Fling was a social media app available for IOS and Android. It was founded in 2014 by Marco Nardone and was taken offline in August 2016. == Overview == In 2012, Marco Nardone founded the startup Unii and launched Unii.com, a social network intended for students in the UK. While working on this service, Nardone had the idea for a messaging service where pictures could be sent to strangers in January 2014. The app Fling was then developed and released between March and July 2014. After a month, it already had 375,000 downloads and 180,000 active users on iOS. Users were able to take pictures inside the app and send them to 50 random people all over the world. The recipient could then choose to answer via chat or reply by sending a picture themselves. The app was used by many users as a medium to exchange sexually explicit pictures and for sexting with strangers. This led to the app being removed from the App Store in June 2015. In the 19 days that followed, flings developers rewrote the App almost completely from scratch, working around the clock. The feature to message random strangers was removed, and the app was readmitted into the App Store as a messenger App resembling Snapchat. But the redesigned Application did not have the success of its predecessor. The funding ran out and the parent company Unii went bankrupt. The company was not able to pay their content moderation team anymore, leading to a new surge of pornographic content on the App. Shortly after that, the Social Network was taken offline in August 2016. It has been inactive since. During the 2 years Fling was online, $21 million was raised from investors while generating no revenue at all. Of this $21 million (£16.5m), £5 million came from Nardone's father. == Allegations against CEO == Former employees made multiple allegations against Marco Nardone, the Founder and CEO of Unii and Fling. According to these claims, he behaved erratic and abusive, throwing "things across the office". He hired his girlfriend as the head of human resources to handle issues between him and his staff. Employees who left the company often had "some part of their pay held back". According to the reports, he also spent the money raised from investors irresponsibly, having no clear concept of a budget. Some of that money was used on expensive restaurants in London, a luxurious office for CEO Nardone and advertisements for Fling on Twitter and Facebook. Nardone also spent time partying in Ibiza with two employees, while the developer team in London frantically tried to get Fling back online after it being removed from the App Store. In December 2017 he pleaded guilty to assaulting his girlfriend at a domestic violence court.
PenTile matrix family
PenTile matrix is a family of patented subpixel matrix schemes used in electronic device displays. PenTile is a trademark of Samsung. PenTile matrices are used in AMOLED and LCD displays. These subpixel layouts are specifically designed to operate with proprietary algorithms for subpixel rendering embedded in the display driver, allowing plug and play compatibility with conventional RGB (Red-Green-Blue) stripe panels. == Overview == "PenTile Matrix" (a neologism from penta-, meaning "five" in Greek and tile) describes the geometric layout of the prototypical subpixel arrangement developed in the early 1990s. The layout consists of a quincunx comprising two red subpixels, two green subpixels, and one central blue subpixel in each unit cell. It was inspired by biomimicry of the human retina, which has nearly equal numbers of L and M type cone cells, but significantly fewer S cones. As the S cones are primarily responsible for perceiving blue colors, which do not appreciably affect the perception of luminance, reducing the number of blue subpixels with respect to the red and green subpixels in a display does not reduce the image quality. However, the layout may cause color leakage image distortion, which can be reduced by filters. In some cases the layout causes reduced moiré and blockiness compared to conventional RGB layouts. The PenTile layout is specifically designed to work with and be dependent upon subpixel rendering that uses only one and a quarter subpixel per pixel, on average, to render an image. That is, that any given input pixel is mapped to either a red-centered logical pixel, or a green-centered logical pixel. === History === PenTile was invented by Candice H. Brown Elliott, for which she was awarded the Society for Information Display's Otto Schade Prize in 2014. The technology was licensed by the company Clairvoyante from 2000 until 2008, during which time several prototype PenTile displays were developed by a number of Asian liquid crystal display (LCD) manufacturers. In March 2008, Samsung Electronics acquired Clairvoyante's PenTile IP assets. Samsung then funded a new company, Nouvoyance, Inc. to continue development of the PenTile technology. == PenTile RGBG == PenTile RGBG layout used in AMOLED and plasma displays uses green pixels interleaved with alternating red and blue pixels. The human eye is most sensitive to green, especially for high resolution luminance information. The green subpixels are mapped to input pixels on a one-to-one basis. The red and blue subpixels are subsampled, reconstructing the chroma signal at a lower resolution. The luminance signal is processed using adaptive subpixel rendering filters to optimize reconstruction of high spatial frequencies from the input image, wherein the green subpixels provide the majority of the reconstruction. The red and blue subpixels are capable of reconstructing the horizontal and vertical spatial frequencies, but not the highest of the diagonal. Diagonal high spatial frequency information in the red and blue channels of the input image are transferred to the green subpixels for image reconstruction. Thus the RG-BG scheme creates a color display with one third fewer subpixels than a traditional RGB-RGB scheme but with the same measured luminance display resolution. This is similar to the Bayer filter commonly used in digital cameras. === Devices === As of 2021, "almost all" OLED screens in portable consumer devices use some form of Pentile subpixel layout. == PenTile RGBW == PenTile RGBW technology, used in LCD, adds an extra subpixel to the traditional red, green and blue subpixels that is a clear area without color filtering material and with the only purpose of letting backlight come through, hence W for white. This makes it possible to produce a brighter image compared to an RGB-matrix while using the same amount of power, or produce an equally