Best AI Writing Tools

Best AI Writing Tools — hands-on reviews, top picks, pricing, pros and cons and a practical how-to guide on Aizhi.

• 

  CloudHealth Technologies

  CloudHealth Technologies, now CloudHealth by VMware, is a software company based in Boston, Massachusetts. The company provides cloud computing services related to cost management, governance, automation, security, and performance. == History == CloudHealth Technologies was founded by Joe Kinsella in 2012. Dan Phillips joined as CEO and co-founder in late 2012, and Dave Eicher joined as co-Founder in January 2013. In May 2016, the company announced plans to expand from its Boston headquarters with branch offices in San Francisco, London, Washington, D.C., Sydney, Amsterdam, Tel Aviv, and Singapore. Headquarters moved in Boston from Fort Point to 100 Summer Street in the Spring of 2018, tripling in square footage. In September 2017, Tom Axbey—who was previously at Rave Mobile Safety—joined as the new CEO and President. VMware announced its intention to acquire CloudHealth Technologies on August 27, 2018. The acquisition is "part of the information technology company's continued push into cloud-based software services" according to Reuters. The deal closed on October 4, 2018, and was reported to be in excess of $500 million. == Technology == Delivered through a software as a service (SaaS) model, CloudHealth Technologies's platform collects and analyzes data from cloud computing services and other IT environments so clients can report on costs, inform their business models, and project future trends. CloudHealth Technologies is compatible with Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud Platform, multicloud, and hybrid cloud environments. CloudHealth Technologies has received Amazon Web Services(AWS) Education Competency status, AWS Migration Competency status and achieved SOC 2 Type 2 Compliance. == Funding == As of June 2017, CloudHealth Technologies has raised a total of $85.7 million through four rounds of funding. In March 2013, CloudHealth Technologies announced that it had secured $4.5 million in Series A funding. This round was led by .406 Ventures and Sigma Prime Ventures. In January 2015, CloudHealth Technologies secured $12 million in Series B funding. This round was led by Scale Venture Partners, .406 Ventures, and Sigma Prime Ventures, and was followed by a $3.2 million extension round. In May 2016, CloudHealth Technologies announced $20 million in Series C funding, led by Sapphire Ventures, .406 Ventures, Scale Venture Partners and Sigma Prime Ventures. In June 2017, CloudHealth Technologies secured $46 million in Series D funding led by Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers with participation from Meritech Capital Partners, Sapphire Ventures, 406 Ventures, and Scale Venture Partners. == Competition == As of March 2023, CloudHealth Technologies competes with Cloudability by Apptio and CloudCheckr by NetApp.

  Read more →
• 

  Vector-field consistency

  Vector-Field Consistency is a consistency model for replicated data (for example, objects), initially described in a paper which was awarded the best-paper prize in the ACM/IFIP/Usenix Middleware Conference 2007. It has since been enhanced for increased scalability and fault-tolerance in a recent paper. == Description == This consistency model was initially designed for replicated data management in ad hoc gaming in order to minimize bandwidth usage without sacrificing playability. Intuitively, it captures the notion that although players require, wish, and take advantage of information regarding the whole of the game world (as opposed to a restricted view to rooms, arenas, etc. of limited size employed in many multiplayer video games), they need to know information with greater freshness, frequency, and accuracy as other game entities are located closer and closer to the player's position. It prescribes a multidimensional divergence bounding scheme, based on a vector field that employs consistency vectors k=(θ,σ,ν), standing for maximum allowed time - or replica staleness, sequence - or missing updates, and value - or user-defined measured replica divergence, applied to all space coordinates in game scenario or world. The consistency vector-fields emanate from field-generators designated as pivots (for example, players) and field intensity attenuates as distance grows from these pivots in concentric or square-like regions. This consistency model unifies locality-awareness techniques employed in message routing and consistency enforcement for multiplayer games, with divergence bounding techniques traditionally employed in replicated database and web scenarios.

  Read more →
• 

  Ontology for Biomedical Investigations

  The Ontology for Biomedical Investigations (OBI) is an open-access, integrated ontology for the description of biological and clinical investigations. OBI provides a model for the design of an investigation, the protocols and instrumentation used, the materials used, the data generated and the type of analysis performed on it. The project is being developed as part of the OBO Foundry and as such adheres to all the principles therein such as orthogonal coverage (i.e. clear delineation from other foundry member ontologies) and the use of a common formal language. In OBI the common formal language used is the Web Ontology Language (OWL). As of March 2008, a pre-release version of the ontology was made available at the project's SVN repository. == Scope == The Ontology for Biomedical Investigations (OBI) addresses the need for controlled vocabularies to support integration and joint ("cross-omics") analysis of experimental data, a need originally identified in the transcriptomics domain by the FGED Society, which developed the MGED Ontology as an annotation resource for microarray data.Smith B, Ashburner M, Rosse C, Bard J, Bug W, Ceusters W, et al. (November 2007). "The OBO Foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration". Nature Biotechnology. 25 (11): 1251–5. doi:10.1038/nbt1346. PMC 2814061. PMID 17989687. OBI uses the basic formal ontology upper-level ontology as a means of describing general entities that do not belong to a specific problem domain. As such, all OBI classes are a subclass of some BFO class. The ontology has the scope of modeling all biomedical investigations and as such contains ontology terms for aspects such as: biological material – for example blood plasma instrument (and parts of an instrument therein) – for example DNA microarray, centrifuge information content – such as an image or a digital information entity such as an electronic medical record design and execution of an investigation (and individual experiments therein) – for example study design, electrophoresis material separation data transformation (incorporating aspects such as data normalization and data analysis) – for example principal components analysis dimensionality reduction, mean calculation Less 'concrete' aspects such as the role a given entity may play in a particular scenario (for example the role of a chemical compound in an experiment) and the function of an entity (for example the digestive function of the stomach to nutriate the body) are also covered in the ontology. == OBI consortium == The MGED Ontology was originally identified in the transcriptomics domain by the FGED Society and was developed to address the needs of data integration. Following a mutual decision to collaborate, this effort later became a wider collaboration between groups such as FGED, PSI and MSI in response to the needs of areas such as transcriptomics, proteomics and metabolomics and the FuGO (Functional Genomics Investigation Ontology) was created. This later became the OBI covering the wider scope of all biomedical investigations. As an international, cross-domain initiative, the OBI consortium draws upon a pool of experts from a variety of fields, not limited to biology. The current list of OBI consortium members is available at the OBI consortium website. The consortium is made up of a coordinating committee which is a combination of two subgroups, the Community Representative (those representing a particular biomedical community) and the Core Developers (ontology developers who may or may not be members of any single community). Separate to the coordinating committee is the Developers Working Group which consists of developers within the communities collaborating in the development of OBI at the discretion of current OBI Consortium members. == Papers on OBI ==

