AI Generator Girl Image

AI Generator Girl Image — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Fabric Connect

Fabric Connect, in computer networking usage, is the name used by Extreme Networks to market an extended implementation of the IEEE 802.1aq and IEEE 802.1ah-2008 standards. The Fabric Connect technology was originally developed by the Enterprise Solutions R&D department within Nortel Networks. In 2009, Avaya, Inc acquired Nortel Networks Enterprise Business Solutions; this transaction included the Fabric Connect intellectual property together with all of the Ethernet Switching platforms that supported it. Subsequently, the Fabric Connect technology became part of the Extreme Networks portfolio by virtue of their 2017 purchase of the Avaya Networking business and assets. It was during the Avaya era that this technology was promoted as the lead element of the Virtual Enterprise Network Architecture (VENA). == Technologies == === Fabric Connect === Fabric Connect's provides network-wide, end-to-end, multi-layer virtualization. A network virtualization capability, based on an enhanced implementation of the IEEE 802.1aq Shortest Path Bridging (SPB) standard, Fabric Connect offers the ability to create a simplified network that can dynamically virtualize elements to efficiently provision and utilize resources, thus reducing the strain on the network and personnel. Extreme Networks base the Fabric Connect technology on the SPB standard, including support for RFC 6329, and have integrated IP Routing and IP Multicast support; this unified technology allows for the replacement of multiple conventional protocols such as Spanning Tree, RIP and/or OSPF, ECMP, and PIM. === Fabric Attach === An adjunct to the Fabric Connect technology, Fabric Attach allows network operators to extend network virtualization directly into conventional wiring closets (using existing non-Fabric Ethernet switches) and automate the provisioning of devices to their appropriate virtual network. This is particularly relevant for the mass of unattended network end-point that are now appearing, such as IP Phones, Wireless Access Points, and IP Cameras. Fabric Attach standardized protocols such as 802.1AB LLDP to exchange credentials and obtain provisioning information that allows "Client" Switches to be automatically re-configured on the fly with parameters that let Traffic Flows Map through to Fabric Connect Edge Switches (aka "Backbone Edge Bridge" in SPB definition) functioning as a Fabric Attach "Server" Switch. This method is described by an IETF "Internet Draft", pending further standardization activity. Fabric Attach is typically used to automate Wiring Closet connectivity, but has the potential to be extensible for use in the Data Center, with Virtual Machines being able to dynamically request VLAN/VSN (Virtual Service Network) assignment based upon application requirements. == Hardware products == === Virtual Services Platform 9000 Series === A range of modular chassis-based products, featuring a carrier-grade Linux operation system, and designed for high-performance deployment scenarios that need to scale to multiple terabits of switching capacity and support 10 and 40 gigabit Ethernet connections, and is designed eventually to support 100 gigabit Ethernet. === Virtual Services Platform 8000 Series === A compact form-factor platform delivering high-density 10/40 gigabit Ethernet connectivity, and targeted at mid-market through to mid-size enterprise core switch applications. === Virtual Services Platform 7000 Series === A range of high-end 10 gigabit Ethernet stackable switches that extend fabric-based networking to the data center top-of-rack. They support 40 gigabit Ethernet via the MDA Slot. === Virtual Services Platform 4000 Series === A range of high-end gigabit Ethernet stackable switches that extend Fabric-based networking to branch and metro locations. === Ethernet Routing Switch 5000 Series === A range of high-end gigabit Ethernet stackable switches that provides enterprise-class desktop features, including PoE, and offers 10 Gbit/s uplink connections. Each Switch supports up to 144 Gbit/s of virtual backplane capacity, delivering up to 1.152 Tbit/s for a system of eight, creating a virtual backplane through a stacking configuration. === Ethernet Routing Switch 4000 Series === A range of gigabit Ethernet stackable switches that provide enterprise-class desktop features, including PoE/PoE+, and offer 1/10 Gbit/s uplink connections. Each switch supports up to 48 Gbit/s of virtual backplane capacity, delivering up to 384 Gbit/s for a system of 8, creating a virtual backplane through a stacking configuration. === Ethernet Routing Switch 3500 Series === These entry-level gigabit Ethernet stackable switches provide enterprise-class desktop features, including PoE/PoE+, and 1 Gbit/s uplink connections.
Read more →
Alexander Gammerman

