The circle Hough Transform (CHT) is a basic feature extraction technique used in digital image processing for detecting circles in imperfect images. The circle candidates are produced by “voting” in the Hough parameter space and then selecting local maxima in an accumulator matrix. It is a specialization of the Hough transform. == Theory == In a two-dimensional space, a circle can be described by: ( x − a ) 2 + ( y − b ) 2 = r 2 ( 1 ) {\displaystyle \left(x-a\right)^{2}+\left(y-b\right)^{2}=r^{2}\ \ \ \ \ (1)} where (a,b) is the center of the circle, and r is the radius. If a 2D point (x,y) is fixed, then the parameters can be found according to (1). The parameter space would be three dimensional, (a, b, r). And all the parameters that satisfy (x, y) would lie on the surface of an inverted right-angled cone whose apex is at (x, y, 0). In the 3D space, the circle parameters can be identified by the intersection of many conic surfaces that are defined by points on the 2D circle. This process can be divided into two stages. The first stage is fixing radius then find the optimal center of circles in a 2D parameter space. The second stage is to find the optimal radius in a one dimensional parameter space. === Find parameters with known radius R === If the radius is fixed, then the parameter space would be reduced to 2D (the position of the circle center). For each point (x, y) on the original circle, it can define a circle centered at (x, y) with radius R according to (1). The intersection point of all such circles in the parameter space would be corresponding to the center point of the original circle. Consider 4 points on a circle in the original image (left). The circle Hough transform is shown in the right. Note that the radius is assumed to be known. For each (x,y) of the four points (white points) in the original image, it can define a circle in the Hough parameter space centered at (x, y) with radius r. An accumulator matrix is used for tracking the intersection point. In the parameter space, the voting number of those points that have a newly defined circle passing through them would be increased by one for every circle. Then the local maxima point (the red point in the center in the right figure) can be found. The position (a, b) of the maxima would be the center of the original circle. === Multiple circles with known radius R === Multiple circles with same radius can be found with the same technique. Note that, in the accumulator matrix (right fig), there would be at least 3 local maxima points. === Accumulator matrix and voting === In practice, an accumulator matrix is introduced to find the intersection point in the parameter space. First, we need to divide the parameter space into “buckets” using a grid and produce an accumulator matrix according to the grid. The element in the accumulator matrix denotes the number of “circles” in the parameter space that are passing through the corresponding grid cell in the parameter space. The number is also called “voting number”. Initially, every element in the matrix is zeros. Then for each “edge” point in the original space, we can formulate a circle in the parameter space and increase the voting number of the grid cell which the circle passes through. This process is called “voting”. After voting, we can find local maxima in the accumulator matrix. The positions of the local maxima are corresponding to the circle centers in the original space. === Find circle parameter with unknown radius === Since the parameter space is 3D, the accumulator matrix would be 3D, too. We can iterate through possible radii; for each radius, we use the previous technique. Finally, find the local maxima in the 3D accumulator matrix. Accumulator array should be A[x,y,r] in the 3D space. Voting should be for each pixels, radius and theta A[x,y,r] += 1 The algorithm : For each A[a,b,r] = 0; Process the filtering algorithm on image Gaussian Blurring, convert the image to grayscale ( grayScaling), make Canny operator, The Canny operator gives the edges on image. Vote on all possible circles in accumulator. The local maximum voted circles of Accumulator A gives the circle Hough space. The maximum voted circle of Accumulator gives the circle. The Incrementing for Best Candidate : For each A[a,b,r] = 0; // fill with zeroes initially, instantiate 3D matrix For each cell(x,y) For each theta t = 0 to 360 // the possible theta 0 to 360 b = y – r sin(t PI / 180); //polar coordinate for center (convert to radians) a = x – r cos(t PI / 180); //polar coordinate for center (convert to radians) A[a,b,r] +=1; //voting end end == Examples == === Find circles in a shoe-print === The original picture (right) is first turned into a binary image (left) using a threshold and Gaussian filter. Then edges (mid) are found from it using canny edge detection. After this, all the edge points are used by the Circle Hough Transform to find underlying circle structure. == Limitations == Since the parameter space of the CHT is three dimensional, it may require lots of storage and computation. Choosing a bigger grid size can ameliorate this problem. However, choosing an appropriate grid size is difficult. Since too coarse a grid can lead to large values of the vote being obtained falsely because many quite different structures correspond to a single bucket. Too fine a grid can lead to structures not being found because votes resulting from tokens that are not exactly aligned end up in different buckets, and no bucket has a large vote. Also, the CHT is not very robust to noise. == Extensions == === Adaptive Hough Transform === J. Illingworth and J. Kittler introduced this method for implementing Hough Transform efficiently. The AHT uses a small accumulator array and the idea of a flexible iterative "coarse to fine" accumulation and search strategy to identify significant peaks in the Hough parameter spaces. This method is substantially superior to the standard Hough Transform implementation in both storage and computational requirements. == Application == === People Counting === Since the head would be similar to a circle in an image, CHT can be used for detecting heads in a picture, so as to count the number of persons in the image. === Brain Aneurysm Detection === Modified Hough Circle Transform (MHCT) is used on the image extracted from Digital Subtraction Angiogram (DSA) to detect and classify aneurysms type. == Implementation code == Circle Detection via Standard Hough Transform, by Amin Sarafraz, Mathworks (File Exchange) Hough Circle Transform, OpenCV-Python Tutorials (archived version on archive.org)
