{\frac {G(s)}{1+G(s)}}\right]=\arg[G(s)]-\arg[1+G(s)]=\arg[z]-\arg[1+z]} are given by the points z in the G(s)-plane such that the angle between -1 and z and the angle between 0 and z is constant. In other words, the angle opposed to the line segment between -1 and 0 must be constant. This implies that the points z satisfying this locus condition are arcs of circles, and this locus is known in the context of control systems as N-circles. == Usage == To use the Hall circles, a plot of M and N circles is done over the Nyquist plot of the open-loop transfer function. The points of the intersection between these graphics give the corresponding value of the closed-loop transfer function. Hall circles are also used with the Nichols plot and in this setting, are also known as Nichols chart. Rather than overlaying directly the Hall circles over the Nichols plot, the points of the circles are transferred to a new coordinate system where the ordinate is given by 20 log 10 ⁡ ( | G ( s ) | ) {\displaystyle 20\log _{10}(|G(s)|)} and the abscissa is given by arg ⁡ ( G ( s ) ) {\displaystyle \arg(G(s))} . The advantage of using Nichols chart is that adjusting the gain of the open loop transfer function directly reflects in up and down translation of the Nichols plot in the chart.

  Read more →
• 

  Metadata

  Metadata (or metainformation) is data (or information) that defines and describes the characteristics of other data. It often helps to describe, explain, locate, or otherwise make data easier to retrieve, use, or manage. For example, the title, author, and publication date of a book are metadata about the book. But, while a data asset is finite, its metadata is infinite. As such, efforts to define, classify types, or structure metadata are expressed as examples in the context of its use. The term "metadata" has a history dating to the 1960s where it occurred in computer science and in popular culture. Different types of metadata serve different functions. For example, descriptive metadata for a document might include the author, creation date, file size and keywords. Metadata has various purposes. It can help users find relevant information and discover resources. It can also help organize electronic resources, provide digital identification, and archive and preserve resources. Metadata allows users to access resources by "allowing resources to be found by relevant criteria, identifying resources, bringing similar resources together, distinguishing dissimilar resources, and giving location information". Metadata of telecommunication activities including Internet traffic is very widely collected by various national governmental organizations. This data is used for the purposes of traffic analysis and can be used for mass surveillance. Unique metadata standards exist for different disciplines (e.g., museum collections, digital audio files, websites, etc.). Describing the contents and context of data or data files increases its usefulness. For example, a web page may include metadata specifying what software language the page is written in (e.g., HTML), what tools were used to create it, what subjects the page is about, and where to find more information about the subject. This metadata can automatically improve the reader's experience and make it easier for users to find the web page online. A CD may include metadata providing information about the musicians, singers, and songwriters whose work appears on the disc. In many countries, government organizations routinely store metadata about emails, telephone calls, web pages, video traffic, IP connections, and cell phone locations. == Types == There are many distinct types of metadata, including: Descriptive metadata – the descriptive information about a resource. It is used for discovery and identification. It includes elements such as title, abstract, author, and keywords. Structural metadata – metadata about containers of data and indicates how compound objects are put together, for example, how pages are ordered to form chapters. It describes the types, versions, relationships, and other characteristics of digital materials. Administrative metadata – the information to help manage a resource, like resource type, and permissions, and when and how it was created. Reference metadata – the information about the contents and quality of statistical data. Statistical metadata – also called process data, may describe processes that collect, process, or produce statistical data. Legal metadata – provides information about the creator, copyright holder, and public licensing, if provided. Metadata is not strictly bound to one of these categories, as it can describe a piece of data in many other ways. While the metadata application is manifold, covering a large variety of fields, there are specialized and well-accepted models to specify types of metadata. Bretherton & Singley (1994) distinguish between two distinct classes: structural/control metadata and guide metadata. Structural metadata describes the structure of database objects such as tables, columns, keys and indexes. Guide metadata helps humans find specific items and is