Alexander Gammerman (born 2 November 1944) is a British computer scientist, and professor at Royal Holloway University of London. He is the co-inventor of conformal prediction. He is the founding director of the Centre for Machine Learning at Royal Holloway, University of London, and a Fellow of the Royal Statistical Society. == Career == Gammerman's academic career has been pursued in the Soviet Union and the United Kingdom. He started working as a Research Fellow in the Agrophysical Research Institute, St. Petersburg. In 1983, he emigrated to the United Kingdom and was appointed as a lecturer in the Computer Science Department at Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh. Together with Roger Thatcher, Gammerman published several articles on Bayesian inference. In 1993, he was appointed to the established chair in Computer Science at University of London tenable at Royal Holloway and Bedford New College, where he served as the Head of Computer Science department from 1995 to 2005. In 1998, the Centre for Reliable Machine Learning was established, and Gammerman became the first director of the centre. Gammerman has written 7 books. == Honours and awards == In 1996, Gammerman received the P.W. Allen Award from the Forensic Science Society. In 2006, he became an Honorary Professor, at University College London. In 2009, he became a Distinguished Professor at Complutense University of Madrid, Spain. In 2019, he received a research grant funded by the energy company Centrica about predicting the time to the next failure of equipment. In 2020, he received the Amazon Research Award for the project titled Conformal Martingales for Change-Point Detection == Selected books == Measures of Complexity (2016), Springer, ISBN 3319357786. Algorithmic Learning in a Random World (2005), Springer, ISBN 0387001522. Causal Models and Intelligent Data Management (1999), Springer, ISBN 978-3-642-58648-4. Probabilistic Reasoning and Bayesian Belief Networks (1998), Nelson Thornes Ltd, ISBN 1872474268. Computational Learning and Probabilistic Reasoning (1996), Wiley, ISBN 0471962791.
Read more →
AI Paraphrasing Tools Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

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

In the theory of computation, a generalized nondeterministic finite automaton (GNFA), also known as an expression automaton or a generalized nondeterministic finite state machine, is a variation of a nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA) where each transition is labeled with any regular expression. The GNFA reads blocks of symbols from the input which constitute a string as defined by the regular expression on the transition. There are several differences between a standard finite state machine and a generalized nondeterministic finite state machine. A GNFA must have only one start state and one accept state, and these cannot be the same state, whereas an NFA or DFA both may have several accept states, and the start state can be an accept state. A GNFA must have only one transition between any two states, whereas a NFA or DFA both allow for numerous transitions between states. In a GNFA, a state has a single transition to every state in the machine, although often it is a convention to ignore the transitions that are labelled with the empty set when drawing generalized nondeterministic finite state machines. == Formal definition == A GNFA can be defined as a 5-tuple, (S, Σ, T, s, a), consisting of a finite set of states (S); a finite set called the alphabet (Σ); a transition function (T : (S ∖ {\displaystyle \setminus } {a}) × (S ∖ {\displaystyle \setminus } {s}) → R); a start state (s ∈ S); an accept state (a ∈ S); where R is the collection of all regular expressions over the alphabet Σ. The transition function takes as its argument a pair of two states and outputs a regular expression (the label of the transition). This differs from other finite state machines, which take as input a single state and an input from the alphabet (or the empty string in the case of nondeterministic finite state machines) and outputs the next state (or the set of possible states in the case of nondeterministic finite state machines). A DFA or NFA can easily be converted into a GNFA and then the GNFA can be easily converted into a regular expression by repeatedly collapsing parts of it to single edges until S = {s, a}. Similarly, GNFAs can be reduced to NFAs by changing regular expression operators into new edges until each edge is labelled with a regular expression matching a single string of length at most 1. NFAs, in turn, can be reduced to DFAs using the powerset construction. This shows that GNFAs recognize the same set of formal languages as DFAs and NFAs.
Read more →
SQLBuddy

SQL Buddy is an open-source web-based application primarily coded in PHP, that allows users to control both MySQL and SQLite database through a web browser. The project was well regarded for its easy installation process and the friendly user interface it offered. The application was further praised for its cross-platform compatibility, meaning users could manage their databases on various operating systems, including Linux, Windows, and macOS. The development of SQL Buddy has stopped, with version 1.3.3 being the final release on January 18, 2011. No further releases are expected.
Read more →
AI Subtitle Generators: Free vs Paid (2026)

Looking for the best AI subtitle generator? An AI subtitle generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it can save you hours every week by automating repetitive work. Most options offer a generous free tier, with paid plans unlocking higher limits, faster processing, and team features. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI subtitle generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.
Read more →
AI Text-to-image Tools Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

