Best Free AI Image Generator

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

Explanation-based learning

Explanation-based learning (EBL) is a form of machine learning that exploits a very strong, or even perfect, domain theory (i.e. a formal theory of an application domain akin to a domain model in ontology engineering, not to be confused with Scott's domain theory) in order to make generalizations or form concepts from training examples. It is also linked with Encoding (memory) to help with Learning. == Details == An example of EBL using a perfect domain theory is a program that learns to play chess through example. A specific chess position that contains an important feature such as "Forced loss of black queen in two moves" includes many irrelevant features, such as the specific scattering of pawns on the board. EBL can take a single training example and determine what are the relevant features in order to form a generalization. A domain theory is perfect or complete if it contains, in principle, all information needed to decide any question about the domain. For example, the domain theory for chess is simply the rules of chess. Knowing the rules, in principle, it is possible to deduce the best move in any situation. However, actually making such a deduction is impossible in practice due to combinatoric explosion. EBL uses training examples to make searching for deductive consequences of a domain theory efficient in practice. In essence, an EBL system works by finding a way to deduce each training example from the system's existing database of domain theory. Having a short proof of the training example extends the domain-theory database, enabling the EBL system to find and classify future examples that are similar to the training example very quickly. The main drawback of the method—the cost of applying the learned proof macros, as these become numerous—was analyzed by Minton. === Basic formulation === EBL software takes four inputs: a hypothesis space (the set of all possible conclusions) a domain theory (axioms about a domain of interest) training examples (specific facts that rule out some possible hypothesis) operationality criteria (criteria for determining which features in the domain are efficiently recognizable, e.g. which features are directly detectable using sensors) == Application == An especially good application domain for an EBL is natural language processing (NLP). Here a rich domain theory, i.e., a natural language grammar—although neither perfect nor complete, is tuned to a particular application or particular language usage, using a treebank (training examples). Rayner pioneered this work. The first successful industrial application was to a commercial NL interface to relational databases. The method has been successfully applied to several large-scale natural language parsing systems, where the utility problem was solved by omitting the original grammar (domain theory) and using specialized LR-parsing techniques, resulting in huge speed-ups, at a cost in coverage, but with a gain in disambiguation. EBL-like techniques have also been applied to surface generation, the converse of parsing. When applying EBL to NLP, the operationality criteria can be hand-crafted, or can be inferred from the treebank using either the entropy of its or-nodes or a target coverage/disambiguation trade-off (= recall/precision trade-off = f-score). EBL can also be used to compile grammar-based language models for speech recognition, from general unification grammars. Note how the utility problem, first exposed by Minton, was solved by discarding the original grammar/domain theory, and that the quoted articles tend to contain the phrase grammar specialization—quite the opposite of the original term explanation-based generalization. Perhaps the best name for this technique would be data-driven search space reduction. Other people who worked on EBL for NLP include Guenther Neumann, Aravind Joshi, Srinivas Bangalore, and Khalil Sima'an.
Read more →
Document

A document is a written, drawn, presented, or memorialized representation of thought, often the manifestation of non-fictional, as well as fictional, content. The etymology of the word "document" derives from the Latin documentum, which denotes a "teaching" or "lesson": the verb doceō denotes "to teach". Historically, the term "document" was usually used to indicate written proof useful as evidence of a truth or fact. In the Computer Age, the term "document" typically refers to a primarily textual computer file, encompassing its structural and format elements, such as fonts, colors, and images. In the contemporary era, the definition of "document" has expanded beyond its traditional medium, such as paper, to encompass electronic documents as well. History, events, examples, opinions, stories, and creativity can all be expressed in documents. "Documentation" is distinct because it has more denotations than "document". Documents are also distinguished from "realia", which are three-dimensional objects that would otherwise satisfy the definition of "document" because they memorialize or represent thought. Documents are usually considered to be two-dimensional representations. == Abstract definitions == The concept of "document" has been defined by Suzanne Briet as "any concrete or symbolic indication, preserved or recorded, for reconstructing or for proving a phenomenon, whether physical or mental." An often-cited article concludes that "the evolving notion of document" among Jonathan Priest, Paul Otlet, Briet, Walter Schürmeyer, and the other documentalists increasingly emphasized whatever functioned as a document rather than traditional physical forms of documents. The shift to digital technology would seem to make this distinction even more important. David M. Levy has said that an emphasis on the technology of digital documents has impeded our understanding of digital documents as documents. A conventional document, such as a mail message or a technical report, exists physically in digital technology as a string of bits, as does everything else in a digital environment. As an object of study, it has been made into a document. It has become physical evidence by those who study it. "Document" is defined in library and information science and documentation science as a fundamental, abstract idea: the word denotes everything that may be represented or memorialized to serve as evidence. The classic example provided by Briet is an antelope: "An antelope running wild on the plains of Africa should not be considered a document[;] she rules. But if it were to be captured, taken to a zoo and made an object of study, it has been made into a document. It has become physical evidence being used by those who study it. Indeed, scholarly articles written about the antelope are secondary documents, since the antelope itself is the primary document." This opinion has been interpreted as an early expression of actor–network theory. == Kinds == A document can be structured, like tabular documents, lists, forms, or scientific charts, semi-structured like a book or a newspaper article, or unstructured like a handwritten note. Documents are sometimes classified as secret, private, or public. They may also be described as drafts or proofs. When a document is copied, the source is denominated the "original". Documents are used in numerous fields, e.g.: Academia: manuscript, thesis, paper, journal, chart, and technical drawing Media: mock-up, script, image, photography, and newspaper article Administration, law, and politics: application, brief, certificate, commission, constitutional document, form, gazette, identity document, license, manifesto, summons, census, and white paper Business: invoice, request for proposal, proposal, contract, packing slip, manifest, report (detailed and summary), spreadsheet, material safety data sheet, waybill, bill of lading, financial statement, nondisclosure agreement (NDA), mutual nondisclosure agreement, and user guide Geography and planning: topographic map, cadastre, legend, and architectural plan Such standard documents can be drafted based on a template. == Drafting == The page layout of a document is how information is graphically arranged in the space of the document, e.g., on a page. If the appearance of the document is of concern, the page layout is generally the responsibility of a graphic designer. Typography concerns the design of letter and symbol forms and their physical arrangement in the document (see typesetting). Information design concerns the effective communication of information, especially in industrial documents and public signs. Simple textual documents may not require visual design and may be drafted only by an author, clerk, or transcriber. Forms may require a visual design for their initial fields, but not to complete the forms. == Media == Traditionally, the medium of a document was paper and the information was applied to it in ink, either by handwriting (to make a manuscript) or by a mechanical process (e.g., a printing press or laser printer). Today, some short documents also may consist of sheets of paper stapled together. Historically, documents were inscribed with ink on papyrus (starting in ancient Egypt) or parchment; scratched as runes or carved on stone using a sharp tool, e.g., the Tablets of Stone described in the Bible; stamped or incised in clay and then baked to make clay tablets, e.g., in the Sumerian and other Mesopotamian civilizations. The papyrus or parchment was often rolled into a scroll or cut into sheets and bound into a codex (book). Contemporary electronic means of memorializing and displaying documents include: Monitor of a desktop computer, laptop, tablet; optionally with a printer to produce a hard copy; Personal digital assistant; Dedicated e-book device; Electronic paper, typically, using the Portable Document Format (PDF); Information appliance; Digital audio player; and Radio and television service provider. Digital documents usually require a specific file format to be presentable in a specific medium. == In law == Documents in all forms frequently serve as material evidence in criminal and civil proceedings. The forensic analysis of such a document is within the scope of questioned document examination. To catalog and manage the large number of documents that may be produced during litigation, Bates numbering is often applied to all documents in the lawsuit so that each document has a unique, arbitrary, identification number.
Read more →
Investigative Data Warehouse