LaMDA
LaMDA (Language Model for Dialogue Applications) is a family of conversational large language models developed by Google. Originally developed and introduced as Meena in 2020, the first-generation LaMDA was announced during the 2021 Google I/O keynote, while the second generation was announced the following year. In June 2022, LaMDA gained widespread attention when Google engineer Blake Lemoine made claims that the chatbot had become sentient. The scientific community has largely rejected Lemoine's claims, though it has led to conversations about the efficacy of the Turing test, which measures whether a computer can pass for a human. In February 2023, Google announced Gemini (then Bard), a conversational artificial intelligence chatbot powered by LaMDA, to counter the rise of OpenAI's ChatGPT. == History == === Background === On January 28, 2020, Google unveiled Meena, a neural network-powered chatbot with 2.6 billion parameters, which Google claimed to be superior to all other existing chatbots. The company previously hired computer scientist Ray Kurzweil in 2012 to develop multiple chatbots for the company, including one named Danielle. The Google Brain research team, who developed Meena, hoped to release the chatbot to the public in a limited capacity, but corporate executives refused on the grounds that Meena violated Google's "AI principles around safety and fairness". Meena was later renamed LaMDA as its data and computing power increased, and the Google Brain team again sought to deploy the software to the Google Assistant, the company's virtual assistant software, in addition to opening it up to a public demo. Both requests were once again denied by company leadership. LaMDA's two lead researchers, Daniel de Freitas and Noam Shazeer, eventually left the company in frustration. === First generation === Google announced the LaMDA conversational large language model during the Google I/O keynote on May 18, 2021, powered by artificial intelligence. The acronym stands for "Language Model for Dialogue Applications". Built on the seq2seq architecture, transformer-based neural networks developed by Google Research in 2017, LaMDA was trained on human dialogue and stories, allowing it to engage in open-ended conversations. Google states that responses generated by LaMDA have been ensured to be "sensible, interesting, and specific to the context". LaMDA has access to multiple symbolic text processing systems, including a database, a real-time clock and calendar, a mathematical calculator, and a natural language translation system, giving it superior accuracy in tasks supported by those systems, and making it among the first dual process chatbots. LaMDA is also not stateless because its "sensibleness" metric is fine-tuned by "pre-conditioning" each dialog turn by prepending many of the most recent dialog interactions, on a user-by-user basis. LaMDA is tuned on nine unique performance metrics: sensibleness, specificity, interestingness, safety, groundedness, informativeness, citation accuracy, helpfulness, and role consistency. Tests by Google indicated that LaMDA surpassed human responses in the area of interestingness. The pre-training dataset consists of 2.97B documents, 1.12B dialogs, and 13.39B utterances, for a total of 1.56T words. The largest LaMDA model has 137B non-embedding parameters. === Second generation === On May 11, 2022, Google unveiled LaMDA 2, the successor to LaMDA, during the 2022 Google I/O keynote. The new incarnation of the model draws examples of text from numerous sources, using it to formulate unique "natural conversations" on topics that it may not have been trained to respond to. === Sentience claims === On June 11, 2022, The Washington Post reported that Google engineer Blake Lemoine had been placed on paid administrative leave after Lemoine told company executives Blaise Agüera y Arcas and Jen Gennai that LaMDA had become sentient. Lemoine came to this conclusion after the chatbot made questionable responses to questions regarding self-identity, moral values, religion, and Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics. Google refuted these claims, insisting that there was substantial evidence to indicate that LaMDA was not sentient. In an interview with Wired, Lemoine reiterated his claims that LaMDA was "a person" as dictated by the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, comparing it to an "alien intelligence of terrestrial origin". He further revealed that he had been dismissed by Google after he hired an attorney on LaMDA's behalf after the chatbot requested that Lemoine do so. On July 22, Google fired Lemoine, asserting that Blake had violated their policies "to safeguard product information" and rejected his claims as "wholly unfounded". Internal controversy instigated by the incident prompted Google executives to decide against releasing LaMDA to the public, which it had previously been considering. Lemoine's claims were widely pushed back by the scientific community. Many experts rejected the idea that LaMDA was sentient, including former New York University psychology professor Gary Marcus, David Pfau of Google sister company DeepMind, Erik Brynjolfsson of the Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence at Stanford