  Read more →
• 

  Algorithmic management

  Algorithmic management is a term used to describe certain labor management practices in the contemporary digital economy. In scholarly uses, the term was initially coined in 2015 by Min Kyung Lee, Daniel Kusbit, Evan Metsky, and Laura Dabbish to describe the managerial role played by algorithms on the Uber and Lyft platforms, but has since been taken up by other scholars to describe more generally the managerial and organisational characteristics of platform economies. However, digital direction of labor was present in manufacturing already since the 1970s and algorithmic management is becoming increasingly widespread across a wide range of industries. The concept of algorithmic management can be broadly defined as the delegation of managerial functions to algorithmic and automated systems. Algorithmic management has been enabled by "recent advances in digital technologies" which allow for the real-time and "large-scale collection of data" which is then used to "improve learning algorithms that carry out learning and control functions traditionally performed by managers". The term does not refer to a specific underlying technology, and encompasses the design choices, organisational policies, and governance that surround the managerial use of algorithms in workplaces. In the contemporary workplace, firms employ an ecology of accounting devices, such as "rankings, lists, classifications, stars and other symbols' in order to effectively manage their operations and create value without the need for traditional forms of hierarchical control." Many of these devices fall under the label of what is called algorithmic management, and were first developed by companies operating in the sharing economy or gig economy, functioning as effective labor and cost cutting measures. The Data&Society explainer of the term, for example, describes algorithmic management as 'a diverse set of technological tools and techniques that structure the conditions of work and remotely manage workforces. Data&Society also provides a list of five typical features of algorithmic management: Prolific data collection and surveillance of workers through technology; Real-time responsiveness to data that informs management decisions; Automated or semi-automated decision-making; Transfer of performance evaluations to rating systems or other metrics; and The use of "nudges" and penalties to indirectly incentivize worker behaviors. Proponents of algorithmic management claim that it "creates new employment opportunities, better and cheaper consumer services, transparency and fairness in parts of the labour market that are characterised by inefficiency, opacity and capricious human bosses." On the other hand, critics of algorithmic management claim that the practice leads to several issues, especially as it impacts the employment status of workers managed by its new array of tools and techniques. == History of the term == "Algorithmic management" was first described by Lee, Kusbit, Metsky, and Dabbish in 2015 in their study of the Uber and Lyft platforms. In their study, Lee et al. termed "software algorithms that assume managerial functions and surrounding institutional devices that support algorithms in practice" algorithmic management. Software algorithms, it was said, are increasingly used to "allocate, optimize, and evaluate work" by platforms in managing their vast workforces. In Lee et al.'s paper on Uber and Lyft this included the use of algorithms to assign work to drivers, as mechanisms to optimise pricing for services, and as systems for evaluating driver performance. In 2016, Alex Rosenblat and Luke Stark sought to extend on this understanding of algorithmic management "to elucidate on the automated implementation of company policies on the behaviours and practices of Uber drivers." Rosenblat and Stark found in their study that algorithmic management practices contributed to a system beset by power asymmetries, where drivers had little control over "critical aspects of their work", whereas Uber had far greater control over the labor of its drivers. Since this time, studies of algorithmic management have extended the use of the term to describe the management practices of various firms, where, for example, algorithms "are taking over scheduling work in fast food restaurants and grocery stores, using various forms of performance metrics ad even mood... to assign the fastest employees to work in peak times." Algorithmic management is seen to be especially prevalent in gig work on platforms, such as on Upwork and Deliveroo, and in the sharing economy, such as in the case of Airbnb. Furthermore, recent research has defined sub-constructs that fall under the umbrella term of algorithmic management, for example, "algorithmic nudging". A Harvard Business Review article published in 2021 explains: "Companies are increasingly using algorithms to manage and control individuals not by force, but rather by nudging them into desirable behavior — in other words, learning from their personalized data and altering their choices in some subtle way." While the concept builds on nudging theory popularized by University of Chicago economist Richard Thaler and Harvard Law School professor Cass Sunstein, "due to recent advances in AI and machine learning, algorithmic nudging is much more powerful than its non-algorithmic counterpart. With so much data about workers' behavioral patterns at their fingertips, companies can now develop personalized strategies for changing individuals' decisions and behaviors at large scale. These algorithms can be adjusted in real-time, making the approach even more effective." == Relationships with other labor management practices == Algorithmic management has been compared and contrasted with other forms of management, such as Scientific management approaches, as pioneered by Frederick Taylor in the early 1900s. Henri Schildt has called algorithmic management "Scientific management 2.0", where management "is no longer a human practice, but a process embedded in technology." Similarly, Kathleen Griesbach, Adam Reich, Luke Elliott-Negri, and Ruth Milkman suggest that, while "algorithmic control over labor may be relatively new, it replicates many features of older mechanisms of labor control." On the other hand, some commentators have argued that algorithmic management is not simply a new form of Scientific management or digital Taylorism, but represents a distinct approach to labor control in platform economies. David Stark and Ivana Pais, for example, state that, "In contrast to Scientific Management at the turn of the twentieth century, in the algorithmic management of the twenty-first century there are rules but these are not bureaucratic, there are rankings but not ranks, and there is monitoring but it is not disciplinary. Algorithmic management does not automate bureaucratic structures and practices to create some new form of algorithmic bureaucracy. Whereas the devices and practices of Taylorism were part of a system of hierarchical supervision, the devices and practices of algorithmic management take place within a different economy of attention and a new regime of visibility. Triangular rather than vertical, and not as a panopticon, the lines of vision in algorithmic management are not lines of supervision." Similarly, Data&Society's explainer for algorithmic management claims that the practice represents a marked departure from earlier management structures that more strongly rely on human supervisors to direct workers. In analyzing the difference and the similarities to previous management styles, David Stark and Pieter Vanden Broeck expand the applicability of algorithmic management beyond the workplace. They develop a theory of algorithmic management in terms of broader changes in the shape and structure of organization in the 21st century, attentive to the erosion of organization's boundaries whereby heterogeneous actors, assets, and activities, are coopted regardless of their place in organizational space. Stark and Vanden Broeck propose the following means of differentiating algorithmic management from other historical managerial paradigms: == Issues == Algorithmic management can provide an effective and efficient means of workforce control and value creation in the contemporary digital economy. However, commentators have highlighted several issues that algorithmic management poses, especially for the workers it manages. Criticisms of the practice often highlight several key issues pertaining to algorithmic management practices, such as the imperfection and scope of its surveillance and control measures, which also threaten to lock workers out of key decision-making processes; its lack of transparency for users and information asymmetries; its potential for bias and discrimination; its dehumanizing tendencies; and its potential to create conditions which sidestep traditional employer-employee accountability. This last point has been especi

