Pixel shift is a method in digital cameras for producing a super-resolution image. The method works by taking several images, after each such capture moving ("shifting") the sensor to a new position. In digital colour cameras that employ pixel shift, this avoids a major limitation inherent in using Bayer pattern for obtaining colour, and instead produces an image with increased colour resolution and, assuming a static subject or additional computational steps, an image free of colour moiré. Taking this idea further, sub-pixel shifting may increase the resolution of the final image beyond that suggested by the specified resolution of the image sensor. Additionally, assuming that the various individual captures are taken at the same sensitivity, the final combined image will have less image noise than a single capture. This can be thought of as an averaging effect (for instance, in a pixel shift image composed of four individual frames with a classic Bayer pattern, every pixel in the final colour image is based on two measurements of the green channel). == List of cameras implementing pixel shift == All of the following cameras are fabricated with one imaging sensor, thus any kind of pixel shift requires a movement of the whole sensor. === Canon === Canon R5: Contains a 45 Mpixel sensor. The High-Resolution Mode shifts the sensor by one pixel to obtain a sequence of nine images that are merged into a 400 Mpixel image. === Fujifilm === Fujifilm GFX50S II: contains a 51 Mpixel sensor. The Pixel Shift Multi-Shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of 16 images that are subsequently merged into a 200 Mpixel image. Fujifilm GFX100, Fujifilm GFX100 II: contains a 102 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 16 pixel shifted images are merged into a 400 Mpixel image. Fujifilm GFX100S, Fujifilm GFX100S II: contains a 102 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 16 pixel shifted images are merged into a 400 Mpixel image Fujifilm GFX100IR: contains a 102 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 16 pixel shifted images are merged into a 400 Mpixel image Fujifilm X-H2: contains a 40 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 20 shifted images are merged into a 160 Mpixel image. Fujifilm X-T5: contains a 40 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 20 shifted images are merged into a 160 Mpixel image. === Nikon === Nikon Z8: contains a 47.5 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of up to 32 images that can be merged in Nikon's NX studio software. Nikon Zf: contains a 24 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of up to 32 images that can be merged in Nikon's NX studio software. === Olympus === Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II: contains a 20.4 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode produces a 50 Mpixel image. Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II: contains a 16 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of 8 images that are subsequently merged into a 40 Mpixel image. Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III: contains a 20.4 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of 8 images that are subsequently merged into a 50 Mpixel image. Olympus OM-D E-M1X: contains a 20.4 Mpixel sensor. The camera sports two pixel shift mode: (a) the 80Mp Tripod mode produces an 80 Mpixel image, (b) the Handheld High Res shot mode produces a 50 Mpixel image. Olympus PEN-F: contains a 20.4 Mpixel sensor. The High Res Shot mode takes multiple images, continually shifting the position of the sensor in sub-pixel increments. Combining these images results in either a 50MP JPEG or an 80MP Raw file. ==== OM System ==== OM System OM-1: contains a 20MPix sensor. The High Res Shot mode takes multiple images, and it can be used handheld or on a tripod. Handheld it will internally produce 50 Mpix files and 80 Mpix when mounted on a tripod. OM System OM-5: contains a 20MPix sensor. The High Res Shot mode takes multiple images, and it can be used handheld or on a tripod. Handheld it will internally produce 50 Mpix files and 80 Mpix when mounted on a tripod. === Panasonic === Panasonic Lumix DC-G9: contains a 20.3 Mpixel sensor. The High Resolution Mode takes a sequence of 8 shots in quick succession between which the sensor is shifted by 0.5 pixel for each image. These are subsequently merged into an 80 Mpixel image. Panasonic Lumix DC-S1: contains a 24.2 Mpixel sensor. The High Resolution Mode takes a sequence of shots in quick succession between which the sensor is shifted by a small amount. These are subsequently merged into a 96 Mpixel image. Panasonic Lumix DC-S1R: contains a 47.3 Mpixel sensor. The High Resolution Mode shifts the imaging sensor by a small increments to obtain a sequence of 8 images that are subsequently merged into a 187 Mpixel image. Panasonic Lumix DC-S1H Panasonic Lumix DC-S5 === Pentax === Pentax K-70: contains a 24.3 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'all color data in each pixel to deliver super-high-resolution images'. Pentax KP: contains a 24.3 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'high-resolution images with more accurate colours and much finer details'. Pentax K-3 II: contains a 24.3 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'super-high-resolution images with far more truthful color reproduction and