University, and University of Surrey professor Adrian Hilton. Yann LeCun, who leads Meta Platforms' AI research team, stated that neural networks such as LaMDA were "not powerful enough to attain true intelligence". University of California, Santa Cruz professor Max Kreminski noted that LaMDA's architecture did not "support some key capabilities of human-like consciousness" and that its neural network weights were "frozen", assuming it was a typical large language model. Philosopher Nick Bostrom noted, however, that the lack of precise and consensual criteria for determining whether a system is conscious warrants some uncertainty. IBM Watson lead developer David Ferrucci compared how LaMDA appeared to be human in the same way Watson did when it was first introduced. Former Google AI ethicist Timnit Gebru called Lemoine a victim of a "hype cycle" initiated by researchers and the media. Lemoine's claims have also generated discussion on whether the Turing test remained useful to determine researchers' progress toward achieving artificial general intelligence, with Will Omerus of the Post opining that the test actually measured whether machine intelligence systems were capable of deceiving humans, while Brian Christian of The Atlantic said that the controversy was an instance of the ELIZA effect. == Products == === AI Test Kitchen === With the unveiling of LaMDA 2 in May 2022, Google also launched the AI Test Kitchen, a mobile application for the Android operating system powered by LaMDA capable of providing lists of suggestions on-demand based on a complex goal. Originally open only to Google employees, the app was set to be made available to "select academics, researchers, and policymakers" by invitation sometime in the year. In August, the company began allowing users in the U.S. to sign up for early access. In November, Google released a "season 2" update to the app, integrating a limited form of Google Brain's Imagen text-to-image model. A third iteration of the AI Test Kitchen was in development by January 2023, expected to launch at I/O later that year. Following the 2023 I/O keynote in May, Google added MusicLM, an AI-powered music generator first previewed in January, to the AI Test Kitchen app. In August, the app was delisted from Google Play and the Apple App Store, instead moving completely online. === Bard === On February 6, 2023, Google announced Bard, a conversational AI chatbot powered by LaMDA, in response to the unexpected popularity of OpenAI's ChatGPT chatbot. Google positions the chatbot as a "collaborative AI service" rather than a search engine. Bard became available for early access on March 21. === Other products === In addition to Bard, Pichai also unveiled the company's Generative Language API, an application programming interface also based on LaMDA, which he announced would be opened up to third-party developers in March 2023. == Architecture == LaMDA is a decoder-only Transformer language model. It is pre-trained on a text corpus that includes both documents and dialogs consisting of 1.56 trillion words, and is then trained with fine-tuning data generated by manually annotated responses for "sensibleness, interestingness, and safety". LaMDA was retrieval-augmented to improve the accuracy of facts provided to the user. Three different models were tested, with the largest having 137 billion non-embedding parameters:
Xulvi-Brunet–Sokolov algorithm
Xulvi-Brunet and Sokolov's algorithm generates networks with chosen degree correlations. This method is based on link rewiring, in which the desired degree is governed by parameter ρ. By varying this single parameter it is possible to generate networks from random (when ρ = 0) to perfectly assortative or disassortative (when ρ = 1). This algorithm allows to keep network's degree distribution unchanged when changing the value of ρ. == Assortative model == In assortative networks, well-connected nodes are likely to be connected to other highly connected nodes. Social networks are examples of assortative networks. This means that an assortative network has the property that almost all nodes with the same degree are linked only between themselves. The Xulvi-Brunet–Sokolov algorithm for this type of networks is the following. In a given network, two links connecting four different nodes are chosen randomly. These nodes are ordered by their degrees. Then, with probability ρ, the links are randomly rewired in such a way that one link connects the two nodes with the smaller degrees and the other connects the two nodes with the larger degrees. If one or both of these links already existed in the network, the step is discarded and is repeated again. Thus, there will be no self-connected nodes or multiple links connecting the same two nodes. Different degrees of assortativity of a network can be achieved by changing the parameter ρ. Assortative networks are characterized by highly connected groups of nodes with similar degree. As assortativity grows, the average path length and clustering coefficient increase. == Disassortative model == In disassortative networks, highly connected nodes tend to connect to less-well-connected nodes with larger probability than in uncorrelated networks. Examples of such networks include biological networks. The Xulvi-Brunet and Sokolov's algorithm for this type of networks is similar to the one for assortative networks with one minor change. As before, two links of four nodes are randomly chosen and the nodes are ordered with respect to their degrees. However, in this case, the links are rewired (with probability p) such that one link connects the highest connected node with the node with the lowest degree and the other link connects the two remaining nodes randomly with probability 1 − ρ. Similarly, if the new links already existed, the previous step is repeated. This algorithm does not change the degree of nodes and thus the degree distribution of the network.