  Read more →
• 

  Outlook on the web

  Outlook on the web (formerly Outlook Web App and Outlook Web Access) is a personal information manager web app from Microsoft. It is a web-based version of Microsoft Outlook, and is included in Exchange Server and Exchange Online (a component of Microsoft 365). It can be freely accessed from any web browser whether inside or outside an organization's network, and includes a web email client, a calendar tool, a contact manager, and a task manager. It also includes add-in integration, Skype on the web, and alerts as well as unified themes that span across all the web apps. == Purpose == Outlook on the web is available to Microsoft 365 (formerly Office 365) and Exchange Online subscribers, and is included with the on-premises Exchange Server, to enable users to connect to their email accounts via a web browser, without requiring the installation of Microsoft Outlook or other email clients. In case of Exchange Server, it is hosted on a local intranet and requires a network connection to the Exchange Server for users to work with e-mail, address book, calendars and task. The Exchange Online version, which can be bought either independently or through Office 365 licensing program, is hosted on Microsoft servers on the World Wide Web. == History == Outlook Web Access was created in 1995 by Microsoft Program Manager Thom McCann on the Exchange Server team. An early working version was demonstrated by Microsoft Vice President Paul Maritz at Microsoft's famous Internet summit in Seattle on December 27, 1995. The first customer version was shipped as part of the Exchange Server 5.0 release in early 1997. The first component to allow client-side scripts to issue HTTP requests (XMLHTTP) was originally written by the Outlook Web Access team. It soon became a part of Internet Explorer 5. Renamed XMLHttpRequest and standardized by the World Wide Web Consortium, it has since become one of the cornerstones of the Ajax technology used to build advanced web apps. Outlook Web Access was later renamed Outlook Web App in 2010. An update on August 4, 2015, renamed OWA to "Outlook on the web", often referred to in brief as simply "Outlook". == Components == === Mail === Mail is the webmail component of Outlook on the web. The default view is a three column view with folders and groups on the left, an email message list in the middle, and the selected message on the right. With the 2015 update, Microsoft introduced the ability to pin, sweep and archive messages, and undo the last action, as well as richer image editing features. It can connect to other services such as GitHub and Twitter through Office 365 Connectors. Actionable Messages in emails allows a user to complete a task from within the email, such as retweeting a Tweet on Twitter or setting a meeting date on a calendar. Outlook on the web supports S/MIME and includes features for managing calendars, contacts, tasks, documents (used with SharePoint or Office Web Apps), and other mailbox content. In the Exchange 2007 release, Outlook on the web (still called Outlook Web App at the time) also offers read-only access to documents stored in SharePoint sites and network UNC shares. === Calendar === Calendar is the calendaring component of Outlook on the web. With the update, Microsoft added a weather forecast directly in the Calendar, as well as icons (or "charms") as visual cues for an event. In addition, email reminders came to all events, and a special Birthday and Holiday event calendars are created automatically. Calendars can be shared and there are multiple views such as day, week, month, and today. Another view is work week which includes Mondays through Fridays in the calendar view. Calendar's "Board View" feature allows for a customizable calendar with widgets such as Goal, Calendar, Tasks and Tips. Calendar details can be added with HTML and rich-text editing, and files can be attached to calendar events and appointments. === People === People is the contact manager component of Outlook on the web. A user can search and edit existing contacts, as well as create new ones. Contacts can be placed into folders and duplicate contacts can be linked from multiple sources such as LinkedIn or Twitter. In Outlook Mail, a contact can be created by clicking on an email address sender, which pulls down a contact card with an add button to add to Outlook People. Contacts can be imported as well as placed into a list that can be utilized when composing an email in Outlook Mail. People can also sync with friends and connections lists on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter. === To Do === To Do was originally launched as Tasks for Outlook Web App. Microsoft was slowly rolling out a preview of Tasks to its consumer-based Outlook.com service that in May 2015, was announced to be moving to the Office 365 infrastructure. It was initially a part of Calendar as a view. Microsoft has separated the services into its own web app in Outlook on the web. In a post on the Office Blogs in 2015, Microsoft announced that Outlook Web App would be renamed Outlook on the web and that Tasks would move under that brand. A user can create tasks, put them into categories, and move them to another folder. A feature added was the ability to set due days and sort and filter the tasks according to those criteria. The app provides the user with fields such as subject, start and end dates, percent complete, priority, and how much work was put into each task. Rich editing features like bold, italic, underline, numbering, and bullet points were also introduced. Tasks can be edited and categorized according to how the user wishes them to be sorted. == Removed features == Outlook on the web has had two interfaces available: one with a complete feature set (known as Premium) and one with reduced functionality (known as Light or sometimes Lite). Prior to Exchange 2010, the Premium client required Internet Explorer. Exchange 2000 and 2003 require Internet Explorer 5 and later, and Exchange 2007 requires Internet Explorer 6 and later. Exchange 2010 supports a wider range of web browsers: Internet Explorer 7 or later, Firefox 3.01 or later, Chrome, or Safari 3.1 or later. However, Exchange 2010 restricts its Firefox and Safari support to macOS and Linux. In Exchange 2013, these browser restrictions were lifted. In Exchange 2010 and earlier, the Light user interface is rendered for browsers other than Internet Explorer. The basic interface did not support search on Exchange Server 2003. In Exchange Server 2007, the Light interface supported searching mail items; managing contacts and the calendar was also improved. The 2010 version can connect to an external email account. The ability to add new accounts to Outlook on the web using the Connected accounts feature was removed in September 2018 and all connected accounts stopped synchronizing email the following month.

  Read more →
• 

  Ontology (information science)

