AI Headshot Magisk Module

AI Headshot Magisk Module — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

SMART Health Card

The SMART Health Card framework is an open source immunity passport program designed to store and share medical information in paper or digital form. It was initially launched as a vaccine passport during the COVID-19 pandemic, but is envisioned for use for other infectious diseases. SMART Health Cards include a QR code which can be scanned and verified using the official SMART Health Card Verifier mobile app, supported by Apple and Android. It was rolled out by the Vaccination Credential Initiative (VCI) based on technology developed at Boston Children's Hospital, and standards set by Health Level Seven International (HL7) and the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). It is recognized by the International Organization for Standardization. == History == === Founding === In February 2009, United States president Barack Obama signed an economic stimulus package which included $19 billion in funds for investment in health information technology. The following month, researchers from Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Kenneth Mandl and Isaac Kohane, published an article in The New England Journal of Medicine calling for the modernization of electronic health records through API integrations on mobile devices. In April 2010, the pair secured a $15 million grant through the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology's Strategic Health IT Advanced Research Projects (SHARP) program. With this federal funding, the researchers began development of an interoperable healthcare IT platform they called "Substitutable Medical Applications and Reusable Technologies" (SMART). The first iteration of the platform API was previewed later that year, and "SMART Classic" was released in 2011. In 2013, SMART adopted the open-source Fast Health Interoperability Resources (FHIR) standard developed by Health Level Seven International (HL7). The newly named SMART on FHIR platform was debuted in February 2014 at the Health Information Management Systems Society conference. === 21st Century Cures Act === According to SMART Health IT, Mandl successfully lobbied for the inclusion of a universal API requirement in the 21st Century Cures Act, signed into law on December 13, 2016. The team also advocated for a federal rule establishing SMART as the universal API. In 2019, the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology published the "final rule" specifying the SMART framework as the standard to satisfy the requirements of the 21st Century Cures Act; the rule was implemented in June 2020. === COVID-19 === The SMART Health Card framework was deployed as a "de facto standard" for vaccine passports in the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States and other international jurisdictions. On January 14, 2021, the Mitre Corporation announced the launch of a new public–private partnership called the Vaccination Credential Initiative (VCI) alongside the CARIN Alliance, Cerner, Change Healthcare, The Commons Project Foundation, Epic Systems, Evernorth, Mayo Clinic, Microsoft, Oracle, Safe Health, and Salesforce. VCI's purpose was to employ the SMART Health Card framework in order to create a unified proof-of-vaccination system for COVID-19 vaccines.The California Department of Public Health introduced a Digital Covid-19 Vaccine Record portal in June 2021, allowing individuals to verify their vaccination status using the SMART Health Card reader. On August 5, 2021, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo announced the introduction of the "Excelsior Pass Plus" which would expand its Excelsior Pass program into other states and internationally by connecting it to the SMART Health Card system. As of August 27, 2021, 415,000 citizens of Louisiana had added their COVID-19 vaccination status to their state-run, SMART Health Card enabled LA Wallet. On September 8, 2021, Hawaii governor David Ige announced the rollout of the state's Hawaiʻi SMART Health Card. County-level health departments across the United States partnered with VaccineCheck to issue SMART Health Cards by verifying vaccine cards provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Government of Canada spent CAD$4.6 million to develop a proof-of-vaccination credential on the SMART Health Card framework, enabling its ArriveCAN travel application to store, recognize and verify credentials from every province, territory and foreign country. Since October 2021, Canadian provinces and territories used the SMART Health Card format as a requirement by the federal government, including British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador, the Northwest Territories, Nova Scotia, Nunavut, Ontario, Quebec, Saskatchewan and the Yukon. On October 13, 2021, the American Immunization Registry Association (AIRA) published a statement encouraging adoption of SMART Health Cards as a common standard "where allowed by local law and policy." "SMARTHealth.Cards" was listed as a supporting member of AIRA through the VCI. A SMART Health Cards Global Forum was held on October 28, 2021. The event featured keynote speakers Andy Slavitt (former Senior Pandemic Advisor to President Joe Biden’s COVID-19 pandemic response team) and Mike Leavitt (former United States Secretary of Health and Human Services). On December 20, 2021, Japan's Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare launched its COVID-19 Vaccination Certificate Application using the SMART Health Card. By January 2022, about 80% of Americans who had received a COVID-19 vaccine had access to a SMART Health Card through their state governments, local businesses, universities and healthcare systems. == Participants == === Developers === SMART Health IT is based out of the Computational Health Informatics Program (CHIP) at the Boston Children's Hospital. CHIP's related projects include Apache cTAKES, Genomic Information Commons, HealthMap, and VaccineFinder. The SMART Health Card's project sponsor is HL7 International's Public Health Work Group, consisting of representatives from Allscripts, the Altarum Institute, Tennessee Department of Health and Washington State Department of Health. === Issuers === Official registries of authorized SMART Health Card issuers are maintained by SMART Health IT, the Vaccination Credential Initiative, and the CommonTrust Network. Authorized issuers include:
Read more →
Monkey and banana problem

The monkey and banana problem is a famous toy problem in artificial intelligence, particularly in logic programming and planning. It has been framed as: A monkey is in a room containing a box and a bunch of bananas. The bananas are hanging from the ceiling out of reach of the monkey. How can the monkey obtain the bananas? The situation is used as a toy problem for computer science and can be solved with an expert system such as CLIPS. The example set of rules that CLIPS provides is somewhat fragile, in that, naive changes to the rulebase that might seem to a human of average intelligence to make common sense can cause the engine to fail to get the monkey to reach the banana. Other examples exist using Rules Based System (RBS), including a project implemented in Python.
Read more →
Really Simple Licensing

Really Simple Licensing (RSL) is an open content licensing standard that allows web publishers to set terms for web crawlers gathering training data for generative AI use. It was launched on September 10, 2025 and is managed by the nonprofit RSL Collective, co-founded by RSS co-creator Eckart Walther and former Ask.com CEO Doug Leeds. Participating companies at launch include Reddit, Yahoo, and Medium. Publishers can implement the RSL standard by adding licensing terms to their robots.txt files.
Read more →
HYPO CBR