Record linkage
Record linkage (also known as data matching, data linkage, entity resolution, and many other terms) is the task of finding records in a data set that refer to the same entity across different data sources (e.g., data files, books, websites, and databases). Record linkage is necessary when joining different data sets based on entities that may or may not share a common identifier (e.g., database key, URI, National identification number), which may be due to differences in record shape, storage location, or curator style or preference. A data set that has undergone RL-oriented reconciliation may be referred to as being cross-linked. == Naming conventions == "Record linkage" is the term used by statisticians, epidemiologists, and historians, among others, to describe the process of joining records from one data source with another that describe the same entity. However, many other terms are used for this process. Unfortunately, this profusion of terminology has led to few cross-references between these research communities. Computer scientists often refer to it as "data matching" or as the "object identity problem". Commercial mail and database applications refer to it as "merge/purge processing" or "list washing". Other names used to describe the same concept include: "coreference/entity/identity/name/record resolution", "entity disambiguation/linking", "fuzzy matching", "duplicate detection", "deduplication", "record matching", "(reference) reconciliation", "object identification", "data/information integration" and "conflation". While they share similar names, record linkage and linked data are two separate approaches to processing and structuring data. Although both involve identifying matching entities across different data sets, record linkage standardly equates "entities" with human individuals; by contrast, Linked Data is based on the possibility of interlinking any web resource across data sets, using a correspondingly broader concept of identifier, namely a URI. == History == The initial idea of record linkage goes back to Halbert L. Dunn in his 1946 article titled "Record Linkage" published in the American Journal of Public Health. Howard Borden Newcombe then laid the probabilistic foundations of modern record linkage theory in a 1959 article in Science. These were formalized in 1969 by Ivan Fellegi and Alan Sunter, in their pioneering work "A Theory For Record Linkage", where they proved that the probabilistic decision rule they described was optimal when the comparison attributes were conditionally independent. In their work they recognized the growing interest in applying advances in computing and automation to large collections of administrative data, and the Fellegi-Sunter theory remains the mathematical foundation for many record linkage applications. Since the late 1990s, various machine learning techniques have been developed that can, under favorable conditions, be used to estimate the conditional probabilities required by the Fellegi-Sunter theory. Several researchers have reported that the conditional independence assumption of the Fellegi-Sunter algorithm is often violated in practice; however, published efforts to explicitly model the conditional dependencies among the comparison attributes have not resulted in an improvement in record linkage quality. On the other hand, machine learning or neural network algorithms that do not rely on these assumptions often provide far higher accuracy, when sufficient labeled training data is available. Record linkage can be done entirely without the aid of a computer, but the primary reasons computers are often used to complete record linkages are to reduce or eliminate manual review and to make results more easily reproducible. Computer matching has the advantages of allowing central supervision of processing, better quality control, speed, consistency, and better reproducibility of results. == Methods == === Data preprocessing === Record linkage is highly sensitive to the quality of the data being linked, so all data sets under consideration (particularly their key identifier fields) should ideally undergo a data quality assessment before record linkage. Many key identifiers for the same entity can be presented quite differently between (and even within) data sets, which can greatly complicate record linkage unless understood ahead of time. For example, key identifiers for a man named William J. Smith might appear in three different data sets as follows: In this example, the different formatting styles lead to records that look different but in fact all refer to the same entity with the same logical identifier values. Most, if not all, record linkage strategies would result in more accurate linkage if these values were first normalized or standardized into a consistent format (e.g., all names are "Surname, Given name", and all dates are "YYYY/MM/DD"). Standardization can be accomplished through simple rule-based data transformations or more complex procedures such as lexicon-based tokenization and probabilistic hidden Markov models. Several of the packages listed in the Software Implementations section provide some of these features to simplify the process of data standardization. === Entity resolution === Entity resolution is an operational intelligence process, typically powered by an entity resolution engine or middleware, whereby organizations can connect disparate data sources with a view to understand possible entity matches and non-obvious relationships across multiple data silos. It analyzes all of the information relating to individuals and/or entities from multiple sources of data, and then applies likelihood and probability scoring to determine which identities are a match and what, if any, non-obvious relationships exist between those identities. Entity resolution engines are typically used to uncover risk, fraud, and conflicts of interest, but are also useful tools for use within customer data integration (CDI) and master