much finer details'. Pentax K-3 III: contains a 25.7 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'a cancelling out of the Bayer pattern and removal of the need for sharpness-sapping demosaicing'. Pentax K-1: contains a 36.4 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'improved detail and colour resolution'. Pentax K-1 II: contains a 36.4 Mpixel sensor. The camera sports two pixel shift mode: (a) a series of 4 tripod-stabilised images shifted by 1 pixel each are subsequently combined into a 47.3 Mpixel image, (b) a series of images taken in handheld mode are combined into a 47.3 Mpixel image that is, within limits, able to cope even with moving subjects. === Sony === Sony a6600: contains a 24.3 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'all color data in each pixel to deliver super-high-resolution images'. Sony α7R III: contains a 42.4 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 42.4 Mpixel image with improved tonal resolution. Sony α7R IV: contains a 61 Mpixel sensor. The camera has two pixel shift modes, (a) the first takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 61 Mpixel image with improved tonal resolution, (b) the other takes a sequence of 16 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 0.5 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 240 Mpixel image with both enhanced detail and improved tonal resolution. Sony α1: contains a 50 Mpixel sensor. The camera has two pixel shift modes, (a) the first takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 50 Mpixel image with improved tonal resolution, (b) the other takes a sequence of 16 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 0.5 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 200 Mpixel image with both enhanced detail and improved tonal resolution. === Hasselblad === Hasselblad H3DII: the model H3DII-39 sports a 39 Mpixel sensor, the model H3DII-50 a 50 Mpixel sensor. Both enable a pixel shift mode which takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a single image. Hasselblad H4D series: the model H4D-200MS contains a 50 Mpixel sensor. The sensor sports 3 different pixel shift modes which take (a) a sequence of 6 shots taken at slight offsets, (b) a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel, (c) a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 0.5 pixels. Images obtained by all three modes are subsequently merged into 200 Mpixel images. Hasselblad H5D series: both models H5D-50c MS and H5D-200c MS contain a 50 Mpixel sensor. This sensor sports 2 different pixel shift modes which take (a) a sequence of 6 shots with full and half pixel moveme
Language Computer Corporation
Language Computer Corporation (LCC) is a natural language processing research company based in Richardson, Texas. The company develops a variety of natural language processing products, including software for question answering, information extraction, and automatic summarization. Since its founding in 1995, the low-profile company has landed significant United States Government contracts, with $8,353,476 in contracts in 2006-2008. While the company has focused primarily on the government software market, LCC has also used its technology to spin off three start-up companies. The first spin-off, known as Lymba Corporation, markets the PowerAnswer question answering product originally developed at LCC. In 2010, LCC's CEO, Andrew Hickl, co-founded two start-ups which made use of the company's technology. These included Swingly, an automatic question answering start-up, and Extractiv, an information extraction service that was founded in partnership with Houston, Texas-based 80legs.
FloodAlerts
FloodAlerts is a software application, developed by software specialists Shoothill, which takes real-time flooding information, and displays the data on an interactive Bing map, updating and warning its users when they, their premises or the routes they need to travel could be at risk of flooding. == History == FloodAlerts was launched in 2012, originally as the world's first Facebook flood warning app. == Operation == FloodAlerts is made available free of charge to individuals. Users are able to set up their own monitored locations and receive alerts via the application or their Facebook wall if the locations they are monitoring are at imminent risk of flooding. Hosted in the Cloud, using the Microsoft Windows Azure platform, the FloodAlerts application processes the data received from the Environment Agency, automatically creates the required map tiles, pins and alerts and displays them on an interactive Bing map, updating the content every 15 minutes. Users are able to see the latest information on the map without having to refresh their browser. FloodAlerts can also be provided as a customised risk management solution to businesses that require infrastructure or asset safety monitoring in areas where water levels are rising or receding. == Awards and recognition == FloodAlerts has received The Guardian and Virgin Media Business's 2012 Innovation Nation Awards and was shortlisted as a finalist for a further two national awards: the UK IT Industry Awards for Innovation and Entrepreneurship and The Institution of Engineering and Technology Innovation Awards for Information Technology. == In the press == The FloodAlerts application was reviewed on the BBC website. It was also reviewed on BBC Click.