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

Candace Lee (Candy) Sidner is an American computer scientist whose research has applied artificial intelligence and natural language processing to problems in personal information management, intelligent user interfaces, and human–robot interaction. She is a research professor of computer science at the Worcester Polytechnic Institute, and a former president of the Association for Computational Linguistics. == Education and career == Sidner majored in mathematics at Kalamazoo College, graduating in 1971. She earned a master's degree in computer science at the University of Pittsburgh in 1975, and completed a Ph.D. in computer science in 1979 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Her dissertation, Towards A Computational Theory of Definite Anaphora Comprehension in English Discourse, was supervised by Jonathan Allen. She worked as a researcher for Bolt Beranek and Newman from 1979 to 1989, and continued to work in industry for the Digital Equipment Corporation (1989 to 1993), the Lotus Development Corporation (1993 to 2000), Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories (2000 to 2007), and BAE Systems (2007 to 2010). She took her present position as a research professor at the Worcester Polytechnic Institute in 2009. She served as president of the Association for Computational Linguistics in 1989. == Recognition == Sidner was named a Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence in 1991. In 2013, she was named a Fellow of the Association for Computational Linguistics, "for seminal contributions to discourse focus and collaborative dialog".
Read more →
Play Integrity API

Play Integrity API (formerly known as SafetyNet) consists of several application programming interfaces (APIs) offered by the Google Play Services to support security sensitive applications and enforce DRM. Currently, these APIs include device integrity verification, app verification, recaptcha and web address verification. It uses an environment called DroidGuard to perform the attestation. == Attestation == The SafetyNet Attestation API, one of the APIs under the SafetyNet umbrella, provides verification that the integrity of the device is not compromised. In practice, non-official ROMs such as LineageOS fail the hardware attestation and thus prevent the user from using a non-compliant ROM with third-party apps (mainly banking) that require the API. Due to this, some consider this a monopolistic practice deterring the entrance of competing mobile operating systems in the market. It requires a network connection to Google servers and validates the hardware signatures. Amongst the checks, the API looks for bootloader unlock status, ROM signatures, kernel strings, it also uses AVB2.0 and dm-verity attestations. Upon successful checks, Google Play will mark the device as Certified. The attestation runs in an environment called DroidGuard (com.google.android.gms.unstable). The SafetyNet Attestation API (one of the four APIs under the SafetyNet umbrella) has been deprecated. As of 6 October 2023, Google planned to replace it with the Play Integrity API by the end of January 2025. The transition ended on 20 May 2025, breaking applications which hadn't been updated. These attestations are offered by Google Play Services and thus are not available on free Android environments, like AOSP. Therefore, developers can require the API to be available and may refuse to execute on AOSP builds. == Google Play Protect == Under the same umbrella, Play Protect is a mechanism to find and remove "vulnerable" apps from one's Android device as well as store apps. Although it's meant to scan for malware-containing apps, it also looks for non-DRM compliant apps. == Criticism == Multiple groups have criticised SafetyNet and the Play Integrity API. Criticisms include that it offers weaker protection compared to alternatives such as Android's hardware attestation API, which provides a stronger form of verification while having the ability to remain compatible with more secure Android operating systems like GrapheneOS. Critics argued it undermines competition by effectively requiring developers to rely on Google's proprietary services, strengthening its monopoly over the Android ecosystem and disadvantaging alternative, privacy-focused operating systems. Users have also developed tools, such as the Play Integrity Fix module for Magisk/KernelSU/APatch, which tricks the attestation using leaked fingerprints of vulnerable devices. Furthermore, some have questioned the effectiveness of the attestation, claiming it does not deliver the level of security promised by Google and instead serves more as a form of vendor lock-in than a meaningful security measure. Activists have also raised concerns that it may violate antitrust and competition laws, like the Digital Markets Act.
Read more →
Sequential minimal optimization