Investigative Data Warehouse (IDW) is a searchable database operated by the FBI. It was created in 2004. Much of the nature and scope of the database is classified. The database is a centralization of multiple federal and state databases, including criminal records from various law enforcement agencies, the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), and public records databases. According to Michael Morehart's testimony before the House Committee on Financial Services in 2006, the "IDW is a centralized, web-enabled, closed system repository for intelligence and investigative data. This system, maintained by the FBI, allows appropriately trained and authorized personnel throughout the country to query for information of relevance to investigative and intelligence matters." == Overview == In 2004, according to a government solicitation for bids to manage the project, it was approximately 10TB in size. In 2005, according to one FBI official, the IDW contained approximately 100 million documents. In 2006 it contained more than 560 million documents and was accessible by more than 12,000 individuals. According to the FBI's website, as of August 22, 2007, the database contained 700 million records from 53 databases and was accessible by 13,000 individuals around the world. As of 2007, the FBI was the subject of a lawsuit brought by the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) because of a lack of public notice describing the database and the criteria for including personal information, as required by the Privacy Act of 1974. The lawsuits were a result of two Freedom of Information Act requests filed by the EFF in 2006. It was built in part by Chiliad corporation, the FBI Office of the Chief Technology Officer, and others. Companies listed on the FOIA files include Northrop Grumman . == Purpose == Investigative Data Warehouse–Secret (IDW-S) "provides data and data processing/analysis services to FBI agents and analysts as they perform counter-terrorism, counter-intelligence, and law enforcement missions". The core subsystem supports the Counter-Terrorism Division (CTD), the Special Event Unit, and via DOCLAB-S, the Joint Intelligence Committee Investigation (JICI) and IntelPlus. According to a 2005 email, "IDW will also be used for criminal and other authorized non-CT investigations as it evolves." (CT being counter terrorism) == Subsystems == Within the system, there were subsystems named IDW-S Core, SPT, and DOCLAB-S The special projects team (SPT): allows for the rapid import of new specialized data sources. These data sources are not made available to the general IDW users but instead are provided to a small group of users who have a demonstrated "need-to-know". The SPT System is similar in function to the IDW-S system, with the main difference is a different set of data sources. The SPT System allows its users to access not only the standard IDW Data Store but the specialized SPT Data Store. == Privacy == According to internal emails, the FBI performed several Privacy Impact Assessments (PIAs) of the IDW system. They worked with lawyers from their National Security Law Branch (NSLB) to attempt to make sure their system was complying with various laws regarding sharing of information and secrecy (for example, rule 6e of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, regarding the secrecy of Grand Jury material ). The Information Sharing Policy Group (ISPG) formed a Discretionary Access Control Team (DACT), to work on "approval of data sets" and "access control requirements" for IDW and DataMart, and responding to other Intelligence Community agencies requesting access. The EFF FOIA IDW website states "Despite the vast amount of personal information contained in the IDW, the FBI has never published a Privacy Act notice describing the system or explaining the ways in which the records might be used." There was also a 2005 email from someone on the Office of General Council (OGC) about "preliminary staff musings that maybe we should limit FBI PIA requirements to non-NS systems" (NS being National Security). There was also an email from 2006 saying that 'national security systems are exempt from E-Gov', apparently referring to the E-Government Act of 2002, which has a section that deals with privacy. == Data sources == The IDW used many data sources. The FOIA documents from EFF are heavily redacted, but some of the sources are as follows: FBI Automated Case Support system (ACS), subset of the Electronic Case File (ECF) system Joint Intelligence Committee Investigation documents (JICI), with OCR text "Open Source News" (public websites, such as the Washington Post and others) Secure Automated Messaging Network (SAMNet) Violent Gang and Terrorist Organizing File (VGTOF) DARPA TIDES program ('open source news' that has been organized and collected) IntelPlus Filerooms, with OCR text FBI National Crime Information Center (NCIC) FBI Records Management Division (RMD), Document Laboratory (DocLab), FBIHQ MiTAP (collects data from public sources, websites, etc.) SPT-Specific data sources (partial list, FOIA files have large parts redacted): Unified Name Index (UNI) extracts Financial Center (FinCen), including Bank Secrecy Act data "Various Sources", including the Transportation Security Administration FBI Counterterrorism Division (CTD) Telephone numbers / addresses from ACS Case data from ACS Terrorist Watch List (TWL) "Other NJTTF data" DoS ... Lost/Stolen Passport data No Fly List, from TSA Selectee list, from TSA ACS/ECF with some case types excluded CIA non-TS/non-SCI Technical Discussions (TDs) and Intelligence Information Reports (IIRs) from 1978 to the May 2004 There was also talk of linking the FTTTF "Data Mart" with IDW. The data in IDW is classified at the 'Secret' level or lower. Higher classifications are not allowed, and can be removed
Read more →
Run-to-completion scheduling

Run-to-completion scheduling or nonpreemptive scheduling is a scheduling model in which each task runs until it either finishes, or explicitly yields control back to the scheduler. Run-to-completion systems typically have an event queue which is serviced either in strict order of admission by an event loop, or by an admission scheduler which is capable of scheduling events out of order, based on other constraints such as deadlines. Some preemptive multitasking scheduling systems behave as run-to-completion schedulers in regard to scheduling tasks at one particular process priority level, at the same time as those processes still preempt other lower priority tasks and are themselves preempted by higher priority tasks.
Read more →
Computational heuristic intelligence