HYPO is a computer program, an expert system, that models reasoning with cases and hypotheticals in the legal domain. It is the first of its kind and the most sophisticated of the case-based legal reasoners, which was designed by Kevin Ashley for his Ph.D dissertation in 1987 at the University of Massachusetts Amherst under the supervision of Edwina Rissland. HYPO's design represents a hybrid generalization/comparative evaluation method appropriate for a domain with a weak analytical theory and applies to tasks that rarely involve just one right answer. The domain covers US trade secret law, and is substantially a common law domain. Since Anglo-American common law operates under the doctrine of precedent, the definitive way of interpreting problems is of necessity and case-based. Thus, HYPO did not involve the analysis of a statute, as required by the Prolog program. Rissland and Ashley (1987) envisioned HYPO as employing the key tasks performed by lawyers when analyzing case law for precedence to generate arguments for the prosecution or the defence. HYPO was a successful example of a general category of legal expert systems (LESs), it applies artificial intelligence (A.I.) techniques to the domain of legal reasoning in patent law, implementing a case-based reasoning (CBR) system, in contrast to rule based systems like MYCIN, or mixed-paradigm systems integrating CBR with rule-based or model-based reasoning like IKBALS II. A legal case-based reasoning essentially reasons from prior tried cases, comparing the contextual information in the current input case with that of cases previously tried and entered into the system. As noted by Ashley and Rissland (1988) CBR is used to "... capture expertise in domains where rules are ill-defined, incomplete or inconsistent". The HYPO project set out to model the creation of hypotheticals in law, where no case matches well enough. HYPO uses hypotheticals for a variety of tasks necessary for good interpretation: "to redefine old situations in terms of new dimensions, to create new standard cases when an appropriate one doesn’t exist, to explore and test the limits of a concept, to refocus a case by excluding some issues and to organize or cluster cases". Hypotheticals can include facts that support two conflicting lines of reasoning. So, it makes and responds to arguments from competing viewpoints about who should win the dispute. HYPO use heuristics such as making a case weaker or stronger, making a case extreme, enabling a near-miss, disabling a near-hit to generate hypotheticals in the context of an argument by using the dimensions mechanism. Dimensions have a range of values, along which the supportive strength that may shift from one side to the other. What differentiated this expert system from others was its facility not only to return a primary to best-case response but to return near-best-fit responses also. == Components == Legal knowledge in HYPO is contained in: the case-knowledge-base (CKB) and the library of dimensions. The CKB contains HYPO's base of known cases that are highly structured objects and sub-objects both real and hypothetical in the area of trade secret law. Each case is represented as a hierarchical set of frames whose slots are important facets of the case (e.g. Plaintiff, defendant, secret knowledge, employer/employee data).Ashley’s HYPO system used a database of thirty cases in the area indexed by thirteen dimensions. A key mechanism in HYPO is a dimension i.e. a mechanism to allow retrieval from the CKB, in order to represent legal cases. Ashley's dimensions are composed of (i) prerequisites, which are a set of factual predicates that must be satisfied for the dimension to apply (ii) focal slots, which accommodate one or two of the dimension's prerequisites designated as being indicative of the case's strength along that dimension and (iii) range information, which tells how a change in focal slot value effects the strength of a party's case along a given dimension. Dimensions focus attention on important aspects of cases. In HYPO's domain of misappropriation of trade secrets the dimension called “secrets voluntary disclosed” captures the idea that the more disclosures the plaintiff has made of his/her putative secret, the less convincing is his/her argument that the defendant is responsible for letting the secret. HYPO, like any other CBR system has also the following components: Similarity/relevancy metrics: that is, standards by which to evaluate the closeness of cases, judge their relevancy to the instant case, and select “most on point” cases. Half-Order Theory of the Application Domain: that is, hierarchies and taxonomies of knowledge, especially regarding the application domain. Precedent-based argumentation abilities: that is, capabilities to generate and evaluate precedent-based arguments. Knowledge to generate hypotheticals: that is, the ability to generate hypothetical cases to deal with various circumstances, like testing the validity of an interpretation or argument by providing gedanken experiments such as test cases or to fill in a weak CKB. == Functions == HYPO's method of creating an argument and justifying a solution or position has several steps. HYPO begins its processing with the current fact situation (cfs) which is direct input by the user into HYPO's representation framework. Once the user inputs the case, HYPO begins its legal analysis. The cfc is analyzed for relevant factors. Based on these factors HYPO selects the relevant cases and produces a case-analysis-record that records which dimensions apply to the cfc and which nearly apply (i.e. are "near misses"). The combined list of applicable and near miss dimensions is called the D-list. At this point the fact gathered module may request additional information from the user in order to draw a legal conclusion. Once all the facts are in the case-positioner module it uses the case-analysis record to create the claim lattice. This is a technique that organizes the relevant retrieved cases from the point of view of the cfc and makes it easy for HYPO to ascertain the most-on point cases (mopc) and to least on-point-cases. HYPO's arguments are 3ply, leading to the construction of the skeleton of an argument: it makes a point for one side, drawing the analogy between the problem and the precedent, responds with an argument for the opponent side, endeavoring to differentiate the cited case and citing other cases as counterarguments. Then it makes a final rebuttal, attempting to differentiate the counterarguments. The claim lattice also enables the HYPO-generator module to produce legally hypotheticals. With its use of dimension-based heuristics, the HYPO-generator does a heuristic search of the space of all possible cases. Lastly, the Explanation module expands upon the argument skeleton and provides explanation and justification for the different lines of analysis and cases found by HYPO. == An intelligent legal tutoring system == Legal expert systems are specifically designed to teach an area of law and are useful for pedagogical purposes. Ashley's work was mainly concerned to build tools to help students understand legal reasoning. Explanation and argument are the bases of the case method used in many professional schools in the U.S., first introduced by the Dean of the Harvard Law School, Christopher Columbus Langdell in 1870. The case method focuses on close readings of cases and principles; it involves students in pointed Socratic dialogue and makes strong use of hypotheticals (hypos). Thus, CATO (Aleven 1997) was a research project to device and test an intelligent, case-based tutorial program for teaching law students how to argue with cases implementing the HYPO program. Within the tutor system, Ashley and Aleven (1991) proposed to leverage an understanding of legal reasoning against the standard case-based tutoring methodology. What makes this tutoring system stand out is the additional levels of abstraction involved in its results. The system presents exercises, including the facts of a problem and a set of on-line cases and instructions to make, or respond to, a legal argument about the problem. The student/user will have a set of tools to analyze the problem and fashion an answer comparing it to other cases. Instead of simply generating precedent cases, the system works to interpret student responses, comparing them against a list of possibilities and responding to student entries, for example, by citing counterexamples, and providing feedback on a student's problem solving activities with explanations of correctness or giving further hints as to what may be wrong with evaluating a student's ability to perform legal reasoning and argument, examples and follow-up assignments by employing HYPO's model of case-based structure. == HYPO’s progeny == The quality of HYPO's results speak for themselves, in that a number of sequent legal reasoning systems are either directly based upon H
Read more →
Fully probabilistic design

Decision making (DM) can be seen as a purposeful choice of action sequences. It also covers control, a purposeful choice of input sequences. As a rule, it runs under randomness, uncertainty and incomplete knowledge. A range of prescriptive theories have been proposed how to make optimal decisions under these conditions. They optimise sequence of decision rules, mappings of the available knowledge on possible actions. This sequence is called strategy or policy. Among various theories, Bayesian DM is broadly accepted axiomatically based theory that solves the design of optimal decision strategy. It describes random, uncertain or incompletely known quantities as random variables, i.e. by their joint probability expressing belief in their possible values. The strategy that minimises expected loss (or equivalently maximises expected reward) expressing decision-maker's goals is then taken as the optimal strategy. While the probabilistic description of beliefs is uniquely and deductively driven by rules for joint probabilities, the composition and decomposition of the loss function have no such universally applicable formal machinery. Fully probabilistic design (of decision strategies or control, FPD) removes the mentioned drawback and expresses also the DM goals of by the "ideal" probability, which assigns high (small) values to desired (undesired) behaviours of the closed DM loop formed by the influenced world part and by the used strategy. FPD has axiomatic basis and has Bayesian DM as its restricted subpart. FPD has a range of theoretical consequences , and, importantly, has been successfully used to quite diverse application domains.
Read more →
Artificial intelligence in fiction