Sequential minimal optimization (SMO) is an algorithm for solving the quadratic programming (QP) problem that arises during the training of support-vector machines (SVM). It was invented by John Platt in 1998 at Microsoft Research. SMO is widely used for training support vector machines and is implemented by the popular LIBSVM tool. The publication of the SMO algorithm in 1998 has generated a lot of excitement in the SVM community, as previously available methods for SVM training were much more complex and required expensive third-party QP solvers. == Optimization problem == Consider a binary classification problem with a dataset (x1, y1), ..., (xn, yn), where xi is an input vector and yi ∈ {-1, +1} is a binary label corresponding to it. A soft-margin support vector machine is trained by solving a quadratic programming problem, which is expressed in the dual form as follows: max α ∑ i = 1 n α i − 1 2 ∑ i = 1 n ∑ j = 1 n y i y j K ( x i , x j ) α i α j , {\displaystyle \max _{\alpha }\sum _{i=1}^{n}\alpha _{i}-{\frac {1}{2}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}\sum _{j=1}^{n}y_{i}y_{j}K(x_{i},x_{j})\alpha _{i}\alpha _{j},} subject to: 0 ≤ α i ≤ C , for i = 1 , 2 , … , n , {\displaystyle 0\leq \alpha _{i}\leq C,\quad {\mbox{ for }}i=1,2,\ldots ,n,} ∑ i = 1 n y i α i = 0 {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}y_{i}\alpha _{i}=0} where C is an SVM hyperparameter and K(xi, xj) is the kernel function, both supplied by the user; and the variables α i {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}} are Lagrange multipliers. == Algorithm == SMO is an iterative algorithm for solving the optimization problem described above. SMO breaks this problem into a series of smallest possible sub-problems, which are then solved analytically. Because of the linear equality constraint involving the Lagrange multipliers α i {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}} , the smallest possible problem involves two such multipliers. Then, for any two multipliers α 1 {\displaystyle \alpha _{1}} and α 2 {\displaystyle \alpha _{2}} , the constraints are reduced to: 0 ≤ α 1 , α 2 ≤ C , {\displaystyle 0\leq \alpha _{1},\alpha _{2}\leq C,} y 1 α 1 + y 2 α 2 = k , {\displaystyle y_{1}\alpha _{1}+y_{2}\alpha _{2}=k,} and this reduced problem can be solved analytically: one needs to find a minimum of a one-dimensional quadratic function. k {\displaystyle k} is the negative of the sum over the rest of terms in the equality constraint, which is fixed in each iteration. The algorithm proceeds as follows: Find a Lagrange multiplier α 1 {\displaystyle \alpha _{1}} that violates the Karush–Kuhn–Tucker (KKT) conditions for the optimization problem. Pick a second multiplier α 2 {\displaystyle \alpha _{2}} and optimize the pair ( α 1 , α 2 ) {\displaystyle (\alpha _{1},\alpha _{2})} . Repeat steps 1 and 2 until convergence. When all the Lagrange multipliers satisfy the KKT conditions (within a user-defined tolerance), the problem has been solved. Although this algorithm is guaranteed to converge, heuristics are used to choose the pair of multipliers so as to accelerate the rate of convergence. This is critical for large data sets since there are n ( n − 1 ) / 2 {\displaystyle n(n-1)/2} possible choices for α i {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}} and α j {\displaystyle \alpha _{j}} . == Related work == The first approach to splitting large SVM learning problems into a series of smaller optimization tasks was proposed by Bernhard Boser, Isabelle Guyon, and Vladimir Vapnik. It is known as the "chunking algorithm". The algorithm starts with a random subset of the data, solves this problem, and iteratively adds examples which violate the optimality conditions. One disadvantage of this algorithm is that it is necessary to solve QP-problems scaling with the number of SVs. On real world sparse data sets, SMO can be more than 1000 times faster than the chunking algorithm. In 1997, E. Osuna, R. Freund, and F. Girosi proved a theorem which suggests a whole new set of QP algorithms for SVMs. By the virtue of this theorem a large QP problem can be broken down into a series of smaller QP sub-problems. A sequence of QP sub-problems that always add at least one violator of the Karush–Kuhn–Tucker (KKT) conditions is guaranteed to converge. The chunking algorithm obeys the conditions of the theorem, and hence will converge. The SMO algorithm can be considered a special case of the Osuna algorithm, where the size of the optimization is two and both Lagrange multipliers are replaced at every step with new multipliers that are chosen via good heuristics. The SMO algorithm is closely related to a family of optimization algorithms called Bregman methods or row-action methods. These methods solve convex programming problems with linear constraints. They are iterative methods where each step projects the current primal point onto each constraint.
Read more →
Is an AI Video Generator Worth It in 2026?