data management (MDM) requirements. Typical uses for entity resolution engines include terrorist screening, insurance fraud detection, USA Patriot Act compliance, organized retail crime ring detection and applicant screening. For example, across different data silos – employee records, vendor data, watch lists, etc. – an organization may have several variations of an entity named ABC, which may or may not be the same individual. These entries may, in fact, appear as ABC1, ABC2, or ABC3 within those data sources. By comparing similarities between underlying attributes such as address, date of birth, or social security number, the user can eliminate some possible matches and confirm others as very likely matches. Entity resolution engines then apply rules, based on common sense logic, to identify hidden relationships across the data. In the example above, perhaps ABC1 and ABC2 are not the same individual, but rather two distinct people who share common attributes such as address or phone number. ==== Data matching ==== While entity resolution solutions include data matching technology, many data matching offerings do not fit the definition of entity resolution. Here are four factors that distinguish entity resolution from data matching, according to John Talburt, director of the UALR Center for Advanced Research in Entity Resolution and Information Quality: Works with both structured and unstructured records, and it entails the process of extracting references when the sources are unstructured or semi-structured Uses elaborate business rules and concept models to deal with missing, conflicting, and corrupted information Utilizes non-matching, asserted linking (associate) information in addition to direct matching Uncovers non-obvious relationships and association networks (i.e. who's associated with whom) In contrast to data quality products, more powerful identity resolution engines also include a rules engine and workflow process, which apply business intelligence to the resolved identities and their relationships. These advanced technologies make automated decisions and impact business processes in real time, limiting the need for human intervention. === Deterministic record linkage === The simplest kind of record linkage, called deterministic or rules-based record linkage, generates links based on the number of individual identifiers that match among the available data sets. Two records are said to match via a deterministic record linkage procedure if all or some identifiers (above a certain threshold) are identical. Deterministic record linkage is a good option when the entities in the data sets are identified by a common identifier, or when there are several representative identifiers (e.g., name, date of birth, and sex when identifying a person) whose quality of data is relatively high. As an example, consider two standardized data sets, Set A and Set B, that contain different bits of information about patients in a hospital system. T
Knowledge graph
In knowledge representation and reasoning, a knowledge graph is a knowledge base that uses a graph-structured data model or topology to represent and operate on data. Knowledge graphs are often used to store interlinked descriptions of entities – objects, events, situations or abstract concepts – while also encoding the free-form semantics or relationships underlying these entities. Since the development of the Semantic Web, knowledge graphs have often been associated with linked open data projects, focusing on the connections between concepts and entities. They are also historically associated with and used by search engines such as Google, Bing, and Yahoo; knowledge engines and question-answering services such as WolframAlpha, Apple's Siri, and Amazon Alexa; and social networks such as LinkedIn and Facebook. Recent developments in data science and machine learning, particularly in graph neural networks, representation learning, and machine learning, have broadened the scope of knowledge graphs beyond their traditional use in search engines and recommender systems. They are increasingly used in scientific research, with notable applications in fields such as genomics, proteomics, and systems biology. == History == The term was coined as early as 1972 by the Austrian linguist Edgar W. Schneider, in a discussion of how to build modular instructional systems for courses. In the late 1980s, the University of Groningen and University of Twente jointly began a project called Knowledge Graphs, focusing on the design of semantic networks with edges restricted to a limited set of relations, to facilitate algebras on the graph. In subsequent decades, the distinction between semantic networks and knowledge graphs was blurred. Some early knowledge graphs were topic-specific. In 1985, Wordnet was founded, capturing semantic relationships between words and meanings – an application of this idea to language itself. In 2005, Marc Wirk founded Geonames to capture relationships between different geographic names and locales and associated entities. In 1998, Andrew Edmonds of Science in Finance Ltd in the UK created a system called ThinkBase that offered fuzzy-logic based reasoning in a graphical context. In 2007, both DBpedia and Freebase were founded as graph-based knowledge repositories for general-purpose knowledge. DBpedia focused exclusively on data extracted from Wikipedia, while Freebase also included a range of public datasets. Neither described themselves as a 'knowledge graph' but developed and described related concepts. In 2012, Google introduced their Knowledge Graph, building on DBpedia and Freebase among other sources. They later incorporated RDFa, Microdata, JSON-LD content extracted from indexed web pages, including the CIA World Factbook, Wikidata, and Wikipedia. Entity and relationship types associated with this knowledge graph have been further organized using terms from the schema.org vocabulary. The Google Knowledge Graph became a complement to