AI Writing Tools

Explore the best AI Writing Tools — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step how-to guides, curated by Aizhi.

Spreading activation

Spreading activation is a method for searching associative networks, biological and artificial neural networks, or semantic networks. The search process is initiated by labeling a set of source nodes (e.g. concepts in a semantic network) with weights or "activation" and then iteratively propagating or "spreading" that activation out to other nodes linked to the source nodes. Most often these "weights" are real values that decay as activation propagates through the network. When the weights are discrete this process is often referred to as marker passing. Activation may originate from alternate paths, identified by distinct markers, and terminate when two alternate paths reach the same node. However brain studies show that several different brain areas play an important role in semantic processing. Spreading activation in semantic networks as a model were invented in cognitive psychology to model the fan out effect. Spreading activation can also be applied in information retrieval, by means of a network of nodes representing documents and terms contained in those documents. == Cognitive psychology == As it relates to cognitive psychology, spreading activation is the theory of how the brain iterates through a network of associated ideas to retrieve specific information. The spreading activation theory presents the array of concepts within our memory as cognitive units, each consisting of a node and its associated elements or characteristics, all connected together by edges. A spreading activation network can be represented schematically, in a sort of web diagram with shorter lines between two nodes meaning the ideas are more closely related and will typically be associated more quickly to the original concept. In memory psychology, the spreading activation model holds that people organize their knowledge of the world based on their personal experiences, which in turn form the network of ideas that is the person's knowledge of the world. When a word (the target) is preceded by an associated word (the prime) in word recognition tasks, participants seem to perform better in the amount of time that it takes them to respond. For instance, subjects respond faster to the word "doctor" when it is preceded by "nurse" than when it is preceded by an unrelated word like "carrot". This semantic priming effect with words that are close in meaning within the cognitive network has been seen in a wide range of tasks given by experimenters, ranging from sentence verification to lexical decision and naming. As another example, if the original concept is "red" and the concept "vehicles" is primed, they are much more likely to say "fire engine" instead of something unrelated to vehicles, such as "cherries". If instead "fruits" was primed, they would likely name "cherries" and continue on from there. The activation of pathways in the network has everything to do with how closely linked two concepts are by meaning, as well as how a subject is primed. == Algorithm == A directed graph is populated by Nodes[ 1...N ] each having an associated activation value A [ i ] which is a real number in the range [0.0 ... 1.0]. A Link[ i, j ] connects source node[ i ] with target node[ j ]. Each edge has an associated weight W [ i, j ] usually a real number in the range [0.0 ... 1.0]. Parameters: Firing threshold F, a real number in the range [0.0 ... 1.0] Decay factor D, a real number in the range [0.0 ... 1.0] Steps: Initialize the graph setting all activation values A [ i ] to zero. Set one or more origin nodes to an initial activation value greater than the firing threshold F. A typical initial value is 1.0. For each unfired node [ i ] in the graph having an activation value A [ i ] greater than the node firing threshold F: For each Link [ i, j ] connecting the source node [ i ] with target node [ j ], adjust A [ j ] = A [ j ] + (A [ i ] W [ i, j ] D) where D is the decay factor. If a target node receives an adjustment to its activation value so that it would exceed 1.0, then set its new activation value to 1.0. Likewise maintain 0.0 as a lower bound on the target node's activation value should it receive an adjustment to below 0.0. Once a node has fired it may not fire again, although variations of the basic algorithm permit repeated firings and loops through the graph. Nodes receiving a new activation value that exceeds the firing threshold F are marked for firing on the next spreading activation cycle. If activation originates from more than one node, a variation of the algorithm permits marker passing to distinguish the paths by which activation is spread over the graph The procedure terminates when either there are no more nodes to fire or in the case of marker passing from multiple origins, when a node is reached from more than one path. Variations of the algorithm that permit repeated node firings and activation loops in the graph, terminate after a steady activation state, with respect to some delta, is reached, or when a maximum number of iterations is exceeded. == Examples ==
Read more →
MultiNet

Multilayered extended semantic networks (MultiNets) are both a knowledge representation paradigm and a language for meaning representation of natural language expressions that has been developed by Prof. Dr. Hermann Helbig on the basis of earlier Semantic Networks. It is used in a question-answering application for German called InSicht. It is also used to create a tutoring application developed by the university of University of Hagen to teach MultiNet to knowledge engineers. MultiNet is claimed to be one of the most comprehensive and thoroughly described knowledge representation systems. It specifies conceptual structures by means of about 140 predefined relations and functions, which are systematically characterized and underpinned by a formal axiomatic apparatus. Apart from their relational connections, the concepts are embedded in a multidimensional space of layered attributes and their values. Another characteristic of MultiNet distinguishing it from simple semantic networks is the possibility to encapsulate whole partial networks and represent the resulting conceptual capsule as a node of higher order, which itself can be an argument of relations and functions. MultiNet has been used in practical NLP applications such as natural language interfaces to the Internet or question answering systems over large semantically annotated corpora with millions of sentences. MultiNet is also a cornerstone of the commercially available search engine SEMPRIA-Search, where it is used for the description of the computational lexicon and the background knowledge, for the syntactic-semantic analysis, for logical answer finding, as well as for the generation of natural language answers. MultiNet is supported by a set of software tools and has been used to build large semantically based computational lexicons. The tools include a semantic interpreter WOCADI, which translates natural language expressions (phrases, sentences, texts) into formal MultiNet expressions, a workbench MWR+ for the knowledge engineer (comprising modules for automatic knowledge acquisition and reasoning), and a workbench LIA+ for the computer lexicographer supporting the creation of large semantically based computational lexica.
Read more →
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence

IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (sometimes abbreviated as IEEE PAMI or simply PAMI) is a monthly peer-reviewed scientific journal published by the IEEE Computer Society. == Background == The journal covers research in computer vision and image understanding, pattern analysis and recognition, machine intelligence, machine learning, search techniques, document and handwriting analysis, medical image analysis, video and image sequence analysis, content-based retrieval of image and video, and face and gesture recognition. The editor-in-chief is Kyoung Mu Lee (Seoul National University). According to the Journal Citation Reports, the journal has a 2023 impact factor of 20.8.
Read more →
Danilo McGarry

Danilo McGarry (born 1985) is a British tech executive, writer, and speaker who has led AI initiatives in finance and healthcare. == Early life and education == Danilo McGarry was born in 1985. He received a Bachelor of Science (BSc) with honors in Business Management from the University of Bath. == Career == McGarry began his career in technology and financial services, with positions at companies including Motorola, JPMorgan Chase, and BNP Paribas. He later joined the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) as an analyst and later became a director, where he led transformation initiatives involving robotic process automation (RPA) in the bank's capital markets operations. McGarry subsequently moved into leadership roles focused on AI. At Citigroup, he served as Head of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, where he launched an AI-driven robotics and automation initiative. At UnitedHealth Group (UHG), he held a senior role in the company's automation program, which utilized a large fleet of software robots in its healthcare operations. In December 2019, McGarry was appointed Global Head of AI & Automation at Alter Domus, a multinational financial services firm. In this role, he established a new AI and automation department. He left the firm in late 2023 to establish his businesses. In 2025, the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) appointed him as its strategic adviser on artificial intelligence.
Read more →
Marq (company)

