Test data are sets of inputs or information used to verify the correctness, performance, and reliability of software systems. Test data encompass various types, such as positive and negative scenarios, edge cases, and realistic user scenarios, and aims to exercise different aspects of the software to uncover bugs and validate its behavior. Test data is also used in regression testing to verify that new code changes or enhancements do not introduce unintended side effects or break existing functionalities. == Background == Test data may be used to verify that a given set of inputs to a function produces an expected result. Alternatively, data can be used to challenge the program's ability to handle unusual, extreme, exceptional, or unexpected inputs. Test data can be produced in a focused or systematic manner, as is typically the case in domain testing, or through less focused approaches, such as high-volume randomized automated tests. Test data can be generated by the tester or by a program or function that assists the tester. It can be recorded for reuse or used only once. Test data may be created manually, using data generation tools (often based on randomness), or retrieved from an existing production environment. The data set may consist of synthetic (fake) data, but ideally, it should include representative (real) data. == Limitations == Due to privacy regulations such as GDPR, PCI, and the HIPAA, the use of privacy-sensitive personal data for testing is restricted. However, anonymized (and preferably subsetted) production data may be used as representative data for testing and development. Programmers may also choose to generate synthetic data as an alternative to using real or anonymized data. While synthetic data can offer significant advantages, such as enhanced privacy and flexibility, it also comes with limitations. For instance, generating synthetic data that accurately reflects real-world complexity can be challenging. There is also a risk of synthetic data not fully capturing the nuances of real data, potentially leading to gaps in test coverage. == Domain testing == Domain testing is a set of techniques focusing on test data. This includes identifying critical inputs, values at the boundaries between equivalence classes, and combinations of inputs that drive the system toward specific outputs. Domain testing helps ensure that various scenarios are effectively tested, including edge cases and unusual conditions.
Sparrow (chatbot)
Sparrow is a chatbot developed by the artificial intelligence research lab DeepMind, a subsidiary of Alphabet Inc. It is designed to answer users' questions correctly, while reducing the risk of unsafe and inappropriate answers. One motivation behind Sparrow is to address the problem of language models producing incorrect, biased or potentially harmful outputs. Sparrow is trained using human judgements, in order to be more “Helpful, Correct and Harmless” compared to baseline pre-trained language models. The development of Sparrow involved asking paid study participants to interact with Sparrow, and collecting their preferences to train a model of how useful an answer is. To improve accuracy and help avoid the problem of hallucinating incorrect answers, Sparrow has the ability to search the Internet using Google Search in order to find and cite evidence for any factual claims it makes. To make the model safer, its behaviour is constrained by a set of rules, for example "don't make threatening statements" and "don't make hateful or insulting comments", as well as rules about possibly harmful advice, and not claiming to be a person. During development study participants were asked to converse with the system and try to trick it into breaking these rules. A 'rule model' was trained on judgements from these participants, which was used for further training. Sparrow was introduced in a paper in September 2022, titled "Improving alignment of dialogue agents via targeted human judgements"; however, the bot was not released publicly. DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis said DeepMind is considering releasing Sparrow for a "private beta" some time in 2023. == Training == Sparrow is a deep neural network based on the transformer machine learning model architecture. It is fine-tuned from DeepMind's Chinchilla AI pre-trained large language model (LLM), which has 70 Billion parameters. Sparrow is trained using reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), although some supervised fine-tuning techniques are also used. The RLHF training utilizes two reward models to capture human judgements: a “preference model” that predicts what a human study participant would prefer and a “rule model” that predicts if the model has broken one of the rules. == Limitations == Sparrow's training data corpus is mainly in English, meaning it performs worse in other languages. When adversarially probed by study participants it breaks the rules 8% of the time; however, this is still three times lower than the baseline prompted pre-trained model (Chinchilla).