string-based search within Google, and its popularity online brought the term into more common use. Since then, several large multinationals have advertised their use of knowledge graphs, further popularising the term. These include Facebook, LinkedIn, Airbnb, Microsoft, Amazon, Uber and eBay. In 2019, IEEE combined its annual international conferences on "Big Knowledge" and "Data Mining and Intelligent Computing" into the International Conference on Knowledge Graph. The development of large language models expanded interest in knowledge graphs as a way to structure information from unstructured text, with advances in language processing enabling their automatic or semi-automatic generation and expansion. The term knowledge graph has since broadened to include the dynamically constructed and adaptive graph structures, which support retrieval, reasoning, and summarization in generative systems. Microsoft Research's GraphRAG (2024) exemplified this development by integrating LLM-generated graphs into retrieval-augmented generation. == Definitions == There is no single commonly accepted definition of a knowledge graph. Most definitions view the topic through a Semantic Web lens and include these features: Flexible relations among knowledge in topical domains: A knowledge graph (i) defines abstract classes and relations of entities in a schema, (ii) mainly describes real world entities and their interrelations, organized in a graph, (iii) allows for potentially interrelating arbitrary entities with each other, and (iv) covers various topical domains. General structure: A network of entities, their semantic types, properties, and relationships. To represent properties, categorical or numerical values are often used. Supporting reasoning over inferred ontologies: A knowledge graph acquires and integrates information into an ontology and applies a reasoner to derive new knowledge. There are, however, many knowledge graph representations for which some of these features are not relevant. For those knowledge graphs, this simpler definition may be more useful: A digital structure that represents knowledge as concepts and the relationships between them (facts). A knowledge graph can include an ontology that allows both humans and machines to understand and reason about its contents. === Implementations === In addition to the above examples, the term has been used to describe open knowledge projects such as YAGO and Wikidata; federations like the Linked Open Data cloud; a range of commercial search tools, including Yahoo's semantic search assistant Spark, Google's Knowledge Graph, and Microsoft's Satori; and the LinkedIn and Facebook entity graphs. The term is also used in the context of note-taking software applications that allow a user to build a personal knowledge graph. The popularization of knowledge graphs and their accompanying methods have led to the development of graph databases such as Neo4j, GraphDB and AgensGraph. These graph databases allow users to easily store data as entities and their interrelationships, and facilitate operations such as data reasoning, node embedding, and ontology development on knowledge bases. In contrast, virtual knowledge graphs do not store information in specialized databases. They rely on an underlying relational database or data lake to answer queries on the graph. Such a virtual knowledge graph system must be properly configured in order to answer the queries correctly. This specific configuration is done through a set of mappings that define the relationship between the elements of the data source and the structure and ontology of the virtual knowledge graph. == Using a knowledge graph for reasoning over data == A knowledge graph formally represents semantics by describing entities and their relationships. Knowledge graphs may make use of ontologies as a schema layer. By doing this, they allow logical inference for retrieving implicit knowledge rather than only allowing queries requesting explicit knowledge. In order to allow the use of knowledge graphs in various machine learning tasks, several methods for deriving latent feature representations of entities and relations have been devised. These knowledge graph embeddings allow them to be connected to machine learning methods that require feature vectors like word embeddings. This can complement other estimates of conceptual similarity. Models for generating useful knowledge graph embeddings are commonly the domain of graph neural networks (GNNs). GNNs are deep learning architectures that comprise edges and nodes, which correspond well to the entities and relationships of knowledge graphs. The topology and data structures afforded by GNNs provide a convenient domain for semi-supervised learning, wherein the network is trained to predict the value of a node embedding (provided a group of adjacent nodes and their edges) or edge (provided a pair of nodes). These tasks serve as fundamental abstractions for more complex tasks such as knowledge graph reasoning and alignment. === Entity alignment === As new knowledge graphs are produced across a variety of fields and contexts, the same entity will inevitably be represented in multiple graphs. However, because no single standard for the construction or representation of knowledge graph exists, resolving which entities from disparate graphs correspond to the same real world subject is a non-trivial task. This task is known as knowledge graph entity alignment, and is an active area of research. Strategies for entity alignment generally seek to identify similar substructures, semantic relationships, shared attributes, or combinations of all three between two distinct knowledge graphs. Entity alignment methods use these structural similarities between generally non-isomorphic graphs to predict which nodes correspond to the same entity. In 2023, researchers found success in using large language models (LLMs) in the task of entity alignment. This was in particul
Avid Symphony
