AI Grammar Maker Free

AI Grammar Maker Free — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Coherent extrapolated volition

Coherent extrapolated volition (CEV) is a theoretical framework in the field of AI alignment describing an approach by which an artificial superintelligence (ASI) would act on a benevolent supposition of what humans would want if they were more knowledgeable, more rational, had more time to think, and had matured together as a society, as opposed to humanity's current individual or collective preferences. It was proposed by Eliezer Yudkowsky in 2004 as part of his work on friendly AI. == Concept == CEV proposes that an advanced AI system should derive its goals by extrapolating the idealized volition of humanity. This means aggregating and projecting human preferences into a coherent utility function that reflects what people would desire under ideal epistemic and moral conditions. The aim is to ensure that AI systems are aligned with humanity's true interests, rather than with transient or poorly informed preferences. In poetic terms, our coherent extrapolated volition is our wish if we knew more, thought faster, were more the people we wished we were, had grown up farther together; where the extrapolation converges rather than diverges, where our wishes cohere rather than interfere; extrapolated as we wish that extrapolated, interpreted as we wish that interpreted. == Debate == Yudkowsky and Nick Bostrom note that CEV has several interesting properties. It is designed to be humane and self-correcting, by capturing the source of human values instead of trying to list them. It avoids the difficulty of laying down an explicit, fixed list of rules. It encapsulates moral growth, preventing flawed current moral beliefs from getting locked in. It limits the influence that a small group of programmers can have on what the ASI would value, thus also reducing the incentives to build ASI first. And it keeps humanity in charge of its destiny. CEV also faces significant theoretical and practical challenges. Bostrom notes that CEV has "a number of free parameters that could be specified in various ways, yielding different versions of the proposal." One such parameter is the extrapolation base (whose extrapolated volition is taken into account). For example, whether it should include people with severe dementia, patients in a vegetative state, foetuses, or embryos. He also notes that if CEV's extrapolation base only includes humans, there is a risk that the result would be ungenerous toward other animals and digital minds. One possible solution would be to include a mechanism to expand CEV's extrapolation base. == Variants and alternatives == A proposed theoretical alternative to CEV is to rely on an artificial superintelligence's superior cognitive capabilities to figure out what is morally right, and let it act accordingly. It is also possible to combine both techniques, for instance with the ASI following CEV except when it is morally impermissible. In another review, a philosophical analysis explores CEV through the lens of social trust in autonomous systems. Drawing on Anthony Giddens' concept of "active trust", the author proposes an evolution of CEV into "Coherent, Extrapolated and Clustered Volition" (CECV). This formulation aims to better reflect the moral preferences of diverse cultural groups, thus offering a more pragmatic ethical framework for designing AI systems that earn public trust while accommodating societal diversity.
Read more →
OpenAI Five

OpenAI Five is a computer program by OpenAI that plays the five-on-five video game Dota 2. Its first public appearance occurred in 2017, where it was demonstrated in a live one-on-one game against the professional player Dendi, who lost to it. The following year, the system had advanced to the point of performing as a full team of five, and began playing against and showing the capability to defeat professional teams. By choosing a game as complex as Dota 2 to study machine learning, OpenAI thought they could more accurately capture the unpredictability and continuity seen in the real world, thus constructing more general problem-solving systems. The algorithms and code used by OpenAI Five were eventually borrowed by another neural network in development by the company, one which controlled a physical robotic hand. OpenAI Five has been compared to other similar cases of artificial intelligence (AI) playing against and defeating humans, such as AlphaStar in the video game StarCraft II, AlphaGo in the board game Go, Deep Blue in chess, and Watson on the television game show Jeopardy!. == History == Development on the algorithms used for the bots began in November 2016. OpenAI decided to use Dota 2, a competitive five-on-five video game, as a base due to it being popular on the live streaming platform Twitch, having native support for Linux, and had an application programming interface (API) available. Before becoming a team of five, the first public demonstration occurred at The International 2017 in August, the annual premiere championship tournament for the game, where Dendi, a Ukrainian professional player, lost against an OpenAI bot in a live one-on-one matchup. After the match, CTO Greg Brockman explained that the bot had learned by playing against itself for two weeks of real time, and that the learning software was a step in the direction of creating software that can handle complex tasks "like being a surgeon". OpenAI used a methodology called reinforcement learning, as the bots learn over time by playing against itself hundreds of times a day for months, in which they are rewarded for actions such as killing an enemy and destroying towers. By June 2018, the ability of the bots expanded to play together as a full team of five and were able to defeat teams of amateur and semi-professional players. At The International 2018, OpenAI Five played in two games against professional teams, one against the Brazilian-based paiN Gaming and the other against an all-star team of former Chinese players. Although the bots lost both matches, OpenAI still considered it a successful venture, stating that playing against some of the best players in Dota 2 allowed them to analyze and adjust their algorithms for future games. The bots' final public demonstration occurred in April 2019, where they won a best-of-three series against The International 2018 champions OG at a live event in San Francisco. A four-day online event to play against the bots, open to the public, occurred the same month. There, the bots played in 42,729 public games, winning 99.4% of those games. == Architecture == Each OpenAI Five bot is a neural network containing a single layer with a 4096-unit LSTM that observes the current game state extracted from the Dota developer's API. The neural network conducts actions via numerous possible action heads (no human data involved), and every head has meaning. For instance, the number of ticks to delay an action, what action to select – the X or Y coordinate of this action in a grid around the unit. In addition, action heads are computed independently. The AI system observes the world as a list of 20,000 numbers and takes an action by conducting a list of eight enumeration values. Also, it selects different actions and targets to understand how to encode every action and observe the world. OpenAI Five has been developed as a general-purpose reinforcement learning training system on the "Rapid" infrastructure. Rapid consists of two layers: it spins up thousands of machines and helps them 'talk' to each other and a second layer runs software. By 2018, OpenAI Five had played around 180 years worth of games in reinforcement learning running on 256 GPUs and 128,000 CPU cores, using Proximal Policy Optimization, a policy gradient method. == Comparisons with other game AI systems == Prior to OpenAI Five, other AI versus human experiments and systems have been successfully used before, such as Jeopardy! with Watson, chess with Deep Blue, and Go with AlphaGo. In comparison with other games that have used AI systems to play against human players, Dota 2 differs as explained below: Long run view: The bots run at 30 frames per second for an average match time of 45 minutes, which results in 80,000 ticks per game. OpenAI Five observes every fourth frame, generating 20,000 moves. By comparison, chess usually ends before 40 moves, while Go ends before 150 moves. Partially observed state of the game: Players and their allies can only see the map directly around them. The rest of it is covered in a fog of war which hides enemies units and their movements. Thus, playing Dota 2 requires making inferences based on this incomplete data, as well as predicting what their opponent could be doing at the same time. By comparison, Chess and Go are "full-information games", as they do not hide elements from the opposing player. Continuous action space: Each playable character in a Dota 2 game, known as a hero, can take dozens of actions that target either another unit or a position. The OpenAI Five developers allow the space into 170,000 possible actions per hero. Without counting the perpetual aspects of the game, there are an average of ~1,000 valid actions each tick. By comparison, the average number of actions in chess is 35 and 250 in Go. Continuous observation space: Dota 2 is played on a large map with ten heroes, five on each team, along with dozens of buildings and non-player character (NPC) units. The OpenAI system observes the state of a game through developers' bot API, as 20,000 numbers that constitute all information a human is allowed to get access to. A chess board is represented as about 70 lists, whereas a Go board has about 400 enumerations. == Reception == OpenAI Five have received acknowledgement from the AI, tech, and video game community at large. Microsoft founder Bill Gates called it a "big deal", as their victories "required teamwork and collaboration". Chess champion Garry Kasparov, who lost against the Deep Blue AI in 1997, stated that despite their losing performance at The International 2018, the bots would eventually "get there, and sooner than expected". In a conversation with MIT Technology Review, AI experts also considered OpenAI Five system as a significant achievement, as they noted that Dota 2 was an "extremely complicated game", so even beating non-professional players was impressive. PC Gamer wrote that their wins against professional players was a significant event in machine learning. In contrast, Motherboard wrote that the victory was "basically cheating" due to the simplified hero pools on both sides, as well as the fact that bots were given direct access to the API, as opposed to using computer vision to interpret pixels on the screen. The Verge wrote that the bots were evidence that the company's approach to reinforcement learning and its general philosophy about AI was "yielding milestones". In 2019, DeepMind unveiled a similar bot for StarCraft II, AlphaStar. Like OpenAI Five, AlphaStar used reinforcement learning and self-play. The Verge reported that "the goal with this type of AI research is not just to crush humans in various games just to prove it can be done. Instead, it's to prove that — with enough time, effort, and resources — sophisticated AI software can best humans at virtually any competitive cognitive challenge, be it a board game or a modern video game." They added that the DeepMind and OpenAI victories were also a testament to the power of certain uses of reinforcement learning. It was OpenAI's hope that the technology could have applications outside of the digital realm. In 2018, they were able to reuse the same reinforcement learning algorithms and training code from OpenAI Five for Dactyl, a human-like robot hand with a neural network built to manipulate physical objects. In 2019, Dactyl solved the Rubik's Cube.
Read more →
Richard S. Sutton