usually expressed as a set of keywords in a natural language. According to Ralph Kimball, metadata can be divided into three categories: technical metadata (or internal metadata), business metadata (or external metadata), and process metadata. Dan Linstedt, creator of the data vault methodology, says business metadata "...provide[s] definition of the functionality, definition of the data, definition of the elements, and definition of how the data is used within business...business metadata includes business requirements, time-lines, business metrics, business process flows, and business terminology." Business metadata is important because it can greatly facilitate the usefulness of the data to business people. A simple example of business metadata is a glossary entry. Hover functionality in an application or web form can enable a glossary definition to be shown when cursor is on a field or term. Other examples of business metadata include annotation ability within applications. For example, a business user may be viewing a business intelligence (BI) report and notice a trend in the data. The user may have background knowledge as to why this trend occurs. Some business intelligence tools enable the user to create an annotation within the report that explains the trend. Such an annotation can enhance other users' understanding of the data. This example is especially powerful because it is created by a business user for the use of other business people. NISO distinguishes three types of metadata: descriptive, structural, and administrative. Descriptive metadata is typically used for discovery and identification, as information to search and locate an object, such as title, authors, subjects, keywords, and publisher. Structural metadata describes how the components of an object are organized. An example of structural metadata would be how pages are ordered to form chapters of a book. Finally, administrative metadata gives information to help manage the source. Administrative metadata refers to the technical information, such as file type, or when and how the file was created. Two sub-types of administrative metadata are rights management metadata and preservation metadata. Rights management metadata explains intellectual property rights, while preservation metadata contains information to preserve and save a resource. Statistical data repositories have their own requirements for metadata in order to describe not only the source and quality of the data but also what statistical processes were used to create the data, which is of particular importance to the statistical community in order to both validate and improve the process of statistical data production. An additional type of metadata beginning to be more developed is accessibility metadata. Accessibility metadata is not a new concept to libraries; however, advances in universal design have raised its profile. Projects like Cloud4All and GPII identified the lack of common terminologies and models to describe the needs and preferences of users and information that fits those needs as a major gap in providing universal access solutions. Those types of information are accessibility metadata. The Schema.org website has incorporated several accessibility properties based on IMS Global Access for All Information Model Data Element Specification. While the efforts to describe and standardize the varied accessibility needs of information seekers are beginning to become more robust, their adoption into established metadata schemas has not been as developed. For example, while Dublin Core (DC)'s "audience" and MARC 21's "reading level" could be used to identify resources suitable for users with dyslexia and DC's "format" could be used to identify resources available in braille, audio, or large print formats, there is more work to be done. == History == Metadata was traditionally used in the card catalogs of libraries until the 1980s when libraries converted their catalog data to digital databases. In the 2000s, as data and information were increasingly stored digitally, this digital data was described using metadata standards. An early description of "meta data" for computer systems was written by David Griffel and Stuart McIntosh at the MIT Center for International Studies in 1967: "In summary then, we have statements in an object language about subject descriptions of data and token codes for the data. We also have statements in a meta language describing the data relationships and transformations, and ought/is relations between norm and data." == Definition == Metadata means "data about data". Metadata is defined as the data providing information about one or more aspects of the data; it is used to summarize basic information about data that can make tracking and working with specific data easier. Some examples include: Means of creation of the data Source of the data Time and date of creation Creator or author of the data Location on a computer network where the data was created Standards used Data quality For example, a digital image may include metadata that describes the size of the image, its color depth, resolution,