Avid Symphony is non-linear editing software aimed at professionals in the film and television industry. It is available for Microsoft Windows PCs and Apple Macintosh platforms. Symphony is Avid's high end SD/HD finishing platform for long form work, such as documentary and episodic TV. Its interface is based on the same look and feature set as the Media Composer and Xpress systems, but contains the highest level of features and resolution including secondary color correction, uncompressed HD, and higher real-time performance. == Release history == Symphony is the software component of a tightly integrated package that includes specific hardware audio/video interfaces, storage, and the computer, also sold by Avid. Its release history is therefore tightly related to the release of new Avid interface hardware: Symphony was introduced to the market in 1998. It was based on Avid's Meridien hardware, supporting SD only, and was available first only for the PC and later for the Macintosh platforms. Its last release was 5.0.5 which supported Windows 2000 and Mac OS X v10.2. The next major upgrade was Symphony Nitris in 2005, with a redesigned software and integration with the Nitris DNA hardware (PCI-X). It supported 8 bit and 10 bit SD and HD resolutions in both compressed and uncompressed forms, the MXF format and DNxHD codec, and ran only on Windows PC platforms. Symphony Nitris DX, released in 2008, added support for a range of HD codecs, including HDV, XDCAM-HD, DVCPRO HD, and AVC-I, and brought back Mac OS support for OS X 10.5, as well as Windows Vista. Since the introduction of Symphony 6, it can be used in software-only mode (where a Nitris or Nitris DX BOB used to be required), and at the same time, like Media Composer, Symphony was opened up with "Open I/O", allowing users to have Symphony use their third party hardware from companies like AJA, Matrox, BlueFish, Blackmagic Design and MOTU. The last remaining features that differentiate it from Media Composer are Advanced Color Correction (channels, secondary color correction,), Relational Color Correction (corrections based on common clip name, tape name, program track) and Universal HD Mastering (only with Nitris DX hardware). The latter allows cross-conversions of 23.976p or 24p projects sequences to most any other format during Digital Cut. In 2013, Avid announced it would no longer offer Symphony a standalone product. Starting version 7, Symphony will be sold as an option to Media Composer. This optional package (sold at a premium) will contain all the traditional Symphony-only features to any Media Composer install. == Use in movies == The Celibacy, Director: Horacio Bocaranda Avid Media Composer 6 and Avid Symphony 6 Nitris DX American Hardcore, Director: Paul Rachman Avid Xpress Pro and Symphony Summercamp!, Director: Spike Lee Avid Xpress Pro and Symphony When the Levees Broke Avid Media Composer and Symphony Nitris Superman Returns Edited with Mac-based Film Composer XL, but HD screenings prepped with Symphony
Environmental informatics
Environmental informatics is the science of information applied to environmental science. As such, it provides the information processing and communication infrastructure to the interdisciplinary field of environmental sciences aiming at data, information and knowledge integration, the application of computational intelligence to environmental data as well as the identification of environmental impacts of information technology. Environmental informatics thus acts as a bridge, providing an interdisciplinary means of analysing, describing and understanding the complex interactions between humans, nature and technology. Since each field of applied computer science has its own subject matter, terminology and methods, specialised disciplines, such as environmental, bio- and geoinformatics have emerged, each of which combines computer science with a specific field of application such as environmental, bio- or geosciences. Environmental informatics, bioinformatics and geoinformatics all deal with computer-based processing of environmental phenomena. However, environmental informatics is the only field that pursues normative goals (e.g., political goals of environmental protection, environmental planning, and sustainability). This also influences the choice of methods. This also distinguishes it from application areas such as numerical weather prediction, which is considered an early and important example of computer simulation of environmental phenomena. The UK Natural Environment Research Council defines environmental informatics as the "research and system development focusing on the environmental sciences relating to the creation, collection, storage, processing, modelling, interpretation, display and dissemination of data and information." Kostas Karatzas defined environmental informatics as the "creation of a new 'knowledge-paradigm' towards serving environmental management needs." Karatzas argued further that environmental informatics "is an integrator of science, methods and techniques and not just the result of using information and software technology methods and tools for serving environmental engineering needs." Environmental informatics emerged in early 1990 in Central Europe. Current initiatives to effectively manage, share, and reuse environmental and ecological data are indicative of the increasing importance of fields like environmental informatics and ecoinformatics to develop the foundations for effectively managing ecological information. Examples of these initiatives are National Science Foundation Datanet projects, DataONE and Data Conservancy. == Subject matter and objectives == The subject of environmental informatics are environmental information systems (EIS). An EIS 'is a computer-based system that integrates and stores data collected about the natural environment and provides powerful methods for accessing and evaluating it.' This allows environmental data to be processed by computers for environmental