Richard Stuart Sutton (born 1957 or 1958) is a Canadian computer scientist. He is a professor of computing science at the University of Alberta, fellow & Chief Scientific Advisor at the Alberta Machine Intelligence Institute, and a research scientist at Keen Technologies. Sutton is considered one of the founders of modern computational reinforcement learning. In particular, he contributed to temporal difference learning and policy gradient methods. He received the 2024 Turing Award with Andrew Barto. == Education and early life == Richard Sutton was born in either 1957 or 1958 in Toledo, Ohio, and grew up in Oak Brook, Illinois, a suburb of Chicago, United States. Sutton received his Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree in psychology from Stanford University in 1978 before taking a Master of Science (1980) and PhD (1984) in computer science from the University of Massachusetts Amherst supervised by Andrew Barto. His doctoral dissertation introduced actor-critic architectures and temporal credit assignment. He was influenced by Harry Klopf's work in the 1970s, which proposed that supervised learning is insufficient for AI or explaining intelligent behavior, and trial-and-error learning, driven by "hedonic aspects of behavior", is necessary. This focused his interest to reinforcement learning. == Career and research == Sutton held a postdoctoral research position at the University of Massachusetts Amherst in 1984. He worked at GTE Laboratories in Waltham, Massachusetts as principal member of technical staff from 1985 to 1994, then returned to the University of Massachusetts Amherst as a senior research scientist. He joined AT&T Labs Shannon Laboratory in Florham Park, New Jersey as principal technical staff member from 1998 to 2002. He has been a professor of computing science at the University of Alberta since 2003, where he helped establish the Reinforcement Learning and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. In 2017 he became a distinguished research scientist with Google DeepMind and helped launch DeepMind Alberta in Edmonton, a research office operated in close collaboration with the University of Alberta. 1984: Postdoctoral researcher, University of Massachusetts Amherst (Amherst, Massachusetts) 1985–1994: Principal member of technical staff, Computer and Intelligent Systems Laboratory, GTE Laboratories (Waltham, Massachusetts) 1995–1998: Senior research scientist, University of Massachusetts Amherst (Amherst, Massachusetts) 1998–2002: Principal technical staff member, Artificial Intelligence Department, AT&T Labs Shannon Laboratory (Florham Park, New Jersey) 2003–present: Professor of computing science, University of Alberta (Edmonton, Alberta) 2017–2023: Distinguished research scientist, DeepMind Alberta, Google DeepMind (Edmonton, Alberta) 2024–Present: Research scientist, Keen Technologies === Reinforcement learning === Sutton joined Andrew Barto in the early 1980s at UMass, trying to explore the behavior of neurons in the human brain as the basis for human intelligence, a concept that had been advanced by computer scientist A. Harry Klopf. Sutton and Barto used mathematics toward furthering the concept and using it as the basis for artificial intelligence. This concept became known as reinforcement learning and went on to becoming a key part of artificial intelligence techniques. Barto and Sutton used Markov decision processes (MDP) as the mathematical foundation to explain how agents (algorithmic entities) made decisions when in a stochastic or random environment, receiving rewards at the end of every action. Traditional MDP theory assumed the agents knew all information about the MDPs in their attempt toward maximizing their cumulative rewards. Barto and Sutton's reinforcement learning techniques allowed for both the environment and the rewards to be unknown, and thus allowed for these category of algorithms to be applied to a wide array of problems. Sutton returned to Canada in the 2000s and continued working on the topic which continued to develop in academic circles until one of its first major real world applications saw Google's AlphaGo program built on this concept defeating the then prevailing human champion. Barto and Sutton have widely been credited and accepted as pioneers of modern reinforcement learning, with the technique itself being foundational to the AI boom. In a 2019 essay, Sutton proposed the "bitter lesson", which criticized the field of AI research for failing to learn that "building in how we think we think does not work in the long run", arguing that "70 years of AI research [had shown] that general methods that leverage computation are ultimately the most effective, and by a large margin", beating efforts building on human knowledge about specific fields like computer vision, speech recognition, chess or Go. Sutton argues that large language models aren’t capable of learning on-the-job, and so new model architectures are required to enable continual learning. Sutton further argues that a special training phase will be unnecessary — the agent will learn on-the-fly, rendering large language models obsolete. In 2023, Sutton and John Carmack announced a partnership for the development of artificial general intelligence (AGI). === Awards and honors === Sutton has been a Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) since 2001; his nomination read: "For significant contributions to many topics in machine learning, including reinforcement learning, temporal difference techniques, and neural networks." In 2003, he received the President's Award from the International Neural Network Society and in 2013, the Outstanding Achievement in Research award from the University of Massachusetts Amherst. He received the 2024 Turing Award from the Association for Computing Machinery together with Andrew Barto; the citation of the award read: "For developing the conceptual and algorithmic foundations of reinforcement learning." In 2016, Sutton was elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. In 2021, he was elected Fellow of the Royal Society (FRS) of London. === Research === Sutton introduced temporal-difference methods for prediction and control, establishing convergence properties and practical algorithms. He proposed integrated learning and planning through the Dyna architecture. He co-developed the options framework for temporal abstraction in reinforcement learning. He co-authored the first modern policy gradient formulation with function approximation. Sutton's essay The Bitter Lesson argued that general methods that scale with computation dominate domain-specific approaches in the long run. His former doctoral students include David Silver and Doina Precup. === Selected publications === His publications include: == Personal life == Sutton became a Canadian citizen in 2015, and his renunciation of US citizenship was reported in 2017.
Read more →
Aurora (supercomputer)