bright image while using less power. The PenTile RGBW layout uses each red, green, blue and white subpixel to present high-resolution luminance information to the human eyes' red-sensing and green-sensing cone cells, while using the combined effect of all the color subpixels to present lower-resolution chroma (color) information to all three cone cell types. Combined, this optimizes the match of display technology to the biological mechanisms of human vision. The layout uses one third fewer subpixels for the same resolution as the RGB stripe (RGB-RGB) layout, in spite of having four color primaries instead of the conventional three, using subpixel rendering combined with metamer rendering. Metamer rendering optimizes the energy distribution between the white subpixel and the combined red, green, and blue subpixels: W <> RGB, to improve image sharpness. The display driver chip has an RGB to RGBW color vector space converter and gamut mapping algorithm, followed by metamer and subpixel rendering algorithms. In order to maintain saturated color quality, to avoid simultaneous contrast error between saturated colors and peak white brightness, while simultaneously reducing backlight power requirements, the display backlight brightness is under control of the PenTile driver engine. When the image is mostly desaturated colors, those near white or grey, the backlight brightness is significantly reduced, often to less than 50% peak, while the LCD levels are increased to compensate. When the image has very bright saturated colors, the backlight brightness is maintained at higher levels. The PenTile RGBW also has an optional high-brightness mode that doubles the brightness of the desaturated color image areas, such as black-and-white text, for improved outdoor viewability. === Devices === Motorola MC65 Motorola ES55 Motorola ES400 Motorola Atrix 4G Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 version Lenovo Yoga 2 Pro Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro HP ENVY TouchSmart 14-k022tx Sleekbook MSI GS60 Ghost Pro 4K Lenovo IdeaPad Y50 4K Asus ZenBook UX303LN 4K Asus ZenBook Pro UX501JW LG UH7500/6500/6100 LG ThinQ G7/G7+ Oculus Quest 1 == Controversy == An ongoing controversy regarding the definition or measurement of resolution of color subpixelated flat panel displays led many people to question the resolution claims of PenTile display products. Journalists have noted that in "just about every flat-panel TV in existence, each pixel is composed of one red, one green, and one blue subpixel (RGB), all of uniform size". In traditional flat-panel screens, the resolution is defined by the number of red, green, and blue subpixels, in groups of three, in an array in each axis. As a result, each pixel or group of subpixels can render any colour on the screen, regardless of neighbouring pixels. This is not the case with PenTile screens. The Video Electronics Standards Association (VESA) method of measuring and defining resolution in color displays is to measure the contrast of line pairs, requiring a minimum of 50% Michelson contrast for displays intended for rendering text. The developers of PenTile displays use this VESA criterion for contrast of line pairs to calculate the resolutions specified. In the RGBG layout the alternate red and blue subpixels are 'shared' or sub-sampled with neighboring pixels. Due to the one third lower subpixel density on PenTile displays the pixel structure may be more visible when compared to RGB stripe displays with the same pixel density. The loss of subpixels for a given resolution specification has led some journalists to describe the use of PenTile as "shady practice" and "sort of cheating". For a given size and resolution specification, the PenTile screen can appear grainy, pixelated, speckled, with blurred text on some saturated colors and backgrounds when compared to RGB stripe color. This effect is understood to be caused by the restriction of the number of subpixels that may participate in the image reconstruction when colors are highly saturated to primaries. In the RGBW case, this is caused as the W subpixel will not be available in order to maintain the saturated color. In the RGBG case, this effect will occur when the color boundary is primarily red or blue, as the fully populated (one green per pixel) sub-pixel cannot contribute. For all other cases, text and especially full color images are effectively reconstructed. == Advantages and disadvantages == The PenTile layout reduces the number of subpixels needed to create a specified resolution. Consequently it is possible to achieve an HD resolution on a PenTile AMOLED screen at lower cost than other technologies, and most reviewers note that "300 ppi" (as per VESA - not full pixels) resolution displays (such as Samsung Galaxy S III) make the PenTile effect less obvious than lower resolution PenTile displays (Droid Razr). The second advantage is lower power consumption: the HTC One S's use of a PenTile display makes it more energy efficient and thinner than equivalent LCD screens, giving it better battery life than the HTC One X's IPS LCD. A PenTile AMOLED screen is also
Algorithmic bias
Algorithmic bias describes systematic and repeatable harmful tendency in a computerized sociotechnical system to create "unfair" outcomes, such as "privileging" one category over another in ways that may or may not be different from the intended function of the algorithm. Bias can emerge from many factors, including intentionally biased design decisions or the unintended or unanticipated use or decisions relating to the way data is coded, collected, selected or used to train the algorithm. For example, algorithmic bias has been observed in search engine results and social media platforms. This bias can have impacts ranging from privacy violations to reinforcing social biases of race, gender, sexuality, and ethnicity. The study of algorithmic bias is most concerned with algorithms that reflect "systematic and unfair" discrimination. This bias has only recently been addressed in legal frameworks, such as the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (enforced in 2018) and the Artificial Intelligence Act (proposed in 2021 and adopted in 2024). As algorithms expand their ability to organize society, politics, institutions, and behavior, sociologists have become concerned with the ways in which unanticipated output and manipulation of data can impact the physical world. Because algorithms are often considered to be neutral and unbiased, they can inaccurately project greater authority than human expertise (in part due to