Object co-segmentation
In computer vision, object co-segmentation is a special case of image segmentation, which is defined as jointly segmenting semantically similar objects in multiple images or video frames. == Challenges == It is often challenging to extract segmentation masks of a target/object from a noisy collection of images or video frames, which involves object discovery coupled with segmentation. A noisy collection implies that the object/target is present sporadically in a set of images or the object/target disappears intermittently throughout the video of interest. Early methods typically involve mid-level representations such as object proposals. == Dynamic Markov networks-based methods == A joint object discover and co-segmentation method based on coupled dynamic Markov networks has been proposed recently, which claims significant improvements in robustness against irrelevant/noisy video frames. Unlike previous efforts which conveniently assumes the consistent presence of the target objects throughout the input video, this coupled dual dynamic Markov network based algorithm simultaneously carries out both the detection and segmentation tasks with two respective Markov networks jointly updated via belief propagation. Specifically, the Markov network responsible for segmentation is initialized with superpixels and provides information for its Markov counterpart responsible for the object detection task. Conversely, the Markov network responsible for detection builds the object proposal graph with inputs including the spatio-temporal segmentation tubes. == Graph cut-based methods == Graph cut optimization is a popular tool in computer vision, especially in earlier image segmentation applications. As an extension of regular graph cuts, multi-level hypergraph cut is proposed to account for more complex high order correspondences among video groups beyond typical pairwise correlations. With such hypergraph extension, multiple modalities of correspondences, including low-level appearance, saliency, coherent motion and high level features such as object regions, could be seamlessly incorporated in the hyperedge computation. In addition, as a core advantage over co-occurrence based approach, hypergraph implicitly retains more complex correspondences among its vertices, with the hyperedge weights conveniently computed by eigenvalue decomposition of Laplacian matrices. == CNN/LSTM-based methods == In action localization applications, object co-segmentation is also implemented as the segment-tube spatio-temporal detector. Inspired by the recent spatio-temporal action localization efforts with tubelets (sequences of bounding boxes), Le et al. present a new spatio-temporal action localization detector Segment-tube, which consists of sequences of per-frame segmentation masks. This Segment-tube detector can temporally pinpoint the starting/ending frame of each action category in the presence of preceding/subsequent interference actions in untrimmed videos. Simultaneously, the Segment-tube detector produces per-frame segmentation masks instead of bounding boxes, offering superior spatial accuracy to tubelets. This is achieved by alternating iterative optimization between temporal action localization and spatial action segmentation. The proposed segment-tube detector is illustrated in the flowchart on the right. The sample input is an untrimmed video containing all frames in a pair figure skating video, with only a portion of these frames belonging to a relevant category (e.g., the DeathSpirals). Initialized with saliency based image segmentation on individual frames, this method first performs temporal action localization step with a cascaded 3D CNN and LSTM, and pinpoints the starting frame and the ending frame of a target action with a coarse-to-fine strategy. Subsequently, the segment-tube detector refines per-frame spatial segmentation with graph cut by focusing on relevant frames identified by the temporal action localization step. The optimization alternates between the temporal action localization and spatial action segmentation in an iterative manner. Upon practical convergence, the final spatio-temporal action localization results are obtained in the format of a sequence of per-frame segmentation masks (bottom row in the flowchart) with precise starting/ending frames.