Aurora is an exascale supercomputer that was sponsored by the United States Department of Energy (DOE) and designed by Intel and Cray for Argonne National Laboratory. It was briefly the second fastest supercomputer in the world from November 2023 to June 2024. The cost was estimated in 2019 to be US$500 million. Olivier Franza is the chief architect and principal investigator of this design. == History == In 2013 DOE presented a proposal for an "exascale" supercomputer, capable of speeds in the neighborhood of 1 exaFLOP (1018 floating point mathematical operations per second) with a maximum power consumption of 20 megawatts (MW) by 2020. Aurora was first announced in 2015 and to be finished in 2018. It was expected to have a speed of 180 petaFLOPS which would be around the speed of Summit. Aurora was meant to be the most powerful supercomputer at the time of its launch and to be built by Cray with Intel processors. Later, in 2017, Intel announced that Aurora would be delayed to 2021 but scaled up to 1 exaFLOP. In March 2019, DOE said that it would build the first supercomputer with a performance of one exaFLOP in the United States in 2021. In October 2020, DOE said that Aurora would be delayed again for a further six months, and would no longer be the first exascale computer in the US. In late October 2021 Intel announced that Aurora would now exceed 2 exaFLOPS in peak double-precision compute – That claim however never was realized. The system was fully installed on June 22, 2023. In May 2024, Aurora appeared at number two on the Top500 supercomputer list, with a performance of 1.012 exaFLOPS, marking the second entry of an exascale capable system on the Top500. == Usage == Functions include research on brain structure, nuclear fusion, low carbon technologies, subatomic particles, cancer and cosmology. It will also develop new materials that will be useful for batteries and more efficient solar cells. It is to be available to the general scientific community. == Architecture == Aurora has 10,624 nodes, with each node being composed of two Intel Xeon Max processors, six Intel Max series GPUs and a unified memory architecture, providing a maximum computing power of 130 teraFLOPS per node. It has around 10 petabytes of memory and 230 petabytes of storage. The machine is stated to consume around 39 MW of power. For comparison, the fastest computer in the world today, El Capitan uses 30 MW, while another Top 500 System, Frontier uses 24 MW.
Read more →
Content determination

Content determination is the subtask of natural language generation (NLG) that involves deciding on the information to be communicated in a generated text. It is closely related to the task of document structuring. == Example == Consider an NLG system which summarises information about sick babies. Suppose this system has four pieces of information it can communicate The baby is being given morphine via an IV drop The baby's heart rate shows bradycardia's (temporary drops) The baby's temperature is normal The baby is crying Which of these bits of information should be included in the generated texts? == Issues == There are three general issues which almost always impact the content determination task, and can be illustrated with the above example. Perhaps the most fundamental issue is the communicative goal of the text, i.e. its purpose and reader. In the above example, for instance, a doctor who wants to make a decision about medical treatment would probably be most interested in the heart rate bradycardias, while a parent who wanted to know how her child was doing would probably be more interested in the fact that the baby was being given morphine and was crying. The second issue is the size and level of detail of the generated text. For instance, a short summary which was sent to a doctor as a 160 character SMS text message might only mention the heart rate bradycardias, while a longer summary which was printed out as a multipage document might also mention the fact that the baby is on a morphine IV. The final issue is how unusual and unexpected the information is. For example, neither doctors nor parents would place a high priority on being told that the baby's temperature was normal, if they expected this to be the case. Regardless, content determination is very important to users, indeed in many cases the quality of content determination is the most important factor (from the user's perspective) in determining the overall quality of the generated text. == Techniques == There are three basic approaches to document structuring: schemas (content templates), statistical approaches, and explicit reasoning. Schemas are templates which explicitly specify the content of a generated text (as well as document structuring information). Typically, they are constructed by manually analysing a corpus of human-written texts in the target genre, and extracting a content template from these texts. Schemas work well in practice in domains where content is somewhat standardised, but work less well in domains where content is more fluid (such as the medical example above). Statistical techniques use statistical corpus analysis techniques to automatically determine the content of the generated texts. Such work is in its infancy, and has mostly been applied to contexts where the communicative goal, reader, size, and level of detail are fixed. For example, generation of newswire summaries of sporting events. Explicit reasoning approaches have probably attracted the most attention from researchers. The basic idea is to use AI reasoning techniques (such as knowledge-based rules, planning, pattern detection, case-based reasoning, etc.) to examine the information available to be communicated (including how unusual/unexpected it is), the communicative goal and reader, and the characteristics of the generated text (including target size), and decide on the optimal content for the generated text. A very wide range of techniques has been explored, but there is no consensus as to which is most effective.
Read more →
IRCF360