  In information science, an ontology encompasses a representation, formal naming, and definitions of the categories, properties, and relations between the concepts, data, or entities that pertain to one, many, or all domains of discourse. More simply, an ontology is a way of showing the properties of a subject area and how they are related, by defining a set of terms and relational expressions that represent the entities in that subject area. The field which studies ontologies so conceived is sometimes referred to as applied ontology. Every academic discipline or field, in creating its terminology, thereby lays the groundwork for an ontology. Each uses ontological assumptions to frame explicit theories, research and applications. Improved ontologies may improve problem solving within that domain, interoperability of data systems, and discoverability of data. Translating research papers within every field is a problem made easier when experts from different countries maintain a controlled vocabulary of jargon between each of their languages. For instance, the definition and ontology of economics is a primary concern in Marxist economics, but also in other subfields of economics. An example of economics relying on information science occurs in cases where a simulation or model is intended to enable economic decisions, such as determining what capital assets are at risk and by how much (see risk management). What ontologies in both information science and philosophy have in common is the attempt to represent entities, including both objects and events, with all their interdependent properties and relations, according to a system of categories. In both fields, there is considerable work on problems of ontology engineering (e.g., Quine and Kripke in philosophy, Sowa and Guarino in information science), and debates concerning to what extent normative ontology is possible (e.g., foundationalism and coherentism in philosophy, BFO and Cyc in artificial intelligence). Applied ontology is considered by some as a successor to prior work in philosophy. However many current efforts are more concerned with establishing controlled vocabularies of narrow domains than with philosophical first principles, or with questions such as the mode of existence of fixed essences or whether enduring objects (e.g., perdurantism and endurantism) may be ontologically more primary than processes. Artificial intelligence has retained considerable attention regarding applied ontology in subfields like natural language processing within machine translation and knowledge representation, but ontology editors are being used often in a range of fields, including biomedical informatics and industry. Such efforts often use ontology editing tools such as Protégé. == Ontology in philosophy == Ontology is a branch of philosophy and intersects areas such as metaphysics, epistemology, and philosophy of language, as it considers how knowledge, language, and perception relate to the nature of reality. Metaphysics deals with questions like "what exists?" and "what is the nature of reality?". One of five traditional branches of philosophy, metaphysics is concerned with exploring existence through properties, entities and relations such as those between particulars and universals, intrinsic and extrinsic properties, or essence and existence. Metaphysics has been an ongoing topic of discussion since recorded history. == Etymology == The compound word ontology combines onto-, from the Greek ὄν, on (gen. ὄντος, ontos), i.e. "being; that which is", which is the present participle of the verb εἰμί, eimí, i.e. "to be, I am", and -λογία, -logia, i.e. "logical discourse", see classical compounds for this type of word formation. While the etymology is Greek, the oldest extant record of the word itself, the Neo-Latin form ontologia, appeared in 1606 in the work Ogdoas Scholastica by Jacob Lorhard (Lorhardus) and in 1613 in the Lexicon philosophicum by Rudolf Göckel (Goclenius). The first occurrence in English of ontology as recorded by the OED (Oxford English Dictionary, online edition, 2008) came in Archeologia Philosophica Nova or New Principles of Philosophy (1663) by Gideon Harvey. == Formal ontology == Since the mid-1970s, researchers in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) have recognized that knowledge engineering is the key to building large and powerful AI systems. AI researchers argued that they could create new ontologies as computational models that enable certain kinds of automated reasoning, which was only marginally successful. In the 1980s, the AI community began to use the term ontology to refer to both a theory of a modeled world and a component of knowledge-based systems. In particular, David Powers introduced the word ontology to AI to refer to real world or robotic grounding, publishing in 1990 literature reviews emphasizing grounded ontology in association with the call for papers for a AAAI Summer Symposium Machine Learning of Natural Language and Ontology, with an expanded version published in SIGART Bulletin and included as a preface to the proceedings. Some researchers, drawing inspiration from philosophical ontologies, viewed computational ontology as a kind of applied philosophy. In 1993, the widely cited web page and paper "Toward Principles for the Design of Ontologies Used for Knowledge Sharing" by Tom Gruber used ontology as a technical term in computer science closely related to earlier idea of semantic networks and taxonomies. Gruber introduced the term as a specification of a conceptualization: An ontology is a description (like a formal specification of a program) of the concepts and relationships that can formally exist for an agent or a community of agents. This definition is consistent with the usage of ontology as set of concept definitions, but more general. And it is a different sense of the word than its use in philosophy. Attempting to distance ontologies from taxonomies and similar efforts in knowledge modeling that rely on classes and inheritance, Gruber stated (1993): Ontologies are often equated with taxonomic hierarchies of classes, class definitions, and the subsumption relation, but ontologies need not be limited to these forms. Ontologies are also not limited to conservative definitions, that is, definitions in the traditional logic sense that only introduce terminology and do not add any knowledge about the world (Enderton, 1972). To specify a conceptualization, one needs to state axioms that do constrain the possible interpretations for the defined terms. Recent experimental ontology frameworks have also explored resonance-based AI-human co-evolution structures, such as IAMF (Illumination AI Matrix Framework), OntoMotoOS (a meta-operating system concept for ethical and ontological AI–human co-evolution), and PSRT (Phase-Structural Reality Theory across multi-scale ontological layers). Though not yet widely adopted in academic discourse, such models propose phased approaches to ethical harmonization and structural emergence. As refinement of Gruber's definition Feilmayr and Wöß (2016) stated: "An ontology is a formal, explicit specification of a shared conceptualization that is characterized by high semantic expressiveness required for increased complexity." == Formal ontology components == Contemporary ontologies share many structural similarities, regardless of the language in which they are expressed. Most ontologies describe individuals (instances), classes (concepts), attributes and relations. === Types === ==== Domain ontology ==== A domain ontology (or domain-specific ontology) represents concepts which belong to a realm of the world, such as biology or politics. Each domain ontology typically models domain-specific definitions of terms. For example, the word card has many different meanings. An ontology about the domain of poker would model the "playing card" meaning of the word, while an ontology about the domain of computer hardware would model the "punched card" and "video card" meanings. Since domain ontologies are written by different people, they represent concepts in very specific and unique ways, and are often incompatible within the same project. As systems that rely on domain ontologies expand, they often need to merge domain ontologies by hand-tuning each entity or using a combination of software merging and hand-tuning. This presents a challenge to the ontology designer. Different ontologies in the same domain arise due to different languages, different intended usage of the ontologies, and different perceptions of the domain (based on cultural background, education, ideology, etc.). At present, merging ontologies that are not developed from a common upper ontology is a largely manual process and therefore time-consuming and expensive. Domain ontologies that use the same upper ontology to provide a set of basic elements with which to specify the meanings of the domain ontology entities can be merged with less effo

  Read more →
• 

  Vinelink.com

  Vinelink.com (VINE) is a national website in the United States that allows victims of crime, and the general public, to track the movements of prisoners held by the various states and territories. The first four letters in the websites name, "vine", are an acronym for "Victim Information and Notification Everyday". Vinelink.com displays information, based on the information provided by the various states' departments of correction and other law enforcement agencies, on whether an inmate is in custody, has been released, has been granted parole or probation, or has escaped from custody. In some cases, the website will reveal whether a defendant has been granted parole or probation, but then subsequently violated conditions of their release and become a fugitive. Information provided on Vinelink.com represents metadata, in that the website lists a defendant's custody status; but does not list what the individual is charged with, their criminal history, or the amount of their bail, if applicable. Internet users accessing the Vinelink.com website choose from a map of states and provinces within the United States where they wish to perform a search for an inmate. The user may then search for an individual using the inmate's or parolee's name, or by entering the inmate's specific department of corrections inmate number, if known. When the inmate's custody status changes, users who have registered to be notified of such changes will be notified via email, phone or both. This information is currently released upon request, without the website requesting reasons for the users search or requiring payment, as public records available to the general public. Inmate information is available for most states, and for Puerto Rico, on the website. The states of Arizona, Georgia, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire and West Virginia provide very limited information on the site. In March of 2025, The Maine Sheriff's Association entered into a contract to pilot the use of the VINE system in three counties in the state as well as a regional jail, therefore making South Dakota the only state that does not participate in the VINE system to any degree. The website does not provide data on prisoners detained by the Federal Bureau of Prisons which has its own inmate locator web site nor for inmates of the U.S. military prisons.

  Read more →
• 

  Golden record (informatics)

  In informatics, a golden record is the valid version of a data element (record) in a single source of truth system. It may refer to a database, specific table or data field, or any unit of information used. A golden copy is a consolidated data set, and is supposed to provide a single source of truth and a "well-defined version of all the data entities in an organizational ecosystem". Other names sometimes used include master source or master version. The term has been used in conjunction with data quality, master data management, and similar topics. (Different technical solutions exist, see master data management). == Master data == In master data management (MDM), the golden copy refers to the master data (master version) of the reference data which works as an authoritative source for the "truth" for all applications in a given IT landscape.