the psychological phenomenon of automation bias), and in some cases, reliance on algorithms can displace human responsibility for their outcomes, without last mile thinking. Bias can enter into algorithmic systems as a result of pre-existing cultural, social, or institutional expectations; by how features and labels are chosen; because of technical limitations of their design; or by being used in unanticipated contexts or by audiences who are not considered in the software's initial design. Algorithmic bias has been cited in cases ranging from election outcomes to the spread of online hate speech. It has also arisen in criminal justice, healthcare, and hiring, compounding existing racial, socioeconomic, and gender biases. The relative inability of facial recognition technology to accurately identify darker-skinned faces has been linked to multiple wrongful arrests of black men, an issue stemming from imbalanced datasets. Problems in understanding, researching, and discovering algorithmic bias persist due to the proprietary nature of algorithms, which are typically treated as trade secrets. Even when full transparency is provided, the complexity of certain algorithms poses a barrier to understanding their functioning. Furthermore, algorithms may change, or respond to input or output in ways that cannot be anticipated or easily reproduced for analysis. In many cases, even within a single website or application, there is no single "algorithm" to examine, but a network of many interrelated programs and data inputs, even between users of the same service. A 2021 survey identified multiple forms of algorithmic bias, including historical, representation, and measurement biases, each of which can contribute to unfair outcomes. == Definitions == Algorithms are difficult to define, but may be generally understood as lists of instructions that determine how programs read, collect, process, and analyze data to generate a usable output. For a rigorous technical introduction, see Algorithms. Advances in computer hardware and software have led to an increased capability to process, store and transmit data. This has in turn made the design and adoption of technologies such as machine learning and artificial intelligence technically and commercially feasible. By analyzing and processing data, algorithms are the backbone of search engines, social media websites, recommendation engines, online retail, online advertising, and more. Contemporary social scientists are concerned with algorithmic processes embedded into hardware and software applications because of their political and social impact, and question the underlying assumptions of an algorithm's neutrality. The term algorithmic bias describes systematic and repeatable errors that create unfair outcomes, such as privileging one arbitrary group of users over others. For example, a credit score algorithm may deny a loan without being unfair, if it is consistently weighing relevant financial criteria. If the algorithm recommends loans to one group of users, but denies loans to another set of nearly identical users based on unrelated criteria, and if this behavior can be repeated across multiple occurrences, an algorithm can be described as biased. This bias may be intentional or unintentional (for example, it can come from biased data obtained from a worker that previously did the job the algorithm is going to do from now on). == Methods == Bias can be introduced to an algorithm in several ways. During the assemblage of a dataset, data may be collected, digitized, adapted, and entered into a database according to human-designed cataloging criteria. Next, programmers assign priorities, or hierarchies, for how a program assesses and sorts that data. This requires human decisions about how data is categorized, and which data is included or discarded. Some algorithms collect their own data based on human-selected criteria, which can also reflect the bias of human designers. Other algorithms may reinforce stereotypes and preferences as they process and display "relevant" data for human users, for example, by selecting information based on previous choices of a similar user or group of users. Beyond assembling and processing data, bias can emerge as a result of design. For example, algorithms that determine the allocation of resources or scrutiny (such as determining school placements) may inadvertently discriminate against a category when determining risk based on similar users (as in credit scores). Meanwhile, recommendation engines that work by associating users with similar users, or that make use of inferred marketing traits, might rely on inaccurate associations that reflect broad ethnic, gender, socio-economic, or racial stereotypes. Another example comes from determining criteria for what is included and excluded from results. These criteria could present unanticipated outcomes for search results, such as with flight-recommendation software that omits flights that do not follow the sponsoring airline's flight paths. Algorithms may also display an uncertainty bias, offering more confident assessments when larger data sets are available. This can skew algorithmic processes toward results that more closely correspond with larger samples, which may disregard data from underrepresented populations. == History == === Early critiques === The earliest computer programs were designed to mimic human reasoning and deductions, and were deemed to be functioning when they successfully and consistently reproduced that human logic. In his 1976 book Computer Power and Human Reason, artificial intelligence pioneer Joseph Weizenbaum suggested that bias could arise both from the data used in a program, but also from the way a program is coded. Weizenbaum wrote that programs are a sequence of rules created by humans for a computer to follow. By following those rules consistently, such programs "embody law", that is, enforce a specific way to solve problems. The rules a computer follows are based on the assumptions of a computer programmer for how these problems might be solved. That means the code could incorporate the programmer's imagination of how the world works, including their biases and expectations. While a computer program can incorporate bias in this way, Weizenbaum also noted that any data fed to a machine additionally reflects "human decision making processes" as data is being selected. Finally, he noted that machines might also transfer good information with unintended consequences if users are unclear about how to interpret the results. Weizenbaum warned against trusting decisions made by computer programs that a user doesn't understand, comparing such faith to a tourist who can find his way to a hotel room exclusively by turning left or right on a coin toss. Crucially, the tourist has no basis of understanding how or why he arrived at his destination, and a successful arrival does not mean the process is accurate or reliable. An early example of algorithmic bias resulted in as many as 60 women and ethnic minorities denied entry to St. George's Hospital Medical School per year from 1982 to 1986, based on implementation of a new computer-guidance assessment system that denied entry to women and men with "foreign-sounding names" based on historical trends in admissions. While many schools at the time employed similar biases in their selection process, St. George was most notable for automating said bias through the use of an algorithm, thus gaining the attention of people on a much