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

Polythematic Structured Subject Heading System (abbreviated as PSH from the Czech Polytematický Strukturovaný Heslář) is a bilingual Czech–English controlled vocabulary of subject headings developed and maintained by the National Technical Library (the former State Technical Library) in Prague. It was designed for describing and searching information resources according to their subject. PSH contains more than 13,900 terms, which cover the main fields of human knowledge. Because of its release in SKOS, PSH can be used not only for describing documents in a library, but also for indexing web pages. Everyone can use PSH for free. PSH is a part of the Linked Open Data cloud diagram (LOD cloud diagram). The image of the LOD cloud diagram shows datasets that have been published in Linked Data format, by contributors to the Linked Open Data community project and other individuals and organisations. == History and development == The PSH preparation project started in 1993, supported by several grants from the Czech Ministry of Culture and Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport. Since 1995, PSH has been used for indexing the State Technical Library's documents. Starting 1997, PSH has been distributed to other libraries and companies, originally as a commercial, paid product; since 2009 for free. In 2000, the State Technical Library received a grant from the Ministry of Culture to translate PSH into English. The next milestone in its development was its releasing in the SKOS format, in 2009. The vast majority of new subject headings is suggested and approved by the indexing experts from the National Technical Library. However, the users and public can also make suggestions, using an online form, which are then assessed by the experts. The main decisions about the development and the future of PSH are done by the Committee for Coordination of Polythematic Structured Subject Heading System. The Committee consists of specialists from the National Technical Library and cooperating institutions, and representatives from the libraries and companies which use PSH. The Committee meets once a year in the National Technical Library; in the meantime, the members communicate using an electronic mailing list. == Browsing PSH == PSH Browser was released in June 2009. It serves for browsing the PSH system and its distribution in SKOS format. This tool navigates users through PSH from general to specific terms. Users can also use the Search field. PSH manager tool was released in 2012. It serves as an indexing tool especially to catalogers. Catalogers can easy orient in its clear structure. All the terms in PSH manager contain link to the catalogue of NTK. There can be also viewed the record in MARC21 format. == Autoindexing == In 2012 was released beta version of autoindexing application. It is accessible on Autoindexing. Users enter chosen text into indexing field and activate indexing. In few seconds the terms describing content are displayed. == PSH structure == PSH is a tree structure with 44 thematic sections. Subject headings are included in a hierarchy of six (or seven) levels according to their semantic content and specificity. There are hierarchical, associative ("see also") and equivalence ("see") relations in PSH. Hierarchical relations are represented by broader and narrower terms (e.g. physical diagnostic methods is broader term to electrocardiography, and on the other hand, electrocardiography is narrower term to physical diagnostic methods). Equivalence relations link subject headings with their nonpreferred versions (e.g. electrocardiography and ECG). Moreover, associative relations are used to link related subject headings from different parts of PSH, regardless their affiliation to a section, (e.g. electrocardiography: see also cardiology). Every subject heading belongs to just one section, which has its own two-character abbreviation, assigned to every subject heading of the section. This enables users to recognize affiliation of subject headings from lower levels to the thematic sections. The 44 thematic sections have following root nodes: == PSH formats == The main format for storage, maintenance and sharing PSH is the MARC 21 Format for Authority Data, which is implemented in library automated systems. PSH is also available in SKOS, using RDF/XML syntax, which is a version suitable for web distribution. Single headings can be accessed on the PSH website through URI links. Alternatively, the whole vocabulary can be downloaded in one file. It is possible to display tags from PSH (metadata snippets – Dublin Core and CommonTag), which can be embedded in an HTML document to provide its semantic description in a machine-readable way. == New subject headings == New subject headings are primarily obtained through the log analysis in the National Technical Library's on-line catalogue of documents, which are the terms used by end-users when searching various documents. Google Analytics service is now used for gaining search queries used by users. Within the data analysis, users queries are divided into seven categories that contain the title of the document, person, subject, action, institution, geographical terms and others. Then the candidates for new preferred terms and non-preferred terms are identified in the subject category. Users can suggest preferred or non-preferred terms through the web form or via e-mail psh(@)techlib.cz. == PSH and Creative Commons == PSH/SKOS has been available under the Creative Commons License CC BY 3.0 CZ (Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Czech Republic)since 2011. Users are free to copy, distribute, display and perform the work and make derivative works, but they must give the original author credit and if they alter, transform, or build upon this work, they have to distribute the resulting work only under a licence identical to this one. Users can download all data in one zip file, which is continuously updated.
Read more →
Richard S. Sutton