  Read more →
• 

  Real-Time UML

  Real-Time UML (RTUML) refers to the application of the Unified Modelling Language (UML) for the analysis, design, and implementation of real-time and embedded systems, where timing constraints, concurrency, and resource management are critical. It extends standard UML with profiles, notations, and semantics to handle hard and soft real-time requirements, such as modelling predictable response times and fault tolerance. RTUML is not a separate language but a methodology leveraging UML diagrams (e.g., statecharts, sequence diagrams) for time-sensitive applications like automotive controls, avionics, and medical devices. The term is closely associated with Bruce Powel Douglass, who popularised it through his books and the Harmony process for embedded software development. As of 2025, RTUML remains relevant in industries requiring certified systems, though its adoption varies with agile methodologies and model-driven engineering tools. == Background == Real-Time UML emerged in the late 1990s as UML was standardized by the Object Management Group (OMG) in 1997, addressing the need for object-oriented modeling in real-time systems previously dominated by procedural languages like C. Traditional real-time development relied on "bare metal" programming or theoretical models, but RTUML introduced visual notations for object structure, behaviour, and timing. Bruce Powel Douglass’s 1999 book, Real-Time UML: Developing Efficient Objects for Embedded Systems, formalised the approach, emphasising statecharts for concurrency and timing constraints. Later editions (2004, 2006) incorporated UML 2.0 features like activity and timing diagrams, aligning with OMG’s Real-Time Profile (now part of MARTE—Modelling and Analysis of Real-Time and Embedded Systems). The Harmony process integrates RTUML with executable models for simulation and code generation. RTUML addresses hard real-time systems (e.g., strict deadlines in avionics) versus soft real-time (e.g., media streaming), using UML extensions for schedulability analysis. == Key concepts == RTUML adapts UML diagrams and techniques for real-time needs: Statecharts and Behaviour Modelling: Extended state machines model reactive behaviour, using and-states for concurrency, pseudostates for transitions, and timing constraints (e.g., {duration < 10ms}). Examples include cardiac pacemaker models. Sequence and Interaction Diagrams: Capture message timing, priorities, and resource allocation in multi-threaded systems. Architectural Patterns: Define logical and physical architectures with active objects for concurrency and patterns like observer or publisher-subscriber. Timing and Constraints: Use Object Constraint Language (OCL) for specifying deadlines and priorities. Profiles and Extensions: OMG’s UML Profile for Schedulability, Performance, and Time (SPT) and MARTE add stereotypes like RT::ActiveObject. These support iterative development, from requirements to deployment, often with tools like IBM Rhapsody or Enterprise Architect. == Applications == RTUML is used in: Embedded Systems: Modelling automotive ECUs or UAV controls. Avionics and Defence: DO-178C-compliant designs for fault tolerance. Medical Devices: Pacemakers or ventilators with precise timing. Industrial Automation: RTOS task visualisation via sequence diagrams. Tools like IBM Rhapsody support RTUML for model-based development and code generation in C/C++. == Criticism and adoption == RTUML’s complexity can overwhelm simple systems, and its use in agile environments is limited, where lightweight diagrams are preferred. Surveys indicate UML (including RTUML) is used in 30–50% of embedded projects, often for documentation rather than full model-driven engineering. It remains standard in academia and certified industries like aerospace.

  Read more →
• 

  Enterprise Objects Framework

  The Enterprise Objects Framework, or simply EOF, was introduced by NeXT in 1994 as a pioneering object-relational mapping product for its NeXTSTEP and OpenStep development platforms. EOF abstracts the process of interacting with a relational database by mapping database rows to Java or Objective-C objects. This largely relieves developers from writing low-level SQL code. EOF enjoyed some niche success in the mid-1990s among financial institutions who were attracted to the rapid application development advantages of NeXT's object-oriented platform. Since Apple Inc's merger with NeXT in 1996, EOF has evolved into a fully integrated part of WebObjects, an application server also originally from NeXT. Many of the core concepts of EOF re-emerged as part of Core Data, which further abstracts the underlying data formats to allow it to be based on non-SQL stores. == History == In the early 1990s NeXT Computer recognized that connecting to databases was essential to most businesses and yet also potentially complex. Every data source has a different data-access language (or API), driving up the costs to learn and use each vendor's product. The NeXT engineers wanted to apply the advantages of object-oriented programming, by getting objects to "talk" to relational databases. As the two technologies are very different, the solution was to create an abstraction layer, insulating developers from writing the low-level procedural code (SQL) specific to each data source. The first attempt came in 1992 with the release of Database Kit (DBKit), which wrapped an object-oriented framework around any database. Unfortunately, NEXTSTEP at the time was not powerful enough and DBKit had serious design flaws. NeXT's second attempt came in 1994 with the Enterprise Objects Framework (EOF) version 1, a complete rewrite that was far more modular and OpenStep compatible. EOF 1.0 was the first product released by NeXT using the Foundation Kit and introduced autoreleased objects to the developer community. The development team at the time was only four people: Jack Greenfield, Rich Williamson, Linus Upson and Dan Willhite. EOF 2.0, released in late 1995, further refined the architecture, introducing the editing context. At that point, the development team consisted of Dan Willhite, Craig Federighi, Eric Noyau and Charly Kleissner. EOF achieved a modest level of popularity in the financial programming community in the mid-1990s, but it would come into its own with the emergence of the World Wide Web and the concept of web applications. It was clear that EOF could help companies plug their legacy databases into the Web without any rewriting of that data. With the addition of frameworks to do state management, load balancing and dynamic HTML generation, NeXT was able to launch the first object-oriented Web application server, WebObjects, in 1996, with EOF at its core. In 2000, Apple Inc. (which had merged with NeXT) officially dropped EOF as a standalone product, meaning that developers would be unable to use it to create desktop applications for the forthcoming Mac OS X. It would, however, continue to be an integral part of a major new release of WebObjects. WebObjects 5, released in 2001, was significant for the fact that its frameworks had been ported from their native Objective-C programming language to the Java language. Critics of this change argue that most of the power of EOF was a side effect of its Objective-C roots, and that EOF lost the beauty or simplicity it once had. Third-party tools, such as EOGenerator, help fill the deficiencies introduced by Java (mainly due to the loss of categories). The Objective-C code base was re-introduced with some modifications to desktop application developers as Core Data, part of Apple's Cocoa API, with the release of Mac OS X Tiger in April 2005. == How EOF works == Enterprise Objects provides tools and frameworks for object-relational mapping. The technology specializes in providing mechanisms to retrieve data from various data sources, such as relational databases via JDBC and JNDI directories, and mechanisms to commit data back to those data sources. These mechanisms are designed in a layered, abstract approach that allows developers to think about data retrieval and commitment at a higher level than a specific data source or data source vendor. Central to this mapping is a model file (an "EOModel") that you build with a visual tool — either EOModeler, or the EOModeler plug-in to Xcode. The mapping works as follows: Database tables are mapped to classes. Database columns are mapped to class attributes. Database rows are mapped to objects (or class instances). You can build data models based on existing data sources or you can build data models from scratch, which you then use to create data structures (tables, columns, joins) in a data source. The result is that database records can be transposed into Java objects. The advantage of using data models is that applications are isolated from the idiosyncrasies of the data sources they access. This separation of an application's business logic from database logic allows developers to change the database an application accesses without needing to change the application. EOF provides a level of database transparency not seen in other tools and allows the same model to be used to access different vendor databases and even allows relationships across different vendor databases without changing source code. Its power comes from exposing the underlying data sources as managed graphs of persistent objects. In simple terms, this means that it organizes the application's model layer into a set of defined in-memory data objects. It then tracks changes to these objects and can reverse those changes on demand, such as when a user performs an undo command. Then, when it is time to save changes to the application's data, it archives the objects to the underlying data sources. === Using Inheritance === In designing Enterprise Objects developers can leverage the object-oriented feature known as inheritance. A Customer object and an Employee object, for example, might both inherit certain characteristics from a more generic Person object, such as name, address, and phone number. While this kind of thinking is inherent in object-oriented design, relational databases have no explicit support for inheritance. However, using Enterprise Objects, you can build data models that reflect object hierarchies. That is, you can design database tables to support inheritance by also designing enterprise objects that map to multiple tables or particular views of a database table. == Enterprise Objects (EOs) == An Enterprise Object is analogous to what is often known in object-oriented programming as a business object — a class which models a physical or conceptual object in the business domain (e.g. a customer, an order, an item, etc.). What makes an EO different from other objects is that its instance data maps to a data store. Typically, an enterprise object contains key-value pairs that represent a row in a relational database. The key is basically the column name, and the value is what was in that row in the database. So it can be said that an EO's properties persist beyond the life of any particular running application. More precisely, an Enterprise Object is an instance of a class that implements the com.webobjects.eocontrol.EOEnterpriseObject interface. An Enterprise Object has a corresponding model (called an EOModel) that defines the mapping between the class's object model and the database schema. However, an enterprise object doesn't explicitly know about its model. This level of abstraction means that database vendors can be switched without it affecting the developer's code. This gives Enterprise Objects a high degree of reusability. == EOF and Core Data == Despite their common origins, the two technologies diverged, with each technology retaining a subset of the features of the original Objective-C code base, while adding some new features. === Features Supported Only by EOF === EOF supports custom SQL; shared editing contexts; nested editing contexts; and pre-fetching and batch faulting of relationships, all features of the original Objective-C implementation not supported by Core Data. Core Data also does not provide the equivalent of an EOModelGroup—the NSManagedObjectModel class provides methods for merging models from existing models, and for retrieving merged models from bundles. === Features Supported Only by Core Data === Core Data supports fetched properties; multiple configurations within a managed object model; local stores; and store aggregation (the data for a given entity may be spread across multiple stores); customization and localization of property names and validation warnings; and the use of predicates for property validation. These features of the original Objective-C implementation are not supported by the Java implementation.