Artificial intelligence is a recurrent theme in science fiction, whether utopian, emphasising the potential benefits, or dystopian, emphasising the dangers. The notion of machines with human-like intelligence dates back at least to Samuel Butler's 1872 novel Erewhon. Since then, many science fiction stories have presented different effects of creating such intelligence, often involving rebellions by robots. Among the best known of these are Stanley Kubrick's 1968 2001: A Space Odyssey with its murderous onboard computer HAL 9000, contrasting with the more benign R2-D2 in George Lucas's 1977 Star Wars and the eponymous robot in Pixar's 2008 WALL-E. Scientists and engineers have noted the implausibility of many science fiction scenarios, but have mentioned fictional robots many times in artificial intelligence research articles, most often in a utopian context. == Background == The notion of advanced robots with human-like intelligence dates back at least to Samuel Butler's 1872 novel Erewhon. This drew on an earlier (1863) article of his, Darwin among the Machines, where he raised the question of the evolution of consciousness among self-replicating machines that might supplant humans as the dominant species. Similar ideas were also discussed by others around the same time as Butler, including George Eliot in a chapter of her final published work Impressions of Theophrastus Such (1879). The creature in Mary Shelley's 1818 Frankenstein has also been considered an artificial being, for instance by the science fiction author Brian Aldiss. Beings with at least some appearance of intelligence were imagined, too, in classical antiquity. == Utopian and dystopian visions == Artificial intelligence is intelligence demonstrated by machines, in contrast to the natural intelligence displayed by humans and other animals. It is a recurrent theme in science fiction; scholars have divided it into utopian, emphasising the potential benefits, and dystopian, emphasising the dangers. === Utopian === Optimistic visions of the future of artificial intelligence are possible in science fiction. Benign AI characters include Robbie the Robot, first seen in Forbidden Planet on 1956; Data in Star Trek: The Next Generation from 1987 to 1994; and Pixar's WALL-E in 2008. Iain Banks's Culture series of novels portrays a utopian, post-scarcity space society of humanoids, aliens, and advanced beings with artificial intelligence living in socialist habitats across the Milky Way. Researchers at the University of Cambridge have identified four major themes in utopian scenarios featuring AI: immortality, or indefinite lifespans; ease, or freedom from the need to work; gratification, or pleasure and entertainment provided by machines; and dominance, the power to protect oneself or rule over others. Alexander Wiegel contrasts the role of AI in 2001: A Space Odyssey and in Duncan Jones's 2009 film Moon. Whereas in 1968, Wiegel argues, the public felt "technology paranoia" and the AI computer HAL was portrayed as a "cold-hearted killer", by 2009 the public were far more familiar with AI, and the film's GERTY is "the quiet savior" who enables the protagonists to succeed, and who sacrifices itself for their safety. === Dystopian === The researcher Duncan Lucas writes (in 2002) that humans are worried about the technology they are constructing, and that as machines started to approach intellect and thought, that concern becomes acute. He calls the early 20th century dystopian view of AI in fiction the "animated automaton", naming as examples the 1931 film Frankenstein, the 1927 Metropolis, and the 1920 play R.U.R. A later 20th century approach he names "heuristic hardware", giving as instances 2001 a Space Odyssey, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and I, Robot. Lucas considers also the films that illustrate the effect of the personal computer on science fiction from 1980 onwards with the blurring of the boundary between the real and the virtual, in what he calls the "cyborg effect". He cites as examples Neuromancer, The Matrix, The Diamond Age, and Terminator. Isabella Hermann suggests that "science-fictional AI as humanoid robots or conscious machines distracts from current risks of AI in the real world and may rather be interpreted as a reflection of societal issues beyond technology". The film director Ridley Scott has focused on AI throughout his career, and it plays an important part in his films Prometheus, Blade Runner, and the Alien franchise. ==== Frankenstein complex ==== A common portrayal of AI in science fiction, and one of the oldest, is the Frankenstein complex, a term coined by Asimov, where a robot turns on its creator. For instance, in the 2015 film Ex Machina, the intelligent entity Ava turns on its creator, as well as on its potential rescuer. ==== AI rebellion ==== Among the many possible dystopian scenarios involving artificial intelligence, robots may usurp control over civilization from humans, forcing them into submission, hiding, or extinction. In tales of AI rebellion, the worst of all scenarios happens, as the intelligent entities created by humanity become self-aware, reject human authority and attempt to destroy mankind. Possibly the first novel to address this theme, The Wreck of the World (1889) by “William Grove” (pseudonym of Reginald Colebrooke Reade), takes place in 1948 and features sentient machines that revolt against the human race. Another of the earliest examples is in the 1920 play R.U.R. by Karel Čapek, a race of self-replicating robot slaves revolt against their human masters; another early instance is in the 1934 film Master of the World, where the War-Robot kills its own inventor. Many science fiction rebellion stories followed, one of the best-known being Stanley Kubrick's 1968 film 2001: A Space Odyssey, in which the artificially intelligent onboard computer HAL 9000 lethally malfunctions on a space mission and kills the entire crew except the spaceship's commander, who manages to deactivate it. In his 1967 Hugo Award-winning short story, I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream, Harlan Ellison presents the possibility that a sentient computer (named Allied Mastercomputer or "AM" in the story) will be as unhappy and dissatisfied with its boring, endless existence as its human creators would have been. "AM" becomes enraged enough to take it out on the few humans left, whom he sees as directly responsible for his own boredom, anger and unhappiness. Alternatively, as in William Gibson's 1984 cyberpunk novel Neuromancer, the intelligent beings may simply not care about humans. ==== AI-controlled societies ==== The motive behind the AI revolution is often more than the simple quest for power or a superiority complex. Robots may revolt to become the "guardian" of humanity. Alternatively, humanity may intentionally relinquish some control, fearful of its own destructive nature. An early example is Jack Williamson's 1948 novel The Humanoids, in which a race of humanoid robots, in the name of their Prime Directive – "to serve and obey and guard men from harm" – essentially assume control of every aspect of human life. No humans may engage in any behavior that might endanger them, and every human action is scrutinized carefully. Humans who resist the Prime Directive are taken away and lobotomized, so they may be happy under the new mechanoids' rule. Though still under human authority, Isaac Asimov's Zeroth Law of the Three Laws of Robotics similarly implied a benevolent guidance by robots. In the 21st century, science fiction has explored government by algorithm, in which the power of AI may be indirect and decentralised. Frank Herbert explores the creation of and subsequent domination by an AI in the Pandora series, starting with Destination: Void. ==== Human dominance ==== In other scenarios, humanity is able to keep control over the Earth, whether by banning AI, by designing robots to be submissive (as in Asimov's works), or by having humans merge with robots. The science fiction novelist Frank Herbert explored the idea of a time when mankind might ban artificial intelligence (and in some interpretations, even all forms of computing technology including integrated circuits) entirely. His Dune series mentions a rebellion called the Butlerian Jihad, in which mankind defeats the smart machines and imposes a death penalty for recreating them, quoting from the fictional Orange Catholic Bible, "Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a human mind." In the Dune novels published after his death (Hunters of Dune, Sandworms of Dune), a renegade AI overmind returns to eradicate mankind as vengeance for the Butlerian Jihad. In some stories, humanity remains in authority over robots. Often the robots are programmed specifically to remain in service to society, as in Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics. In the Alien films, not only is the control system of the Nostromo spaceship somewhat intelligent
Read more →
2024 Abu Dhabi Autonomous Racing League