Artificial consciousness
Artificial consciousness, also known as machine consciousness, synthetic consciousness, or digital consciousness, is consciousness hypothesized to be possible for artificial intelligence. It is also the corresponding field of study, which draws insights from philosophy of mind, philosophy of artificial intelligence, cognitive science and neuroscience. The term "sentience" can be used when specifically designating ethical considerations stemming from a form of phenomenal consciousness (P-consciousness, or the ability to feel qualia). Since sentience involves the ability to experience ethically positive or negative (i.e., valenced) mental states, it may justify welfare concerns and legal protection, as with non-human animals. Some scholars believe that consciousness is generated by the interoperation of various parts of the brain; these mechanisms are labeled the neural correlates of consciousness (NCC). Some further believe that constructing a system (e.g., a computer system) that can emulate this NCC interoperation would result in a system that is conscious. Some scholars reject the possibility of non-biological conscious beings. == Philosophical views == As there are many hypothesized types of consciousness, there are many potential implementations of artificial consciousness. In the philosophical literature, perhaps the most common taxonomy of consciousness is into "access" and "phenomenal" variants. Access consciousness concerns those aspects of experience that can be apprehended, while phenomenal consciousness concerns those aspects of experience that seemingly cannot be apprehended, instead being characterized qualitatively in terms of "raw feels", "what it is like" or qualia. === Plausibility debate === Type-identity theorists and other skeptics hold the view that consciousness can be realized only in particular physical systems because consciousness has properties that necessarily depend on physical constitution. In his 2001 article "Artificial Consciousness: Utopia or Real Possibility," Giorgio Buttazzo says that a common objection to artificial consciousness is that, "Working in a fully automated mode, they [the computers] cannot exhibit creativity, unreprogrammation (which means can 'no longer be reprogrammed', from rethinking), emotions, or free will. A computer, like a washing machine, is a slave operated by its components." For other theorists (e.g., functionalists), who define mental states in terms of causal roles, any system that can instantiate the same pattern of causal roles, regardless of physical constitution, will instantiate the same mental states, including consciousness. ==== Thought experiments ==== David Chalmers proposed two thought experiments intending to demonstrate that "functionally isomorphic" systems (those with the same "fine-grained functional organization", i.e., the same information processing) will have qualitatively identical conscious experiences, regardless of whether they are based on biological neurons or digital hardware. The "fading qualia" is a reductio ad absurdum thought experiment. It involves replacing, one by one, the neurons of a brain with a functionally identical component, for example based on a silicon chip. Chalmers makes the hypothesis, knowing it in advance to be absurd, that "the qualia fade or disappear" when neurons are replaced one-by-one with identical silicon equivalents. Since the original neurons and their silicon counterparts are functionally identical, the brain's information processing should remain unchanged, and the subject's behaviour and introspective reports would stay exactly the same. Chalmers argues that this leads to an absurd conclusion: the subject would continue to report normal conscious experiences even as their actual qualia fade away. He concludes that the subject's qualia actually don't fade, and that the resulting robotic brain, once every neuron is replaced, would remain just as sentient as the original biological brain. Similarly, the "dancing qualia" thought experiment is another reductio ad absurdum argument. It supposes that two functionally isomorphic systems could have different perceptions (for instance, seeing the same object in different colors, like red and blue). It involves a switch that alternates between a chunk of brain that causes the perception of red, and a functionally isomorphic silicon chip, that causes the perception of blue. Since both perform the same function within the brain, the subject would not notice any change during the switch. Chalmers argues that this would be highly implausible if the qualia were truly switching between red and blue, hence the contradiction. Therefore, he concludes that the equivalent digital system would not only experience qualia, but it would perceive the same qualia as the biological system (e.g., seeing the same color). Greg Egan's short story Learning To Be Me (mentioned in §In fiction), illustrates how undetectable duplication of the brain and its functionality could be from a first-person perspective. Critics object that Chalmers' proposal begs the question in assuming that all mental properties and external connections are already sufficiently captured by abstract causal organization. Van Heuveln et al. argue that the dancing qualia argument contains an equivocation fallacy, conflating a "change in experience" between two systems with an "experience of change" within a single system. Mogensen argues that the fading qualia argument can be resisted by appealing to vagueness at the boundaries of consciousness and the holistic structure of conscious neural activity, which suggests consciousness may require specific biological substrates