Richard Stuart Sutton (born 1957 or 1958) is a Canadian computer scientist. He is a professor of computing science at the University of Alberta, fellow & Chief Scientific Advisor at the Alberta Machine Intelligence Institute, and a research scientist at Keen Technologies. Sutton is considered one of the founders of modern computational reinforcement learning. In particular, he contributed to temporal difference learning and policy gradient methods. He received the 2024 Turing Award with Andrew Barto. == Education and early life == Richard Sutton was born in either 1957 or 1958 in Toledo, Ohio, and grew up in Oak Brook, Illinois, a suburb of Chicago, United States. Sutton received his Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree in psychology from Stanford University in 1978 before taking a Master of Science (1980) and PhD (1984) in computer science from the University of Massachusetts Amherst supervised by Andrew Barto. His doctoral dissertation introduced actor-critic architectures and temporal credit assignment. He was influenced by Harry Klopf's work in the 1970s, which proposed that supervised learning is insufficient for AI or explaining intelligent behavior, and trial-and-error learning, driven by "hedonic aspects of behavior", is necessary. This focused his interest to reinforcement learning. == Career and research == Sutton held a postdoctoral research position at the University of Massachusetts Amherst in 1984. He worked at GTE Laboratories in Waltham, Massachusetts as principal member of technical staff from 1985 to 1994, then returned to the University of Massachusetts Amherst as a senior research scientist. He joined AT&T Labs Shannon Laboratory in Florham Park, New Jersey as principal technical staff member from 1998 to 2002. He has been a professor of computing science at the University of Alberta since 2003, where he helped establish the Reinforcement Learning and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. In 2017 he became a distinguished research scientist with Google DeepMind and helped launch DeepMind Alberta in Edmonton, a research office operated in close collaboration with the University of Alberta. 1984: Postdoctoral researcher, University of Massachusetts Amherst (Amherst, Massachusetts) 1985–1994: Principal member of technical staff, Computer and Intelligent Systems Laboratory, GTE Laboratories (Waltham, Massachusetts) 1995–1998: Senior research scientist, University of Massachusetts Amherst (Amherst, Massachusetts) 1998–2002: Principal technical staff member, Artificial Intelligence Department, AT&T Labs Shannon Laboratory (Florham Park, New Jersey) 2003–present: Professor of computing science, University of Alberta (Edmonton, Alberta) 2017–2023: Distinguished research scientist, DeepMind Alberta, Google DeepMind (Edmonton, Alberta) 2024–Present: Research scientist, Keen Technologies === Reinforcement learning === Sutton joined Andrew Barto in the early 1980s at UMass, trying to explore the behavior of neurons in the human brain as the basis for human intelligence, a concept that had been advanced by computer scientist A. Harry Klopf. Sutton and Barto used mathematics toward furthering the concept and using it as the basis for artificial intelligence. This concept became known as reinforcement learning and went on to becoming a key part of artificial intelligence techniques. Barto and Sutton used Markov decision processes (MDP) as the mathematical foundation to explain how agents (algorithmic entities) made decisions when in a stochastic or random environment, receiving rewards at the end of every action. Traditional MDP theory assumed the agents knew all information about the MDPs in their attempt toward maximizing their cumulative rewards. Barto and Sutton's reinforcement learning techniques allowed for both the environment and the rewards to be unknown, and thus allowed for these category of algorithms to be applied to a wide array of problems. Sutton returned to Canada in the 2000s and continued working on the topic which continued to develop in academic circles until one of its first major real world applications saw Google's AlphaGo program built on this concept defeating the then prevailing human champion. Barto and Sutton have widely been credited and accepted as pioneers of modern reinforcement learning, with the technique itself being foundational to the AI boom. In a 2019 essay, Sutton proposed the "bitter lesson", which criticized the field of AI research for failing to learn that "building in how we think we think does not work in the long run", arguing that "70 years of AI research [had shown] that general methods that leverage computation are ultimately the most effective, and by a large margin", beating efforts building on human knowledge about specific fields like computer vision, speech recognition, chess or Go. Sutton argues that large language models aren’t capable of learning on-the-job, and so new model architectures are required to enable continual learning. Sutton further argues that a special training phase will be unnecessary — the agent will learn on-the-fly, rendering large language models obsolete. In 2023, Sutton and John Carmack announced a partnership for the development of artificial general intelligence (AGI). === Awards and honors === Sutton has been a Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) since 2001; his nomination read: "For significant contributions to many topics in machine learning, including reinforcement learning, temporal difference techniques, and neural networks." In 2003, he received the President's Award from the International Neural Network Society and in 2013, the Outstanding Achievement in Research award from the University of Massachusetts Amherst. He received the 2024 Turing Award from the Association for Computing Machinery together with Andrew Barto; the citation of the award read: "For developing the conceptual and algorithmic foundations of reinforcement learning." In 2016, Sutton was elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. In 2021, he was elected Fellow of the Royal Society (FRS) of London. === Research === Sutton introduced temporal-difference methods for prediction and control, establishing convergence properties and practical algorithms. He proposed integrated learning and planning through the Dyna architecture. He co-developed the options framework for temporal abstraction in reinforcement learning. He co-authored the first modern policy gradient formulation with function approximation. Sutton's essay The Bitter Lesson argued that general methods that scale with computation dominate domain-specific approaches in the long run. His former doctoral students include David Silver and Doina Precup. === Selected publications === His publications include: == Personal life == Sutton became a Canadian citizen in 2015, and his renunciation of US citizenship was reported in 2017.
Read more →
Ugly duckling theorem