Marq (formerly Lucidpress) is a cloud-based software platform for brand management and templated content creation. The platform integrates with digital asset management (DAM) systems—including Aprimo and Bynder and customer relationship management (CRM) tools such as Salesforce and HubSpot. Marq also includes AI-assisted features for brand compliance and content automation. Trade publications have described the product as a brand templating and creative automation platform. == History == In October 2013, Lucid Software, Inc. announced Lucidpress as a public beta version. Following its release, Lucidpress was featured in TechCrunch, VentureBeat and PC World, with TechCrunch noting: "I had a chance to test the app before its launch and it is indeed very easy to use. If you've ever used a desktop publishing app in the past, you'll feel right at home with Marq, as it features the same kind of standard top-bar menu and layout options as most other publishing apps. In terms of features, it can also hold its own against similar desktop-based apps." In May 2021, Lucidpress announced that it had been acquired by Charles Thayne Capital ("CTC"), a growth-oriented and technology-focused private investment firm. In May 2021, following its acquisition by Charles Thayne Capital, Lucidpress became fully independent. Owen Fuller, who had served as General Manager since 2017, was appointed Chief Executive Officer. In 2022, Lucidpress was rebranded as Marq to reflect the company’s shift toward brand templating and creative automation tools, while continuing to support its publishing features. == Features == Marq integrates with customer relationship management (CRM) platforms such as Salesforce and HubSpot, enabling the creation of personalized, on-brand sales and marketing materials. The platform also connects with multiple digital asset management (DAM) systems, including Bynder, Aprimo, MediaValet, PhotoShelter, Acquia, and Canto. == Investment == Lucid Software raised $1 million in Seed in 2011, led by Google Ventures. In May 2014, the company received a $5 million investment. The round was led by Salt Lake-based Kickstart Seed Fund. In September 2016, the company received a $36 million investment from Spectrum Equity.
Read more →
Google Brain

Google Brain was a deep learning artificial intelligence research team that served as the sole AI branch of Google before being incorporated under the newer umbrella of Google AI, a research division at Google dedicated to artificial intelligence. Formed in 2011, it combined open-ended machine learning research with information systems and large-scale computing resources. It created tools such as TensorFlow, which allow neural networks to be used by the public, and multiple internal AI research projects, and aimed to create research opportunities in machine learning and natural language processing. It was merged into former Google sister company DeepMind to form Google DeepMind in April 2023. == History == The Google Brain project began in 2011 as a part-time research collaboration between Google fellow Jeff Dean and Google Researcher Greg Corrado. Google Brain started as a Google X project and became so successful that it was graduated back to Google: Astro Teller has said that Google Brain paid for the entire cost of Google X. In June 2012, The New York Times reported that a cluster of 16,000 processors in 1,000 computers dedicated to mimicking some aspects of human brain activity had successfully trained itself to recognize a cat based on 10 million digital images taken from YouTube videos. The story was also covered by National Public Radio (NPR). In March 2013, Google hired Geoffrey Hinton, a leading researcher in the deep learning field, and acquired the company DNNResearch Inc. headed by Hinton. Hinton said that he would be dividing his future time between his university research and his work at Google. In April 2023, Google Brain merged with Google sister company DeepMind to form Google DeepMind, as part of the company's continued efforts to accelerate work on AI. == Team and location == Google Brain was initially established by Google Fellow Jeff Dean and visiting Stanford professor Andrew Ng. In 2014, the team included Jeff Dean, Quoc V. Le, Ilya Sutskever, Alex Krizhevsky, Samy Bengio, and Vincent Vanhoucke. In 2017, team members included Anelia Angelova, Samy Bengio, Greg Corrado, George Dahl, Michael Isard, Anjuli Kannan, Hugo Larochelle, Chris Olah, Benoit Steiner, Vincent Vanhoucke, Vijay Vasudevan, and Fernanda Viegas. Chris Lattner, who created Apple's programming language Swift and then ran Tesla's autonomy team for six months, joined Google Brain's team in August 2017. Lattner left the team in January 2020 and joined SiFive. As of 2021, Google Brain was led by Jeff Dean, Geoffrey Hinton, and Zoubin Ghahramani. Other members include Katherine Heller, Pi-Chuan Chang, Ian Simon, Jean-Philippe Vert, Nevena Lazic, Anelia Angelova, Lukasz Kaiser, Carrie Jun Cai, Eric Breck, Ruoming Pang, Carlos Riquelme, Hugo Larochelle, and David Ha. Samy Bengio left the team in April 2021, and Zoubin Ghahramani took on his responsibilities. Google Research includes Google Brain and is based in Mountain View. It also has satellite groups in Accra, Amsterdam, Atlanta, Beijing, Berlin, Cambridge, Israel, Los Angeles, London, Montreal, Munich, New York City, Paris, Pittsburgh, Princeton, San Francisco, Seattle, Tokyo, Toronto, and Zurich. == Projects == === Artificial-intelligence-devised encryption system === In October 2016, Google Brain designed an experiment to determine that neural networks are capable of learning secure symmetric encryption. In this experiment, three neural networks were created: Alice, Bob and Eve. Adhering to the idea of a generative adversarial network (GAN), the goal of the experiment was for Alice to send an encrypted message to Bob that Bob could decrypt, but the adversary, Eve, could not. Alice and Bob maintained an advantage over Eve, in that they shared a key used for encryption and decryption. In doing so, Google Brain demonstrated the capability of neural networks to learn secure encryption. === Image enhancement === In February 2017, Google Brain determined a probabilistic method for converting pictures with 8x8 resolution to a resolution of 32x32. The method built upon an already existing probabilistic model called pixelCNN to generate pixel translations. The proposed software utilizes two neural networks to make approximations for the pixel makeup of translated images. The first network, known as the "conditioning network," downsizes high-resolution images to 8x8 and attempts to create mappings from the original 8x8 image to these higher-resolution ones. The other network, known as the "prior network," uses the mappings from the previous network to add more detail to the original image. The resulting translated image is not the same image in higher resolution, but rather a 32x32 resolution estimation based on other existing high-resolution images. Google Brain's results indicate the possibility for neural networks to enhance images. === Google Translate === The Google Brain contributed to the Google Translate project by employing a new deep learning system that combines artificial neural networks with vast databases of multilingual texts. In September 2016, Google Neural Machine Translation (GNMT) was launched, an end-to-end learning framework, able to learn from a large number of examples. Previously, Google Translate's Phrase-Based Machine Translation (PBMT) approach would statistically analyze word by word and try to match corresponding words in other languages without considering the surrounding phrases in the sentence. But rather than choosing a replacement for each individual word in the desired language, GNMT evaluates word segments in the context of the rest of the sentence to choose more accurate replacements. Compared to older PBMT models, the GNMT model scored a 24% improvement in similarity to human translation, with a 60% reduction in errors. The GNMT has also shown significant improvement for notoriously difficult translations, like Chinese to English. While the introduction of the GNMT has increased the quality of Google Translate's translations for the pilot languages, it was very difficult to create such improvements for all of its 103 languages. Addressing this problem, the Google Brain Team was able to develop a Multilingual GNMT system, which extended the previous one by enabling translations between multiple languages. Furthermore, it allows for Zero-Shot Translations, which are translations between two languages that the system has never explicitly seen before. Google announced that Google Translate can now also translate without transcribing, using neural networks. This means that it is possible to translate speech in one language directly into text in another language, without first transcribing it to text. According to the Researchers at Google Brain, this intermediate step can be avoided using neural networks. In order for the system to learn this, they exposed it to many hours of Spanish audio together with the corresponding English text. The different layers of neural networks, replicating the human brain, were able to link the corresponding parts and subsequently manipulate the audio waveform until it was transformed to English text. Another drawback of the GNMT model is that it causes the time of translation to increase exponentially with the number of words in the sentence. This caused the Google Brain Team to add 2000 more processors to ensure the new translation process would still be fast and reliable. === Robotics === Aiming to improve traditional robotics control algorithms where new skills of a robot need to be hand-programmed, robotics researchers at Google Brain are developing machine learning techniques to allow robots to learn new skills on their own. They also attempt to develop ways for information sharing between robots so that robots can learn from each other during their learning process, also known as cloud robotics. As a result, Google has launched the Google Cloud Robotics Platform for developers in 2019, an effort to combine robotics, AI, and the cloud to enable efficient robotic automation through cloud-connected collaborative robots. Robotics research at Google Brain has focused mostly on improving and applying deep learning algorithms to enable robots to complete tasks by learning from experience, simulation, human demonstrations, and/or visual representations. For example, Google Brain researchers showed that robots can learn to pick and throw rigid objects into selected boxes by experimenting in an environment without being pre-programmed to do so. In another research, researchers trained robots to learn behaviors such as pouring liquid from a cup; robots learned from videos of human demonstrations recorded from multiple viewpoints. Google Brain researchers have collaborated with other companies and academic institutions on robotics research. In 2016, the Google Brain Team collaborated with researchers at X in a research on learning hand-eye coordination for robotic grasping. Their method allowed real-time robot control for grasping novel objec
Read more →
Safe Superintelligence Inc.