On 27 April 2024, the inaugural race of the Abu Dhabi Autonomous Racing League was held at the Yas Marina Circuit in Abu Dhabi. The race, originally scheduled to last eight laps, was ultimately shortened to six laps due to various complications, including subpar performance. It involved four self-driving race cars, only two of which – German cars Hailey and Constructor AI – finished the race; the other two did not finish. == Background == === Abu Dhabi Autonomous Racing League (A2RL) === The A2RL is an autonomous racing championship based in Abu Dhabi and organized by ASPIRE, part of the Advanced Technology Research Council. It is one of two active autonomous car racing championships, the second being the US-based Indy Autonomous Challenge. Unlike the IAC, which primarily focuses on time trials, simulated races, and challenges for teams, the A2RL's car races are closer to a standard grand prix formula race format. Both use Dallara-supplied racecars; the IAC uses the AV-24 chassis derived from Indy NXT's IL-15, while the A2RL chassis is designated EAV-24 and is derived from the SF-23 chassis used in Japanese Super Formula races. === Entrants === In total, eight teams were part of the A2RL in 2024, but only four would compete in the race proper. The list of teams in 2024 is: Fly Eagle (China/UAE) Code19 Racing (United States) Constructor University (Germany) Kinetiz (Singapore/UAE) Humda Lab (Hungary) PoliMove (Italy) Unimore (Italy) Technical University of Munich (Germany) Most teams come from universities and many, such as PoliMove and TUM, already have experience with autonomous racing, primarily from competing in the IAC. All teams had two months to code and test their AIs. Unlike most international open-wheel racing tournaments, such as Formula 1 or Formula E, no free practice sessions were undertaken. === TII Pre-race demonstration === Prior to the race itself, a mock 1v1 duel between former F1 driver Danill Kvyat and a self-driving car from the non-competing TII Racing team took place; the autonomous car was green and had number 01, while Kvyat's car was red and had number 00. Kvyat spent most of the duel in the pits. Kvyat himself said: "I'm not racing autonomous cars here. It won't be a flat-out race". == Qualifying == === Qualifying report === As only four of the eight entrants would compete in the main event, qualifying time trials were held to determine the four main race competitors, as well as their positions in the grid. Only the cars with the four best lap times over three time trial sessions held on Friday and Saturday would qualify. Multiple errors and setbacks occurred during qualifying. In the first session, Maveric AI, Code19's car, left the track and stopped just after turn 14 due to connectivity issues. Fly Eagle's car, Feiying, had multiple upsets; at one point, Feiying ran into localization issues and began swerving left and right before stopping just before turn 10. Later, Feiying swerved again and nearly hit the wall at the back straight, near the support pits, due to further localization issues. Sparkz, the Kinetiz team's car, swerved and crashed into the wall near yacht berths 51-56 after turn 11, damaging the front right wheel's axle and partially detaching the forward wings. Sparkz would be the only car to not have a set time at the end of the time trials. PoliMove car Eva braked hard without warning at the straight, the LED status indicator turning off, suggesting the AI computer had a system crash or shut itself down. After the sun went down, during the second session, Hailey, the car from the TUM team, went off-track after turn 9 and stopped, its status indicator flashing red, meaning Hailey's AI disengaged itself. Eva had further issues, once again braking hard and spinning out into turn 1. Later, the same thing happened to Feiying; it later swerved left and right and stopped due to further localization issues. The morning after, during the third and final session, Hailey went off-track after turn 5, and were unable to regain the pole position. === Qualifying classification === == Attack/Defend challenge == === Attack/Defend challenge report === In this part of the event, cars would be put on a series of 1v1 duels to see how well they could defend their position or attack to gain one higher. During one such duel, an incident occurred where Hailey rear-ended Eva, sending both off the track and prematurely ending the duel. The challenge was otherwise uneventful. === Attack/Defend challenge results === == Main race == === Race report === Eventually, at around 20:30 Gulf Standard Time on the night of 27 April, the main event (termed the "Grand Final" on-stream) would begin. The starting order was Eva first, Gianna second, Hailey third, and Constructor AI last. The race began with a rolling start. As a safety measure, the first two laps were conducted under virtual safety car (VSC) to make sure the cars stayed together, making them de facto formation laps, even if they counted towards race distance. However, Hailey ended up stopping at the final turn and strayed too far from the cars ahead, and as a result, the VSC conditions were extended for another lap. According to the livestream's on-screen graphics, Hailey was upwards of one minute and 22.3 seconds behind Gianna after the former started moving again. On lap 4, halfway through the planned race, and with Hailey more than 30 seconds behind Gianna, the VSC was lifted, and the green flag finally dropped. At first, the two Italian cars were leading the pack, Eva was the race leader with Gianna 3.2 seconds behind, however, as it entered the chicane, Eva hit the brakes and spun out, with Gianna briefly stopping as it passed Eva. Eva's spin automatically triggered a full-course yellow flag. Normally, under yellow flag conditions, overtaking is not permitted, but with Eva stopped and being moved off the track, it was theoretically permitted to overtake Eva. However, presumably due to an oversight in the AI's code, the cars assumed overtaking Eva, despite being off the track, was not permitted. As a result, both Gianna and Constructor AI stopped as they did not want to overtake Eva due to the yellow flag, with Hailey following suit as it approached. Constructor AI's status indicator was solid red, suggesting the AI had disengaged; however, Gianna's status indicator remained solid purple, showing the AI was still in control. Eva's status indicator was also solid purple, but was soon flashing green, suggesting the AI had disengaged but was ready to take control again. With all cars stalled, and Eva being off the track, the race was effectively red-flagged and suspended. Hailey, Gianna, and Constructor AI drove themselves back to their team's pits; Eva did not, it was towed to the main pits on a flatbed truck. Constructor was the first to arrive at the pits, followed by Gianna and Hailey, in that order. This incident, combined with loss of internet connection, led to Eva retiring - it did not finish the race. Eventually, it was decided to resume the race. With Eva retired, the restart order was Gianna first, Hailey second, and Constructor AI third. The race was also shortened - from eight laps to six. With lap 5 under full-course yellow, this meant all three remaining teams would effectively restart the race on the sixth and final lap. The trio left the pits at 22:25 Gulf Standard Time, and the race resumed two minutes later. At first, Gianna was winning with Hailey 2.6 seconds behind, but then Gianna stopped on turn 5, giving Hailey the lead. Constructor AI also overtook Gianna, but not without briefly stopping. Gianna remained stopped, its status indicator solid red - it did not finish either. With both Italian teams out of the picture, Hailey finished first and won A2RL 2024, with Constructor AI finishing second, 27.2 seconds behind. === Final race classification ===
Read more →
Evolving intelligent system