  Read more →
• 

  Deep learning

  In machine learning, deep learning (DL) focuses on utilizing multilayered neural networks to perform tasks such as classification, regression, and representation learning. The field takes inspiration from biological neuroscience and revolves around stacking artificial neurons into layers and "training" them to process data. The adjective "deep" refers to the use of multiple layers (ranging from three to several hundred or thousands) in the network. Methods used can be supervised, semi-supervised or unsupervised. Some common deep learning network architectures include fully connected networks, deep belief networks, recurrent neural networks, convolutional neural networks, generative adversarial networks, transformers, and neural radiance fields. These architectures have been applied to fields including computer vision, speech recognition, natural language processing, machine translation, bioinformatics, drug design, medical image analysis, climate science, material inspection and board game programs, where they have produced results comparable to and in some cases surpassing human expert performance. Early forms of neural networks were inspired by information processing and distributed communication nodes in biological systems, particularly the human brain. However, current neural networks do not intend to model the brain function of organisms, and are generally seen as low-quality models for that purpose. == Overview == Most modern deep learning models are based on multi-layered neural networks such as convolutional neural networks and transformers, although they can also include propositional formulas or latent variables organized layer-wise in deep generative models such as the nodes in deep belief networks and deep Boltzmann machines. Fundamentally, deep learning refers to a class of machine learning algorithms in which a hierarchy of layers is used to transform input data into a progressively more abstract and composite representation. For example, in an image recognition model, the raw input may be an image (represented as a tensor of pixels). The first representational layer may attempt to identify basic shapes such as lines and circles, the second layer may compose and encode arrangements of edges, the third layer may encode a nose and eyes, and the fourth layer may recognize that the image contains a face. Importantly, a deep learning process can learn which features to optimally place at which level on its own. Prior to deep learning, machine learning techniques often involved hand-crafted feature engineering to transform the data into a more suitable representation for a classification algorithm to operate on. In the deep learning approach, features are not hand-crafted and the model discovers useful feature representations from the data automatically. This does not eliminate the need for hand-tuning; for example, varying numbers of layers and layer sizes can provide different degrees of abstraction. The word "deep" in "deep learning" refers to the number of layers through which the data is transformed. More precisely, deep learning systems have a substantial credit assignment path (CAP) depth. The CAP is the chain of transformations from input to output. CAPs describe potentially causal connections between input and output. For a feedforward neural network, the depth of the CAPs is that of the network and is the number of hidden layers plus one (as the output layer is also parameterized). For recurrent neural networks, in which a signal may propagate through a layer more than once, the CAP depth is potentially unlimited. No universally agreed-upon threshold of depth divides shallow learning from deep learning, but most researchers agree that deep learning involves CAP depth higher than two. CAP of depth two has been shown to be a universal approximator in the sense that it can emulate any function. Beyond that, more layers do not add to the function approximator ability of the network. Deep models (CAP > two) are able to extract better features than shallow models and hence, extra layers help in learning the features effectively. Deep learning architectures can be constructed with a greedy layer-by-layer method. Deep learning helps to disentangle these abstractions and pick out which features improve performance. Deep learning algorithms can be applied to unsupervised learning tasks. This is an important benefit because unlabeled data is more abundant than labeled data. Examples of deep structures that can be trained in an unsupervised manner are deep belief networks. The term deep learning was introduced to the machine learning community by Rina Dechter in 1986, and to artificial neural networks by Igor Aizenberg and colleagues in 2000, in the context of Boolean threshold neurons. The etymology of the term is more complicated. == Interpretations == Deep neural networks are generally interpreted in terms of the universal approximation theorem or probabilistic inference. The classic universal approximation