Computational heuristic intelligence (CHI) refers to specialized programming techniques in computational intelligence (also called artificial intelligence, or AI). These techniques have the express goal of avoiding complexity issues, also called NP-hard problems, by using human-like techniques. They are best summarized as the use of exemplar-based methods (heuristics), rather than rule-based methods (algorithms). Hence the term is distinct from the more conventional computational algorithmic intelligence, or symbolic AI. An example of a CHI technique is the encoding specificity principle of Tulving and Thompson. In general, CHI principles are problem solving techniques used by people, rather than programmed into machines. It is by drawing attention to this key distinction that the use of this term is justified in a field already replete with confusing neologisms. Note that the legal systems of all modern human societies employ both heuristics (generalisations of cases) from individual trial records as well as legislated statutes (rules) as regulatory guides. Another recent approach to the avoidance of complexity issues is to employ feedback control rather than feedforward modeling as a problem-solving paradigm. This approach has been called computational cybernetics, because (a) the term 'computational' is associated with conventional computer programming techniques which represent a strategic, compiled, or feedforward model of the problem, and (b) the term 'cybernetic' is associated with conventional system operation techniques which represent a tactical, interpreted, or feedback model of the problem. Of course, real programs and real problems both contain both feedforward and feedback components. A real example which illustrates this point is that of human cognition, which clearly involves both perceptual (bottom-up, feedback, sensor-oriented) and conceptual (top-down, feedforward, motor-oriented) information flows and hierarchies. The AI engineer must choose between mathematical and cybernetic problem solution and machine design paradigms. This is not a coding (program language) issue, but relates to understanding the relationship between the declarative and procedural programming paradigms. The vast majority of STEM professionals never get the opportunity to design or implement pure cybernetic solutions. When pushed, most responders will dismiss the importance of any difference by saying that all code can be reduced to a mathematical model anyway. Unfortunately, not only is this belief false, it fails most spectacularly in many AI scenarios. Mathematical models are not time agnostic, but by their very nature are pre-computed, i.e. feedforward. Dyer [2012] and Feldman [2004] have independently investigated the simplest of all somatic governance paradigms, namely control of a simple jointed limb by a single flexor muscle. They found that it is impossible to determine forces from limb positions- therefore, the problem cannot have a pre-computed (feedforward) mathematical solution. Instead, a top-down command bias signal changes the threshold feedback level in the sensorimotor loop, e.g. the loop formed by the afferent and efferent nerves, thus changing the so-called ‘equilibrium point’ of the flexor muscle/ elbow joint system. An overview of the arrangement reveals that global postures and limb position are commanded in feedforward terms, using global displacements (common coding), with the forces needed being computed locally by feedback loops. This method of sensorimotor unit governance, which is based upon what Anatol Feldman calls the ‘equilibrium Point’ theory, is formally equivalent to a servomechanism such as a car's ‘cruise control’.
Read more →
National Data Repository

A National Data Repository (NDR) is a data bank that seeks to preserve and promote a country's natural resources data, particularly data related to the petroleum exploration and production (E&P) sector. A National Data Repository is normally established by an entity that governs, controls and supports the exchange, capture, transference and distribution of E&P information, with the final target to provide the State with the tools and information to assure the growth, govern-ability, control, independence and sovereignty of the industry. The two fundamental reasons for a country to establish an NDR are to preserve data generated inside the country by the industry, and to promote investments in the country by utilizing data to reduce the exploration, production, and transportation business risks. Countries take different approaches towards preserving and promoting their natural resources data. The approach varies according to a country's natural resources policies, level of openness, and its attitude towards foreign investment. == Data types == NDRs store a vast array of data related to a country's natural resources. This includes wells, well log data, well reports, core samples, seismic surveys, post-stack seismic, field data/tapes, seismic (acquisition/processing) reports, production data, geological maps and reports, license data and geological models. == Funding models == Some NDRs are financed entirely by a country's government. Others are industry-funded. Still some are hybrid systems, funded in part by industry and government. NDRs typically charge fees for data requests and for data loading. The cost differs significantly between countries. In some cases an annual membership is charged to oil companies to store and access the data in the NDR. == Standards body == Energistics is the global energy standards resource center for the upstream oil and gas industry. Energistics National Data Repository Work Group: The standards body is Energistics. === Energistics-standards-directory === Global regulators of upstream oil and natural gas information, including seismic, drilling, production and reservoir data, formed the National Data Repository (NDR) Work Group in 2008 to collaborate on the development of data management standards and to assist emerging nations with hydrocarbon reserves to better collect, maintain and deliver oil and gas data to the public and to the industry. Ten countries, led by the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom, formed NDR to share best practices and to formalize the development and deployment of data management standards for regulatory agencies. The other countries involved in the NDR Work Group's formation are Australia, Canada, India, Kenya, New Zealand, South Africa and the United States. Annual NDR Conference: Approximately every 18 months Energistics organizes a National Data Repository Conference. The purpose is to provide government and regulatory agencies from around the world an opportunity to attend a series of workshops dedicated to developing data exchange standards, improving communications with the oil and gas industry and learning data management techniques for natural resources information. === Society of Exploration Geophysicists and The International Oil and Gas Producers Association === The SEG is the custodian of the SEG standards which are used for the exchange, retention and release of seismic data. They are commonly used by National Data Repositories with the SEGD and SEGY being the field and processed exchange standards respectively. == NDRs around the world == Click here to see a map of the NDRs around the world
Read more →
CENDI