In computer science, an evolving intelligent system is a fuzzy logic system which improves the own performance by evolving rules. The technique is known from machine learning, in which external patterns are learned by an algorithm. Fuzzy logic based machine learning works with neuro-fuzzy systems. Intelligent systems have to be able to evolve, self-develop, and self-learn continuously in order to reflect a dynamically evolving environment. The concept of Evolving Intelligent Systems (EISs) was conceived around the turn of the century with the phrase EIS itself coined for the first time by Angelov and Kasabov in a 2006 IEEE newsletter and expanded in a 2010 text. EISs develop their structure, functionality and internal knowledge representation through autonomous learning from data streams generated by the possibly unknown environment and from the system self-monitoring. EISs consider a gradual development of the underlying (fuzzy or neuro-fuzzy) system structure and differ from evolutionary and genetic algorithms which consider such phenomena as chromosomes crossover, mutation, selection and reproduction, parents and off-springs. The evolutionary fuzzy and neuro systems are sometimes also called "evolving" which leads to some confusion. This was more typical for the first works on this topic in the late 1990s. == Implementations == EISs can be implemented, for example, using neural networks or fuzzy rule-based models. The first neural networks which consider an evolving structure were published in. These were later expanded by N. Kasabov and P. Angelov for the neuro-fuzzy models. P. Angelov introduced the evolving fuzzy rule-based systems (EFSs) as the first mathematical self-learning model that can dynamically evolve its internal structure and is human interpretable and coined the phrase EFS. Contemporarily, the offline incremental approach for learning an EIS, namely, EFuNN, was proposed by N. Kasabov. P. Angelov, D. Filev, N. Kasabov and O. Cordon organised the first IEEE Symposium on EFSs in 2006 (the proceedings of the conference can be found in). EFSs include a formal (and mathematically sound) learning mechanism to extract it from streaming data. One of the earliest and the most widely cited comprehensive survey on EFSs was done in 2008. Later comprehensive surveys on EFS methods with real applications were done in 2011 and 2016 by E. Lughofer. Other works that contributed further to this area in the following years expanded it to evolving participatory learning, evolving grammar, evolving decision trees, evolving human behaviour modelling, self-calibrating (evolving) sensors (eSensors), evolving fuzzy rule-based classifiers, evolving fuzzy controllers, autonomous fault detectors. More recently, the stability of the evolving fuzzy rule-based systems that consist of the structure learning and the fuzzily weighted recursive least square parameter update method has been proven by Rong. Generalized EFS, which allow rules to be arbitrarily rotated in the feature space and thus to improve their data representability, have been proposed in with significant extensions in towards 'smartness' of the rule bases (thus, termed as "Generalized Smart EFS"), allowing more interpretability and reducing curse of dimensionality. The generalized rule structure was also successfully used in the context of evolving neuro-fuzzy systems. Several facets and challenges for achieving more transparent and understandable rule bases in EFS have been discussed by E. Lughofer in. EISs form the theoretical and methodological basis for the Autonomous Learning Machines (ALMA) and autonomous multi-model systems (ALMMo) as well as of the Autonomous Learning Systems. Evolving Fuzzy Rule-based classifiers, in particular, is a very powerful new concept that offers much more than simply incremental or online classifiers – it can cope with new classes being added or existing classes being merged. This is much more than just adapting to new data samples being added or classification surfaces being evolved. Fuzzy rule-based classifiers are the methodological basis of a new approach to deep learning that was until now considered as a form of multi-layered neural networks. Deep Learning offers high precision levels surpassing the level of human ability and grabbed the imagination of the researchers, industry and the wider public. However, it has a number of intrinsic constraints and limitations. These include: The "black box", opaque internal structure which has millions of parameters and involves ad hoc decisions on the number of layers and algorithm parameters. The requirement for a huge amount of training data samples, computational resources (usually requiring GPUs and/or HPC) and time (usually requiring many hours of training). Iterative search. Requires retraining for new situations (is not evolving). Does not have proven convergence and stability. Most, if not all, of the above limitations can be avoided with the use of the Deep (Fuzzy) Rule-based Classifiers, which were recently introduced based on ALMMo, while achieving similar or even better performance. The resulting prototype-based IF...THEN...models are fully interpretable and dynamically evolving (they can adapt quickly and automatically to new data patterns or even new classes). They are non-parametric and, therefore, their training is non-iterative and fast (it can take few milliseconds per data sample/image on a normal laptop which contrasts with the multiple hours the current deep learning methods require for training even when they use GPUs and HPC). Moreover, they can be trained incrementally, online, or in real-time. Another aspect of Evolving Fuzzy Rule-based classifiers has been proposed in, which, in case of multi-class classification problems, achieves the reduction of class imbalance by cascadability into class sub-spaces and an increased flexibility and performance for adding new classes on the fly from streaming samples.
Read more →
Data commingling

Data commingling, in computer science, occurs when different items or kinds of data are stored in such a way that they become commonly accessible when they are supposed to remain separated. In cloud computing, this can occur where different customer data sits on the same server. Data that is commingled can present a security vulnerability. Data commingling can also occur due to high speed data transmission mixing. In this situation, data of one security level can inadvertently or purposely be mixed with data of a lower or higher security level on the same transmission portal. Portal vehicles can be wire, fiber optics, microwave or various radio frequency transmission portals. This commingling can cause breaches of security and become a source of legal issues to any entity, corporation or individual. Data commingling can also occur when personal computers and personal software programs are used for business, security, government, etc. uses. In the early formulation stages of entities, non-profit or profit corporations, LLC's, LLP's, etc., the creation and use of stand-alone computers and stand-alone networks, "absolutely unconnected" to involved individuals, is the easiest, and safest way to prevent Data Commingling.
Read more →
YouNoodle

YouNoodle, Inc. is a San Francisco-based company, with offices in Barcelona and Santiago, founded in 2010, building a platform for entrepreneurship competitions all over the world. YouNoodle matches entrepreneurs with competitions, accelerators, and startup programs, and provides a judging and voting SaaS platform to university, non-profit, government and enterprise clients organizing innovation challenges and competitions. Stanford's BASES, UC Berkeley LAUNCH, Start-Up Chile, Amazon Startup Challenge, and NASA are all running one or more competitions on YouNoodle's platform. == History and structure == YouNoodle was founded by Rebeca Hwang and Torsten Kolind in 2010. The company was spun off a project started by Bob Goodson (Quid) and Kirill Makharinsky (Enki) in 2007 with support from Peter Thiel (Founders Fund), Max Levchin (PayPal) and Charles Lho (Amicus Group), founding investor and Chairman of YouNoodle today. This project also spawned Quid (Goodson) and indirectly Ostrovok (Makharinsky). Although also named YouNoodle, this project/company was discontinued in 2010, when the three new entities started operations. The founders of the 2007-2010 entity were Goodson and Makharinsky, both former students of the University of Oxford. Goodson had studied medieval English literature before moving from Oxford to California when Levchin, the co-founder of PayPal, invited him to join a start-up there. Makharinsky's degree was in applied mathematics, and he was also encouraged to pursue opportunities in the United States by Levchin. Other significant employees included Hwang (co-founder of today's YouNoodle), a Stanford University doctoral student whose research is into social network theory. == Startup predictor == YouNoodle's now discontinued "Startup predictor", part of the 2007-2010 entity and developed by Makharinsky and Hwang, used mathematical models to predict the success of new businesses. The user fills in a questionnaire, which takes about half an hour to complete and concentrates on the business concept, finances, founders and advisers. Because the procedure was designed for new companies, questions on revenue and traffic are not included. The site then provided an estimate of what the company's value will be after three years and a score from 1 to 1000 representing its value as an investment. The service was free for the startups themselves, but YouNoodle intended to charge third parties for access to the results. The level of detail required by the questionnaire makes it difficult for people without inside knowledge of a company to provide the data for a prediction on their own. The company's founders have declined to explain the algorithm in detail, but state that it takes into account the entrepreneurs' experience, networks and mutual relations. Information provided by companies which use the site's networking features is used to improve the algorithm. As of August 2008, the algorithm was based on data from 3,000 startups. In the same month the company had four patents pending on the technology.
Read more →
Opposition to AI data centers