theorem concerns the capacity of feedforward neural networks with a single hidden layer of finite size to approximate continuous functions. In 1989, the first proof was published by George Cybenko for sigmoid activation functions and was generalised to feed-forward multi-layer architectures in 1991 by Kurt Hornik. Recent work also showed that universal approximation also holds for non-bounded activation functions such as Kunihiko Fukushima's rectified linear unit. The universal approximation theorem for deep neural networks concerns the capacity of networks with bounded width but the depth is allowed to grow. Lu et al. proved that if the width of a deep neural network with ReLU activation is strictly larger than the input dimension, then the network can approximate any Lebesgue integrable function; if the width is smaller or equal to the input dimension, then a deep neural network is not a universal approximator. The probabilistic interpretation derives from the field of machine learning. It features inference, as well as the optimization concepts of training and testing, related to fitting and generalization, respectively. More specifically, the probabilistic interpretation considers the activation nonlinearity as a cumulative distribution function. The probabilistic interpretation led to the introduction of dropout as regularizer in neural networks. The probabilistic interpretation was introduced by researchers including Hopfield, Widrow and Narendra and popularized in surveys such as the one by Bishop. == History == === Before 1980 === There are two types of artificial neural network (ANN): feedforward neural network (FNN) or multilayer perceptron (MLP) and recurrent neural networks (RNN). RNNs have cycles in their connectivity structure, whereas FNNs do not. In the 1920s, Wilhelm Lenz and Ernst Ising created the Ising model which is essentially a non-learning RNN architecture consisting of neuron-like threshold elements. In 1972, Shun'ichi Amari made this architecture adaptive. His learning RNN was republished by John Hopfield in 1982. Other early recurrent neural networks were published by Kaoru Nakano in 1971. Already in 1948, Alan Turing produced work on "Intelligent Machinery" that was not published in his lifetime, containing "ideas related to artificial evolution and learning RNNs". Frank Rosenblatt (1958) proposed the perceptron, an MLP with 3 layers: an input layer, a hidden layer with randomized weights that did not learn, and an output layer. He later published a 1962 book that also introduced variants and computer experiments, including a version with four-layer perceptrons "with adaptive preterminal networks" where the last two layers have learned weights (here he credits H. D. Block and B. W. Knight). The book cites an earlier network by R. D. Joseph (1960) "functionally equivalent to a variation of" this four-layer system (the book mentions Joseph over 30 times). Should Joseph therefore be considered the originator of proper adaptive multilayer perceptrons with learning hidden units? Unfortunately, the learning algorithm was not a functional one, and fell into oblivion. The first working deep learning algorithm was the Group method of data handling, a method to train arbitrarily deep neural networks, published by Alexey Ivakhnenko and Lapa in 1965. They regarded it as a form of polynomial regression, or a generalization of Rosenblatt's perceptron to handle more complex, nonlinear, and hierarchical relationships. A 1971 paper described a deep network with eight layers trained by this method, which is based on layer by layer training through regression analysis. Superfluous hidden units are pruned using a separate validation set. Since the activation functions of the nodes are Kolmogorov-Gabor polynomials, these were also the first deep networks with multiplicative units or "gates". The first deep learning multilayer perceptron trained by stochastic gradient descent was published in 1967 by Shun'ichi

  Read more →
• 

  DONE

  The Data-based Online Nonlinear Extremumseeker (DONE) algorithm is a black-box optimization algorithm. DONE models the unknown cost function and attempts to find an optimum of the underlying function. The DONE algorithm is suitable for optimizing costly and noisy functions and does not require derivatives. An advantage of DONE over similar algorithms, such as Bayesian optimization, is that the computational cost per iteration is independent of the number of function evaluations. == Methods == The DONE algorithm was first proposed by Hans Verstraete and Sander Wahls in 2015. The algorithm fits a surrogate model based on random Fourier features and then uses a well-known L-BFGS algorithm to find an optimum of the surrogate model. == Applications == DONE was first demonstrated for maximizing the signal in optical coherence tomography measurements, but has since then been applied to various other applications. For example, it was used to help extending the field of view in light sheet fluorescence microscopy.