rather than being substrate-independent. Anil Seth argues that the complexity of brain neurons intrinsically matters in addition to their function and that it is not possible to replace any part of the brain with a perfect silicon equivalent. He points out that some of biological neurons exhibit activity aimed at cleaning up metabolic waste products, and writes that a perfect silicon replacement would require a silicon-based metabolism, but silicon is not suitable for creating such artificial metabolism. ==== In large language models ==== In 2022, Google engineer Blake Lemoine made a viral claim that Google's LaMDA chatbot was sentient. Lemoine supplied as evidence the chatbot's humanlike answers to many of his questions; however, the chatbot's behavior was judged by the scientific community as likely a consequence of mimicry, rather than machine sentience. Lemoine's claim was widely derided for being ridiculous. Moreover, attributing consciousness based solely on the basis of LLM outputs or the immersive experience created by an algorithm is considered a fallacy. However, while philosopher Nick Bostrom states that LaMDA is unlikely to be conscious, he additionally poses the question of "what grounds would a person have for being sure about it?" One would have to have access to unpublished information about LaMDA's architecture, and also would have to understand how consciousness works, and then figure out how to map the philosophy onto the machine: "(In the absence of these steps), it seems like one should be maybe a little bit uncertain. [...] there could well be other systems now, or in the relatively near future, that would start to satisfy the criteria." David Chalmers argued in 2023 that LLMs today display impressive conversational and general intelligence abilities, but are likely not conscious yet, as they lack some features that may be necessary, such as recurrent processing, a global workspace, and unified agency. Nonetheless, he considers that non-biological systems can be conscious, and suggested that future, extended models (LLM+s) incorporating these elements might eventually meet the criteria for consciousness, raising both profound scientific questions and significant ethical challenges. However, the view that consciousness can exist without biological phenomena is controversial and some reject it. Kristina Šekrst cautions that anthropomorphic terms such as "hallucination" can obscure important ontological differences between artificial and human cognition. While LLMs may produce human-like outputs, she argues that it does not justify ascribing mental states or consciousness to them. Instead, she advocates for an epistemological framework (such as reliabilism) that recognizes the distinct nature of AI knowledge production. She suggests that apparent understanding in LLMs may be a sophisticated form of AI hallucination. She also questions what would happen if an LLM were trained without any mention of consciousness. === Testing === Sentience is an inherently first-person phenomenon. Because of that, and due to the lack of an empirical definition of sentience, directly measuring it may be impossible. Although systems may display numerous behaviors correlated with sentience, determining whether a system is sentient is known as the hard pr
Granular computing
Granular computing is an emerging computing paradigm of information processing that concerns the processing of complex information entities called "information granules", which arise in the process of data abstraction and derivation of knowledge from information or data. Generally speaking, information granules are collections of entities that usually originate at the numeric level and are arranged together due to their similarity, functional or physical adjacency, indistinguishability, coherency, or the like. At present, granular computing is more a theoretical perspective than a coherent set of methods or principles. As a theoretical perspective, it encourages an approach to data that recognizes and exploits the knowledge present in data at various levels of resolution or scales. In this sense, it encompasses all methods which provide flexibility and adaptability in the resolution at which knowledge or information is extracted and represented. == Types of granulation == As mentioned above, granular computing is not an algorithm or process; there is no particular method that is called "granular computing". It is rather an approach to looking at data that recognizes how different and interesting regularities in the data can appear at different levels of granularity, much as different features become salient in satellite images of greater or lesser resolution. On a low-resolution satellite image, for example, one might notice interesting cloud patterns representing cyclones or other large-scale weather phenomena, while in a higher-resolution image, one misses these large-scale atmospheric phenomena but instead notices smaller-scale phenomena, such as the interesting pattern that is the streets of Manhattan. The same is generally true of all data: At different resolutions or granularities, different features and relationships emerge. The aim of granular computing is to try to take advantage of this fact in designing more effective machine-learning and reasoning systems. There are several types of granularity that are often encountered in data mining and machine learning, and we review them below: === Value granulation (discretization/quantization) === One type of granulation is the quantization of variables. It is very common that in data mining or machine-learning applications the resolution of variables needs to be decreased in order to extract meaningful regularities. An example of this would be a variable such as "outside temperature" (temp), which in a given application might be recorded to several decimal places of precision (depending on the sensing apparatus). However, for purposes of extracting relationships between "outside temperature" and, say, "number of health-club applications" (club), it will generally be advantageous to quantize "outside temperature" into a smaller number of intervals. ==== Motivations ==== There are several interrelated reasons for granulating variables in this fashion: Based on prior domain knowledge, there is no expectation that minute variations in temperature (e.g., the difference between 80–80.7 °F (26.7–27.1 °C)) could have an influence on behaviors driving the number of health-club applications. For this reason, any "regularity" which our learning algorithms might detect at this level of resolution