Safe Superintelligence Inc. (SSI Inc.) is an Israeli-American artificial intelligence company founded by Ilya Sutskever, the former chief scientist of OpenAI; Daniel Gross, former head of Apple’s AI efforts; and Daniel Levy, an investor and AI researcher. The company's mission is to focus on safely developing a superintelligence, a computer-based agent capable of surpassing human intelligence. == History == On May 15, 2024, OpenAI co-founder Ilya Sutskever left OpenAI after a board dispute where he voted to fire Sam Altman amid concerns about communication and trust. Sutskever and others additionally believed that OpenAI was neglecting its original focus on safety in favor of pursuing opportunities for commercialization. On June 19, 2024, Sutskever posted on X that he was starting SSI Inc, with the goal to safely develop superintelligent AI, alongside Daniel Levy, and Daniel Gross. The company, composed of a small team, is split between Palo Alto, California and Tel Aviv, Israel. In September 2024, SSI revealed it had raised $1 billion from venture capital firms including SV Angel, DST Global, Sequoia Capital, and Andreessen Horowitz. The money will be used to build up more computing power and hire top individuals in the field. In March 2025, SSI reached a $30 billion valuation in a funding round led by Greenoaks Capital. This is six times its previous $5 billion valuation from September 2024. Despite not yet generating revenue and having approximately 20 employees, the company has attracted significant investor interest, largely due to co-founder Ilya Sutskever's reputation and its focus on developing safe superintelligence. In April 2025, Google Cloud announced a partnership to provide TPUs for SSI's research. In the first half of 2025, Meta attempted to acquire SSI but was rebuffed by Sutskever. In July 2025, co-founder Gross left the company to join Meta Superintelligence Labs, and Sutskever became the CEO of SSI.
Read more →
Qualification problem

In philosophy and AI (especially, knowledge-based systems), the qualification problem is concerned with the impossibility of listing all the preconditions required for a real-world action to have its intended effect. It might be posed as how to deal with the things that prevent me from achieving my intended result. It is strongly connected to, and opposite the ramification side of, the frame problem. John McCarthy gives the following motivating example, in which it is impossible to enumerate all the circumstances that may prevent a robot from performing its ordinary function: [T]he successful use of a boat to cross a river requires, if the boat is a rowboat, that the oars and rowlocks be present and unbroken, and that they fit each other. Many other qualifications can be added, making the rules for using a rowboat almost impossible to apply, and yet anyone will still be able to think of additional requirements not yet stated.
Read more →
Application enablement