CENDI (Commerce, Energy, NASA, Defense Information Managers Group) is an interagency group of senior Scientific and Technical Information (STI) managers from 14 United States federal agencies. CENDI managers cooperate by exchanging information and ideas, collaborating to address common issues, and undertaking joint initiatives. CENDI's accomplishments range from impacting federal information policy to educating a broad spectrum of stakeholders on all aspects of federal STI systems, including its value to research and the taxpayer, and to operational improvements in agency and interagency STI operations. == History == CENDI traces its roots to the Committee on Scientific and Technical Information (COSATI) of the Federal Council on Science and Technology. COSATI was established in the early 1960s to coordinate the management of the results from the U.S. government's increasing commitment to scientific research and technology development. The scientific and technical information (STI) managers of the government's major research and development (R&D) agencies worked within COSATI to standardize guidelines for cataloging and indexing technical reports. COSATI ceased formal operations in the early 1970s. To continue the cooperation begun under COSATI, managers of agency STI programs from Commerce (National Technical Information Service), Energy (Office of Scientific and Technical Information), NASA (HQ/STI Division), and Defense (Defense Technical Information Center) began meeting periodically to discuss common topics and stimulate more effective cooperation. In 1985, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed by the four charter agencies and CENDI was established. From this small core of STI managers, CENDI has grown to its current membership, which represents the major science agencies, the national libraries, and agencies involved in the dissemination and long-term management of scientific and technical information. The vision of CENDI is to facilitate cooperative enterprise where capabilities are shared and challenges are faced together so that the sum of the accomplishments is greater than each individual agency can achieve on its own amongst federal STI agencies. The abbreviation CENDI refers to the "Commerce, Energy, NASA, Defense Information Managers Group". == Membership == New members from other federal R&D information organizations may be admitted by unanimous agreement of the members. However, it is the intent of the group that membership in CENDI should remain small and focus on organizations with STI or supporting responsibilities. Each agency provides funding to CENDI. == Members == The members of CENDI are: Defense Technical Information Center (United States Department of Defense) Office of Research and Development and Office of Environmental Information (United States Environmental Protection Agency) Government Printing Office Library of Congress NASA Scientific and Technical Information Program National Agricultural Library (United States Department of Agriculture) National Archives and Records Administration National Library of Education (United States Department of Education) National Library of Medicine (United States Department of Health and Human Services) National Science Foundation National Technical Information Service (United States Department of Commerce) National Transportation Library (United States Department of Transportation) Office of Scientific and Technical Information (United States Department of Energy) USGS/Biological Resources Discipline (United States Department of the Interior) == Mission and operation == CENDI's mission is to help improve the productivity of federal science- and technology-based programs through effective scientific, technical, and related information support systems. In fulfilling its mission, CENDI agencies play an important role in addressing science- and technology-based national priorities and strengthening U.S. competitiveness. === Goals === STI Coordination and Leadership: Provide coordination and leadership for information exchange on important STI policy issues. Improvement of STI Systems: Promote the development of improved STI systems through the productive interrelationship of content and technology. STI Understanding: Promote better understanding of STI and STI management. === Principals and Alternates === CENDI is made up of senior federal STI managers and each organization appoints a Principal representative. This person is the point of contact for that organization within CENDI. Each Principal has an Alternate. The Principals and Alternates comprise the main group that meets on a regular basis, usually every other month. === Secretariat === A Tennessee-based information management company, -- Information International Associates, Inc., currently serves as the CENDI Secretariat. The Secretariat provides day-to-day operations to CENDI. The Secretariat prepares the necessary materials for the Principals' meetings, provides support for the working group and task group meetings, assists in developing papers, and maintains the CENDI files and outreach tools. === Task Groups and Working Groups === The chair(s) of a working group is appointed by the Principals and has the overall responsibility for the group's activities. The Secretariat provides support at the request of the Working Group chair(s). The Working Groups and Task Groups that are currently operating are: Copyright and Intellectual Property Working Group Distribution Markings Task Group Digital Preservation Task Group Digitization Specifications Task Group Image Metadata Task Group Science.gov (see below) STI Policy Working Group Terminology Resources Task Group === Science.gov and Worldwidescience.org === In 2001, in response to the April 2001 workshop on "Strengthening the Public Information Infrastructure for Science", and taking into consideration a request from Firstgov (now USA.gov) to develop specialized topical portals, CENDI formed an alliance to develop an interagency website for access to STI. This website, called Science.gov, is a one-stop source of STI, including both selected, authoritative government websites and deep Web databases of technical reports, journal articles, conference proceedings, and other published materials. Through the volunteer efforts of members and involving over 100 staff, content and architecture is developed for the site. The Science.gov website is hosted by the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI). The site was formally launched in December 2002. As a result of the success of Science.gov, under DOE leadership and in cooperation with the International Council of Scientific and Technical Information, a worldwide coordination across national portals called WorldWideScience was launched in 2008. === Work with non-member organizations === CENDI works with several cooperating non-member organizations on a regular basis. These agencies are in academia, federal government, legal and policy analysis, international, non-governmental, and private organizations.
Read more →
Sardinas–Patterson algorithm

In coding theory, the Sardinas–Patterson algorithm is a classical algorithm for determining in polynomial time whether a given variable-length code is uniquely decodable, named after August Albert Sardinas and George W. Patterson, who published it in 1953. The algorithm carries out a systematic search for a string which admits two different decompositions into codewords. As Knuth reports, the algorithm was rediscovered about ten years later in 1963 by Floyd, despite the fact that it was at the time already well known in coding theory. == Idea of the algorithm == Consider the code { a ↦ 1 , b ↦ 011 , c ↦ 01110 , d ↦ 1110 , e ↦ 10011 } {\displaystyle \{\,{\texttt {a}}\mapsto {\texttt {1}},{\texttt {b}}\mapsto {\texttt {011}},{\texttt {c}}\mapsto {\texttt {01110}},{\texttt {d}}\mapsto {\texttt {1110}},{\texttt {e}}\mapsto {\texttt {10011}}\,\}} . This code, which is based on an example by Berstel, is an example of a code which is not uniquely decodable, since the string 011101110011 can be interpreted as the sequence of codewords 01110 – 1110 – 011, but also as the sequence of codewords 011 – 1 – 011 – 10011. Two possible decodings of this encoded string are thus given by cdb and babe. In general, a codeword can be found by the following idea: In the first round, we choose two codewords x 1 {\displaystyle x_{1}} and y 1 {\displaystyle y_{1}} such that x 1 {\displaystyle x_{1}} is a prefix of y 1 {\displaystyle y_{1}} , that is, x 1 w = y 1 {\displaystyle x_{1}w=y_{1}} for some "dangling suffix" w {\displaystyle w} . If one tries first x 1 = 011 {\displaystyle x_{1}={\texttt {011}}} and y 1 = 01110 {\displaystyle y_{1}={\texttt {01110}}} , the dangling suffix is w = 10 {\displaystyle {\texttt {w}}={\texttt {10}}} . If we manage to find two sequences x 2 , … , x p {\displaystyle x_{2},\ldots ,x_{p}} and y 2 , … , y q {\displaystyle y_{2},\ldots ,y_{q}} of codewords such that x 2 ⋯ x p = w y 2 ⋯ y q {\displaystyle x_{2}\cdots x_{p}=wy_{2}\cdots y_{q}} , then we are finished: For then the string x = x 1 x 2 ⋯ x p {\displaystyle x=x_{1}x_{2}\cdots x_{p}} can alternatively be decomposed as y 1 y 2 ⋯ y q {\displaystyle y_{1}y_{2}\cdots y_{q}} , and we have found the desired string having at least two different decompositions into codewords. In the second round, we try out two different approaches: the first trial is to look for a codeword that has w as prefix. Then we obtain a new dangling suffix w, with which we can continue our search. If we eventually encounter a dangling suffix that is itself a codeword (or the empty word), then the search will terminate, as we know there exists a string with two decompositions. The second trial is to seek for a codeword that is itself a prefix of w. In our example, we have w = 10 {\displaystyle w={\texttt {10}}} , and the sequence 1 is a codeword. We can thus also continue with w = 0 {\displaystyle w={\texttt {0}}} as the new dangling suffix. == Precise description of the algorithm == The algorithm is described most conveniently using quotients of formal languages. In general, for two sets of strings D and N, the (left) quotient N − 1 D {\displaystyle N^{-1}D} is defined as the residual words obtained from D by removing some prefix in N. Formally, N − 1 D = { y ∣ x y ∈ D and x ∈ N } {\displaystyle N^{-1}D=\{\,y\mid xy\in D~{\textrm {and}}~x\in N\,\}} . Now let C {\displaystyle C} denote the (finite) set of codewords in the given code. The algorithm proceeds in rounds, where we maintain in each round not only one dangling suffix as described above, but the (finite) set of all potential dangling suffixes. Starting with round i = 1 {\displaystyle i=1} , the set of potential dangling suffixes will be denoted by S i {\displaystyle S_{i}} . The sets S i {\displaystyle S_{i}} are defined inductively as follows: S 1 = C − 1 C ∖ { ε } {\displaystyle S_{1}=C^{-1}C\setminus \{\varepsilon \}} . Here, the symbol ε {\displaystyle \varepsilon } denotes the empty word. S i + 1 = C − 1 S i ∪ S i − 1 C {\displaystyle S_{i+1}=C^{-1}S_{i}\cup S_{i}^{-1}C} , for all i ≥ 1 {\displaystyle i\geq 1} . The algorithm computes the sets S i {\displaystyle S_{i}} in increasing order of i {\displaystyle i} . As soon as one of the S i {\displaystyle S_{i}} contains a word from C or the empty word, then the algorithm terminates and answers that the given code is not uniquely decodable. Otherwise, once a set S i {\displaystyle S_{i}} equals a previously encountered set S j {\displaystyle S_{j}} with j < i {\displaystyle j Read more →
PDE surface