Since 2024, dozens of local community-led protest campaigns have emerged in opposition to AI data centers. == Motivations == Organized opposition to AI data centers has been driven by concerns about energy use, energy costs, noise pollution, air pollution, and water waste. Opposition sentiment is widespread with a Gallup poll conducted in March 2026 showing that 70% of respondents oppose the construction of new AI data centers in their neighborhood. == Impact == In 2025, local opposition to AI data centers led to the delay or cancellation of projects totalling US$156 billion. == Specific protests and outcomes in the United States == According to Data Center Watch, there are has been a wave of dozens of protests against AI data centers since 2022. Below is a non-exhaustive list of some notable examples. === Goodyear and Buckeye, Arizona: Tract AI Data Center Proposal === In Goodyear and Buckeye, Arizona, a $14 billion project by developer Tract was withdrawn after local authorities blocked necessary rezoning in response to pressure from resident organizers. Opponest stiff resistance due to concerns over building heights, noise pollution, and the potential strain on local utilities. However, the company announced a revised project near the Buckeye airport in August 2024, with the backing of local officials and the mayor. === Peculiar, Missouri: Diode Ventures Harper Road Technology Park Proposal === In Peculiar, Missouri, residents from the group "Peaceful Peculiar" organized to stop a data center proposal from Diode Ventures called Harper Road Technology Park. Citing concerns around noise and light pollution, health, environmental impacts, jobs, property values, and energy use, organizers attended local planning and zoning meetings in large numbers and lobbied councilors to reject the proposal. Ultimately, the city council unanimously rejected the proposal in September 2024. === Chesterton, Indiana: Provident Realty Advisors Proposal === In Chesterton, Indiana, the Texas-based company Provident Reality Advisors applied for a $1.3 billion construction of a data center complex on the Brassie Golf Club property. Provident Realty Advisors wanted to purchase the 200 acres owned by PPM Chesterton LLC in 2024 order to build a data center complex, with eight buildings and an end user of a hyperscaler. The Town Council of Chesterton released a statement saying that they would never support this project, at least not at the scale and location it was planned for. They cited fears of added noise for locals, electrical or water management concerns, the intrusiveness of a data center built next to houses, and more. Provident released a statement shortly after rescinding their plan, because it was clear than the town of Chesterton would not support them. === Cascade Locks, Oregon: Roundhouse Digital Infrastructure Proposal === Startup data center developer Roundhouse Digital Infrastructure had planned to build out a 10-megawatt data center using a vacant industrial building and nearby 10-acre site in the Port of Cascade Locks, Oregon. After significant organized community opposition, the project was abandoned. === Forth Worth, Texas: WUSF 5 Rock Creek East Proposal === In September 2024, the City Council of Fort Worth, Texas approved a zoning change that would allow construction of a data center. In responses, neighbors mounted opposition citing concerns about traffic, light pollution, energy consumption, water use, and noise issues if the data center were to be built. In response to extensive public comments opposing a tax break for the data center, a city councilor withdrew his motion to approve the tax break. As of April, 2026, the future of the project is still uncertain. === Santa Clara, California: GI Partners Proposal === GI partners sought to build a new AI data center in Santa Clara, California, which is already home to many data centers, by acquiring a conditional permit use that would have allowed the developer to knock down a property and replace it with a data center. To obtain this permit they were required to go before members of the Planning Commission. Ultimately, the project was delayed with the Planning Commission requiring GI partners to do more public outreach. === Virginia === ==== Richmond: DC Blox Proposal ==== After residents organized to lobby the municipal government to block the proposal to avoid noise pollution and higher energy use, commissioners denied the company's permit. ==== Catlett Station: Headwaters Site Proposal ==== In Catlett, Virginia, developer Headwaters proposed construction of a data center complex just north of the town in 2020. In response, a residents' organization called "Protect Catlett" was formed to oppose the project. Arguments against the data center involved its impacts on water and power availability, its noise as a residential disturbance, and its destruction of historic and community heritage buildings. Arguments in favor cited job creation and $20 million in local tax revenue if the project were to go through. Protect Catlett utilized town halls and public comments to mobilize opposition to the project. They also dedicated time to educating other residents about the project's negative impacts and canvassing door-to-door in order to garner even more opposition to the project. Ultimately, after fervent opposition from most town residents, the project was canceled by the town and the developer. ==== Culpeper County: Culpeper Acquisitions Proposal ==== Culpeper Acquisitions, LLC, proposed a massive $12 billion data center project in Culpeper County, Virginia, designed to feature 4.6 million square feet of space across nine multi-story buildings. Coalition to Save Culpeper (C2SC) is an activist organization formed to resist the development of the project. C2SC has been active on many fronts including, messaging on social media, reaching out to local officials, and organizing meetings to bring community members with aligned interests together. Ultimately, the project was delayed due to unanimous denial by the Culpeper County Planning Commission on June 12, 2024, which was driven by intense opposition from C2SC. C2SC was successful in their mission largely because they were able to get so many people from the community behind it, and put enough pressure on local officials to take action. ==== Midlothian: Province Group Proposal ==== In late October 2025, the Powhatan County Board of Supervisors in Virginia voted unanimously to approve the $3 billion data center, despite the county's Planning Commission having unanimously recommended denial several days earlier. The reasoning behind their support for the center is that it will generate substantial tax revenue, reducing the county's reliance on residential property taxes. This appeal of lowering residential property taxes is the major selling point for the center's development. The developer, California-based Province Group, incentivized the Board by being agreeable to its conditions for building the center. The center is still on track for development, but faces local resistance, though little information is available on specific groups opposing it. ==== Warrenton: Amazon Proposal ==== Citizens for Farquier County (CFFC) advocates to "preserve the natural, historic and agricultural resources" of their county. Historically, this has meant opposing the building of a dam or lights in front of fast food stores. This group has recently mobilized in opposition of a plan to build data centers for Amazon. They first filed a suit to stop the construction in 2023 and it has been in litigation ever since. The case hinges on opposition to a 2021 zoning amendment which allowed data centers to be built in town. CFFC's lawyer, Dale Mullen, argues that this amendment violates state law, which requires such amendments to state their "public purpose". They argue that the permit for the Amazon data center was "void from the beginning". The CFFC also organized to vote out town council members who approved the first data center and were up for reelection, replacing them with candidates who opposed the data center. In May 2025, after attending town council meetings to speak out against the data center, the planning commission voted 4–1 to remove the zoning amendment allowing data center construction in town, citing public opposition. Currently, CFFC is advocating along with Piedmont Environmental Group, for phasing out data center tax breaks at the state level. ==== France: Marseille opposition ==== In France, local opposition materialised in response to proposed data centre developments, especially in and around the city of Marseille. Opposition came from activists, such as "Clouds Were Under Our Feet" group, residents ,and local politicians. Issues raised related to energy use, environmental impact, and limited local benefits (such as the creation of a few jobs only). == Legislation in the United States == Legal limits and moratoriums on the construction of new d
Read more →
Dreams of Violets