Application enablement is an approach which brings telecommunications network providers and developers together to combine their network and web abilities in creating and delivering high demand advanced services and new intelligent applications. Network providers, in addition to bandwidth, provide abilities such as billing, location, presence, and security, which have allowed them to establish long-term relationships with end-users. By offering these select abilities as application programming interfaces (APIs), providers give developers access to a set of tools to create (mashup) new applications and services to run on provider networks. Unifying the strengths of providers and developers facilitates the creation of mash-up applications, and in turn, a better end user quality of experience (QoE) for improved profit margins. Apple's iOS with App Store, and Google's Android with Android Market exemplify this approach. Both have introduced mobile platforms that are supported by a comprehensive ecosystem in order to perpetuate innovation in product design, content and service offerings, and overall consumer behavior. By the end of April 2010, downloadable applications numbered over 200,000 for iPhone and over 50,000 for Android. == Background == Historically, telecommunication providers primarily based their business models on network performance, emphasizing connectivity, availability, and quality of service (QoS) as key sources of revenue and customer value. With the increasing demand for bandwidth-intensive data and video applications, maintaining service continuity has required substantial infrastructure investments. To address rising operational costs and declining average revenue per user (ARPU), providers have increasingly adopted customer-oriented strategies and diversified business models to expand their roles within the telecommunications value chain. Application enablement supports providers in making this transition by providing an environment, or ecosystem, where providers and developers can collaborate to build, test, manage, and distribute applications across networks including television, broadband, Internet, and mobile. This cooperative effort produces mutually beneficial results for all parties, opening up new revenue streams while enhancing value and rate of return (ROI). The following are some examples of key network abilities which function as application enablers in the telecommunications market: Billing systems Security for private transactions Network-based storage of digital content End-to-end bandwidth for high-quality transmissions Scoring abilities to identify end-user preferences and behaviors Subscriber data to customize the end-user experience Context information, such as location and presence, to localize services. == New business models == As network providers work toward effective collaboration with application and content developers, several new business models are emerging to help facilitate the business relationships: === Vendor-led === A type of business model driven by telecommunications vendors, who assist network providers in building relationships with application and content developers to lower the cost and complexity of managing third parties. Examples of this model include: Forum Nokia IBM Technology Partner Ecosystem Ng Connect Huawei Intouch program === Operator-led === Characterized by network providers who want to maintain a high degree of flexibility and control over applications created for their end-consumers, this model lets them create and manage their own developer program, development platform, and application store. Under this arrangement, independent developers provide their own branding, marketing communications, pricing and customer care. Network providers pursuing this model will often seek to partner with a large number of third parties using standardized on-boarding processes. Examples of this model include: o2 Litmus Orange Partner Joint Innovation Lab === Aggregator === Network providers who choose not to create/manage their own developer relationships will partner with one or multiple aggregators, to administer a portion of or their entire application strategy. Examples of this model include: Ovi Operator Partnership Blackberry Operator Partnership Cellmania Buongiorno === Mass wholesale === Select network providers also participate in wholesale models that exist primarily for applications (BT's Ribbit- an Internet Protocol (IP) based calling and messaging platform) and devices (Verizon's Open Device initiative). This business-to-business approach reduces a large portion of the potential costs of third party application enablement (marketing, acquisition and support). Examples of this model include: BT's Ribbit Verizon Wireless ODI AT&T Synaptic Hosting === The enterprise customer === Some network providers are focusing on enabling applications in the enterprise space. In this model, the network provider establishes a platform for their large enterprise customers who want to blend custom software with enhanced abilities, and will provide standardized processes around mobilizing enterprise applications, and exposing core back-office abilities to allow for dynamic customer interaction. Examples of this model include: Vodafone Applications Service Verizon Private Network Sprint Solution Launchpad === Trusted partner === In this model, the network provider builds one-on-one relationships with trusted third-party developers by exposing customized network abilities, bringing a greater variety of brands to the network provider's portfolio. Network providers using this model tend to only have a few partners (in contrast to the operator led model). Under this scenario, network providers benefit from a pre-established customer base and the developer's marketing resources. Examples of this model include: 3/Skype Partnership (UK) Virgin Media and BBC iPlayer == Network operator developer resources == Operator led model o2 Litmus Orange Partner Joint Innovations Lab Aggregator model Ovi Operator Partnership Cellmania Buongiorno Mass wholesale model BT Ribbit Verizon Wireless ODI AT&T Synaptic Hosting Enterprise customer model Vodafone Applications Service Verizon Private Network Sprint Solution Launchpad == Rerencesfe ==
Read more →
The Machine Question

The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI, Robots, and Ethics is a 2012 nonfiction book by David J. Gunkel that discusses the evolution of the theory of human ethical responsibilities toward non-human things and to what extent intelligent, autonomous machines can be considered to have legitimate moral responsibilities and what legitimate claims to moral consideration they can hold. The book was awarded as the 2012 Best Single Authored Book by the Communication Ethics Division of the National Communication Association. == Content == The book is spread across three chapters, with the first two chapters focusing on an overall review of the history of philosophy and its discussion of moral agency, moral rights, human rights, and animal rights and the third chapter focusing on what defines "thingness" and why machines have been excluded from moral and ethical consideration due to a misuse of the patient/agent binary. The first chapter, titled Moral Agency, breaks down the history of said agency based on what it included and excluded in various parts of history. Gunkel also raises the conflict between discussing the morality of humans toward objects and the theory of the philosophy of technology that "technology is merely a tool: a means to an end". The main issue, he explains, in defining what constitutes an appropriate moral agent is that there will be things left outside of what is included, as the definition is based on a set of characteristics that will inherently not be all-encompassing. The subject of consciousness is broached and subsequently derided by Gunkel because of it being one of the main arguments against machine rights, while Gunkel points out that no "settled definition" of the term exists and that he considers it no better than a synonym used for "the occultish soul". In addition, the issue of the other minds problem entails that no proper understanding of consciousness can come to pass due to the inability to properly understand the mind of a being that is not oneself. The second chapter, titled Moral Patiency, focuses on the patient end of the topic and discusses the expansion of the fields of animal studies and environmental studies. Gunkel describes moral patients as the ones that are to be the object of moral consideration and deserve such consideration even if they lack their own agency, such as animals, thus allowing moral consideration itself to be broader and more inclusive. The topic of other minds is discussed again when examining the question of whether animals can suffer, a question that Gunkel ultimately abandons because it encounters the same problems that the topic of consciousness does. Especially because the subject of animal rights is often only afforded for the animals deemed to be "cute", but often not including "reptiles, insects, or microbes". Gunkel continues on to examine environmental ethics and information ethics, but finds them to be too anthropocentric, just as all the other examined models have been. The third chapter, titled Thinking Otherwise, proposes a combination of Heideggerian ontology and Levinasian ethics to properly discuss the otherness of technology and machines, but finds that the patient/agent binary is unable to be properly extended to confine the extent of "the machine question". In discussing the land ethic philosophy espoused by Aldo Leopold, Gunkel proposes that it is the entire relationship between agent and patient that should have moral consideration and not a specific definition based on either side, as each part contributes to the relationship as a whole and cannot be removed without breaking that relationship. == Critical reception == Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries writer R. S. Stansbury explained that the book is able to use simple examples to discuss difficult topics and separate ideas and that it would be "useful for philosophy students, and for engineering students interested in exploring the ethical implications of their work". Dominika Dzwonkowska, writing for International Philosophical Quarterly, stated that the "unprecedented value of the book is that Gunkel not only analyzes important aspects of the immediate problem but also that he places his discussion in the context of philosophical discussions on such related issues as rights discourse." Mark Coeckelbergh in Ethics and Information Technology noted that focusing on the question itself of the machine question allows further exploration of machine ethics and the expansion of general ethics and that the book's questions point out that "good, critical philosophical reflection on machines is not only about how we should cope with machines, but also about how we (should) think and what role technology plays (and should play) in this thinking." A review in Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews by Colin Allen criticized some of Gunkel's methodology and the indecisiveness of his ultimate answer to the machine question, but also acknowledged that the book "succeeded in connecting the ethics of robots and AI to a much broader ethical discussion than has been represented in the literature on machine ethics to date". Blay Whitby, in a review for AISB Quarterly, lauded The Machine Question for its "clear exposition" and wide range of references to other works, concluding that the book is "essential reading for philosophers interested in AI, robot ethics, or animal ethics". In a twin review of The Machine Question and Robot Ethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Robots by Patrick Lin, Keith Abney, and George A. Bekey, Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology reviewer Jeff Shaw called Gunkel's book a good introduction to the "complex field of robot ethics" and that both books are "highly recommended to both the general reader as well as to experts in the field of robotics, philosophy, and ethics." In a 2017 paper for Ethics and Information Technology, Katharyn Hogan investigated whether the machine question presented by Gunkel in the book is any different from the longstanding animal question. She concludes that the real question that is revealed from this discussion is whether humans deserve any moral preference over artificial life in the first place.
Read more →
Sriram Krishnan