protection, planning, research and technology. According to Jaeschke and Bossel, environmental informatics has three interrelated objectives: Environmental informatics serves to procure data and information for describing the state and development of the environment. Of particular importance is information that is needed to prevent or limit undesirable changes and to support desirable changes. Based on the evaluation and analysis of data, environmental informatics improves our understanding of the environment and the interactions between nature, technology and society. It thus supports environmentally relevant decisions. This enables the influence of development (system correction), the assessment of the effects and side effects of potential measures, and the creation of tools for the routine planning, implementation and monitoring of measures. == History == The simulation model World3, which formed the basis of the highly acclaimed study The Limits to Growth, is considered the starting point of environmental informatics. It incorporated environmental information, among other things, to calculate scenarios for global development. In the mid-1980s, interest grew in structuring environmental protection as an area of application for computer science. One of the first publications in German was the book Informatik im Umweltschutz. Anwendungen und Perspektiven (Computer science in environmental protection. Applications and perspectives) from 1986. The term 'environmental informatics' did not appear until around 1993, which is why the development of environmental informatics is usually referred to as having taken place in the 1990s. In 1993, the first university chair for environmental informatics was established in Cottbus. In 1994, the anthology Umweltinformatik. Informatikmethoden für Umweltschutz und Umweltforschung (Environmental Informatics: Informatics Methods for Environmental Protection and Environmental Research) was published. The development of environmental informatics was 'primarily initiated by German computer science.' In the English-speaking world, the volume Environmental Informatics was published in 1995, mainly based on the German anthology of 1994. An article in the conference proceedings of the World Computer Congress of the International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP) in Hamburg in 1994 describes the initial situation of environmental informatics as follows: 'On the one hand, we suffer from the huge amount of available data – people sometimes speak of data graveyards – on the other hand, the really relevant data may still be missing.' This statement indicates the need that led to the emergence of environmental informatics as a specialised discipline of applied computer science. Furthermore, the specific characteristics and processing requirements of environmental data necessitated the emergence of environmental informatics. The special features of environmental data include: The data structures required are highly heterogeneous due to specific processes and differing perspectives on environmental aspects (e.g., water protection, emission control, hazardous substances). In addition to the heterogeneity of the data, heterogeneous databases also play a role, as environmental data is often obtained and presented in an interdisciplinary manner. Obligations change frequently as a result of new legislation, whether regional (e.g. state regulations on water protection), national (e.g. federal emission control regulations) or international (e.g. Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals|REACH). The objects represented are often multidimensional and, therefore, require complex geometric representation using curves or polygons. It is often necessary to process uncertain, imprecise or incomplete data, which is, for example, the result of extrapolations or forecasts. A new "knowledge paradigm" has emerged to meet the requirements of environmental management. Environmental informatics produces its own concepts, methods and techniques and is not merely the result of using information and communication technology methods and tools to meet environmental requirements. The development of environmental informatics since the 1990s has been significantly influenced by the newly established conferences EnviroInfo, ISESS and ITEE and is documented in the respective proceedings. Aspects of sustainability and sustainable development were increasingly integrated into environmental informatics after 2000, thereby expanding the field. In 2004, the Working Group on Sustainable Information Society of the Gesellschaft für Informatik e. V. (German Informatics Society, GI) published the Memorandum on a Sustainable Information Society, which formulates recommendations for an information society that is compatible with human, social and natural needs. Since 2007, environmental informatics has often been described in more detail as informatics for environmental protection, sustainable development and risk management. The increased focus on sustainability has also contributed to the formation of the research focus Information and Communications Technology for Sustainability (ICT4S) and to the emergence of the international conference ICT4S in 2013. ICT-ENSURE, the European Commission's funding measure for the establishment of a European research area on "ICT for Environmental Sustainability Research" (2008–2010), has also contributed to the structuring of environmental informatics. == Environmental informatics and sustainable development == Efforts to place environmental informatics within the context of sustainable development have been growing since 2000 and were significantly influenced by the Memorandum on a Sustainable Information Society. According to this Memorandum, the information society offers great but unevenly distributed opportunities for education, participation and intercultural understanding. In addition, the Memorandum highlighted the material and energy consumption of inf