  Read more →
• 

  Anyword

  Anyword is a technology company that offers an artificial intelligence platform, using natural language processing to generate and optimize marketing text for websites, social media, email, and ads. The company also offers a complete managed service to publishers and brands to help them increase their revenue through social ads. It is used by National Geographic, Red Bull, The New York Times, BBC, Ted Baker, etc. The company has an office in New York, and Tel Aviv. == History == It was founded in 2013 — its original name was Keywee Inc. In March 2015, Anyword received $9.1 million in the Series A funding round led by a notable group of investors. In July 2016, the company was selected as an official Facebook Marketing Partner. In August 2019, Anyword was named Best Content Marketing Platform in the Digiday Technology Award winners. In November 2021, it raised $21 million in its Series B funding round.

  Read more →
• 

  Weak stability boundary

  Weak stability boundary (WSB), including low-energy transfer, is a concept introduced by Edward Belbruno in 1987. The concept explained how a spacecraft could change orbits using very little fuel. Weak stability boundary is defined for the three-body problem. This problem considers the motion of a particle P of negligible mass moving with respect to two larger bodies, P1, P2, modeled as point masses, where these bodies move in circular or elliptical orbits with respect to each other, and P2 is smaller than P1. The force between the three bodies is the classical Newtonian gravitational force. For example, P1 is the Earth, P2 is the Moon and P is a spacecraft; or P1 is the Sun, P2 is Jupiter and P is a comet, etc. This model is called the restricted three-body problem. The weak stability boundary defines a region about P2 where P is temporarily captured. This region is in position-velocity space. Capture means that the Kepler energy between P and P2 is negative. This is also called weak capture. == Background == This boundary was defined for the first time by Edward Belbruno of Princeton University in 1987. He described a Low-energy transfer which would allow a spacecraft to change orbits using very little fuel. It was for motion about Moon (P2) with P1 = Earth. It is defined algorithmically by monitoring cycling motion of P about the Moon and finding the region where cycling motion transitions between stable and unstable after one cycle. Stable motion means P can completely cycle about the Moon for one cycle relative to a reference section, starting in weak capture. P needs to return to the reference section with negative Kepler energy. Otherwise, the motion is called unstable, where P does not return to the reference section within one cycle or if it returns, it has non-negative Kepler energy. The set of all transition points about the Moon comprises the weak stability boundary, W. The motion of P is sensitive or chaotic as it moves about the Moon within W. A mathematical proof that the motion within W is chaotic was given in 2004. This is accomplished by showing that the set W about an arbitrary body P2 in the restricted three-body problem contains a hyperbolic invariant set of fractional dimension consisting of the infinitely many intersections Hyperbolic manifolds. The weak stability boundary was originally referred to as the fuzzy boundary. This term was used since the transition between capture and escape defined in the algorithm is not well defined and limited by the numerical accuracy. This defines a "fuzzy" location for the transition points. It is also due the inherent chaos in the motion of P near the transition points. It can be thought of as a fuzzy chaos region. As is described in an article in Discover magazine, the WSB can be roughly viewed as the fuzzy edge of a region, referred to as a gravity well, about a body (the Moon), where its force of gravity becomes small enough to be dominated by force of gravity of another body (the Earth) and the motion there is chaotic. A much more general algorithm defining W was given in 2007. It defines W relative to n-cycles, where n = 1,2,3,..., yielding boundaries of order n. This gives a much more complex region consisting of the union of all the weak stability boundaries of order n. This definition was explored further in 2010. The results suggested that W consists, in part, of the hyperbolic network of invariant manifolds associated to the Lyapunov orbits about the L1, L2 Lagrange points near P2. The explicit determination of the set W about P2 = Jupiter, where P1 is the Sun, is described in "Computation of Weak Stability Boundaries: Sun-Jupiter Case". It turns out that a weak stability region can also be defined relative to the larger mass point, P1. A proof of the existence of the weak stability boundary about P1 was given in 2012, but a different definition is used. The chaos of the motion is analytically proven in "Geometry of Weak Stability Boundaries". The boundary is studied in "Applicability and Dynamical Characterization of the Associated Sets of the Algorithmic Weak Stability Boundary in the Lunar Sphere of Influence". == Applications == There are a number of important applications for the weak stability boundary (WSB). Since the WSB defines a region of temporary capture, it can be used, for example, to find transfer trajectories from the Earth to the Moon that arrive at the Moon within the WSB region in weak capture, which is called ballistic capture for a spacecraft. No fuel is required for capture in this case. This was numerically demonstrated in 1987. This is the first reference for ballistic capture for spacecraft and definition of the weak stability boundary. The boundary was operationally demonstrated to exist in 1991 when it was used to find a ballistic capture transfer to the Moon for Japan's Hiten spacecraft. Other missions have used the same transfer type as Hiten, including Grail, Capstone, Danuri, Hakuto-R Mission 1 and SLIM. The WSB for Mars is studied in "Earth-Mars Transfers with Ballistic Capture" and ballistic capture transfers to Mars are computed. The BepiColombo mission of ESA should achieve ballistic capture at the WSB of Mercury in November 2026. The WSB region can be used in the field of Astrophysics. It can be defined for stars within open star clusters. This is done in "Chaotic Exchange of Solid Material Between Planetary Systems: Implications for the Lithopanspermia Hypothesis" to analyze the capture of solid material that may have arrived on the Earth early in the age of the Solar System to study the validity of the lithopanspermia hypothesis. Numerical explorations of trajectories for P starting in the WSB region about P2 show that after the particle P escapes P2 at the end of weak capture, it moves about the primary body, P1, in a near resonant orbit, in resonance with P2 about P1. This property was used to study comets that move in orbits about the Sun in orbital resonance with Jupiter, which change resonance orbits by becoming weakly captured by Jupiter. An example of such a comet is 39P/Oterma. This property of change of resonance of orbits about P1 when P is weakly captured by the WSB of P2 has an interesting application to the field of quantum mechanics to the motion of an electron about the proton in a hydrogen atom. The transition motion of an electron about the proton between different energy states described by the Schrödinger equation is shown to be equivalent to the change of resonance of P about P1 via weak capture by P2 for a family of transitioning resonance orbits. This gives a classical model using chaotic dynamics with Newtonian gravity for the motion of an electron.