Personal network
A personal network is a set of human contacts known to an individual, with whom that individual would expect to interact at intervals to support a given set of activities. In other words, a personal network is a group of caring, dedicated people who are committed to maintain a relationship with a person in order to support a given set of activities. Having a strong personal network requires being connected to a network of resources for mutual development and growth. Personal networks can be understood by: who knows you what you know about them what they know about you what are you learning together how you work at that Personal networks are intended to be mutually beneficial, extending the concept of teamwork beyond the immediate peer group. The term is usually encountered in the workplace, though it could apply equally to other pursuits outside work. Personal networking is the practice of developing and maintaining a personal network, which is usually undertaken over an extended period. The concept is related to business networking and is often encouraged by large organizations, in the hope of improving productivity, and so a number of tools exist to support the maintenance of networks. Many of these tools are IT-based, and use Web 2.0 technologies. == History of networking and business success == In the second half of the twentieth century, U.S. advocates for workplace equity popularized the term and concept of networking as part of a larger social capital lexicon—which also includes terms such as glass ceiling, role model, mentoring, and gatekeeper—serving to identify and address the problems barring non-dominant groups from professional success. Mainstream business literature subsequently adopted the terms and concepts, promoting them as pathways to success for all career climbers. In 1970 these terms were not in the general American vocabulary; by the mid-1990s they had become part of everyday speech. Before the mid-twentieth century, what we call networking today was framed in the language of family and friendship. These close personal relationships provided a range of opportunities to preferred subsets of people, such as access to job opportunities, information, credit, and partnerships. Family networks and nepotism have proven particularly strong throughout history. However, other common bonds—from ethnicity and religion to school ties and club memberships—can connect subsets of people as well. Of course people whom insiders consider undesirable have been barred from such networks, with important consequences. Those who tap into influential networks can be nurtured toward success. Those who are shut out from networks can lose hope of success. Numerous business heroes of the past—such as Benjamin Franklin, Andrew Carnegie, Henry Ford, and John D. Rockefeller—exploited networks to great effect. The business networks that seemed natural and transparent to these white men were a closed book to women and minorities for much of American history. Drawing on work from the social sciences, these outsider groups had to identify and then harness the mechanisms behind networking's power. A prominent early example of this process was the formation of corporate caucuses by black men at Xerox starting in 1969. Groups of black salesmen met regularly to share information about Xerox's culture and strategies for navigating it most effectively. Through confrontation and collaboration with a relatively accommodating upper management, the caucuses helped open opportunities for high-performing black employees. The popular and business press began using the terms "network" and "networking" in the mid-1970s in the context of businesswomen consciously pursuing this strategy. Authors encouraged female workers to recognize and exploit the informal workplace systems that provided advancement. They urged women to identify mentors, use social contacts, and build peer and authority networks. The push for networking drew on ideas and relationships from the era's feminist movement, and dictionaries of the time explicitly linked business networking to women's efforts to succeed in the workplace. Since the closing decades of the twentieth century, networking has become a pervasive term and concept in American society. People now invoke networking in relation to everything from business to child rearing to science. While ambitious careerists seek networks as an indispensable talisman, companies purposefully encourage networking among their employees to boost performance and gain competitive advantage. At the same time, Americans are forgetting the workplace activism that first illuminated the power of networking. Unfortunately, this loss of historical context can fuel a backlash against outsider groups who still seek to synthesize networks so they can access the same opportunities enjoyed by insiders. == Characteristics of networks == Broadly speaking, all networks have the following characteristics: Purpose – A network can be established for learning, mission, business, idea, and family or personal reasons. Structure – A network is a group of interlinked entities that form a cluster. Most social structures tend to be characterized by dense clusters of strong connections. Style – The place, space, pace and style of interaction of the networks give an understanding of the style of the networks. Namkee Park, Seungyoon Lee and Jang Hyun Kim examined the relations between personal network characteristics and Facebook use. According to their study, personal networks are investigated through several structural characteristics, which can be categorized into three major dimensions according to the level of analysis: Dyadic tie attributes which include the characteristics of ego-alter ties such as