PDE surfaces are used in geometric modelling and computer graphics for creating smooth surfaces conforming to a given boundary configuration. PDE surfaces use partial differential equations to generate a surface which usually satisfy a mathematical boundary value problem. PDE surfaces were first introduced into the area of geometric modelling and computer graphics by two British mathematicians, Malcolm Bloor and Michael Wilson. == Technical details == The PDE method involves generating a surface for some boundary by means of solving an elliptic partial differential equation of the form ( ∂ 2 ∂ u 2 + a 2 ∂ 2 ∂ v 2 ) 2 X ( u , v ) = 0. {\displaystyle \left({\frac {\partial ^{2}}{\partial u^{2}}}+a^{2}{\frac {\partial ^{2}}{\partial v^{2}}}\right)^{2}X(u,v)=0.} Here X ( u , v ) {\displaystyle X(u,v)} is a function parameterised by the two parameters u {\displaystyle u} and v {\displaystyle v} such that X ( u , v ) = ( x ( u , v ) , y ( u , v ) , z ( u , v ) ) {\displaystyle X(u,v)=(x(u,v),y(u,v),z(u,v))} where x {\displaystyle x} , y {\displaystyle y} and z {\displaystyle z} are the usual cartesian coordinate space. The boundary conditions on the function X ( u , v ) {\displaystyle X(u,v)} and its normal derivatives ∂ X / ∂ n {\displaystyle \partial {X}/\partial {n}} are imposed at the edges of the surface patch. With the above formulation it is notable that the elliptic partial differential operator in the above PDE represents a smoothing process in which the value of the function at any point on the surface is, in some sense, a weighted average of the surrounding values. In this way, a surface is obtained as a smooth transition between the chosen set of boundary conditions. The parameter a {\displaystyle a} is a special design parameter which controls the relative smoothing of the surface in the u {\displaystyle u} and v {\displaystyle v} directions. When a = 1 {\displaystyle a=1} , the PDE is the biharmonic equation: X u u u u + 2 X u u v v + X v v v v = 0 {\displaystyle X_{uuuu}+2X_{uuvv}+X_{vvvv}=0} . The biharmonic equation is the equation produced by applying the Euler-Lagrange equation to the simplified thin plate energy functional X u u 2 + 2 X u v 2 + X v v 2 {\displaystyle X_{uu}^{2}+2X_{uv}^{2}+X_{vv}^{2}} . So solving the PDE with a = 1 {\displaystyle a=1} is equivalent to minimizing the thin plate energy functional subject to the same boundary conditions. == Applications == PDE surfaces can be used in many application areas. These include computer-aided design, interactive design, parametric design, computer animation, computer-aided physical analysis and design optimisation. == Related publications == M.I.G. Bloor and M.J. Wilson, Generating Blend Surfaces using Partial Differential Equations, Computer Aided Design, 21(3), 165–171, (1989). H. Ugail, M.I.G. Bloor, and M.J. Wilson, Techniques for Interactive Design Using the PDE Method, ACM Transactions on Graphics, 18(2), 195–212, (1999). J. Huband, W. Li and R. Smith, An Explicit Representation of Bloor-Wilson PDE Surface Model by using Canonical Basis for Hermite Interpolation, Mathematical Engineering in Industry, 7(4), 421-33 (1999). H. Du and H. Qin, Direct Manipulation and Interactive Sculpting of PDE surfaces, Computer Graphics Forum, 19(3), C261-C270, (2000). H. Ugail, Spine Based Shape Parameterisations for PDE surfaces, Computing, 72, 195–204, (2004). L. You, P. Comninos, J.J. Zhang, PDE Blending Surfaces with C2 Continuity, Computers and Graphics, 28(6), 895–906, (2004).
Read more →
Gen (software)

Gen is a Computer Aided Software Engineering (CASE) application development environment marketed by Broadcom Inc. Gen was previously known as CA Gen, IEF (Information Engineering Facility), Composer by IEF, Composer, COOL:Gen, Advantage:Gen and AllFusion Gen. The toolset originally supported the information technology engineering methodology developed by Clive Finkelstein, James Martin and others in the early 1980s. Early versions supported IBM's DB2 database, 3270 'block mode' screens and generated COBOL code. In the intervening years the toolset has been expanded to support additional development techniques such as component-based development; creation of client/server and web applications and generation of C, Java and C#. In addition, other platforms are now supported such as many variants of Unix-like Operating Systems (AIX, HP-UX, Solaris, Linux) as well as Windows. Its range of supported database technologies have widened to include ORACLE, Microsoft SQL Server, ODBC, JDBC as well as the original DB2. The toolset is fully integrated - objects identified during analysis carry forward into design without redefinition. All information is stored in a repository (central encyclopedia). The encyclopedia allows for large team development - controlling access so that multiple developers may not change the same object simultaneously. == History == === 1985-1997: Texas Instruments === It was initially produced by Texas Instruments, with input from James Martin and his consultancy firm James Martin Associates, and was based on the Information Engineering Methodology (IEM). The first version was launched in 1985. IEF (Information Engineering Facility) became popular among large government departments and public utilities. It initially supported a CICS/COBOL/DB2 target environment. However, it now supports a wider range of relational databases and operating systems. IEF was intended to shield the developer from the complexities of building complete multi-tier cross-platform applications. In 1995, Texas Instruments decided to change their marketing focus for the product. Part of this change included a new name - "Composer". By 1996, IEF had become a popular tool. However, it was criticized by some IT professionals for being too restrictive, as well as for having a high per-workstation cost ($15K USD). But it is claimed that IEF reduces development time and costs by removing complexity and allowing rapid development of large scale enterprise transaction processing systems. === 1997-2000: Sterling Software === In 1997, Composer had another change of branding, Texas Instruments sold the Texas Instruments Software division, including the Composer rights, to Sterling Software. Sterling software changed the well known name "Information Engineering Facility" to "COOL:Gen". COOL was an acronym for "Common Object Oriented Language" - despite the fact that there was little object orientation in the product. === 2000-2018: Computer Associates === In 2000, Sterling Software was acquired by Computer Associates (now CA). CA has rebranded the product three times to date and the product is still used widely today. Under CA, recent releases of the tool added support for the CA-Datacom DBMS, the Linux operating system, C# code generation and ASP.NET web clients. The current version is known as CA Gen - version 8 being released in May 2010, with support for customised web services, and more of the toolset being based around the Eclipse framework. === 2018-current: Broadcom === As of 2020, CA Gen is owned and marketed by Broadcom Inc., which rebranded the product to Gen to avoid confusion with the former owner of the product. There are a variety of "add-on" tools available for Gen, including GuardIEn - a Configuration Management and Developer Productivity Suite, QAT Wizard, an interview style wizard that takes advantage of the meta model in Gen, products for multi-platform application reporting and XML/SOAP enabling of Gen applications., and developer productivity tools such as Access Gen, APMConnect, QA Console and Upgrade Console from Response Systems Version 8.6 of CA Gen came to market in June 2016. Version 8.6.3 of CA Gen was released in 2021. Following this release, Broadcom have switched to a continuous delivery model with new features to be delivered as patches.
Read more →
Long division