  Read more →
• 

  NCAA transfer portal

  The NCAA transfer portal is a National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) application, database, and compliance tool that facilitates student athletes' transfers between member institutions. It is intended to bring greater transparency to the transfer process and to enable student athletes to publicize their desire to transfer. The transfer portal is an NCAA-wide database covering all three NCAA divisions, although most media coverage of the transfer portal involves its use in the top-level Division I (D-I). The portal launched on October 15, 2018. Regulations adopted in 2021 allowed student-athletes in D-I football, men's and women's basketball, men's ice hockey, and baseball to transfer schools using the portal once without sitting out a year. In 2024, the NCAA authorized athletes unlimited transfers. == Process == For Divisions I and II, once an athlete desiring to transfer informs their school; the school must enter the athlete's name in the database within two business days. Then coaches and staff from other universities may contact the athlete about potentially transferring. Before the January 2026 NCAA convention, Division III schools were allowed, but not required, to enter such a student into the portal. A proposal to require use of the portal in that division was approved at the convention. The timeline for D-III members to enter athletes into the portal differs from that of the other divisions. Athletes wishing to enter the portal must first complete an educational module. Once completed, the school has seven calendar days to enter the athlete's transfer request into the portal. == Transfer windows == On August 31, 2022, the D-I board adopted a series of changes to transfer rules, introducing the concept of transfer windows, similar to those used in professional soccer worldwide. Student-athletes who wish to take advantage of the one-time transfer rule must, under normal circumstances, enter the portal within a designated window for their sport. These windows are slightly different for each NCAA sport, but are broadly grouped by the NCAA's three athletic "seasons". At that time, the windows were as follows: Fall sports – A 45-day winter window opening the day after championship selections are made in that sport, and a spring window from May 1–15. According to the NCAA, "reasonable accommodations" would be made for participants in football's FBS and FCS championship games (respectively the College Football Playoff National Championship and Division I Football Championship Game), both of which take place in early January. Participants in those games had a 14-day window opening on the day after the championship game, as well as the spring window. Winter sports – A 60-day window opening the day after championship selections are made in that sport. Spring sports – A winter window from December 1–15, and a 45-day spring window opening the day after championship selections are made in that sport. For sports included in the NCAA Emerging Sports for Women program, transfer windows are the same as those for fully recognized NCAA sports. As with fully recognized NCAA sports, transfer windows linked to championship events open on the day after selections are made for the generally recognized championship events in emerging sports. Student-athletes whose athletic aid is reduced, canceled, or not renewed by their school, as well as those affected by a university's elimination of a sports team, may enter the transfer portal at any time without penalty. A slightly different exception applies to those undergoing a head coaching change; student-athletes so affected in sports other than Division I football can enter the portal within 30 days of the change, starting on the day after the coach's departure is announced. The coaching change window also applied to Division I football before October 2025. Less than a month after transfer windows were adopted, the Division I Council adopted a change that affected only graduate transfers. Student-athletes who are set to graduate with remaining athletic eligibility, and plan to continue competition as postgraduate students, were exempt from transfer windows. They could enter the portal at any time during the academic year, and were not subject to the standard deadlines of May 1 for fall and winter sports and July 1 for spring sports. In April 2024, graduate transfers became subject to the same deadlines as all other transfer students. This change did not affect windows for student-athletes affected by a head coaching change, a loss of athletic aid, or the discontinuation of a team. Because the Ivy League allows neither redshirting nor athletic participation by graduate students, athletes at its member schools who are set to complete four years of attendance but still have remaining athletic eligibility may enter the portal at any time during their fourth academic year of attendance. In October 2024, the Division I Council reduced transfer windows in football and basketball to a total of 30 days. For FBS and FCS football, the fall window opened for 20 days, starting on the Monday after FBS conference championship games. Participants in postseason play had a 5-day window that opened on the day after each team's final game. A 10-day spring window opened in mid-April. In men's and women's basketball, a single 30-day window opens on the day after the second round of each Division I tournament concludes. The existing exceptions regarding head coaching changes, a loss of athletic aid, or the discontinuation of a team remained in place. Almost exactly a year later, Division I adopted more significant changes to the football transfer portal for both FBS and FCS. The previous two windows were abolished and replaced by a single window that opens from January 2–16. Participants in the College Football Playoff National Championship—the only game in FBS or FCS played after the closure of the new window—receive a 5-day window that opens on the day after that game. The window for players undergoing a head coaching change was also reduced. A new window of 15 days opens five calendar days after the hiring or public announcement of a new head coach. Should a school fail to hire or publicly announce a new head coach within 30 days after the previous coach's departure, the window will open on the 31st day after departure, provided that the 31st day is no earlier than January 3. This particular window, also open for 15 days, may open at any time before June 30. No change was announced to the exceptions for those affected by a loss of athletic aid or the discontinuation of a team. == Impact on high school recruiting == Effective July 1, 2025, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors implemented new DI roster limits following the court-approved House settlement. Additionally, according to the NCAA, "NCAA rules for Division I programs will no longer include sport-specific scholarship limits." As a result, many top Division I programs, especially those in power conferences, are relying heavily on the transfer portal to bring in conference- and national-level student-athletes. This shift in recruiting focus has already been exemplified across Division I men's and women's track and field especially, beginning in the recruitment cycle for 2025 college entries. Track and field coaches formerly managing rosters of 120-plus (60-plus men and 60-plus women) are now limited to 45 per side for a total of 90 roster spots across men's and women's track and field, meaning they are recruiting fewer student-athletes out of high school and more immediately impactful scholarship-worthy student-athletes via the transfer portal. Roster limits for track and field teams are even more stringent in the Southeastern Conference (SEC): 35 men and 35 women. For high school track and field athletes seeking opportunities with top DI programs, they no longer need to display potential to be point-scorers, but demonstrate the ability to contribute immediately, often by competing at a level aligned with conference scoring standards.