Curious about the best AI video generator? An AI video generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI video generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.
Read more →
DFA minimization

In automata theory (a branch of theoretical computer science), DFA minimization is the task of transforming a given deterministic finite automaton (DFA) into an equivalent DFA that has a minimum number of states. Here, two DFAs are called equivalent if they recognize the same regular language. Several different algorithms accomplishing this task are known and described in standard textbooks on automata theory. == Minimal DFA == For each regular language, there also exists a minimal automaton that accepts it, that is, a DFA with a minimum number of states and this DFA is unique (except that states can be given different names). The minimal DFA ensures minimal computational cost for tasks such as pattern matching. There are three classes of states that can be removed or merged from the original DFA without affecting the language it accepts. Unreachable states are the states that are not reachable from the initial state of the DFA, for any input string. These states can be removed. Dead states are the states from which no final state is reachable. These states can be removed unless the automaton is required to be complete. Nondistinguishable states are those that cannot be distinguished from one another for any input string. These states can be merged. DFA minimization is usually done in three steps: remove dead and unreachable states (this will accelerate the following step), merge nondistinguishable states, optionally, re-create a single dead state ("sink" state) if the resulting DFA is required to be complete. == Unreachable states == The state p {\displaystyle p} of a deterministic finite automaton M = ( Q , Σ , δ , q 0 , F ) {\displaystyle M=(Q,\Sigma ,\delta ,q_{0},F)} is unreachable if no string w {\displaystyle w} in Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} exists for which p = δ ∗ ( q 0 , w ) {\displaystyle p=\delta ^{}(q_{0},w)} . In this definition, Q {\displaystyle Q} is the set of states, Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is the set of input symbols, δ {\displaystyle \delta } is the transition function (mapping a state and an input symbol to a set of states), δ ∗ {\displaystyle \delta ^{}} is its extension to strings (also known as extended transition function), q 0 {\displaystyle q_{0}} is the initial state, and F {\displaystyle F} is the set of accepting (also known as final) states. Reachable states can be obtained with the following algorithm: Assuming an efficient implementation of the state sets (e.g. new_states) and operations on them (such as adding a state or checking whether it is present), this algorithm can be implemented with time complexity O ( n + m ) {\displaystyle O(n+m)} , where n {\displaystyle n} is the number of states and m {\displaystyle m} is the number of transitions of the input automaton. Unreachable states can be removed from the DFA without affecting the language that it accepts. == Nondistinguishable states == The following algorithms present various approaches to merging nondistinguishable states. === Hopcroft's algorithm === One algorithm for merging the nondistinguishable states of a DFA, due to Hopcroft (1971), is based on partition refinement, partitioning the DFA states into groups by their behavior. These groups represent equivalence classes of the Nerode congruence, whereby every two states are equivalent if they have the same behavior for every input sequence. That is, for every two states p1 and p2 that belong to the same block of the partition P, and every input word w, the transitions determined by w should always take states p1 and p2 to either states that both accept or states that both reject. It should not be possible for w to take p1 to an accepting state and p2 to a rejecting state or vice versa. The following pseudocode describes the form of the algorithm as given by Xu. Alternative forms have also been presented. The algorithm starts with a partition that is too coarse: every pair of states that are equivalent according to the Nerode congruence belong to the same set in the partition, but pairs that are inequivalent might also belong to the same set. It gradually refines the partition into a larger number of smaller sets, at each step splitting sets of states into pairs of subsets that are necessarily inequivalent. The initial partition is a separation of the states into two subsets of states that clearly do not have the same behavior as each other: the accepting states and the rejecting states. The algorithm then repeatedly chooses a set A from the current partition and an input symbol c, and splits each of the sets of the partition into two (possibly empty) subsets: the subset of states that lead to A on input symbol c, and the subset of states that do not lead to A. Since A is already known to have different behavior than the other sets of the partition, the subsets that lead to A also have different behavior than the subsets that do not lead to A. When no more splits of this type can be found, the algorithm terminates. Lemma. Given a fixed character c and an equivalence class Y that splits into equivalence classes B and C, only one of B or C is necessary to refine the whole partition. Example: Suppose we have an equivalence class Y that splits into equivalence classes B and C. Suppose we also have classes D, E, and F; D and E have states with transitions into B on character c, while F has transitions into C on character c. By the Lemma, we can choose either B or C as the distinguisher, let's say B. Then the states of D and E are split by their transitions into B. But F, which doesn't point into B, simply doesn't split during the current iteration of the algorithm; it will be refined by other distinguisher(s). Observation. All of B or C is necessary to split referring classes like D, E, and F correctly—subsets won't do. The purpose of the outermost if statement (if Y is in W) is to patch up W, the set of distinguishers. We see in the previous statement in the algorithm that Y has just been split. If Y is in W, it has just become obsolete as a means to split classes in future iterations. So Y must be replaced by both splits because of the Observation above. If Y is not in W, however, only one of the two splits, not both, needs to be added to W because of the Lemma above. Choosing the smaller of the two splits guarantees that the new addition to W is no more than half the size of Y; this is the core of the Hopcroft algorithm: how it gets its speed, as explained in the next paragraph. The worst case running time of this algorithm is O(ns log n), where n is the number of states and s is the size of the alphabet. This bound follows from the fact that, for each of the ns transitions of the automaton, the sets drawn from Q that contain the target state of the transition have sizes that decrease relative to each other by a factor of two or more, so each transition participates in O(log n) of the splitting steps in the algorithm. The partition refinement data structure allows each splitting step to be performed in time proportional to the number of transitions that participate in it. This remains the most efficient algorithm known for solving the problem, and for certain distributions of inputs its average-case complexity is even better, O(n log log n). Once Hopcroft's algorithm has been used to group the states of the input DFA into equivalence classes, the minimum DFA can be constructed by forming one state for each equivalence class. If S is a set of states in P, s is a state in S, and c is an input character, then the transition in the minimum DFA from the state for S, on input c, goes to the set containing the state that the input automaton would go to from state s on input c. The initial state of the minimum DFA is the one containing the initial state of the input DFA, and the accepting states of the minimum DFA are the ones whose members are accepting states of the input DFA. === Moore's algorithm === Moore's algorithm for DFA minimization is due to Edward F. Moore (1956). Like Hopcroft's algorithm, it maintains a partition that starts off separating the accepting from the rejecting states, and repeatedly refines the partition until no more refinements can be made. At each step, it replaces the current partition with the coarsest common refinement of s + 1 partitions, one of which is the current one and the rest of which are the preimages of the current partition under the transition functions for each of the input symbols. The algorithm terminates when this replacement does not change the current partition. Its worst-case time complexity is O(n2s): each step of the algorithm may be performed in time O(ns) using a variant of radix sort to reorder the states so that states in the same set of the new partition are consecutive in the ordering, and there are at most n steps since each one but the last increases the number of sets in the partition. The instances of the DFA minimization problem that cause the worst-case behavior are the same as for Hopcroft's algorithm. The number of steps th
Read more →
ElabFTW