The ugly duckling theorem is an argument showing that classification is not really possible without some sort of bias. More particularly, it assumes finitely many properties combinable by logical connectives, and finitely many objects; it asserts that any two different objects share the same number of (extensional) properties. The theorem is named after Hans Christian Andersen's 1843 story "The Ugly Duckling", because it shows that a duckling is just as similar to a swan as two swans are to each other. It was derived by Satosi Watanabe in 1969. == Mathematical formula == Suppose there are n things in the universe, and one wants to put them into classes or categories. One has no preconceived ideas or biases about what sorts of categories are "natural" or "normal" and what are not. So one has to consider all the possible classes that could be, all the possible ways of making a set out of the n objects. There are 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} such ways, the size of the power set of n objects. One can use that to measure the similarity between two objects, and one would see how many sets they have in common. However, one cannot. Any two objects have exactly the same number of classes in common if we can form any possible class, namely 2 n − 1 {\displaystyle 2^{n-1}} (half the total number of classes there are). To see this is so, one may imagine each class is represented by an n-bit string (or binary encoded integer), with a zero for each element not in the class and a one for each element in the class. As one finds, there are 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} such strings. As all possible choices of zeros and ones are there, any two bit-positions will agree exactly half the time. One may pick two elements and reorder the bits so they are the first two, and imagine the numbers sorted lexicographically. The first 2 n / 2 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/2} numbers will have bit #1 set to zero, and the second 2 n / 2 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/2} will have it set to one. Within each of those blocks, the top 2 n / 4 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/4} will have bit #2 set to zero and the other 2 n / 4 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/4} will have it as one, so they agree on two blocks of 2 n / 4 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/4} or on half of all the cases, no matter which two elements one picks. So if we have no preconceived bias about which categories are better, everything is then equally similar (or equally dissimilar). The number of predicates simultaneously satisfied by two non-identical elements is constant over all such pairs. Thus, some kind of inductive bias is needed to make judgements to prefer certain categories over others. === Boolean functions === Let x 1 , x 2 , … , x n {\displaystyle x_{1},x_{2},\dots ,x_{n}} be a set of vectors of k {\displaystyle k} booleans each. The ugly duckling is the vector which is least like the others. Given the booleans, this can be computed using Hamming distance. However, the choice of boolean features to consider could have been somewhat arbitrary. Perhaps there were features derivable from the original features that were important for identifying the ugly duckling. The set of booleans in the vector can be extended with new features computed as boolean functions of the k {\displaystyle k} original features. The only canonical way to do this is to extend it with all possible Boolean functions. The resulting completed vectors have 2 k {\displaystyle 2^{k}} features. The ugly duckling theorem states that there is no ugly duckling because any two completed vectors will either be equal or differ in exactly half of the features. Proof. Let x and y be two vectors. If they are the same, then their completed vectors must also be the same because any Boolean function of x will agree with the same Boolean function of y. If x and y are different, then there exists a coordinate i {\displaystyle i} where the i {\displaystyle i} -th coordinate of x {\displaystyle x} differs from the i {\displaystyle i} -th coordinate of y {\displaystyle y} . Now the completed features contain every Boolean function on k {\displaystyle k} Boolean variables, with each one exactly once. Viewing these Boolean functions as polynomials in k {\displaystyle k} variables over GF(2), segregate the functions into pairs ( f , g ) {\displaystyle (f,g)} where f {\displaystyle f} contains the i {\displaystyle i} -th coordinate as a linear term and g {\displaystyle g} is f {\displaystyle f} without that linear term. Now, for every such pair ( f , g ) {\displaystyle (f,g)} , x {\displaystyle x} and y {\displaystyle y} will agree on exactly one of the two functions. If they agree on one, they must disagree on the other and vice versa. (This proof is believed to be due to Watanabe.) == Discussion == A possible way around the ugly duckling theorem would be to introduce a constraint on how similarity is measured by limiting the properties involved in classification, for instance, between A and B. However Medin et al. (1993) point out that this does not actually resolve the arbitrariness or bias problem since in what respects A is similar to B: "varies with the stimulus context and task, so that there is no unique answer, to the question of how similar is one object to another". For example, "a barberpole and a zebra would be more similar than a horse and a zebra if the feature striped had sufficient weight. Of course, if these feature weights were fixed, then these similarity relations would be constrained". Yet the property "striped" as a weight 'fix' or constraint is arbitrary itself, meaning: "unless one can specify such criteria, then the claim that categorization is based on attribute matching is almost entirely vacuous". Stamos (2003) remarked that some judgments of overall similarity are non-arbitrary in the sense they are useful: "Presumably, people's perceptual and conceptual processes have evolved that information that matters to human needs and goals can be roughly approximated by a similarity heuristic... If you are in the jungle and you see a tiger but you decide not to stereotype (perhaps because you believe that similarity is a false friend), then you will probably be eaten. In other words, in the biological world stereotyping based on veridical judgments of overall similarity statistically results in greater survival and reproductive success." Unless some properties are considered more salient, or 'weighted' more important than others, everything will appear equally similar, hence Watanabe (1986) wrote: "any objects, in so far as they are distinguishable, are equally similar". In a weaker setting that assumes infinitely many properties, Murphy and Medin (1985) give an example of two putative classified things, plums and lawnmowers: "Suppose that one is to list the attributes that plums and lawnmowers have in common in order to judge their similarity. It is easy to see that the list could be infinite: Both weigh less than 10,000 kg (and less than 10,001 kg), both did not exist 10,000,000 years ago (and 10,000,001 years ago), both cannot hear well, both can be dropped, both take up space, and so on. Likewise, the list of differences could be infinite… any two entities can be arbitrarily similar or dissimilar by changing the criterion of what counts as a relevant attribute." According to Woodward, the ugly duckling theorem is related to Schaffer's Conservation Law for Generalization Performance, which states that all algorithms for learning of boolean functions from input/output examples have the same overall generalization performance as random guessing. The latter result is generalized by Woodward to functions on countably infinite domains.
Read more →
Allen's interval algebra

Allen's interval algebra is a calculus for temporal reasoning that was introduced by James F. Allen in 1983. The calculus defines possible relations between time intervals and provides a composition table that can be used as a basis for reasoning about temporal descriptions of events. == Formal description == === Relations === The following 13 base relations capture the possible relations between two intervals. To see that the 13 relations are exhaustive, note that each point of X {\displaystyle X} can be at 5 possible locations relative to Y {\displaystyle Y} : before, at the start, within, at the end, after. These give 5 + 4 + 3 + 2 + 1 = 15 {\displaystyle 5+4+3+2+1=15} possible relative positions for the start and the end of X {\displaystyle X} . Of these, we cannot have X 0 = X 1 = Y 0 {\displaystyle X_{0}=X_{1}=Y_{0}} since X 0 < X 1 {\displaystyle X_{0} Read more →
No Fakes Act