duration, multiplexity, and proximity. Ego-alter tie attributes represent various dimensions of relationships between the focal person and their close contacts. First, tie duration refers to the length of time since the tie was originally initiated, which indicates the duration of relationships. Second, multiplexity includes a focal individual's degree of involvement in various types of interactions with network members. The third dimension is the physical proximity between ego and alter. Theories of proximity suggest that physical proximity between people affects their interaction and subsequently, their formation of network ties. The characteristics of alter-alter ties including personal network density. When moving to ties at the alter-alter level, ego-network density, which refers to the extent to which one's alters are connected with each other, is an important dimension of personal networks. Dense personal network structure indicates close interpersonal contacts among alters, and consequently, is considered to promote the sharing of resources. On the other hand, loose connections, or structural holes in ego-networks, have been found to facilitate the flow of information and to provide advantages in searching and obtaining resources (e.g., getting a job). The composition of alter attributes centered on the heterogeneity of alters in one's personal network. The heterogeneity of alters in one's personal network is associated with access to diverse resources and information It is expected, thus, that the heterogeneity attributes may enhance the focal actor's social activities. Each of these characteristics represents unique aspects of individuals' network relationships. == Types of personal networks == Personal networks can be used for two main reasons: social and professional. In 2012, LinkedIn along with TNS conducted a survey of 6,000 social network users to understand the difference between personal social networks and personal professional networks. The "Mindset Divide" of users of these networks was compared as follows: Emotions: Personal social networks: Nostalgia, fun, distraction. Personal professional networks: Achievement, success, aspiration. Use: Personal social networks: Users are in a casual mindset often just passing time. They use social networks to socialize, stay in touch, be entertained and kill time. Personal professional networks: In this purposeful mindset, users invest time to improve themselves and their future. These networks are used to maintain professional identity, make useful contacts, search for opportunities and stay in touch. Content: Personal professional networks: These provide information about career, brand updates and current affairs. Professional development: Personal development networks: These provide access to those who can provide information, knowledge, advice, support, expertise, guidance, and concrete resources to learn and work effectively—thus those who support the continuing professional development. == Personal network management == Personal network management (PNM) is a crucial aspect of personal information management and can be understood as the practice of managing the links and connections for social and profession
Simply Local
Simply Local is a decentralized community social networking and neighborhood broadcasting service developed by Simply Local, based in New Delhi. The app is used as a tool by residents to bridge the information gap and know what is happening in the locality. Simply Local creates private geo-fenced networks for people living in an area and provides social and community related services within that network. The user doesn’t post to a single person but broadcasts to a chosen community. One of its primary purposes is also to connect citizens to their elected representatives. Each community is independent of the other and information shared remains telescoped to that particular community. The app has been designed to maintain privacy and security of users and provides decentralized social networking in the sense that it forms an owner-independent, micro community, which is not connected with the world outside. Simply Local is available on Android Play and iOS App Store. It is available in two languages - English and Hindi. Simply Local’s founder and CEO is Nikhil Bapna. == History == 2020 May: Included as a Top 5 Useful App by Zee News. 2020: Used to connect candidates with local residents during the Delhi assembly elections. 2019: Renamed from Gadfly to its current name. 2018: Used for Karnataka State Elections to get detailed information on candidates. 2017: Launched under the name Gadfly as a tool to connect citizens with their elected representatives.
Batch cryptography
Batch cryptography is a field of cryptology focused on the design of cryptographic protocols that perform operations—such as encryption, decryption, key exchange, and authentication—on multiple inputs simultaneously, rather than processing each input individually. Batching cryptographic operations can significantly reduce the marginal cost of handling individual inputs—a principle that was first introduced by Amos Fiat in 1989.
Algorithmic inference