would have to be spurious, as an artifact of overfitting. By coarsening the temperature variable into intervals the difference between which we do anticipate (based on prior domain knowledge) might influence number of health-club applications, we eliminate the possibility of detecting these spurious patterns. Thus, in this case, reducing resolution is a method of controlling overfitting. By reducing the number of intervals in the temperature variable (i.e., increasing its grain size), we increase the amount of sample data indexed by each interval designation. Thus, by coarsening the variable, we increase sample sizes and achieve better statistical estimation. In this sense, increasing granularity provides an antidote to the so-called curse of dimensionality, which relates to the exponential decrease in statistical power with increase in number of dimensions or variable cardinality. Independent of prior domain knowledge, it is often the case that meaningful regularities (i.e., which can be detected by a given learning methodology, representational language, etc.) may exist at one level of resolution and not at another. For example, a simple learner or pattern recognition system may seek to extract regularities satisfying a conditional probability threshold such as p ( Y = y j | X = x i ) ≥ α . {\displaystyle p(Y=y_{j}|X=x_{i})\geq \alpha .} In the special case where α = 1 , {\displaystyle \alpha =1,} this recognition system is essentially detecting logical implication of the form X = x i → Y = y j {\displaystyle X=x_{i}\rightarrow Y=y_{j}} or, in words, "if X = x i , {\displaystyle X=x_{i},} then Y = y j {\displaystyle Y=y_{j}} ". The system's ability to recognize such implications (or, in general, conditional probabilities exceeding threshold) is partially contingent on the resolution with which the system analyzes the variables. As an example of this last point, consider the feature space shown to the right. The variables may each be regarded at two different resolutions. Variable X {\displaystyle X} may be regarded at a high (quaternary) resolution wherein it takes on the four values { x 1 , x 2 , x 3 , x 4 } {\displaystyle \{x_{1},x_{2},x_{3},x_{4}\}} or at a lower (binary) resolution wherein it takes on the two values { X 1 , X 2 } . {\displaystyle \{X_{1},X_{2}\}.} Similarly, variable Y {\displaystyle Y} may be regarded at a high (quaternary) resolution or at a lower (binary) resolution, where it takes on the values { y 1 , y 2 , y 3 , y 4 } {\displaystyle \{y_{1},y_{2},y_{3},y_{4}\}} or { Y 1 , Y 2 } , {\displaystyle \{Y_{1},Y_{2}\},} respectively. At the high resolution, there are no detectable implications of the form X = x i → Y = y j , {\displaystyle X=x_{i}\rightarrow Y=y_{j},} since every x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} is associated with more than one y j , {\displaystyle y_{j},} and thus, for all x i , {\displaystyle x_{i},} p ( Y = y j | X = x i ) < 1. {\displaystyle p(Y=y_{j}|X=x_{i})<1.} However, at the low (binary) variable resolution, two bilateral implications become detectable: X = X 1 ↔ Y = Y 1 {\displaystyle X=X_{1}\leftrightarrow Y=Y_{1}} and X = X 2 ↔ Y = Y 2 {\displaystyle X=X_{2}\leftrightarrow Y=Y_{2}} , since every X 1 {\displaystyle X_{1}} occurs iff Y 1 {\displaystyle Y_{1}} and X 2 {\displaystyle X_{2}} occurs iff Y 2 . {\displaystyle Y_{2}.} Thus, a pattern recognition system scanning for implications of this kind would find them at the binary variable resolution, but would fail to find them at the higher quaternary variable resolution. ==== Issues and methods ==== It is not feasible to exhaustively test all possible discretization resolutions on all variables in order to see which combination of resolutions yields interesting or significant results. Instead, the feature space must be preprocessed (often by an entropy analysis of some kind) so that some guidance can be given as to how the discretization process should proceed. Moreover, one cannot generally achieve good results by naively analyzing and discretizing each variable independently, since this may obliterate the very interactions that we had hoped to discover. A sample of papers that address the problem of variable discretization in general, and multiple-variable discretization in particular, is as follows: Chiu, Wong & Cheung (1991), Bay (2001), Liu et al. (2002), Wang & Liu (1998), Zighed, Rabaséda & Rakotomalala (1998), Catlett (1991), Dougherty, Kohavi & Sahami (1995), Monti & Cooper (1999), Fayyad & Irani (1993), Chiu, Cheung & Wong (1990), Nguyen & Nguyen (1998), Grzymala-Busse & Stefanowski (2001), Ting (1994), Ludl & Widmer (2000), Pfahringer (1995), An & Cercone (1999), Chiu & Cheung (1989), Chmielewski & Grzymala-Busse (1996), Lee & Shin (1994), Liu & Wellman (2002), Liu & Wellman (2004). === Variable granulation (clustering/aggregation/transformation) === Variable granulation is a term that could describe a variety of techniques, most of which are aimed at reducing dimensionality, redundancy, and storage requirements. We briefly describe some of the ideas here, and present pointers to the literature. ==== Variable transformation ==== A number of classical methods, such as principal component analysis, multidimensional scaling, factor analysis, and structural equation modeling, and their relatives, fall under the genus of "variable transformation." Also in this category are more modern areas of study such as dimensionality reduction, projection pursuit, and independent component analysis. The common goal of these methods in general is to find a representation of the data in terms of new variables, which are a linear or nonlinear transformation of the original variables, and in which important stati
Imaging