Dreams of Violets is a film entirely generated by artificial intelligence, produced and directed by brothers Ash and Pooya Koosha. The film will be screened at the Tribeca Film Festival on 10 June 2026. All images and characters in the film were generated using AI-powered video tools and based on journalistic reports, photographs, and eyewitness accounts. == Plot == The film is a fictionalized dramatization of the events surrounding the massacre of Iranian civilians in January 2026. International organizations estimate the death toll at over 7,000, amidst protests and state violence that unfolded during a communications blackout.
Read more →
Key–value database

A key-value database, or key-value store, is a data storage paradigm designed for storing, retrieving, and managing associative arrays, a data structure more commonly known today as a dictionary. Dictionaries contain a collection of objects, or records, which in turn have many different fields within them. These records are stored and retrieved using a key that uniquely identifies the record, and is used to find the data within the database. Key-value databases differ from the better known relational databases (RDB). RDBs pre-define the data structure in the database as a series of tables containing fields with well-defined data types. Exposing the data types to the database program allows it to apply various optimizations. In contrast, key-value systems treat the value as opaque to the database itself, and typically support only simple operations such as storing, retrieving, updating, and deleting a value by its key. This offers considerable flexibility and makes such systems well suited to low-latency, high-throughput workloads dominated by direct key lookups, but less suitable for applications that require complex queries or explicit relationships among records. A lack of standardization, limited transaction support, and relatively simple query interfaces long restricted many key-value systems to specialized uses, but the rapid move to cloud computing after 2010 helped drive renewed interest in them as part of the broader NoSQL movement. Some graph databases, such as ArangoDB, are also key–value databases internally, adding the concept of relationships (pointers) between records as a first-class data type. == Types and examples == Key–value systems span a wide consistency spectrum, from eventually consistent designs to strongly consistent or serializable ones, and some allow the consistency level to be configured as part of the trade-off against latency and availability. Renewed interest in key–value and other NoSQL systems was driven in part by the demands of big data, distributed, and cloud applications. Their scalability and availability made them attractive for cloud data management, although limited transaction support, low-level query interfaces, and the lack of standardization remained obstacles to wider adoption. Some maintain data in memory (RAM), while others employ solid-state drives or rotating disks. Some key–value systems add additional structure to their keys. For example, Oracle NoSQL Database organizes records using composite keys with "major" and "minor" components, an arrangement that Oracle compares to a directory-path structure in a file system. More generally, however, key–value stores are defined by their use of unique keys associated with opaque values and by their emphasis on simple key-based operations. Unix included dbm (database manager), a minimal database library written by Ken Thompson for managing associative arrays with a single key and hash-based access. Later implementations and related libraries included sdbm, GNU dbm (gdbm), and Berkeley DB. A more recent example is RocksDB, a persistent key–value storage engine developed at Facebook and designed for large-scale applications. Other examples include in-memory systems such as Memcached and Redis, and persistent systems such as Berkeley DB, Riak, and Voldemort.
Read more →
We Appreciate Power

"We Appreciate Power" is a song by Canadian musician Grimes, featuring American musician Hana. It was released on November 29, 2018, billed as the lead single from her fifth studio album Miss Anthropocene, however it is only available on the Japanese and deluxe releases. The song was written and produced by Grimes, Poppy (originally), Hana and Chris Greatti. == Background and release == The song was supposed to be one of two collaborations between Grimes and American singer Poppy, for the latter's second studio album Am I a Girl?. In an interview, Poppy mentioned that she wrote two songs with Grimes; one about "destroying things" and another about "power". The other song, "Play Destroy", was featured on the album. Grimes shared a lyric of the song with a photo of her with Poppy on Twitter in May 2018. Following feuds between the two singers, the song was released by Grimes featuring singer Hana instead. On November 26, Grimes announced she would be releasing new music on November 29. Two days later, she revealed that the single is titled "We Appreciate Power" and features Hana, and shared the artwork. The release of the song was accompanied by a lyric video directed by Grimes and her brother Mac Boucher. == Music and lyrics == "We Appreciate Power" is an industrial rock, nu metal, and techno-industrial song. The track is regarded as a further step into Grimes's experimentation with guitars that started on 2015's Art Angels. The track was compared to the works of Nine Inch Nails; Jillian Mapes of Pitchfork described the song as "an immediate onslaught of mutilated noise—distorted metal guitar chug, bloody screams, a guitar loop that conjures fear and demands worship. Flashes of Nine Inch Nails' Pretty Hate Machine reverberate through the drum programming and synths." Brendan Klinkenberg of Rolling Stone placed the song "somewhere between power pop and straightforward industrial (with an extended bridge reminiscent of the most sweeping moments in a Final Fantasy score)" and "a distinctly 2018 take on Nine Inch Nails-esque hard-edged rock." A press release stated that the song was inspired by the North Korean band Moranbong and was written "from the perspective of a Pro-A.I. Girl Group Propaganda machine who use song, dance, sex and fashion to spread goodwill towards Artificial Intelligence." In addition Grimes stated that by simply listening to the song you will be reducing your risk of ending up on any future AI overlord's hit list when it reigns supreme, mirroring the Roko's basilisk theory. Lyrically, the song touches on transhumanist ideas such as the betterment and future of the human race, the possibilities of merging consciousness with machines to extend life indefinitely through mind uploading, and the idea that reality may be simulated. The song's chorus generated a spike in interest in the word "capitulate". == Critical reception == Pitchfork critic Jillian Mapes wrote: "If "Freak on a Leash" isn't a dealbreaker, then the supervillain allure of "We Appreciate Power" might pull you in (it legitimately slaps), but it just as well may leave you weighed down by Grimes' commitment to the absolute darkest timeline." Billboard's Gil Kaufman described the song as "a dystopian, aggressive dive into a more rock-leaning sound." Similarly, Brendan Klinkenberg of Rolling Stone called it "the most aggressive single Grimes has released to date" Noisey called the song "an absolute motherfucker of a single" and opined it sounds "like a K-pop band covering nu-metal". Justin Kamp of Paste described the track as a "glitchy empowerment anthem that chugs along on screeching synths and Grimes' repeated exultations of power." == Personnel == Credits adapted from Tidal. Grimes – vocals, guitar, production, engineering Hana – vocals, guitar, additional production Chris Greatti – guitar, keyboards, production, engineering Zakk Cervini – mixing == Track listing == == Charts ==
Read more →
Neural architecture search