In arithmetic, long division is a standard division algorithm suitable for dividing multi-digit numbers that is simple enough to perform by hand. It breaks down a division problem into a series of easier steps. As in all division problems, one number, called the dividend, is divided by another, called the divisor, producing a result called the quotient. It enables computations involving arbitrarily large numbers to be performed by following a series of simple steps. The abbreviated form of long division is called short division, which is almost always used instead of long division when the divisor has only one digit. == History == Related algorithms have existed since the 12th century. Al-Samawal al-Maghribi (1125–1174) performed calculations with decimal numbers that essentially require long division, leading to infinite decimal results, but without formalizing the algorithm. Caldrini (1491) is the earliest printed example of long division, known as the Danda method in medieval Italy, and it became more practical with the introduction of decimal notation for fractions by Pitiscus (1608). The specific algorithm in modern use was introduced by Henry Briggs c. 1600. == Education == Inexpensive calculators and computers have become the most common tools for performing division in educational and professional contexts worldwide, reducing reliance on traditional paper-and-pencil techniques. Internally, these devices implement various division algorithms, many of which rely on iterative approximations and multiplication to improve computational efficiency. Educational approaches to teaching division vary across countries and regions, reflecting differing curricular priorities. In North America, long division has been de-emphasized or, in some cases, removed from portions of the curriculum as part of reform mathematics, which emphasizes conceptual understanding and the use of technology. In contrast, many education systems in Europe and Asia continue to emphasize mastery of standard algorithms, including long division, as a foundational arithmetic skill. For example, curricula in countries such as Japan and Germany typically introduce and reinforce long division during primary education, often alongside mental arithmetic strategies and problem-solving techniques. International assessments such as the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) highlight these differences, showing variation in how procedural fluency and conceptual understanding are balanced across educational systems. These differing approaches reflect broader educational philosophies regarding the balance between procedural fluency, conceptual understanding, and the role of technology in mathematics education. == Method == In English-speaking countries, long division does not use the division slash ⟨∕⟩ or division sign ⟨÷⟩ symbols but instead constructs a tableau. The divisor is separated from the dividend by a right parenthesis ⟨)⟩ or vertical bar ⟨|⟩; the dividend is separated from the quotient by a vinculum (i.e., an overbar). The combination of these two symbols is sometimes known as a long division symbol, division bracket, or even a bus stop. It developed in the 18th century from an earlier single-line notation separating the dividend from the quotient by a left parenthesis. The process is begun by dividing the left-most digit of the dividend by the divisor. The quotient (rounded down to an integer) becomes the first digit of the result, and the remainder is calculated (this step is notated as a subtraction). This remainder carries forward when the process is repeated on the following digit of the dividend (notated as 'bringing down' the next digit to the remainder). When all digits have been processed and no remainder is left, the process is complete. An example is shown below, representing the division of 500 by 4 (with a result of 125). 125 (Explanations) 4)500 4 ( 4 × 1 = 4) 10 ( 5 - 4 = 1) 8 ( 4 × 2 = 8) 20 (10 - 8 = 2) 20 ( 4 × 5 = 20) 0 (20 - 20 = 0) A more detailed breakdown of the steps goes as follows: Find the shortest sequence of digits starting from the left end of the dividend, 500, that the divisor 4 goes into at least once. In this case, this is simply the first digit, 5. The largest number that the divisor 4 can be multiplied by without exceeding 5 is 1, so the digit 1 is put above the 5 to start constructing the quotient. Next, the 1 is multiplied by the divisor 4, to obtain the largest whole number that is a multiple of the divisor 4 without exceeding the 5 (4 in this case). This 4 is then placed under and subtracted from the 5 to get the remainder, 1, which is placed under the 4 under the 5. Afterwards, the first as-yet unused digit in the dividend, in this case the first digit 0 after the 5, is copied directly underneath itself and next to the remainder 1, to form the number 10. At this point the process is repeated enough times to reach a stopping point: The largest number by which the divisor 4 can be multiplied without exceeding 10 is 2, so 2 is written above as the second leftmost quotient digit. This 2 is then multiplied by the divisor 4 to get 8, which is the largest multiple of 4 that does not exceed 10; so 8 is written below 10, and the subtraction 10 minus 8 is performed to get the remainder 2, which is placed below the 8. The next digit of the dividend (the last 0 in 500) is copied directly below itself and next to the remainder 2 to form 20. Then the largest number by which the divisor 4 can be multiplied without exceeding 20, which is 5, is placed above as the third leftmost quotient digit. This 5 is multiplied by the divisor 4 to get 20, which is written below and subtracted from the existing 20 to yield the remainder 0, which is then written below the second 20. At this point, since there are no more digits to bring down from the dividend and the last subtraction result was 0, we can be assured that the process finished. If the last remainder when we ran out of dividend digits had been something other than 0, there would have been two possible courses of action: We could just stop there and say that the dividend divided by the divisor is the quotient written at the top with the remainder written at the bottom, and write the answer as the quotient followed by a fraction that is the remainder divided by the divisor. We could extend the dividend by writing it as, say, 500.000... and continue the process (using a decimal point in the quotient directly above the decimal point in the dividend), in order to get a decimal answer, as in the following example. 31.75 4)127.00 12 (12 ÷ 4 = 3) 07 (0 remainder, bring down next figure) 4 (7 ÷ 4 = 1 r 3) 3.0 (bring down 0 and the decimal point) 2.8 (7 × 4 = 28, 30 ÷ 4 = 7 r 2) 20 (an additional zero is brought down) 20 (5 × 4 = 20) 0 In this example, the decimal part of the result is calculated by continuing the process beyond the units digit, "bringing down" zeros as being the decimal part of the dividend. This example also illustrates that, at the beginning of the process, a step that produces a zero can be omitted. Since the first digit 1 is less than the divisor 4, the first step is instead performed on the first two digits 12. Similarly, if the divisor were 13, one would perform the first step on 127 rather than 12 or 1. === Basic procedure for long division of n ÷ m === Find the location of all decimal points in the dividend n and divisor m. If necessary, simplify the long division problem by moving the decimals of the divisor and dividend by the same number of decimal places, to the right (or to the left), so that the decimal of the divisor is to the right of the last digit. When doing long division, keep the numbers lined up straight from top to bottom under the tableau. After each step, be sure the remainder for that step is less than the divisor. If it is not, there are three possible problems: the multiplication is wrong, the subtraction is wrong, or a greater quotient is needed. In the end, the remainder, r, is added to the growing quotient as a fraction, r⁄m. === Invariant property and correctness === The basic presentation of the steps of the process (above) focuses on what steps are to be performed, rather than the properties of those steps that ensure the result will be correct (specifically, that q × m + r = n, where q is the final quotient and r the final remainder). A slight variation of presentation requires more writing, and requires that we change, rather than just update, digits of the quotient, but can shed more light on why these steps actually produce the right answer by allowing evaluation of q × m + r at intermediate points in the process. This illustrates the key property used in the derivation of the algorithm (below). Specifically, we amend the above basic procedure so that we fill the space after the digits of the quotient under construction with 0's, to at least the 1's place, and include those 0's in the numbers we write below the division bra
Read more →
XOR swap algorithm