  Read more →
• 

  Reference data

  Reference data is data used to classify or categorize other data. Typically, they are static or slowly changing over time. Examples of reference data include: Units of measurement Country codes Corporate codes Fixed conversion rates e.g., weight, temperature, and length Calendar structure and constraints Reference data sets are sometimes alternatively referred to as a "controlled vocabulary" or "lookup" data. Reference data differs from master data. While both provide context for business transactions, reference data is concerned with classification and categorisation, while master data is concerned with business entities. A further difference between reference data and master data is that a change to the reference data values may require an associated change in business process to support the change, while a change in master data will always be managed as part of existing business processes. For example, adding a new customer or sales product is part of the standard business process. However, adding a new product classification (e.g. "restricted sales item") or a new customer type (e.g. "gold level customer") will result in a modification to the business processes to manage those items. == Externally-defined reference data == For most organisations, most or all reference data is defined and managed within that organisation. Some reference data, however, may be externally defined and managed, for example by standards organizations. An example of externally defined reference data is the set of country codes as defined in ISO 3166-1. == Reference data management == Curating and managing reference data is key to ensuring its quality and thus fitness for purpose. All aspects of an organisation, operational and analytical, are greatly dependent on the quality of an organization's reference data. Without consistency across business process or applications, for example, similar things may be described in quite different ways. Reference data gain in value when they are widely re-used and widely referenced. Examples of good practice in reference data management include: Formalize the reference data management Use external reference data as much as possible Govern the reference data specific to your enterprise Manage reference data at enterprise level Version control your reference data