Sayre's paradox
Sayre's paradox is a dilemma encountered in the design of automated handwriting recognition systems. A standard statement of the paradox is that a cursively written word cannot be recognized without being segmented and cannot be segmented without being recognized. The paradox was first articulated in a 1973 publication by Kenneth M. Sayre, after whom it was named. == Nature of the problem == It is relatively easy to design automated systems capable of recognizing words inscribed in a printed format. Such words are segmented into letters by the very act of writing them on the page. Given templates matching typical letter shapes in a given language, individual letters can be identified with a high degree of probability. In cases of ambiguity, probable letter sequences can be compared with a selection of properly spelled words in that language (called a lexicon). If necessary, syntactic features of the language can be applied to render a generally accurate identification of the words in question. Printed-character recognition systems of this sort are commonly used in processing standardized government forms, in sorting mail by zip code, and so forth. In cursive writing, however, letters comprising a given word typically flow sequentially without gaps between them. Unlike a sequence of printed letters, cursively connected letters are not segmented in advance. Here is where Sayre's Paradox comes into play. Unless the word is already segmented into letters, template-matching techniques like those described above cannot be applied. That is, segmentation is a prerequisite for word recognition. But there are no reliable techniques for segmenting a word into letters unless the word itself has been identified. Word recognition requires letter segmentation, and letter segmentation requires word recognition. There is no way a cursive writing recognition system employing standard template-matching techniques can do both simultaneously. Advantages to be gained by use of automated cursive writing recognition systems include routing mail with handwritten addresses, reading handwritten bank checks, and automated digitalization of hand-written documents. These are practical incentives for finding ways of circumventing Sayre's Paradox. == Avoiding the paradox == One way of ameliorating the adverse effects of the paradox is to normalize the word inscriptions to be recognized. Normalization amounts to eliminating idiosyncrasies in the penmanship of the writer, such as unusual slope of the letters and unusual slant of the cursive line. This procedure can increase the probability of a correct match with a letter template, resulting in an incremental improvement in the success rate of the system. Since improvement of this sort still depends on accurate segmentation, however, it remains subject to the limitations of Sayre's Paradox. Researchers have come to realize that the only way to circumvent the paradox is by use of procedures that do not rely on accurate segmentation. == Directions of current research == Segmentation is accurate to the extent that it matches distinctions among letters in the actual inscriptions presented to the system for recognition (the input data). This is sometimes referred to as “explicit segmentation”. “Implicit segmentation,” by contrast, is division of the cursive line into more parts than the number of actual letters in the cursive line itself. Processing these “implicit parts” to achieve eventual word identification requires specific statistical procedures involving hidden Markov models (HMM). A Markov model is a statistical representation of a random process, which is to say a process in which future states are independent of states occurring before the present. In such a process, a given state is dependent only on the conditional probability of its following the state immediately before it. An example is a series of outcomes from successive casts of a die. An HMM is a Markov model, individual states of which are not fully known. Conditional probabilities between states are still determinate, but the identities of individual states are not fully disclosed. Recognition proceeds by matching HMMs of words to be recognized with previously prepared HMMs of words in the lexicon. The best match in a given case is taken to indicate the identity of the handwritten word in question. As with systems based on explicit segmentation, automated recognition systems based on implicit segmentation are judged more or less successful according to the percentage of correct identifications they accomplish. Instead of explicit segmentation techniques, most automated handwriting recognition systems today employ implicit segmentation in conjunction with HMM-based matching procedures. The constraints epitomized by Sayre's Paradox are largely responsible for this shift in approach.
Language engineering
Language engineering involves the creation of natural language processing systems, whose cost and outputs are measurable and predictable. It is a distinct field contrasted to natural language processing and computational linguistics. A recent trend of language engineering is the use of Semantic Web technologies for the creation, archiving, processing, and retrieval of machine processable language data. Meta-Language Engineering is a proposed extension of Language Engineering first recorded in 2025, associated with the work of Delyone de Paula Canedo Filho. The term is used to designate an approach that, in addition to natural language processing, encompasses the symbolic, cognitive, and epistemological structuring of language systems.
BLOOM (language model)
The BigScience Large Open-science Open-access Multilingual Language Model (BLOOM) is an open-access large language model (LLM) released in 2022. It was created by a volunteer-driven research effort to provide a transparently-created alternative to proprietary AI models. With 176 billion parameters, BLOOM is a transformer-based autoregressive model designed to generate text in 46 natural languages and 13 programming languages. The model is distributed under the project's "Responsible AI License". == Development == BLOOM is the main outcome of the BigScience initiative, a one-year-long research workshop. The project was coordinated by Hugging Face using funding from the French government and involved several hundred volunteer researchers and engineers from academia and the private sector. The model was trained between March and July 2022 on the Jean Zay public supercomputer in France, managed by GENCI and IDRIS (CNRS). Unlike GPT-3, BLOOM was trained to be multilingual. The source code is released under the Apache 2.0 license. The model's parameters are released under BigScience's "Responsible AI License" (RAIL), which grants open access and reuse rights but with some usage restrictions. BLOOM was used in the chatbots BLOOMChat and HuggingChat due to its multilingual abilities. BLOOM's training corpus, named ROOTS, combines data extracted from the then-latest version of the web-based OSCAR corpus (38% of ROOTS) and newly collected data extracted from a manually selected and documented list of language data sources. In total, the model was trained on approximately 366 billion (1.6TB) tokens. It was developed using the open-source libraries DeepSpeed Megatron. BigScience then released xP3, a multilingual dataset for LLM supervised learning. It also released BLOOMZ, a variant of BLOOM fine-tuned on xP3 to follow instructions.