In computer programming, the exclusive or swap (sometimes shortened to XOR swap) is an algorithm that uses the exclusive or bitwise operation to swap the values of two variables without using the temporary variable which is normally required. The algorithm is primarily a novelty and a way of demonstrating properties of the exclusive or operation. It is sometimes discussed as a program optimization, but there are almost no cases where swapping via exclusive or provides benefit over the standard, obvious technique. == The algorithm == Conventional swapping requires the use of a temporary storage variable. Using the XOR swap algorithm, however, no temporary storage is needed. The algorithm is as follows: Since XOR is a commutative operation, either X XOR Y or Y XOR X can be used interchangeably in any of the foregoing three lines. Note that on some architectures the first operand of the XOR instruction specifies the target location at which the result of the operation is stored, preventing this interchangeability. The algorithm typically corresponds to three machine-code instructions, represented by corresponding pseudocode and assembly instructions in the three rows of the following table: In the above System/370 assembly code sample, R1 and R2 are distinct registers, and each XR operation leaves its result in the register named in the first argument. Using x86 assembly, values X and Y are in registers eax and ebx (respectively), and xor places the result of the operation in the first register (Note: x86 supports XCHG instruction so using triple XOR do not make sense on this architecture). In RISC-V assembly, value X and Y are in registers x10 and x11, and xor places the result of the operation in the first operand. However, in the pseudocode or high-level language version or implementation, the algorithm fails if x and y use the same storage location, since the value stored in that location will be zeroed out by the first XOR instruction, and then remain zero; it will not be "swapped with itself". This is not the same as if x and y have the same values. The trouble only comes when x and y use the same storage location, in which case their values must already be equal. That is, if x and y use the same storage location, then the line: sets x to zero (because x = y so X XOR Y is zero) and sets y to zero (since it uses the same storage location), causing x and y to lose their original values. == Proof of correctness == The binary operation XOR over bit strings of length N {\displaystyle N} exhibits the following properties (where ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } denotes XOR): L1. Commutativity: A ⊕ B = B ⊕ A {\displaystyle A\oplus B=B\oplus A} L2. Associativity: ( A ⊕ B ) ⊕ C = A ⊕ ( B ⊕ C ) {\displaystyle (A\oplus B)\oplus C=A\oplus (B\oplus C)} L3. Identity exists: there is a bit string, 0, (of length N) such that A ⊕ 0 = A {\displaystyle A\oplus 0=A} for any A {\displaystyle A} L4. Each element is its own inverse: for each A {\displaystyle A} , A ⊕ A = 0 {\displaystyle A\oplus A=0} . Suppose that we have two distinct registers R1 and R2 as in the table below, with initial values A and B respectively. We perform the operations below in sequence, and reduce our results using the properties listed above. === Linear algebra interpretation === As XOR can be interpreted as binary addition and a pair of bits can be interpreted as a vector in a two-dimensional vector space over the field with two elements, the steps in the algorithm can be interpreted as multiplication by 2×2 matrices over the field with two elements. For simplicity, assume initially that x and y are each single bits, not bit vectors. For example, the step: which also has the implicit: corresponds to the matrix ( 1 1 0 1 ) {\displaystyle \left({\begin{smallmatrix}1&1\\0&1\end{smallmatrix}}\right)} as ( 1 1 0 1 ) ( x y ) = ( x + y y ) . {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\0&1\end{pmatrix}}{\begin{pmatrix}x\\y\end{pmatrix}}={\begin{pmatrix}x+y\\y\end{pmatrix}}.} The sequence of operations is then expressed as: ( 1 1 0 1 ) ( 1 0 1 1 ) ( 1 1 0 1 ) = ( 0 1 1 0 ) {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\0&1\end{pmatrix}}{\begin{pmatrix}1&0\\1&1\end{pmatrix}}{\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\0&1\end{pmatrix}}={\begin{pmatrix}0&1\\1&0\end{pmatrix}}} (working with binary values, so 1 + 1 = 0 {\displaystyle 1+1=0} ), which expresses the elementary matrix of switching two rows (or columns) in terms of the transvections (shears) of adding one element to the other. To generalize to where X and Y are not single bits, but instead bit vectors of length n, these 2×2 matrices are replaced by 2n×2n block matrices such as ( I n I n 0 I n ) . {\displaystyle \left({\begin{smallmatrix}I_{n}&I_{n}\\0&I_{n}\end{smallmatrix}}\right).} These matrices are operating on values, not on variables (with storage locations), hence this interpretation abstracts away from issues of storage location and the problem of both variables sharing the same storage location. == Code example == A C function that implements the XOR swap algorithm: The code first checks if the addresses are distinct and uses a guard clause to exit the function early if they are equal. Without that check, if they were equal, the algorithm would fold to a triple x ^= x resulting in zero. == Reasons for avoidance in practice == On modern CPU architectures, the XOR technique can be slower than using a temporary variable to do swapping. At least on recent x86 CPUs, both by AMD and Intel, moving between registers regularly incurs zero latency. (This is called MOV-elimination.) Even if there is not any architectural register available to use, the XCHG instruction will be at least as fast as the three XORs taken together. Another reason is that modern CPUs strive to execute instructions in parallel via instruction pipelines. In the XOR technique, the inputs to each operation depend on the results of the previous operation, so they must be executed in strictly sequential order, negating any benefits of instruction-level parallelism. === Aliasing === The XOR swap is also complicated in practice by aliasing. If an attempt is made to XOR-swap the contents of some location with itself, the result is that the location is zeroed out and its value lost. Therefore, XOR swapping must not be used blindly in a high-level language if aliasing is possible. This issue does not apply if the technique is used in assembly to swap the contents of two registers. Similar problems occur with call by name, as in Jensen's Device, where swapping i and A[i] via a temporary variable yields incorrect results due to the arguments being related: swapping via temp = i; i = A[i]; A[i] = temp changes the value for i in the second statement, which then results in the incorrect i value for A[i] in the third statement. == Variations == The underlying principle of the XOR swap algorithm can be applied to any operation meeting criteria L1 through L4 above. Replacing XOR by addition and subtraction gives various slightly different, but largely equivalent, formulations. For example: Unlike the XOR swap, this variation requires that the underlying processor or programming language uses a method such as modular arithmetic or bignums to guarantee that the computation of X + Y cannot cause an error due to integer overflow. Therefore, it is seen even more rarely in practice than the XOR swap. However, the implementation of AddSwap above in the C programming language always works even in case of integer overflow, since, according to the C standard, addition and subtraction of unsigned integers follow the rules of modular arithmetic, i. e. are done in the cyclic group Z / 2 s Z {\displaystyle \mathbb {Z} /2^{s}\mathbb {Z} } where s {\displaystyle s} is the number of bits of unsigned int. Indeed, the correctness of the algorithm follows from the fact that the formulas ( x + y ) − y = x {\displaystyle (x+y)-y=x} and ( x + y ) − ( ( x + y ) − y ) = y {\displaystyle (x+y)-((x+y)-y)=y} hold in any abelian group. This generalizes the proof for the XOR swap algorithm: XOR is both the addition and subtraction in the abelian group ( Z / 2 Z ) s {\displaystyle (\mathbb {Z} /2\mathbb {Z} )^{s}} (which is the direct sum of s copies of Z / 2 Z {\displaystyle \mathbb {Z} /2\mathbb {Z} } ). This doesn't hold when dealing with the signed int type (the default for int). Signed integer overflow is an undefined behavior in C and thus modular arithmetic is not guaranteed by the standard, which may lead to incorrect results. The sequence of operations in AddSwap can be expressed via matrix multiplication as: ( 1 − 1 0 1 ) ( 1 0 1 − 1 ) ( 1 1 0 1 ) = ( 0 1 1 0 ) {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}1&-1\\0&1\end{pmatrix}}{\begin{pmatrix}1&0\\1&-1\end{pmatrix}}{\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\0&1\end{pmatrix}}={\begin{pmatrix}0&1\\1&0\end{pmatrix}}} == Application to register allocation == On architectures lacking a dedicated swap instruction, because it avoids the extra temporary register, the XOR swap algorithm is required for optimal register allocatio
Read more →
SimSimi