  Read more →
• 

  Emotion recognition

  Emotion recognition is the process of identifying human emotion. People vary widely in their accuracy at recognizing the emotions of others. Use of technology to help people with emotion recognition is a relatively nascent research area. Generally, the technology works best if it uses multiple modalities in context. To date, the most work has been conducted on automating the recognition of facial expressions from video, spoken expressions from audio, written expressions from text, and physiology as measured by wearables. == Human == Humans show a great deal of variability in their abilities to recognize emotion. A key point to keep in mind when learning about automated emotion recognition is that there are several sources of "ground truth", or truth about what the real emotion is. Suppose we are trying to recognize the emotions of Alex. One source is "what would most people say that Alex is feeling?" In this case, the 'truth' may not correspond to what Alex feels, but may correspond to what most people would say it looks like Alex feels. For example, Alex may actually feel sad, but he puts on a big smile and then most people say he looks happy. If an automated method achieves the same results as a group of observers it may be considered accurate, even if it does not actually measure what Alex truly feels. Another source of 'truth' is to ask Alex what he truly feels. This works if Alex has a good sense of his internal state, and wants to tell you what it is, and is capable of putting it accurately into words or a number. However, some people are alexithymic and do not have a good sense of their internal feelings, or they are not able to communicate them accurately with words and numbers. In general, getting to the truth of what emotion is actually present can take some work, can vary depending on the criteria that are selected, and will usually involve maintaining some level of uncertainty. == Automatic == Decades of scientific research have been conducted developing and evaluating methods for automated emotion recognition. There is now an extensive literature proposing and evaluating hundreds of different kinds of methods, leveraging techniques from multiple areas, such as signal processing, machine learning, computer vision, and speech processing. Different methodologies and techniques may be employed to interpret emotion such as Bayesian networks. , Gaussian Mixture models and Hidden Markov Models and deep neural networks. === Approaches === The accuracy of emotion recognition is usually improved when it combines the analysis of human expressions from multimodal forms such as texts, physiology, audio, or video. Different emotion types are detected through the integration of information from facial expressions, body movement and gestures, and speech. The technology is said to contribute in the emergence of the so-called emotional or emotive Internet. The existing approaches in emotion recognition to classify certain emotion types can be generally classified into three main categories: knowledge-based techniques, statistical methods, and hybrid approaches. ==== Knowledge-based techniques ==== Knowledge-based techniques (sometimes referred to as lexicon-based techniques), utilize domain knowledge and the semantic and syntactic characteristics of text and potentially spoken language in order to detect certain emotion types. In this approach, it is common to use knowledge-based resources during the emotion classification process such as WordNet, SenticNet, ConceptNet, and EmotiNet, to name a few. One of the advantages of this approach is the accessibility and economy brought about by the large availability of such knowledge-based resources. A limitation of this technique on the other hand, is its inability to handle concept nuances and complex linguistic rules. Knowledge-based techniques can be mainly classified into two categories: dictionary-based and corpus-based approaches. Dictionary-based approaches find opinion or emotion seed words in a dictionary and search for their synonyms and antonyms to expand the initial list of opinions or emotions. Corpus-based approaches on the other hand, start with a seed list of opinion or emotion words, and expand the database by finding other words with context-specific characteristics in a large corpus. While corpus-based approaches take into account context, their performance still vary in different domains since a word in one domain can have a different orientation in another domain. ==== Statistical methods ==== Statistical methods commonly involve the use of different supervised machine learning algorithms in which a large set of annotated data is fed into the algorithms for the system to learn and predict the appropriate emotion types. Machine learning algorithms generally provide more reasonable classification accuracy compared to other approaches, but one of the challenges in achieving good results in the classification process, is the need to have a sufficiently large training set. Some of the most commonly used machine learning algorithms include Support Vector Machines (SVM), Naive Bayes, and Maximum Entropy. Deep learning, which is under the unsupervised family of machine learning, is also widely employed in emotion recognition. Well-known deep learning algorithms include different architectures of Artificial Neural Network (ANN) such as Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), Long Short-term Memory (LSTM), and Extreme Learning Machine (ELM). The popularity of deep learning approaches in the domain of emotion recognition may be mainly attributed to its success in related applications such as in computer vision, speech recognition, and Natural Language Processing (NLP). ==== Hybrid approaches ==== Hybrid approaches in emotion recognition are essentially a combination of knowledge-based techniques and statistical methods, which exploit complementary characteristics from both techniques. Some of the works that have applied an ensemble of knowledge-driven linguistic elements and statistical methods include sentic computing and iFeel, both of which have adopted the concept-level knowledge-based resource SenticNet. The role of such knowledge-based resources in the implementation of hybrid approaches is highly important in the emotion classification process. Since hybrid techniques gain from the benefits offered by both knowledge-based and statistical approaches, they tend to have better classification performance as opposed to employing knowledge-based or statistical methods independently. A downside of using hybrid techniques however, is the computational complexity during the classification process. === Datasets === Data is an integral part of the existing approaches in emotion recognition and in most cases it is a challenge to obtain annotated data that is necessary to train machine learning algorithms. For the task of classifying different emotion types from multimodal sources in the form of texts, audio, videos or physiological signals, the following datasets are available: HUMAINE: provides natural clips with emotion words and context labels in multiple modalities Belfast database: provides clips with a wide range of emotions from TV programs and interview recordings SEMAINE: provides audiovisual recordings between a person and a virtual agent and contains emotion annotations such as angry, happy, fear, disgust, sadness, contempt, and amusement IEMOCAP: provides recordings of dyadic sessions between actors and contains emotion annotations such as happiness, anger, sadness, frustration, and neutral state eNTERFACE: provides audiovisual recordings of subjects from seven nationalities and contains emotion annotations such as happiness, anger, sadness, surprise, disgust, and fear DEAP: provides electroencephalography (EEG), electrocardiography (ECG), and face video recordings, as well as emotion annotations in terms of valence, arousal, and dominance of people watching film clips DREAMER: provides electroencephalography (EEG) and electrocardiography (ECG) recordings, as well as emotion annotations in terms of valence, dominance of people watching film clips MELD: is a multiparty conversational dataset where each utterance is labeled with emotion and sentiment. MELD provides conversations in video format and hence suitable for multimodal emotion recognition and sentiment analysis. MELD is useful for multimodal sentiment analysis and emotion recognition, dialogue systems and emotion recognition in conversations. MuSe: provides audiovisual recordings of natural interactions between a person and an object. It has discrete and continuous emotion annotations in terms of valence, arousal and trustworthiness as well as speech topics useful for multimodal sentiment analysis and emotion recognition. UIT-VSMEC: is a standard Vietnamese Social Media Emotion Corpus (UIT-VSMEC) with about 6,927 human-annotated sentences with six emotion labels, contributing to emotion recognition research in Vietnamese