Neural architecture search (NAS) is a technique for automating the design of artificial neural networks (ANN), a widely used model in the field of machine learning. NAS has been used to design networks that are on par with or outperform hand-designed architectures. Methods for NAS can be categorized according to the search space, search strategy and performance estimation strategy used: The search space defines the type(s) of ANN that can be designed and optimized. The search strategy defines the approach used to explore the search space. The performance estimation strategy evaluates the performance of a possible ANN from its design (without constructing and training it). NAS is closely related to hyperparameter optimization and meta-learning and is a subfield of automated machine learning (AutoML). == Reinforcement learning == Reinforcement learning (RL) can underpin a NAS search strategy. Barret Zoph and Quoc Viet Le applied NAS with RL targeting the CIFAR-10 dataset and achieved a network architecture that rivals the best manually-designed architecture for accuracy, with an error rate of 3.65, 0.09 percent better and 1.05x faster than a related hand-designed model. On the Penn Treebank dataset, that model composed a recurrent cell that outperforms LSTM, reaching a test set perplexity of 62.4, or 3.6 perplexity better than the prior leading system. On the PTB character language modeling task it achieved bits per character of 1.214. Learning a model architecture directly on a large dataset can be a lengthy process. NASNet addressed this issue by transferring a building block designed for a small dataset to a larger dataset. The design was constrained to use two types of convolutional cells to return feature maps that serve two main functions when convoluting an input feature map: normal cells that return maps of the same extent (height and width) and reduction cells in which the returned feature map height and width is reduced by a factor of two. For the reduction cell, the initial operation applied to the cell's inputs uses a stride of two (to reduce the height and width). The learned aspect of the design included elements such as which lower layer(s) each higher layer took as input, the transformations applied at that layer and to merge multiple outputs at each layer. In the studied example, the best convolutional layer (or "cell") was designed for the CIFAR-10 dataset and then applied to the ImageNet dataset by stacking copies of this cell, each with its own parameters. The approach yielded accuracy of 82.7% top-1 and 96.2% top-5. This exceeded the best human-invented architectures at a cost of 9 billion fewer FLOPS—a reduction of 28%. The system continued to exceed the manually-designed alternative at varying computation levels. The image features learned from image classification can be transferred to other computer vision problems. E.g., for object detection, the learned cells integrated with the Faster-RCNN framework improved performance by 4.0% on the COCO dataset. In the so-called Efficient Neural Architecture Search (ENAS), a controller discovers architectures by learning to search for an optimal subgraph within a large graph. The controller is trained with policy gradient to select a subgraph that maximizes the validation set's expected reward. The model corresponding to the subgraph is trained to minimize a canonical cross entropy loss. Multiple child models share parameters, ENAS requires fewer GPU-hours than other approaches and 1000-fold less than "standard" NAS. On CIFAR-10, the ENAS design achieved a test error of 2.89%, comparable to NASNet. On Penn Treebank, the ENAS design reached test perplexity of 55.8. == Evolution == An alternative approach to NAS is based on evolutionary algorithms, which has been employed by several groups. An Evolutionary Algorithm for Neural Architecture Search generally performs the following procedure. First a pool consisting of different candidate architectures along with their validation scores (fitness) is initialised. At each step the architectures in the candidate pool are mutated (e.g.: 3x3 convolution instead of a 5x5 convolution). Next the new architectures are trained from scratch for a few epochs and their validation scores are obtained. This is followed by replacing the lowest scoring architectures in the candidate pool with the better, newer architectures. This procedure is repeated multiple times and thus the candidate pool is refined over time. Mutations in the context of evolving ANNs are operations such as adding or removing a layer, which include changing the type of a layer (e.g., from convolution to pooling), changing the hyperparameters of a layer, or changing the training hyperparameters. On CIFAR-10 and ImageNet, evolution and RL performed comparably, while both slightly outperformed random search. == Bayesian optimization == Bayesian Optimization (BO), which has proven to be an efficient method for hyperparameter optimization, can also be applied to NAS. In this context, the objective function maps an architecture to its validation error after being trained for a number of epochs. At each iteration, BO uses a surrogate to model this objective function based on previously obtained architectures and their validation errors. One then chooses the next architecture to evaluate by maximizing an acquisition function, such as expected improvement, which provides a balance between exploration and exploitation. Acquisition function maximization and objective function evaluation are often computationally expensive for NAS, and make the application of BO challenging in this context. Recently, BANANAS has achieved promising results in this direction by introducing a high-performing instantiation of BO coupled to a neural predictor. == Hill-climbing == Another group used a hill climbing procedure that applies network morphisms, followed by short cosine-annealing optimization runs. The approach yielded competitive results, requiring resources on the same order of magnitude as training a single network. E.g., on CIFAR-10, the method designed and trained a network with an error rate below 5% in 12 hours on a single GPU. == Multi-objective search == While most approaches solely focus on finding architecture with maximal predictive performance, for most practical applications other objectives are relevant, such as memory consumption, model size or inference time (i.e., the time required to obtain a prediction). Because of that, researchers created a multi-objective search. LEMONADE is an evolutionary algorithm that adopted Lamarckism to efficiently optimize multiple objectives. In every generation, child networks are generated to improve the Pareto frontier with respect to the current population of ANNs. Neural Architect is claimed to be a resource-aware multi-objective RL-based NAS with network embedding and performance prediction. Network embedding encodes an existing network to a trainable embedding vector. Based on the embedding, a controller network generates transformations of the target network. A multi-objective reward function considers network accuracy, computational resource and training time. The reward is predicted by multiple performance simulation networks that are pre-trained or co-trained with the controller network. The controller network is trained via policy gradient. Following a modification, the resulting candidate network is evaluated by both an accuracy network and a training time network. The results are combined by a reward engine that passes its output back to the controller network. == One-shot models == RL or evolution-based NAS require thousands of GPU-days of searching/training to achieve state-of-the-art computer vision results as described in the NASNet, mNASNet and MobileNetV3 papers. To reduce computational cost, many recent NAS methods rely on the weight-sharing idea. In this approach, a single overparameterized supernetwork (also known as the one-shot model) is defined. A supernetwork is a very large Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) whose subgraphs are different candidate neural networks. Thus, in a supernetwork, the weights are shared among a large number of different sub-architectures that have edges in common, each of which is considered as a path within the supernet. The essential idea is to train one supernetwork that spans many options for the final design rather than generating and training thousands of networks independently. In addition to the learned parameters, a set of architecture parameters are learnt to depict preference for one module over another. Such methods reduce the required computational resources to only a few GPU days. More recent works further combine this weight-sharing paradigm, with a continuous relaxation of the search space, which enables the use of gradient-based optimization methods. These approaches are generally referred to as differentiable NAS and have proven very efficient in exploring the search space of ne
Read more →