Imaging is the process of creating visual representations of objects, scenes, or phenomena. The term encompasses both the formation of images through physical processes and the technologies used to capture, store, process, and display them. While traditional imaging relies on visible light, modern imaging systems can visualize information across the electromagnetic spectrum and through other physical phenomena such as sound waves, magnetic fields, and particle emissions, enabling the visualization of subjects invisible to the human eye. Imaging science is the multidisciplinary field concerned with the theoretical foundations and practical applications of image creation and analysis. The field draws on physics, mathematics, electrical engineering, computer science, computer vision, and perceptual psychology to develop systems that generate, collect, duplicate, analyze, modify, and visualize images. == Principles == === The imaging chain === The imaging chain is a conceptual framework describing the interconnected components of any imaging system. Understanding each link in this chain allows engineers and scientists to optimize system performance for specific applications. The chain begins with the subject and its observable properties, typically energy that is emitted, reflected, or transmitted. A light source or other energy source may illuminate the subject to make these properties detectable. The capture device then collects this energy using appropriate sensors: optical systems for electromagnetic radiation, transducers for acoustic waves, or antenna arrays for radio frequencies. In digital systems, a processor converts the captured signals into a format suitable for rendering, applying algorithms for noise reduction, enhancement, or reconstruction. Finally, a display renders the processed information as a visible image on media such as paper, screens, or projection surfaces. Throughout this process, the characteristics of the human visual system inform design decisions, as the ultimate purpose of most imaging systems is to convey information to human observers. === Coherent and non-coherent imaging === Imaging systems are often classified by whether they use coherent or non-coherent illumination. Coherent imaging employs an active source that produces waves with a consistent phase relationship, as in radar, synthetic aperture radar, medical ultrasound, and optical coherence tomography. These systems can capture phase information in addition to amplitude, enabling techniques such as holography and interferometry. Non-coherent imaging systems, including conventional photography, fluorescence microscopy, and telescopes, rely on illumination sources where light waves have random phase relationships. == Methods and applications == Imaging methods span a wide range of physical principles, each suited to particular applications. Optical imaging encompasses photography, cinematography, microscopy, and telescopic observation. These methods capture electromagnetic radiation in or near the visible spectrum and form the basis of most consumer and scientific imaging. Extensions include thermography, which visualizes infrared radiation to reveal temperature distributions, and multispectral imaging, which captures data across multiple wavelength bands for applications in remote sensing and materials analysis. Medical imaging comprises techniques designed to visualize the interior of the human body for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. Radiography and computed tomography use X-rays to image dense structures such as bone. Magnetic resonance imaging exploits nuclear magnetic properties to produce detailed soft-tissue images without ionizing radiation. Ultrasound imaging uses high-frequency sound waves and is particularly valuable for real-time imaging and fetal monitoring. Nuclear medicine techniques such as positron emission tomography track radioactive tracers to reveal metabolic activity. Emerging modalities include photoacoustic imaging, which combines optical and acoustic principles, and Magneto-acousto-electrical tomography, which maps electrical conductivity in biological tissues. Acoustic imaging uses sound waves to create images. Beyond medical ultrasound, applications include sonar for underwater navigation and mapping, seismic imaging for geological exploration, and industrial non-destructive testing. Radar and microwave imaging employ radio waves to detect and image objects. Synthetic aperture radar produces high-resolution images from aircraft or satellites regardless of weather or lighting conditions, making it essential for Earth observation and reconnaissance. Ground-penetrating radar images subsurface structures for archaeological and engineering applications. Electron and particle imaging use beams of electrons or other particles to achieve resolutions far beyond the diffraction limit of visible light. Electron microscopes can image individual atoms, enabling advances in materials science and structural biology. Chemical imaging combines spectroscopy with spatial imaging to map the chemical composition of samples, with applications in pharmaceutical development, food safety, and forensics. LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) measures distances using laser pulses to create three-dimensional representations of surfaces and objects, widely used in autonomous vehicles, topographic mapping, and forestry. Computational and digital imaging encompasses image processing, computer graphics, three-dimensional rendering, and digital image restoration. Computer vision applies algorithmic analysis to extract information from images automatically. == History == Photography and imaging have always been intertwined. When Joseph Nicéphore Niépce created the first permanent photograph using heliography in 1826, and Louis Daguerre refined the process into the daguerreotype a decade later, they weren't just inventing a new art form, they were laying the groundwork for an entire scientific discipline built on silver halide chemistry. For most of the nineteenth century, photography remained the province of specialists. That changed with George Eastman's Kodak camera, introduced in 1888 with the slogan "You press the button, we do the rest." Suddenly, anyone could take pictures. Around the same time, Wilhelm Röntgen stumbled onto X-rays in 1895, an accident that would spawn the entire field of medical imaging. World War II proved to be a turning point. Radar technology, developed frantically on both sides of the conflict, introduced concepts that engineers would later adapt for synthetic aperture radar and medical ultrasound. Then the charge-coupled device came: Willard Boyle and George E. Smith built the first one at Bell Labs in 1969, and within a few decades it had made film nearly obsolete. Magnetic resonance imaging arrived in the 1970s, offering doctors something X-rays never could, detailed views of soft tissue without any radiation. Digital cameras took over fast. By the 2000s, film was already in decline; by the 2010s, smartphones had put a surprisingly capable camera in nearly every pocket. Features that once required real skill, proper exposure, sharp focus, accurate color, became automatic. Today, billions of photos get uploaded to social media every day. As a result, a growing issue is that generative artificial intelligence can fabricate photorealistic images from scratch. What counts as a "real" photograph is no longer necessarily obvious.