  Read more →
• 

  Human–AI interaction

  Human–AI interaction is a developing field of research and a sub-field of human–computer interaction (HCI). HCI is a field of research that explores the interactions between humans and computer-based technology, focusing on design implementation, user experience, and psychological factors. With the proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI), there has developed a sub-section of HCI research dedicated specifically to artificial intelligence and how people interact with and are impacted by it. This is human–AI interaction, abbreviated either as HAX or HAII. == Introduction == Artificial intelligence (AI), in general, has fluid definitions and varied research applications, but in brief can be applied to mechanizing tasks that would require human intelligence to complete. AI are tools designed to replicate the human abilities of navigating uncertainty, active learning, and processing information in different contexts. Within the context of HCI and HAX research, artificial intelligence can be broken into two sub-fields, natural language processing (NLP) and computer vision (CV). AI technologies notably include machine-learning, deep-learning and neural networks, and large-language models (LLMs). As a new and rapidly developing technology, AI is changing how computers work and therefore changing how humans interact with computers. Unlike the traditional human-computer interaction, where a human directs a machine, human-AI interaction is characterized by a more collaborative relationship between the computer program (the AI) and the human user, as AI is perceived as an active agent rather than a tool. This changing dynamic creates new questions and necessitates new research methods that are not present in traditional HCI research. According to a scoping review on the state of the discipline, the HAX field comprises research on the "design, development, and evaluation of AI systems" and encompasses the themes of human-AI collaboration, human-AI competition, human-AI conflict, and human-AI symbiosis. == Design == Machine learning and artificial intelligence have been used for decades in targeted advertising and to recommend content in social media. Ethical Guidelines (Framework for ethical AI development) == User Experience (UX) == This section should handle research on how users interact with tools. What techniques do they use, do they develop habits, what types of programs and devices are they using to access these tools, what do they use these tools to do exactly. === Cognitive Frameworks in AI Tool Users === AI has been viewed with various expectations, attributions, and often misconceptions. Many people exclusively understand AI as the LLM chatbots they interact with, like ChatGPT or Claude, or other generative AI programs. [Insert section: discuss how people interact with these specific AI tools as a connection to the following paragraphs] Most fundamentally, humans have a mental model of understanding AI's reasoning and motivation for its decision recommendations, and building a holistic and precise mental model of AI helps people create prompts to receive more valuable responses from AI. However, these mental models are not whole because people can only gain more information about AI through their limited interaction with it; more interaction with AI builds a better mental model that a person may build to produce better prompt outcomes. Research on human-AI interaction has emphasized that users develop mental models of AI systems and revise those models through repeated use, feedback, and explanation, while design research has stressed the importance of communicating capabilities and limitations early and supporting trust calibration through explanation and correction. In a 2025 SSRN working paper, John DeVadoss proposed "Hypothetico-Deductive Interaction" (HDI), a framework that describes human-AI interaction as a mutual process of conjecture and refutation in which users test assumptions about an AI system's capabilities while the system infers and updates assumptions about user goals through its responses and clarifying questions. DeVadoss argued that this framing helps explain prompt iteration, weak capability awareness, and trust miscalibration, and suggested design responses such as clearer communication of uncertainty, easier correction, actionable explanations, and safer failure modes. == Research themes == === Human-AI collaboration === Human-AI collaboration occurs when the human and AI supervise the task on the same level and extent to achieve the same goal. Some collaboration occurs in the form of augmenting human capability. AI may help human ability in analysis and decision-making through providing and weighing a volume of information, and learning to defer to the human decision when it recognizes its unreliability. It is especially beneficial when the human can detect a task that AI can be trusted to make few errors so that there is not a lot of excessive checking process required on the human's end. Some findings show signs of human-AI augmentation, or human–AI symbiosis, in which AI enhances human ability in a way that co-working on a task with AI produces better outcomes than a human working alone. For example: the quality and speed of customer service tasks increase when a human agent collaborates with AI, training on specific models allows AI to improve diagnoses in clinical settings, and AI with human-intervention can improve creativity of artwork while fully AI-generated haikus were rated negatively. Human-AI synergy, a concept in which human-AI collaboration would produce more optimal outcomes than either human or AI working alone could explain why AI does not always help with performance. Some AI features and development may accelerate human-AI synergy, while others may stagnate it. For example, when AI updates for better performance, it sometimes worsens the team performance with human and AI by reducing the compatibility with the new model and the mental model a user has developed on the previous version. Research has found that AI often supports human capabilities in the form of human-AI augmentation and not human-AI synergy, potentially because people rely too much on AI and stop thinking on their own. Prompting people to actively engage in analysis and think when to follow AI recommendations reduces their over-reliance, especially for individuals with higher need for cognition. === Human-AI competition === Robots and computers have substituted routine tasks historically completed by humans, but agentic AI has made it possible to also replace cognitive tasks including taking phone calls for appointments and driving a car. At the point of 2016, research has estimated that 45% of paid activities could be replaced by AI by 2030. Perceived autonomy of robots is known to increase people's negative attitude toward them, and worry about the technology taking over leads people to reject it. There has been a consistent tendency of algorithm aversion in which people prefer human advice over AI advice. However, people are not always able to tell apart tasks completed by AI or other humans. See AI takeover for more information. It is also notable that this sentiment is more prominent in the Western cultures as Westerners tend to show less positive views about AI compared to East Asians. == Research on the psychological impacts of AI == === Perception on others who use AI === As much as people perceive and make judgment about AI itself, they also form impressions of themselves and others who use AI. In the workplace, employees who disclose the use of AI in their tasks are more likely to receive feedback that they are not as hardworking as those who are in the same job who receive non-AI help to complete the same tasks. AI use disclosure diminishes the perceived legitimacy in the employee's task and decision making which ultimately leads observers to distrust people who use AI. Although these negative effects of AI use disclosure are weakened by the observers who use AI frequently themselves, the effect is still not attenuated by the observers' positive attitude towards AI. === Bias, AI, and human === Although AI provides a wide range of information and suggestions to its users, AI itself is not free of biases and stereotypes, and it does not always help people reduce their cognitive errors and biases. People are prone to such errors by failing to see other potential ideas and cases that are not listed by AI responses and committing to a decision suggested by AI that directly contradicts the correct information and directions that they are already aware of. Gender bias is also reflected as the female gendering of AI technologies which conceptualizes females as a helpful assistant. == Emotional connection with AI == Human-AI interaction has been theorized in the context of interpersonal relationships mainly in social psychology, communications and media studies, and as a technology interface through the lens of hu

  Read more →
• 

  Recording format

  A recording format is a format for encoding data for storage on a storage medium. The format can be container information such as sectors on a disk, or user/audience information (content) such as analog stereo audio. Multiple levels of encoding may be achieved in one format. For example, a text encoded page may contain HTML and XML encoding, combined in a plain text file format, using either EBCDIC or ASCII character encoding, on a UDF digitally formatted disk. In electronic media, the primary format is the encoding that requires hardware to interpret (decode) data; while secondary encoding is interpreted by secondary signal processing methods, usually computer software. == Recording container formats == A container format is a system for dividing physical storage space or virtual space for data. Data space can be divided evenly by a system of measurement, or divided unevenly with meta data. A grid may divide physical or virtual space with physical or virtual (dividers) borders, evenly or unevenly. Just as a physical container (such as a file cabinet) is divided by physical borders (such as drawers and file folders), data space is divided by virtual borders. Meta data such as a unit of measurement, address, or meta tags act as virtual borders in a container format. A template may be considered an abstract format for containing a solution as well as the content itself. Systems of measurement Metric system Geographic coordinate system Page grid Film formats Audio data format Video tape format Disk format File format Meta data Text formatting Template Data structure == Raw content formats == A raw content format is a system of converting data to displayable information. Raw content formats may either be recorded in secondary signal processing methods such as a software container format (e.g. digital audio, digital video) or recorded in the primary format. A primary raw content format may be directly observable (e.g. image, sound, motion, smell, sensation) or physical data which only requires hardware to display it, such as a phonographic needle and diaphragm or a projector lamp and magnifying glass.

  Read more →
• 

  Causal AI

  Causal AI is a technique in artificial intelligence that builds a causal model and can thereby make inferences using causality rather than just correlation. One practical use for causal AI is for organisations to explain decision-making and the causes for a decision. Systems based on causal AI, by identifying the underlying web of causality for a behaviour or event, provide insights that solely predictive AI models might fail to extract from historical data. An analysis of causality may be used to supplement human decisions in situations where understanding the causes behind an outcome is necessary, such as quantifying the impact of different interventions, policy decisions or performing scenario planning. A 2024 paper from Google DeepMind demonstrated mathematically that "Any agent capable of adapting to a sufficiently large set of distributional shifts must have learned a causal model". The paper offers the interpretation that learning to generalise beyond the original training set requires learning a causal model, concluding that causal AI is necessary for artificial general intelligence. == History == The concept of causal AI and the limits of machine learning were raised by Judea Pearl, the Turing Award-winning computer scientist and philosopher, in 2018's The Book of Why: The New Science of Cause and Effect. Pearl asserted: “Machines' lack of understanding of causal relations is perhaps the biggest roadblock to giving them human-level intelligence.” In 2020, Columbia University established a Causal AI Lab under Director Elias Bareinboim. Professor Bareinboim's research focuses on causal and counterfactual inference and their applications to data-driven fields in the health and social sciences as well as artificial intelligence and machine learning. Technological research and consulting firm Gartner for the first time included causal AI in its 2022 Hype Cycle report, citing it as one of five critical technologies in accelerated AI automation. Causal AI is closely related to but distinct from fields such as causal inference, explainable AI and causal reasoning. While causal inference focuses on estimating cause-effect relationships (often from observational data), causal AI emphasises the integration of those causal models into AI systems for prediction, planning and adaptation.

  Read more →