The NO FAKES Act or the Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe Act, is proposed United States federal legislation concerning digital replicas. The bill was first introduced in 2023 as a discussion draft, formally introduced in 2024, and reintroduced in 2025. If enacted, the bill would establish a federal right of publicity, giving public figures and private individuals greater control over the creation and use of digital replicas of their likenesses, including artificial intelligence (AI)-generated content. If passed, the NO FAKES Act would create a legal framework for licensing digital replicas, including provisions for liability, safe harbors, and statutory exceptions. The proposal has received broad support from the entertainment and technology industries. However, digital rights organizations have raised concerns that the Act risks chilling protected speech. == Background == === Entertainment industry concerns === Actors’ concerns over studios' use of their digital likeness were one of the primary drivers of the Screen Actors Guild–American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) strike in 2023. Negotiators for SAG-AFTRA alleged that the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) sought to use the digital likenesses of actors in perpetuity and would try to replace union members, especially background actors. The AMPTP denied SAG-AFTRA's interpretation of its proposal. In November 2023, AMPTP and SAG-AFTRA reached an agreement on the use of actors’ digital replicas, which included requirements for consent and compensation. Recording labels have also expressed concerns over unauthorized digital replicas of their performers' likeness. In 2023, TikTok user Ghostwriter977 released "Heart on My Sleeve," an AI-produced song in the styles of Drake and the Weeknd. After the song received millions of streams, the Universal Music Group (UMG) initiated takedown requests to TikTok and YouTube, which removed the song from their platforms. The legal arguments attorneys made were not disclosed; however, commentators noted that they likely used the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). This presented a novel scenario, since UMG did not have licensing rights to "Heart on My Sleeve." According to The Verge, UMG based its DMCA takedown request on an unauthorized sample used at the start of the song for the producer tag. While legal commentators noted that UMG could have asserted a violation of the artists’ rights of publicity, existing state right of publicity laws do not provide notice-and-takedown mechanisms comparable to those under the DMCA. === Legal landscape === Legal scholars have observed that AI-generated digital replicas raise questions under existing copyright and intellectual property law. U.S. copyright law generally requires that original authorship be attributable to a human; however, the extent of human intervention needed to satisfy this requirement is not clear. Copyright holders have filed lawsuits against AI companies alleging unauthorized usage of copyrighted material to train their models, though many of these cases remain pending. In terms of outputs, record labels often hold rights to artists’ musical works but do not necessarily control the artists’ voice, appearance, or likeness in the same way. As a result, AI-generated recordings such as "Heart on My Sleeve" may fall outside the scope of certain traditional copyright protections. Individuals' likenesses have historically been governed under the Lanham Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act, and right of publicity laws. The right of publicity, recognized in many state-level statutes and common law, allows individuals to bring legal claims against unauthorized commercial use of their identities. It has often, but not exclusively, been applied to celebrities or other recognizable individuals. There is no federal-level right to publicity, and state-level protections vary, especially on issues relating to digital replicas and posthumous rights, which makes it difficult for creators or other individuals to prevent unauthorized use of their likenesses. In July 2024, the U.S. Copyright Office released a report on digital replicas and recommended that Congress create a federal law to protect individuals from unauthorized uses of their digital replicas, noting the inadequacy, narrowness, and inconsistency of existing laws. == Provisions == Under the NO FAKES Act of 2025, a digital replica is defined as "a newly created, computer-generated, highly realistic electronic representation that is readily identifiable as the voice or visual likeness of an individual," living or dead. A digital replica can be embodied in sound recordings, images, or audiovisual works in which the individual did not perform or in which the individual did perform but the "fundamental character of the performance or appearance has been materially altered." The Act specifies that digital replicas do not include reproduced samples of works authorized by the copyright holder. The Act defines a "right holder" as either the individual who is the subject of a digital replica or an entity that has acquired the rights to that individual’s likeness. The Act grants right holders the exclusive right to authorize the use of an individual’s likeness in a digital replica. This right is not assignable during the individual’s lifetime; however, it can be licensed to a living individual for up to 10 years under certain conditions. Postmortem rights The Act provides that the right does not automatically expire upon an individual’s death. It may be transferred to executors, heirs, or other parties designated by the individual. The right is held by the right holder for 10 years following the individual’s death. If the right holder demonstrates active use of the digital replica within the 2 years preceding the end of the 10-year term, the right may be extended for an additional 5-year period. These five-year extensions may be renewed for up to 70 years after the individual’s death. Liability The Act establishes liability for individuals who knowingly distribute a digital replica without authorization from the right holder, as well as for entities that make available a service primarily designed to produce unlawful digital replicas. Safe harbor provisions Similar to the Communications Decency Act and the DMCA, the Act establishes safe harbor provisions for online service providers. Providers are shielded from liability if they adopt and inform users of a policy for terminating accounts that repeatedly violate the Act. The NO FAKES Act does not require online services to proactively monitor content. Instead, it creates a notice-and-takedown mechanism under which providers must promptly respond to notifications seeking the removal of unauthorized digital replicas. These safe harbor protections apply only if the online service provider designates an agent with the U.S. Copyright Office to receive notifications of alleged violations. Remedies The NO FAKES Act provides remedies that are similar to those available under U.S. copyright law. Under the Act, individuals may be held liable for either statutory damages of $5,000 or actual damages for creating or distributing an unauthorized digital replica. The legislation also establishes a tiered liability framework for online service providers. Those that make good faith efforts to comply with the Act may face statutory damages of up to $25,000 per work for violations or actual damages. Providers that do not undertake such compliance efforts may be liable for $5,000 per unauthorized display or transmission of a digital replica, with damages capped at $750,000 per work. Exclusions The Act includes several exceptions to liability that are modeled in part on fair use principles. Digital replicas are excluded from liability when "used in a bona fide news, public affairs, or sports broadcast or account;" in a documentary or historical context; or in a way that is "consistent with the public interest." These exclusions do not apply to de minimis uses or to digital replicas that are sexually explicit in nature. The Act further states that licensing requirements do not apply to licenses established through collective bargaining agreements that contain provisions governing the use of digital replicas. The Act does not impose secondary liability on providers of generative artificial intelligence tools or services whose primary purpose is not the creation of unauthorized digital replicas. Preemption The NO FAKES Act preempts laws that protect "an individual's voice and visual likeness rights in connection with a digital replica, as defined in this Act, in an expressive work." However, the Act preserves state laws governing digital replicas enacted before January 2, 2025, as well as state laws addressing digital replicas that portray sexually explicit conduct. == History == In 2023, Senators Marsha Blackburn, Chris Coons, Amy Klobuchar, and Th
Read more →
WYSIWYM (interaction technique)

What you see is what you meant (WYSIWYM) is a text editing interaction technique that emerged from two projects at University of Brighton. It allows users to create abstract knowledge representations such as those required by the Semantic Web using a natural language interface. Natural language understanding (NLU) technology is not employed. Instead, natural language generation (NLG) is used in a highly interactive manner. The text editor accepts repeated refinement of a selected span of text as it becomes progressively less vacuous of authored semantics. Using a mouse, a text property held in the evolving text can be further refined by a set of options derived by NLG from a built-in ontology. An invisible representation of the semantic knowledge is created which can be used for multilingual document generation, formal knowledge formation, or any other task that requires formally specified information. The two projects at Brighton worked in the field of Conceptual Authoring to lay a foundation for further research and development of a Semantic Web Authoring Tool (SWAT). This tool has been further explored as a means for developing a knowledge base by those without prior experience with Controlled Natural Language tools.
Read more →
Something Big Is Happening