Zeuthen strategy
The Zeuthen strategy in cognitive science is a negotiation strategy used by some artificial agents. Its purpose is to measure the willingness to risk conflict. An agent will be more willing to risk conflict if it does not have much to lose in case that the negotiation fails. In contrast, an agent is less willing to risk conflict when it has more to lose. The value of a deal is expressed in its utility. An agent has much to lose when the difference between the utility of its current proposal and the conflict deal is high. When both agents use the monotonic concession protocol, the Zeuthen strategy leads them to agree upon a deal in the negotiation set. This set consists of all conflict free deals, which are individually rational and Pareto optimal, and the conflict deal, which maximizes the Nash product. The strategy was introduced in 1930 by the Danish economist Frederik Zeuthen. == Three key questions == The Zeuthen strategy answers three open questions that arise when using the monotonic concession protocol, namely: Which deal should be proposed at first? On any given round, who should concede? In case of a concession, how much should the agent concede? The answer to the first question is that any agent should start with its most preferred deal, because that deal has the highest utility for that agent. The second answer is that the agent with the smallest value of Risk(i,t) concedes, because the agent with the lowest utility for the conflict deal profits most from avoiding conflict. To the third question, the Zeuthen strategy suggests that the conceding agent should concede just enough raise its value of Risk(i,t) just above that of the other agent. This prevents the conceding agent to have to concede again in the next round. == Risk == Risk ( i , t ) = { 1 U i ( δ ( i , t ) ) = 0 U i ( δ ( i , t ) ) − U i ( δ ( j , t ) ) U i ( δ ( i , t ) ) otherwise {\displaystyle {\text{Risk}}(i,t)={\begin{cases}1&U_{i}(\delta (i,t))=0\\{\frac {U_{i}(\delta (i,t))-U_{i}(\delta (j,t))}{U_{i}(\delta (i,t))}}&{\text{otherwise}}\end{cases}}} Risk(i,t) is a measurement of agent i's willingness to risk conflict. The risk function formalizes the notion that an agent's willingness to risk conflict is the ratio of the utility that agent would lose by accepting the other agent's proposal to the utility that agent would lose by causing a conflict. Agent i is said to be using a rational negotiation strategy if at any step t + 1 that agent i sticks to his last proposal, Risk(i,t) > Risk(j,t). == Sufficient concession == If agent i makes a sufficient concession in the next step, then, assuming that agent j is using a rational negotiation strategy, if agent j does not concede in the next step, he must do so in the step after that. The set of all sufficient concessions of agent i at step t is denoted SC(i, t). == Minimal sufficient concession == δ ′ = arg max δ ∈ S C ( A , t ) { U A ( δ ) } {\displaystyle \delta '=\arg \max _{\delta \in {SC(A,t)}}\{U_{A}(\delta )\}} is the minimal sufficient concession of agent A in step t. Agent A begins the negotiation by proposing δ ( A , 0 ) = arg max δ ∈ N S U A ( δ ) {\displaystyle \delta (A,0)=\arg \max _{\delta \in {NS}}U_{A}(\delta )} and will make the minimal sufficient concession in step t + 1 if and only if Risk(A,t) ≤ Risk(B,t). Theorem If both agents are using Zeuthen strategies, then they will agree on δ = arg max δ ′ ∈ N S { π ( δ ′ ) } , {\displaystyle \delta =\arg \max _{\delta '\in {NS}}\{\pi (\delta ')\},} that is, the deal which maximizes the Nash product. Proof Let δA = δ(A,t). Let δB = δ(B,t). According to the Zeuthen strategy, agent A will concede at step t {\displaystyle t} if and only if R i s k ( A , t ) ≤ R i s k ( B , t ) . {\displaystyle Risk(A,t)\leq Risk(B,t).} That is, if and only if U A ( δ A ) − U A ( δ B ) U A ( δ A ) ≤ U B ( δ B ) − U B ( δ A ) U B ( δ B ) {\displaystyle {\frac {U_{A}(\delta _{A})-U_{A}(\delta _{B})}{U_{A}(\delta _{A})}}\leq {\frac {U_{B}(\delta _{B})-U_{B}(\delta _{A})}{U_{B}(\delta _{B})}}} U B ( δ B ) ( U A ( δ A ) − U A ( δ B ) ) ≤ U A ( δ A ) ( U B ( δ B ) − U B ( δ A ) ) {\displaystyle U_{B}(\delta _{B})(U_{A}(\delta _{A})-U_{A}(\delta _{B}))\leq U_{A}(\delta _{A})(U_{B}(\delta _{B})-U_{B}(\delta _{A}))} U A ( δ A ) U B ( δ B ) − U A ( δ B ) U B ( δ B ) ≤ U A ( δ A ) U B ( δ B ) − U A ( δ A ) U B ( δ A ) {\displaystyle U_{A}(\delta _{A})U_{B}(\delta _{B})-U_{A}(\delta _{B})U_{B}(\delta _{B})\leq U_{A}(\delta _{A})U_{B}(\delta _{B})-U_{A}(\delta _{A})U_{B}(\delta _{A})} − U A ( δ B ) U B ( δ B ) ≤ − U A ( δ A ) U B ( δ A ) {\displaystyle -U_{A}(\delta _{B})U_{B}(\delta _{B})\leq -U_{A}(\delta _{A})U_{B}(\delta _{A})} U A ( δ A ) U B ( δ A ) ≤ U A ( δ B ) U B ( δ B ) {\displaystyle U_{A}(\delta _{A})U_{B}(\delta _{A})\leq U_{A}(\delta _{B})U_{B}(\delta _{B})} π ( δ A ) ≤ π ( δ B ) {\displaystyle \pi (\delta _{A})\leq \pi (\delta _{B})} Thus, Agent A will concede if and only if δ A {\displaystyle \delta _{A}} does not yield the larger product of utilities. Therefore, the Zeuthen strategy guarantees a final agreement that maximizes the Nash Product.