  Read more →
• 

  Recommender system

  A recommender system, also called a recommendation algorithm, recommendation engine, or recommendation platform, is a type of information filtering system that suggests items most relevant to a particular user. The value of these systems becomes particularly evident in scenarios where users must select from a large number of options, such as products, media, or content. Major social media platforms and streaming services rely on recommender systems that employ machine learning to analyze user behavior and preferences, thereby enabling personalized content feeds. Typically, the suggestions refer to a variety decision-making processes, including the selection of a product, musical selection, or online news source to read. The implementation of recommender systems is pervasive, with commonly recognised examples including the generation of playlist for video and music services, the provision of product recommendations for e-commerce platforms, and the recommendation of content on social media platforms and the open web. These systems can operate using a single type of input, such as music, or multiple inputs from diverse platforms, including news, books and search queries. Additionally, popular recommender systems have been developed for specific topics, such as restaurants and online dating services. Recommender systems have also been developed to explore research articles and experts, collaborators, and financial services. A content discovery platform is a software recommendation platform that employs recommender system tools. It utilizes user metadata in order to identify and suggest relevant content, whilst reducing ongoing maintenance and development costs. A content discovery platform delivers personalized content to websites, mobile devices, and set-top boxes. A large range of content discovery platforms currently exist for various forms of content ranging from news articles and academic journal articles to television. As operators compete to serve as the gateway to home entertainment, personalized television emerges as a key service differentiator. Academic content discovery has recently become another area of interest, the emergence of numerous companies dedicated to assisting academic researchers in keeping up to date with relevant academic content and facilitating serendipitous discovery of new content. == Overview == Recommender systems usually make use of either or both collaborative filtering and content-based filtering, as well as other systems such as knowledge-based systems. Collaborative filtering approaches build a model from a user's past behavior (e.g., items previously purchased or selected and/or numerical ratings given to those items) as well as similar decisions made by other users. This model is then used to predict items (or ratings for items) that the user may have an interest in. Content-based filtering approaches utilize a series of discrete, pre-tagged characteristics of an item in order to recommend additional items with similar properties. === Example === The differences between collaborative and content-based filtering can be demonstrated by comparing two early music recommender systems, Last.fm and Pandora Radio. We can also look at how these methods are applied in e-commerce, for example, on platforms like Amazon. Last.fm creates a "station" of recommended songs by observing what bands and individual tracks the user has listened to on a regular basis and comparing those against the listening behavior of other users. Last.fm will play tracks that do not appear in the user's library, but are often played by other users with similar interests. As this approach leverages the behavior of users, it is an example of a collaborative filtering technique. Pandora uses the properties of a song or artist (a subset of the 450 attributes provided by the Music Genome Project) to seed a "station" that plays music with similar properties. User feedback is used to refine the station's results, deemphasizing certain attributes when a user "dislikes" a particular song and emphasizing other attributes when a user "likes" a song. This is an example of a content-based approach. In e-commerce, Amazon's well-known "customers who bought X also bought Y" feature is a prime example of collaborative filtering. It also uses content-based filtering when it recommends a book by the same author you've previously read or a pair of shoes in a similar style to ones you've viewed. Each type of system has its strengths and weaknesses. In the above example, Last.fm requires a large amount of information about a user to make accurate recommendations. This is an example of the cold start problem, and is common in collaborative filtering systems. Whereas Pandora needs very little information to start, it is far more limited in scope (for example, it can only make recommendations that are similar to the original seed). === Alternative implementations === Recommender systems are a useful alternative to search algorithms since they help users discover items they might not have found otherwise. Of note, recommender systems are often implemented using search engines indexing non-traditional data. In some cases, like in the Gonzalez v. Google Supreme Court case, may argue that search and recommendation algorithms are different technologies. Recommender systems have been the focus of several granted patents, and there are more than 50 software libraries that support the development of recommender systems including LensKit, RecBole, ReChorus and RecPack. == History == Elaine Rich created the first recommender system in 1979, called Grundy. She looked for a way to recommend users books they might like. Her idea was to create a system that asks users specific questions and classifies them into classes of preferences, or "stereotypes", depending on their answers. Depending on users' stereotype membership, they would then get recommendations for books they might like. Another early recommender system, called a "digital bookshelf", was described in a 1990 technical report by Jussi Karlgren at Columbia University, and implemented at scale and worked through in technical reports and publications from 1994 onwards by Jussi Karlgren, then at SICS, and research groups led by Pattie Maes at MIT, Will Hill at Bellcore, and Paul Resnick, also at MIT, whose work with GroupLens was awarded the 2010 ACM Software Systems Award. Montaner provided the first overview of recommender systems from an intelligent agent perspective. Adomavicius provided a new, alternate overview of recommender systems. Herlocker provides an additional overview of evaluation techniques for recommender systems, and Beel et al. discussed the problems of offline evaluations. Beel et al. have also provided literature surveys on available research paper recommender systems and existing challenges. == Approaches == === Collaborative filtering === One approach to the design of recommender systems that has wide use is collaborative filtering. Collaborative filtering is based on the assumption that people who agreed in the past will agree in the future, and that they will like similar kinds of items as they liked in the past. The system generates recommendations using only information about rating profiles for different users or items. By locating peer users/items with a rating history similar to the current user or item, they generate recommendations using this neighborhood. This approach is a cornerstone for e-commerce sites that analyze the purchasing patterns of thousands of users to suggest what you might like. Collaborative filtering methods are classified as memory-based and model-based. A well-known example of memory-based approaches is the user-based algorithm, while that of model-based approaches is matrix factorization (recommender systems). A key advantage of the collaborative filtering approach is that it does not rely on machine analyzable content and therefore it is capable of accurately recommending complex items such as movies without requiring an "understanding" of the item itself. Many algorithms have been used in measuring user similarity or item similarity in recommender systems. For example, the k-nearest neighbor (k-NN) approach and the Pearson Correlation as first implemented by Allen. When building a model from a user's behavior, a distinction is often made between explicit and implicit forms of data collection. Examples of explicit data collection include the following: Asking a user to rate an item on a sliding scale. Asking a user to search. Asking a user to rank a collection of items from favorite to least favorite. Presenting two items to a user and asking him/her to choose the better one of them. Asking a user to create a list of items that he/she likes (see Rocchio classification or other similar techniques). Examples of implicit data collection include the following: Observing the items that a user views in an online store, media library, or other repository of med