eLabFTW is a web application written by Nicolas Carpi in PHP which can be used to create personal and common logbooks. It has been developed at the Curie Institute originally. Besides there, it is used on universities around the world eLabFTW is licensed under the GNU Affero General Public License as free software. It is translated into seven languages. == Description == eLabFTW is a free and open-source lab book. It is written in PHP and uses a MySQL database. Docker containers are also available. Among the various features are Secure. Entries and transmission are encrypted Timestamps. RFC 3161 compliant timestamping of experiments. Inventory management. Apart from experience logs, it also can manage the inventory Import and export. Entries can be imported and exported == Platforms == eLabFTW is a PHP package with Mysql database. Therefore, it can be executed on most servers. Furthermore, the docker containers allow to run it almost everywhere. == Usage == eLabFTW is used by various universities, like University of Alberta, Berkeley University, Hanover Medical School, Cardiff University and UMC Utrecht
Read more →
The Best Free AI Image Generator for Beginners

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

A machine translation system developed at the University of Texas and at Siemens which ran on Lisp Machines. == Background == Originally titled the Linguistics Research System (LRS), it was later renamed METAL (Mechanical Translation and Analysis of Languages). It started life as a German-English system funded by the USAF. == 1980 == A copy of the Weidner Multi-Lingual Word Processing software was requested by the German Government for the Siemens Corporation of Germany in September 1980 and was nicknamed the Siemens-Weidner Engine (originally English-German). This revolutionary multilingual word processing engine became foundational in the development of the Metal MT project, according to John White of the Siemens Corporation. After the Metal MT, development Rights to the Siemens-Weidner Engine were sold to a Belgium company, Lernout & Hauspie. The Siemens copy of the Weidner Multilingual Word Processing software has since been acquired through the purchase of assets of Lernout & Hauspie by Bowne Global Solutions, Inc., which was later acquired by Lionbridge Technologies, Inc. and is demonstrated in their itranslator software.
Read more →