Sriram Krishnan (born 1984) is a tech executive and White House official, currently serving as the Senior White House Policy Advisor on Artificial Intelligence. Krishnan was named a Time Person of the Year in 2025 as an "Architect of Artificial Intelligence." He was described in Time as providing the "wake-up call that we needed" to the other AI builders, leading to "a multiyear, $500 billion initiative dubbed Stargate" to push American-made AI, as well as numerous other AI initiatives. Also in December 2025, President Trump said of Krishnan, "without him, things on AI would not function well" and cited Krishnan as the leading figure behind the American executive order on AI. As the leader of the United States' policy team regarding artificial intelligence, Krishnan plays "a significant role in shaping the administration’s approach to AI and driving measures to advance federal adoption of AI." The role calls for removing barriers to AI adoption within the government, driving vendors toward solutions suitable for federal needs, designing sensible regulation of private-sector AI, and conducting "AI diplomacy". He has stated a policy goal of "reinvigorating US dominance in emerging technologies," including AI. He also represents the United States' interests in AI abroad, such as at the Paris AI Summit. He is one of the authors of the American "AI Action Plan" released in July, 2025, which he contends is necessary to win the "existential race with China" for AI supremacy. Krishnan, a U.S. citizen born in India, is also a venture capitalist, podcaster, product manager and author. Early in his career, he led product teams at Microsoft, Twitter, Yahoo!, Facebook, and Snap. In addition to his work as an investor and technologist, he and his wife, Aarthi Ramamurthy, rose to additional prominence in 2021 as podcast hosts. He served as a general partner at the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz and led its London office. In 2022, Krishnan announced that he was working with Elon Musk on the rebuilding of Twitter following Musk's acquisition of the company. On December 22, 2024, US president-elect Donald Trump announced that Krishnan would be Senior White House Policy Advisor on Artificial Intelligence in his incoming administration; in 2026 he joined the National Economic Council. == Early life and education == Krishnan was born in Chennai, India. He earned his Bachelor of Technology in Information Technology from SRM University (2001–2005), moved to the United States in 2007 to join Microsoft, and became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 2016. == Career == === Early career === In 2007, he began working at Microsoft where he served as a program manager for Visual Studio. At Facebook, Krishnan built the Facebook Audience Network, a competitive platform to Google's ad technologies. At Twitter, he led product and core user experience, driving a 20% annual user growth rate and launching a redesigned home page and events experience. === Andreessen Horowitz === Krishnan was appointed a general partner of American venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz ("a16z") in February 2021. He was anticipated to serve consumer and social markets, however he has also theorized on the impact of "deep tech" on society. In 2023 he was appointed to lead the firm's London office, its first non-US location. The office is expected to serve Web3 investments as well as AI and other fields. Krishnan announced that he would leave the firm at the end of 2024. === Social media and AI === In 2022, various news media reported that Krishnan was assisting Elon Musk in the revamp of Twitter following Musk's takeover of the company. Additional reports named Krishnan as the leading candidate for the role of CEO of the newly private company. Krishnan penned a 2023 New York Times opinion column regarding social media, AI, and related fields. He predicted a rise in the number and diversity of online spaces due to decentralization and platforms like Farcaster, Bluesky and Mastodon. === Public office === In 2024, the Financial Times reported that Krishnan was active in international affairs, reintroducing Boris Johnson to Elon Musk, following Musk's nomination to the proposed Department of Government Efficiency. Krishnan was also reported as potentially leaving a16z at the end of the year to "be jumping into something I've wanted to spend [his] energy on," which was widely reported as being related to Musk's and Vivek Ramaswamy's work at DOGE. Others reported to be involved include Joe Lonsdale, Marc Andreesen, Bill Ackman, and Travis Kalanick. On December 22, 2024, US president-elect Donald Trump announced that he would be Senior White House Policy Advisor on Artificial Intelligence in his incoming administration. On February 6, 2025, Reuters reported that Krishnan would be accompanying Vice President Vance to the Paris AI Summit, a "major artificial intelligence" event later that month. Other members of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy would also be joining the event with around 100 other countries to "focus on AI's potential." Krishnan joined a U.S. technology policy delegation to the Middle East in advance of President Trump's visit in May 2025. Conducting "AI diplomacy," Krishnan negotiated the spread of U.S. AI technologies with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, as well as other means to strengthen bilateral trade in artificial intelligence technologies. He explained that the goal of the diplomatic mission was that "we want American A.I. to spread." Krishnan, along with David Sacks and Michael Kratsios, were credited as authors of the American AI Action Plan released in July 2025. The plan is "the administration’s most significant policy directive" regarding artificial intelligence; it calls for financing to support the global spread of American AI models and a policy to enforce neutrality in models. The Washington Post referred to the plan as a "bold action to ensure that American AI remains at the cutting edge." The AI Action Plan is a continuation of prior efforts to reduce barriers to U.S. production of AI systems and the removal of rules that were considered to hinder such growth. Later in 2025, at the POLITICO AI & Tech Summit, Krishnan called national AI development "an existential race with China." He suggested that private companies are best positioned to create new models, quipping "let them cook." He further suggested that state-by-state regulation of AI technologies may hinder national AI competitiveness. Also in 2025, at the Axios AI+ Summit, Krishnan stated that the United States and China are in a race for AI supremacy, in which the winner will be judged by market share. Winning the race is a "business strategy" to Krishnan. Krishnan was named in the 2025 Time Person of the Year article as an "AI Architect". === The Aarthi and Sriram Show and other media === In early 2021, Krishnan and his wife, Aarthi Ramamurthy, launched a Clubhouse talk show that "focuses on organic conversations on anything from startups to venture capitalism and cryptocurrencies." An early appearance by Elon Musk on the Good Time Show was described as the first show that "broke Clubhouse" by rapidly exceeding the limit of 5,000 simultaneous users. The desire to interact with a larger community led to a variety of later innovations to allow streaming and replaying of Clubhouse chats. On that episode, Elon Musk grilled Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev regarding the GameStop trading controversy. As of December 2021, the show had over 187,000 subscribers, plus 735,000 subscribers between Krishnan and Ramamurthy's personal Clubhouse accounts. Other guests have included Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Diane von Fürstenberg, Tony Hawk, MrBeast, and A.R. Rahman. In 2022, the Good Time Show moved to YouTube. It then evolved to a podcasting format under the name The Aarthi and Sriram Show, with both audio and video content. The Hollywood Reporter reported that the podcast had received more than 1 million downloads by early 2023. == Personal life == Krishnan is married to Aarthi Ramamurthy, co-host of The Aarthi and Sriram Show (formerly the Good Time Show) and a serial entrepreneur. They met in college in 2003 through a Yahoo! chat room related to a coding project and began dating in 2006 and eloped in 2010. == Awards == Time Person of the Year - 2025
Read more →
Daisy Intelligence