  Read more →
• 

  Geospatial metadata

  Geospatial metadata (also geographic metadata) is a type of metadata applicable to geographic data and information. Such objects may be stored in a geographic information system (GIS) or may simply be documents, data-sets, images or other objects, services, or related items that exist in some other native environment but whose features may be appropriate to describe in a (geographic) metadata catalog (may also be known as a data directory or data inventory). == Definition == ISO 19115:2013 "Geographic Information – Metadata" from ISO/TC 211, the industry standard for geospatial metadata, describes its scope as follows: [This standard] provides information about the identification, the extent, the quality, the spatial and temporal aspects, the content, the spatial reference, the portrayal, distribution, and other properties of digital geographic data and services. ISO 19115:2013 also provides for non-digital mediums: Though this part of ISO 19115 is applicable to digital data and services, its principles can be extended to many other types of resources such as maps, charts, and textual documents as well as non-geographic data. The U.S. Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) describes geospatial metadata as follows: A metadata record is a file of information, usually presented as an XML document, which captures the basic characteristics of a data or information resource. It represents the who, what, when, where, why and how of the resource. Geospatial metadata commonly document geographic digital data such as Geographic Information System (GIS) files, geospatial databases, and earth imagery but can also be used to document geospatial resources including data catalogs, mapping applications, data models and related websites. Metadata records include core library catalog elements such as Title, Abstract, and Publication Data; geographic elements such as Geographic Extent and Projection Information; and database elements such as Attribute Label Definitions and Attribute Domain Values. == History == The growing appreciation of the value of geospatial metadata through the 1980s and 1990s led to the development of a number of initiatives to collect metadata according to a variety of formats either within agencies, communities of practice, or countries/groups of countries. For example, NASA's "DIF" metadata format was developed during an Earth Science and Applications Data Systems Workshop in 1987, and formally approved for adoption in 1988. Similarly, the U.S. FGDC developed its geospatial metadata standard over the period 1992–1994. The Spatial Information Council of Australia and New Zealand (ANZLIC), a combined body representing spatial data interests in Australia and New Zealand, released version 1 of its "metadata guidelines" in 1996. ISO/TC 211 undertook the task of harmonizing the range of formal and de facto standards over the approximate period 1999–2002, resulting in the release of ISO 19115 "Geographic Information – Metadata" in 2003 and a subsequent revision in 2013. As of 2011 individual countries, communities of practice, agencies, etc. have started re-casting their previously used metadata standards as "profiles" or recommended subsets of ISO 19115, occasionally with the inclusion of additional metadata elements as formal extensions to the ISO standard. The growth in popularity of Internet technologies and data formats, such as Extensible Markup Language (XML) during the 1990s led to the development of mechanisms for exchanging geographic metadata on the web. In 2004, the Open Geospatial Consortium released the current version (3.1) of Geography Markup Language (GML), an XML grammar for expressing geospatial features and corresponding metadata. With the growth of the Semantic Web in the 2000s, the geospatial community has begun to develop ontologies for representing semantic geospatial metadata. Some examples include the Hydrology and Administrative ontologies developed by the Ordnance Survey in the United Kingdom. == ISO 19115: Geographic information – Metadata == ISO 19115 is a standard of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). The standard is part of the ISO geographic information suite of standards (19100 series). ISO 19115 and its parts define how to describe geographical information and associated services, including contents, spatial-temporal purchases, data quality, access and rights to use. The objective of this International Standard is to provide a clear procedure for the description of digital geographic data-sets so that users will be able to determine whether the data in a holding will be of use to them and how to access the data. By establishing a common set of metadata terminology, definitions and extension procedures, this standard promotes the proper use and effective retrieval of geographic data. ISO 19115 was revised in 2013 to accommodate growing use of the internet for metadata management, as well as add many new categories of metadata elements (referred to as codelists) and the ability to limit the extent of metadata use temporally or by user. == ISO 19139 Geographic information Metadata XML schema implementation == ISO 19139:2012 provides the XML implementation schema for ISO 19115 specifying the metadata record format and may be used to describe, validate, and exchange geospatial metadata prepared in XML. The standard is part of the ISO geographic information suite of standards (19100 series), and provides a spatial metadata XML (spatial metadata eXtensible Mark-up Language (smXML)) encoding, an XML schema implementation derived from ISO 19115, Geographic information – Metadata. The metadata includes information about the identification, constraint, extent, quality, spatial and temporal reference, distribution, lineage, and maintenance of the digital geographic data-set. == Metadata directories == Also known as metadata catalogues or data directories. (need discussion of, and subsections on GCMD, FGDC metadata gateway, ASDD, European and Canadian initiatives, etc. etc.) GIS Inventory – National GIS Inventory System which is maintained by the US-based National States Geographic Information Council (NSGIC) as a tool for the entire US GIS Community. Its primary purpose is to track data availability and the status of geographic information system (GIS) implementation in state and local governments to aid the planning and building of statewide spatial data infrastructures (SSDI). The Random Access Metadata for Online Nationwide Assessment (RAMONA) database is a critical component of the GIS Inventory. RAMONA moves its FGDC-compliant metadata (CSDGM Standard) for each data layer to a web folder and a Catalog Service for the Web (CSW) that can be harvested by Federal programs and others. This provides far greater opportunities for discovery of user information. The GIS Inventory website was originally created in 2006 by NSGIC under award NA04NOS4730011 from the Coastal Services Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. The Department of Homeland Security has been the principal funding source since 2008 and they supported the development of the Version 5 during 2011/2012 under Order Number HSHQDC-11-P-00177. The Federal Emergency Management Agency and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have provided additional resources to maintain and improve the GIS Inventory. Some US Federal programs require submission of CSDGM-Compliant Metadata for data created under grants and contracts that they issue. The GIS Inventory provides a very simple interface to create the required Metadata. GCMD - Global Change Master Directory's goal is to enable users to locate and obtain access to Earth science data sets and services relevant to global change and Earth science research. The GCMD database holds more than 20,000 descriptions of Earth science data sets and services covering all aspects of Earth and environmental sciences. ECHO - The EOS Clearing House (ECHO) is a spatial and temporal metadata registry, service registry, and order broker. It allows users to more efficiently search and access data and services through the Reverb Client or Application Programmer Interfaces (APIs). ECHO stores metadata from a variety of science disciplines and domains, totalling over 3400 Earth science data sets and over 118 million granule records. GoGeo - GoGeo is a service run by EDINA (University of Edinburgh) and is supported by Jisc. GoGeo allows users to conduct geographically targeted searches to discover geospatial datasets. GoGeo searches many data portals from the HE and FE community and beyond. GoGeo also allows users to create standards compliant metadata through its Geodoc metadata editor. == Geospatial metadata tools == There are many proprietary GIS or geospatial products that support metadata viewing and editing on GIS resources. For example, ESRI's ArcGIS Desktop, SOCET GXP, Autodesk's AutoCAD Map 3D 2008, Arcitecta's Mediaflux and Intergraph's Geo

  Read more →