"Something Big Is Happening" is an essay by Matt Shumer, an AI entrepreneur, about the impact of artificial intelligence, published in February 2026, that has since been reportedly viewed more than 80 million times and widely discussed. Shumer noted that the technology has crossed an important threshold, where AI has become capable of creating self-improving systems. Referring to one the most recent AI models, he wrote: "It was making intelligent decisions. It had something that felt, for the first time, like judgment. Like taste." Speaking to CNBC's Power Lunch, Shumer said that his "core message" is "people in the workforce should start to use and experiment with AI tools so they can understand what’s coming". Even as the essay was widely shared and discussed, the essay also elicited criticism. Paulo Carvao, in an essay published by the Forbes Magazine stated that some of his advice is sound, but added: "It reads at times like a sales pitch. He urges readers to subscribe to the most advanced AI tools. He implies that those with access to premium models will outpace those without. He frames paid AI subscriptions as a form of insurance against obsolescence." Writing in The Guardian, Dan Milmo and Aisha Down mentioned Shumer as having a history of AI hype and stated, "He previously excited the internet by announcing the release of the world's "top open-source model", which it was not". Many workers in the technology sector criticized the article in blog posts shared on Hacker News; Edward Zitron commented that "while coding LLMs can test products, or scan/fix some bugs, this suggests they A) do this autonomously without human input, B) they do this correctly every time (or ever!)." In an article alluding to Shumer's original post, Ari Colaprete wrote "the LLM is fundamentally a writing machine, it does everything via text, and if you make it produce writing that exists purely to serve some sort of mechanical function, and you train it to succeed in that task, then it will tend to do so, even with vast intricacy."
Read more →
Lobsang Monlam

Geshe Lobsang Monlam (Tibetan: དགེ་བཤེས་བློ་བཟང་སྨོན་ལམ, Wylie: dge bshes blo bzang smon lam), born in 1976 in Ngawa eastern Tibet, is a Tibetan Buddhist scholar and programmer who uses digital technologies to preserve the Tibetan language and culture. He is best known for developing Tibetan typefaces and for the multi-volume Great Monlam Tibetan Dictionary. In 2025, he received the Snow Lion Award for Human Rights from the International Campaign for Tibet. He is also working on developing a "Dalai Lama AI," a specialized language model. == Biography == Lobsang Monlam was born in 1976 in Ngawa, eastern Tibet, anciently Tibetan Amdo, where he became a monk at the age of 12.. At the age of 17, in 1993, Lobsang Monlam fled Tibet by crossing the Himalayas to reach southern India and discovered computer science in a monastery. In 1993, he was ordained monk in the Sera Mey College in Bylakuppe, Karnataka, India, where he obtained a Geshe title in 2013.. By the early 2000s, Lobsang Monlam had already learned to paint thangkas and to compose plans and drawings. He used this knowledge to design a new assembly hall for Sera Mey, which the monks needed. Thanks to his work, Lobsang Monlam received donations from patrons of the monastery, which he was able to use to buy his first computer. He bought his first laptop in 2002 and largely taught himself how to use the hardware and software with the help of manuals. As a Buddhist scholar, he combines meditation practice with his digital work. In 2012, he founded and directs the Monlam Tibetan Information Technology Research Center in Dharamsala, which specializes in Tibetan language and software projects. Since then, he is its director, researching Tibetan language-related software. In 2019, advised by the 14th Dalai Lama, he founded Monlam IT and Research (OPC) Private Limited. Since the 2000s, Monlam has been developing Tibetan typefaces; the first Monlam Tibetan font was created in 2005. Under his direction, the Monlam Great Tibetan Dictionary was created, comprising 223 printed volumes and over 300,000 entries; approximately 150 people worked on this project for over nine years. On May 27, 2022, the Dalai Lama inaugurated the Monlam Tibetan Dictionary, produced by the Monlam Tibetan Information Technology Research Center, at Namgyal Monastery in McLeod Ganj. According to Penpa Tsering, this is the world's largest dictionary, created with guidance from the Dalai Lama, based on proposals from Lobsang Monlam and his team under the direction of Samdhong Rinpoche, and other lamas from all schools of Tibetan Buddhism and Yungdrung Bön. On December 5, 2024, Lobsang Monlam testified at a hearing of the US Congressional-Executive Commission on China in Washington, chaired by Christopher Smith, on the difficulties of preserving the Tibetan language and culture in Tibet and the Tibetan diaspora, and on the interest of the Monlam Tibetan Informatics Research Center in developing technologies for the preservation of the Tibetan language. On December 12, 2024, the work was presented to the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C., and launched at an event. The free Monlam Great Tibetan Dictionary app is available in several languages; the German version was created in collaboration with the Tibet Institute Rikon and has been downloaded millions of times. In total, Monlam has created over 37 apps related to the Tibetan language and translation; In 2023, its center launched the Monlam artificial intelligence platform, equipped with modules for machine translation, optical character recognition, speech transcription and speech synthesis.. For their efforts, he and Sophie Richardson received the Snow Lion Award in 2025, which was presented by Richard Gere and came with a prize of €3,000. In 2019, he started a PhD at Bangalore University on Library Science. He obtained his doctorate on November 30, 2023. Currently, he spearheads Monlam AI. Lobsang Monlam is developing "Dalai Lama AI" to digitally preserve the teachings of the 14th Dalai Lama, now 90 years old, for future generations. Lobsang Monlam states, "If we succeed in preserving the Dalai Lama, we also preserve the movement."
Read more →
Unique name assumption

The unique name assumption is a simplifying assumption made in some ontology languages and description logics. In logics with the unique name assumption, different names always refer to different entities in the world. It was included in Ray Reiter's discussion of the closed-world assumption often tacitly included in Database Management Systems (e.g. SQL) in his 1984 article "Towards a logical reconstruction of relational database theory" (in M. L. Brodie, J. Mylopoulos, J. W. Schmidt (editors), Data Modelling in Artificial Intelligence, Database and Programming Languages, Springer, 1984, pages 191–233). The standard ontology language OWL does not make this assumption, but provides explicit constructs to express whether two names denote the same or distinct entities. owl:sameAs is the OWL property that asserts that two given names or identifiers (e.g., URIs) refer to the same individual or entity. owl:differentFrom is the OWL property that asserts that two given names or identifiers (e.g., URIs) refer to different individuals or entities.
Read more →