Daisy Intelligence is a Canadian artificial intelligence (AI) company that provides data analysis services to help retailers, mainly grocers and supermarkets, to determine optimal pricing and promotional mix. The company also helps insurance companies detect fraudulent claims. The company uses a subset of AI known as reinforcement learning. In October 2019, the company moved from the suburban Vaughan, Ontario, to downtown Toronto, joining other AI and technology startups concentrated in the King Street East area. In 2019, the company was ranked No. 39 on The Globe and Mail's annual list of Canada's "top growing companies by three-year revenue growth."
Read more →
Stability (learning theory)

Stability, also known as algorithmic stability, is a notion in computational learning theory of how a machine learning algorithm output is changed with small perturbations to its inputs. A stable learning algorithm is one for which the prediction does not change much when the training data is modified slightly. For instance, consider a machine learning algorithm that is being trained to recognize handwritten letters of the alphabet, using 1000 examples of handwritten letters and their labels ("A" to "Z") as a training set. One way to modify this training set is to leave out an example, so that only 999 examples of handwritten letters and their labels are available. A stable learning algorithm would produce a similar classifier with both the 1000-element and 999-element training sets. Stability can be studied for many types of learning problems, from language learning to inverse problems in physics and engineering, as it is a property of the learning process rather than the type of information being learned. The study of stability gained importance in computational learning theory in the 2000s when it was shown to have a connection with generalization. It was shown that for large classes of learning algorithms, notably empirical risk minimization algorithms, certain types of stability ensure good generalization. == History == A central goal in designing a machine learning system is to guarantee that the learning algorithm will generalize, or perform accurately on new examples after being trained on a finite number of them. In the 1990s, milestones were reached in obtaining generalization bounds for supervised learning algorithms. The technique historically used to prove generalization was to show that an algorithm was consistent, using the uniform convergence properties of empirical quantities to their means. This technique was used to obtain generalization bounds for the large class of empirical risk minimization (ERM) algorithms. An ERM algorithm is one that selects a solution from a hypothesis space H {\displaystyle H} in such a way to minimize the empirical error on a training set S {\displaystyle S} . A general result, proved by Vladimir Vapnik for an ERM binary classification algorithms, is that for any target function and input distribution, any hypothesis space H {\displaystyle H} with VC-dimension d {\displaystyle d} , and n {\displaystyle n} training examples, the algorithm is consistent and will produce a training error that is at most O ( d n ) {\displaystyle O\left({\sqrt {\frac {d}{n}}}\right)} (plus logarithmic factors) from the true error. The result was later extended to almost-ERM algorithms with function classes that do not have unique minimizers. Vapnik's work, using what became known as VC theory, established a relationship between generalization of a learning algorithm and properties of the hypothesis space H {\displaystyle H} of functions being learned. However, these results could not be applied to algorithms with hypothesis spaces of unbounded VC-dimension. Put another way, these results could not be applied when the information being learned had a complexity that was too large to measure. Some of the simplest machine learning algorithms—for instance, for regression—have hypothesis spaces with unbounded VC-dimension. Another example is language learning algorithms that can produce sentences of arbitrary length. Stability analysis was developed in the 2000s for computational learning theory and is an alternative method for obtaining generalization bounds. The stability of an algorithm is a property of the learning process, rather than a direct property of the hypothesis space H {\displaystyle H} , and it can be assessed in algorithms that have hypothesis spaces with unbounded or undefined VC-dimension such as nearest neighbor. A stable learning algorithm is one for which the learned function does not change much when the training set is slightly modified, for instance by leaving out an example. A measure of Leave one out error is used in a Cross Validation Leave One Out (CVloo) algorithm to evaluate a learning algorithm's stability with respect to the loss function. As such, stability analysis is the application of sensitivity analysis to machine learning. == Summary of classic results == Early 1900s - Stability in learning theory was earliest described in terms of continuity of the learning map L {\displaystyle L} , traced to Andrey Nikolayevich Tikhonov. 1979 - Devroye and Wagner observed that the leave-one-out behavior of an algorithm is related to its sensitivity to small changes in the sample. 1999 - Kearns and Ron discovered a connection between finite VC-dimension and stability. 2002 - In a landmark paper, Bousquet and Elisseeff proposed the notion of uniform hypothesis stability of a learning algorithm and showed that it implies low generalization error. Uniform hypothesis stability, however, is a strong condition that does not apply to large classes of algorithms, including ERM algorithms with a hypothesis space of only two functions. 2002 - Kutin and Niyogi extended Bousquet and Elisseeff's results by providing generalization bounds for several weaker forms of stability which they called almost-everywhere stability. Furthermore, they took an initial step in establishing the relationship between stability and consistency in ERM algorithms in the Probably Approximately Correct (PAC) setting. 2004 - Poggio et al. proved a general relationship between stability and ERM consistency. They proposed a statistical form of leave-one-out-stability which they called CVEEEloo stability, and showed that it is a) sufficient for generalization in bounded loss classes, and b) necessary and sufficient for consistency (and thus generalization) of ERM algorithms for certain loss functions such as the square loss, the absolute value and the binary classification loss. 2010 - Shalev Shwartz et al. noticed problems with the original results of Vapnik due to the complex relations between hypothesis space and loss class. They discuss stability notions that capture different loss classes and different types of learning, supervised and unsupervised. 2016 - Moritz Hardt et al. proved stability of gradient descent given certain assumption on the hypothesis and number of times each instance is used to update the model. == Preliminary definitions == We define several terms related to learning algorithms training sets, so that we can then define stability in multiple ways and present theorems from the field. A machine learning algorithm, also known as a learning map L {\displaystyle L} , maps a training data set, which is a set of labeled examples ( x , y ) {\displaystyle (x,y)} , onto a function f {\displaystyle f} from X {\displaystyle X} to Y {\displaystyle Y} , where X {\displaystyle X} and Y {\displaystyle Y} are in the same space of the training examples. The functions f {\displaystyle f} are selected from a hypothesis space of functions called H {\displaystyle H} . The training set from which an algorithm learns is defined as S = { z 1 = ( x 1 , y 1 ) , . . , z m = ( x m , y m ) } {\displaystyle S=\{z_{1}=(x_{1},\ y_{1})\ ,..,\ z_{m}=(x_{m},\ y_{m})\}} and is of size m {\displaystyle m} in Z = X × Y {\displaystyle Z=X\times Y} drawn i.i.d. from an unknown distribution D. Thus, the learning map L {\displaystyle L} is defined as a mapping from Z m {\displaystyle Z_{m}} into H {\displaystyle H} , mapping a training set S {\displaystyle S} onto a function f S {\displaystyle f_{S}} from X {\displaystyle X} to Y {\displaystyle Y} . Here, we consider only deterministic algorithms where L {\displaystyle L} is symmetric with respect to S {\displaystyle S} , i.e. it does not depend on the order of the elements in the training set. Furthermore, we assume that all functions are measurable and all sets are countable. The loss V {\displaystyle V} of a hypothesis f {\displaystyle f} with respect to an example z = ( x , y ) {\displaystyle z=(x,y)} is then defined as V ( f , z ) = V ( f ( x ) , y ) {\displaystyle V(f,z)=V(f(x),y)} . The empirical error of f {\displaystyle f} is I S [ f ] = 1 n ∑ V ( f , z i ) {\displaystyle I_{S}[f]={\frac {1}{n}}\sum V(f,z_{i})} . The true error of f {\displaystyle f} is I [ f ] = E z V ( f , z ) {\displaystyle I[f]=\mathbb {E} _{z}V(f,z)} Given a training set S of size m, we will build, for all i = 1....,m, modified training sets as follows: By removing the i-th element S | i = { z 1 , . . . , z i − 1 , z i + 1 , . . . , z m } {\displaystyle S^{|i}=\{z_{1},...,\ z_{i-1},\ z_{i+1},...,\ z_{m}\}} By replacing the i-th element S i = { z 1 , . . . , z i − 1 , z i ′ , z i + 1 , . . . , z m } {\displaystyle S^{i}=\{z_{1},...,\ z_{i-1},\ z_{i}',\ z_{i+1},...,\ z_{m}\}} == Definitions of stability == === Hypothesis Stability === An algorithm L {\displaystyle L} has hypothesis stability β with respect to the loss function V if the following holds: ∀ i ∈ { 1 , . . . , m } , E S , z [ | V ( f S , z ) − V ( f S |
Read more →
Simultaneous localization and mapping

Simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) is a process where a computer constructs or updates a map of an unknown environment while simultaneously keeping track of an entity's location within it. While this initially appears to be a chicken or the egg problem, there are several algorithms known to solve it in, at least approximately, tractable time for certain environments. Popular approximate solution methods include the particle filter, extended Kalman filter, covariance intersection, and GraphSLAM. SLAM algorithms are based on concepts in computational geometry and computer vision, and are used in robot navigation, robotic mapping and odometry for virtual reality or augmented reality. SLAM algorithms are tailored to the available resources and are not aimed at perfection but at operational compliance. Published approaches are employed in self-driving cars, unmanned aerial vehicles, autonomous underwater vehicles, planetary rovers, newer domestic robots and even inside the human body. == Mathematical description of the problem == Given a series of controls u t {\displaystyle u_{t}} and sensor observations o t {\displaystyle o_{t}} over discrete time steps t {\displaystyle t} , the SLAM problem is to compute an estimate of the agent's state x t {\displaystyle x_{t}} and a map of the environment m t {\displaystyle m_{t}} . All quantities are usually probabilistic, so the objective is to compute P ( m t + 1 , x t + 1 | o 1 : t + 1 , u 1 : t ) {\displaystyle P(m_{t+1},x_{t+1}|o_{1:t+1},u_{1:t})} Applying Bayes' rule gives a framework for sequentially updating the location posteriors, given a map and a transition function P ( x t | x t − 1 ) {\displaystyle P(x_{t}|x_{t-1})} , P ( x t | o 1 : t , u 1 : t , m t ) = ∑ m t − 1 P ( o t | x t , m t , u 1 : t ) ∑ x t − 1 P ( x t | x t − 1 ) P ( x t − 1 | m t , o 1 : t − 1 , u 1 : t ) / Z {\displaystyle P(x_{t}|o_{1:t},u_{1:t},m_{t})=\sum _{m_{t-1}}P(o_{t}|x_{t},m_{t},u_{1:t})\sum _{x_{t-1}}P(x_{t}|x_{t-1})P(x_{t-1}|m_{t},o_{1:t-1},u_{1:t})/Z} where Z {\displaystyle Z} is the normalization constant, which ensures all the probabilities sum up to 1. Similarly the map can be updated sequentially by P ( m t | x t , o 1 : t , u 1 : t ) = ∑ x t ∑ m t P ( m t | x t , m t − 1 , o t , u 1 : t ) P ( m t − 1 , x t | o 1 : t − 1 , m t − 1 , u 1 : t ) {\displaystyle P(m_{t}|x_{t},o_{1:t},u_{1:t})=\sum _{x_{t}}\sum _{m_{t}}P(m_{t}|x_{t},m_{t-1},o_{t},u_{1:t})P(m_{t-1},x_{t}|o_{1:t-1},m_{t-1},u_{1:t})} Like many inference problems, the solutions to inferring the two variables together can be found, to a local optimum solution, by alternating updates of the two beliefs in a form of an expectation–maximization algorithm. == Algorithms == Statistical techniques used to approximate the above equations include Kalman filters and particle filters (the algorithm behind Monte Carlo Localization). They provide an estimation of the posterior probability distribution for the pose of the robot and for the parameters of the map. Methods which conservatively approximate the above model using covariance intersection are able to avoid reliance on statistical independence assumptions to reduce algorithmic complexity for large-scale applications. Other approximation methods achieve improved computational efficiency by using simple bounded-region representations of uncertainty. Set-membership techniques are mainly based on interval constraint propagation. They provide a set which encloses the pose of the robot and a set approximation of the map. Bundle adjustment, and more generally maximum a posteriori estimation (MAP), is another popular technique for SLAM using image data, which jointly estimates poses and landmark positions, increasing map fidelity, and is used in commercialized SLAM systems such as Google's ARCore which replaces their prior augmented reality computing platform named Tango, formerly Project Tango. MAP estimators compute the most likely explanation of the robot poses and the map given the sensor data, rather than trying to estimate the entire posterior probability. New SLAM algorithms remain an active research area, and are often driven by differing requirements and assumptions about the types of maps, sensors and models as detailed below. Many SLAM systems can be viewed as combinations of choices from each of these aspects. === Mapping === Topological maps are a method of environment representation which capture the connectivity (i.e., topology) of the environment rather than creating a geometrically accurate map. Topological SLAM approaches have been used to enforce global consistency in metric SLAM algorithms. In contrast, grid maps use arrays (typically square or hexagonal) of discretized cells to represent a topological world, and make inferences about which cells are occupied. Typically the cells are assumed to be statistically independent to simplify computation. Under such assumption, P ( m t | x t , m t − 1 , o t ) {\displaystyle P(m_{t}|x_{t},m_{t-1},o_{t})} are set to 1 if the new map's cells are consistent with the observation o t {\displaystyle o_{t}} at location x t {\displaystyle x_{t}} and 0 if inconsistent. Modern self driving cars mostly simplify the mapping problem to almost nothing, by making extensive use of highly detailed map data collected in advance. This can include map annotations to the level of marking locations of individual white line segments and curbs on the road. Location-tagged visual data such as Google's StreetView may also be used as part of maps. Essentially such systems simplify the SLAM problem to a simpler localization only task, perhaps allowing for moving objects such as cars and people only to be updated in the map at runtime. === Sensing === SLAM will always use several different types of sensors, and the powers and limits of various sensor types have been a major driver of new algorithms. Statistical independence is the mandatory requirement to cope with metric bias and with noise in measurements. Different types of sensors give rise to different SLAM algorithms which assumptions are most appropriate to the sensors. At one extreme, laser scans or visual features provide details of many points within an area, sometimes rendering SLAM inference unnecessary because shapes in these point clouds can be easily and unambiguously aligned at each step via image registration. At the opposite extreme, tactile sensors are extremely sparse as they contain only information about points very close to the agent, so they require strong prior models to compensate in purely tactile SLAM. Most practical SLAM tasks fall somewhere between these visual and tactile extremes. Sensor models divide broadly into landmark-based and raw-data approaches. Landmarks are uniquely identifiable objects in the world which location can be estimated by a sensor, such as Wi-Fi access points or radio beacons. Raw-data approaches make no assumption that landmarks can be identified, and instead model P ( o t | x t ) {\displaystyle P(o_{t}|x_{t})} directly as a function of the location. Optical sensors may be one-dimensional (single beam) or 2D- (sweeping) laser rangefinders, 3D high definition light detection and ranging (lidar), 3D flash lidar, 2D or 3D sonar sensors, and one or more 2D cameras. Since the invention of local features, such as SIFT, there has been intense research into visual SLAM (VSLAM) using primarily visual (camera) sensors, because of the increasing ubiquity of cameras such as those in mobile devices. Follow up research includes. Both visual and lidar sensors are informative enough to allow for landmark extraction in many cases. Other recent forms of SLAM include tactile SLAM (sensing by local touch only), radar SLAM, acoustic SLAM, and Wi-Fi-SLAM (sensing by strengths of nearby Wi-Fi access points). Recent approaches apply quasi-optical wireless ranging for multi-lateration (real-time locating system (RTLS)) or multi-angulation in conjunction with SLAM as a tribute to erratic wireless measures. A kind of SLAM for human pedestrians uses a shoe mounted inertial measurement unit as the main sensor and relies on the fact that pedestrians are able to avoid walls to automatically build floor plans of buildings by an indoor positioning system. For some outdoor applications, the need for SLAM has been almost entirely removed due to high precision differential GPS sensors. From a SLAM perspective, these may be viewed as location sensors which likelihoods are so sharp that they completely dominate the inference. However, GPS sensors may occasionally decline or go down entirely, e.g. during times of military conflict, which are of particular interest to some robotics applications. === Kinematics modeling === The P ( x t | x t − 1 ) {\displaystyle P(x_{t}|x_{t-1})} term represents the kinematics of the model, which usually include information about action commands given to a robot. As a part of the model, the kinematics of the robot is included, to improve estimates of sensing under con
Read more →
Rule-based system