SimSimi is an artificial intelligence conversation program created in 2002 by ISMaker. It grows its artificial intelligence day by day assisted by a feature that allows users to teach it to respond correctly. SimSimi, pronounced as "shim-shimi", is from a Korean word simsim (심심) which means "bored". It has an application designed for Android, Windows Phone and iOS. The application was banned in Thailand in 2012 after users taught it to make responses containing profanity, and to criticise leading politicians. In April 2018, SimSimi was suspended in Brazil due to accusations of sending inappropriate messages, such as sexual language, bullying and even death threats, being labeled as "dangerous" mainly due to its popularity among children, and according to its developer, the suspension of the app in the country "was inevitable because the SimSimi app, at least in the last few days, had a significant negative social impact in Brazil.”
Read more →
Information flow

In discourse-based grammatical theory, information flow is any tracking of referential information by speakers. Information may be new, i.e., just introduced into the conversation; given, i.e., already active in the speakers' consciousness; or old, i.e., no longer active. The various types of activation, and how these are defined, are model-dependent. Information flow affects grammatical structures such as: Word order (topic, focus, and afterthought constructions). Active, passive, or middle voice. Choice of deixis, such as articles; "medial" deictics such as Spanish ese and Japanese sore are generally determined by the familiarity of a referent rather than by physical distance. Overtness of information, such as whether an argument of a verb is indicated by a lexical noun phrase, a pronoun, or not mentioned at all. Clefting: Splitting a single clause into two clauses, each with its own verb, e.g. ‘The chicken turtles tasted like chicken.’ becomes ‘It was the chicken turtle | that tasted like chicken.’ In this case, clefting is used to shift the focus of the sentence to the subject, the chicken turtle. Front focus: Placing at the start (front) of a sentence information that would normally occur later in the sentence, to give it extra prominence. For example, in pop culture, Yoda's speech often utilizes such syntactic construction, such as when he says 'much to learn you still have' to Luke Skywalker. End focus (or end weight): Given or familiar information followed by new information. This gives prominence to the final part of the sentences and can enable suspense to build, e.g. ‘Through the door came a gigantic wolf’.(Umer Prince)
Read more →
National Data Repository

A National Data Repository (NDR) is a data bank that seeks to preserve and promote a country's natural resources data, particularly data related to the petroleum exploration and production (E&P) sector. A National Data Repository is normally established by an entity that governs, controls and supports the exchange, capture, transference and distribution of E&P information, with the final target to provide the State with the tools and information to assure the growth, govern-ability, control, independence and sovereignty of the industry. The two fundamental reasons for a country to establish an NDR are to preserve data generated inside the country by the industry, and to promote investments in the country by utilizing data to reduce the exploration, production, and transportation business risks. Countries take different approaches towards preserving and promoting their natural resources data. The approach varies according to a country's natural resources policies, level of openness, and its attitude towards foreign investment. == Data types == NDRs store a vast array of data related to a country's natural resources. This includes wells, well log data, well reports, core samples, seismic surveys, post-stack seismic, field data/tapes, seismic (acquisition/processing) reports, production data, geological maps and reports, license data and geological models. == Funding models == Some NDRs are financed entirely by a country's government. Others are industry-funded. Still some are hybrid systems, funded in part by industry and government. NDRs typically charge fees for data requests and for data loading. The cost differs significantly between countries. In some cases an annual membership is charged to oil companies to store and access the data in the NDR. == Standards body == Energistics is the global energy standards resource center for the upstream oil and gas industry. Energistics National Data Repository Work Group: The standards body is Energistics. === Energistics-standards-directory === Global regulators of upstream oil and natural gas information, including seismic, drilling, production and reservoir data, formed the National Data Repository (NDR) Work Group in 2008 to collaborate on the development of data management standards and to assist emerging nations with hydrocarbon reserves to better collect, maintain and deliver oil and gas data to the public and to the industry. Ten countries, led by the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom, formed NDR to share best practices and to formalize the development and deployment of data management standards for regulatory agencies. The other countries involved in the NDR Work Group's formation are Australia, Canada, India, Kenya, New Zealand, South Africa and the United States. Annual NDR Conference: Approximately every 18 months Energistics organizes a National Data Repository Conference. The purpose is to provide government and regulatory agencies from around the world an opportunity to attend a series of workshops dedicated to developing data exchange standards, improving communications with the oil and gas industry and learning data management techniques for natural resources information. === Society of Exploration Geophysicists and The International Oil and Gas Producers Association === The SEG is the custodian of the SEG standards which are used for the exchange, retention and release of seismic data. They are commonly used by National Data Repositories with the SEGD and SEGY being the field and processed exchange standards respectively. == NDRs around the world == Click here to see a map of the NDRs around the world
Read more →