In computer science, a rule-based system is a computer system in which domain-specific knowledge is represented in the form of rules and general-purpose reasoning is used to solve problems in the domain. Two different kinds of rule-based systems emerged within the field of artificial intelligence in the 1970s: Production systems, which use if-then rules to derive actions from conditions. Logic programming systems, which use conclusion if conditions rules to derive conclusions from conditions. The differences and relationships between these two kinds of rule-based system has been a major source of misunderstanding and confusion. Both kinds of rule-based systems use either forward or backward chaining, in contrast with imperative programs, which execute commands listed sequentially. However, logic programming systems have a logical interpretation, whereas production systems do not. == Production system rules == A classic example of a production rule-based system is the domain-specific expert system that uses rules to make deductions or choices. For example, an expert system might help a doctor choose the correct diagnosis based on a cluster of symptoms, or select tactical moves to play a game. Rule-based systems can be used to perform lexical analysis to compile or interpret computer programs, or in natural language processing. Rule-based programming attempts to derive execution instructions from a starting set of data and rules. This is a more indirect method than that employed by an imperative programming language, which lists execution steps sequentially. === Construction === A typical rule-based system has four basic components: A list of rules or rule base, which is a specific type of knowledge base. An inference engine or semantic reasoner, which infers information or takes action based on the interaction of input and the rule base. The interpreter executes a production system program by performing the following match-resolve-act cycle: Match: In this first phase, the condition sides of all productions are matched against the contents of working memory. As a result a set (the conflict set) is obtained, which consists of instantiations of all satisfied productions. An instantiation of a production is an ordered list of working memory elements that satisfies the condition side of the production. Conflict-resolution: In this second phase, one of the production instantiations in the conflict set is chosen for execution. If no productions are satisfied, the interpreter halts. Act: In this third phase, the actions of the production selected in the conflict-resolution phase are executed. These actions may change the contents of working memory. At the end of this phase, execution returns to the first phase. Temporary working memory, which is a database of facts. A user interface or other connection to the outside world through which input and output signals are received and sent. Whereas the matching phase of the inference engine has a logical interpretation, the conflict resolution and action phases do not. Instead, "their semantics is usually described as a series of applications of various state-changing operators, which often gets quite involved (depending on the choices made in deciding which ECA rules fire, when, and so forth), and they can hardly be regarded as declarative". == Logic programming rules == The logic programming family of computer systems includes the programming language Prolog, the database language Datalog and the knowledge representation and problem-solving language Answer Set Programming (ASP). In all of these languages, rules are written in the form of clauses: A :- B1, ..., Bn. and are read as declarative sentences in logical form: A if B1 and ... and Bn. In the simplest case of Horn clauses (or "definite" clauses), which are a subset of first-order logic, all of the A, B1, ..., Bn are atomic formulae. Although Horn clause logic programs are Turing complete, for many practical applications, it is useful to extend Horn clause programs by allowing negative conditions, implemented by negation as failure. Such extended logic programs have the knowledge representation capabilities of a non-monotonic logic. == Differences and relationships between production rules and logic programming rules == The most obvious difference between the two kinds of systems is that production rules are typically written in the forward direction, if A then B, and logic programming rules are typically written in the backward direction, B if A. In the case of logic programming rules, this difference is superficial and purely syntactic. It does not affect the semantics of the rules. Nor does it affect whether the rules are used to reason backwards, Prolog style, to reduce the goal B to the subgoals A, or whether they are used, Datalog style, to derive B from A. In the case of production rules, the forward direction of the syntax reflects the stimulus-response character of most production rules, with the stimulus A coming before the response B. Moreover, even in cases when the response is simply to draw a conclusion B from an assumption A, as in modus ponens, the match-resolve-act cycle is restricted to reasoning forwards from A to B. Reasoning backwards in a production system would require the use of an entirely different kind of inference engine. In his Introduction to Cognitive Science, Paul Thagard includes logic and rules as alternative approaches to modelling human thinking. He does not consider logic programs in general, but he considers Prolog to be, not a rule-based system, but "a programming language that uses logic representations and deductive techniques" (page 40). He argues that rules, which have the form IF condition THEN action, are "very similar" to logical conditionals, but they are simpler and have greater psychological plausibility (page 51). Among other differences between logic and rules, he argues that logic uses deduction, but rules use search (page 45) and can be used to reason either forward or backward (page 47). Sentences in logic "have to be interpreted as universally true", but rules can be defaults, which admit exceptions (page 44). He does not observe that all of these features of rules apply to logic programming systems.
Read more →