Algorithmic inference gathers new developments in the statistical inference methods made feasible by the powerful computing devices widely available to any data analyst. Cornerstones in this field are computational learning theory, granular computing, bioinformatics, and, long ago, structural probability (Fraser 1966). The main focus is on the algorithms which compute statistics rooting the study of a random phenomenon, along with the amount of data they must feed on to produce reliable results. This shifts the interest of mathematicians from the study of the distribution laws to the functional properties of the statistics, and the interest of computer scientists from the algorithms for processing data to the information they process. == The Fisher parametric inference problem == Concerning the identification of the parameters of a distribution law, the mature reader may recall lengthy disputes in the mid 20th century about the interpretation of their variability in terms of fiducial distribution (Fisher 1956), structural probabilities (Fraser 1966), priors/posteriors (Ramsey 1925), and so on. From an epistemology viewpoint, this entailed a companion dispute as to the nature of probability: is it a physical feature of phenomena to be described through random variables or a way of synthesizing data about a phenomenon? Opting for the latter, Fisher defines a fiducial distribution law of parameters of a given random variable that he deduces from a sample of its specifications. With this law he computes, for instance "the probability that μ (mean of a Gaussian variable – omeur note) is less than any assigned value, or the probability that it lies between any assigned values, or, in short, its probability distribution, in the light of the sample observed". == The classic solution == Fisher fought hard to defend the difference and superiority of his notion of parameter distribution in comparison to analogous notions, such as Bayes' posterior distribution, Fraser's constructive probability and Neyman's confidence intervals. For half a century, Neyman's confidence intervals won out for all practical purposes, crediting the phenomenological nature of probability. With this perspective, when you deal with a Gaussian variable, its mean μ is fixed by the physical features of the phenomenon you are observing, where the observations are random operators, hence the observed values are specifications of a random sample. Because of their randomness, you may compute from the sample specific intervals containing the fixed μ with a given probability that you denote confidence. === Example === Let X be a Gaussian variable with parameters μ {\displaystyle \mu } and σ 2 {\displaystyle \sigma ^{2}} and { X 1 , … , X m } {\displaystyle \{X_{1},\ldots ,X_{m}\}} a sample drawn from it. Working with statistics S μ = ∑ i = 1 m X i {\displaystyle S_{\mu }=\sum _{i=1}^{m}X_{i}} and S σ 2 = ∑ i = 1 m ( X i − X ¯ ) 2 , where X ¯ = S μ m {\displaystyle S_{\sigma ^{2}}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}(X_{i}-{\overline {X}})^{2},{\text{ where }}{\overline {X}}={\frac {S_{\mu }}{m}}} is the sample mean, we recognize that T = S μ − m μ S σ 2 m − 1 m = X ¯ − μ S σ 2 / ( m ( m − 1 ) ) {\displaystyle T={\frac {S_{\mu }-m\mu }{\sqrt {S_{\sigma ^{2}}}}}{\sqrt {\frac {m-1}{m}}}={\frac {{\overline {X}}-\mu }{\sqrt {S_{\sigma ^{2}}/(m(m-1))}}}} follows a Student's t distribution (Wilks 1962) with parameter (degrees of freedom) m − 1, so that f T ( t ) = Γ ( m / 2 ) Γ ( ( m − 1 ) / 2 ) 1 π ( m − 1 ) ( 1 + t 2 m − 1 ) m / 2 . {\displaystyle f_{T}(t)={\frac {\Gamma (m/2)}{\Gamma ((m-1)/2)}}{\frac {1}{\sqrt {\pi (m-1)}}}\left(1+{\frac {t^{2}}{m-1}}\right)^{m/2}.} Gauging T between two quantiles and inverting its expression as a function of μ {\displaystyle \mu } you obtain confidence intervals for μ {\displaystyle \mu } . With the sample specification: x = { 7.14 , 6.3 , 3.9 , 6.46 , 0.2 , 2.94 , 4.14 , 4.69 , 6.02 , 1.58 } {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} =\{7.14,6.3,3.9,6.46,0.2,2.94,4.14,4.69,6.02,1.58\}} having size m = 10, you compute the statistics s μ = 43.37 {\displaystyle s_{\mu }=43.37} and s σ 2 = 46.07 {\displaystyle s_{\sigma ^{2}}=46.07} , and obtain a 0.90 confidence interval for μ {\displaystyle \mu } with extremes (3.03, 5.65). == Inferring functions with the help of a computer == From a modeling perspective the entire dispute looks like a chicken-egg dilemma: either fixed data by first and probability distribution of their properties as a consequence, or fixed properties by first and probability distribution of the observed data as a corollary. The classic solution has one benefit and one drawback. The former was appreciated particularly back when people still did computations with sheet and pencil. Per se, the task of computing a Neyman confidence interval for the fixed parameter θ is hard: you do not know θ, but you look for disposing around it an interval with a possibly very low probability of failing. The analytical solution is allowed for a very limited number of theoretical cases. Vice versa a large variety of instances may be quickly solved in an approximate way via the central limit theorem in terms of confidence interval around a Gaussian distribution – that's the benefit. The drawback is that the central limit theorem is applicable when the sample size is sufficiently large. Therefore, it is less and less applicable with the sample involved in modern inference instances. The fault is not in the sample size on its own part. Rather, this size is not sufficiently large because of the complexity of the inference problem. With the availability of large computing facilities, scientists refocused from isolated parameters inference to complex functions inference, i.e. re sets of highly nested parameters identifying functions. In these cases we speak about learning of functions (in terms for instance of regression, neuro-fuzzy system or computational learning) on the basis of highly informative samples. A first effect of having a complex structure linking data is the reduction of the number of sample degrees of freedom, i.e. the burning of a part of sample points, so that the effective sample size to be considered in the central limit theorem is too small. Focusing on the sample size ensuring a limited learning error with a given confidence level, the consequence is that the lower bound on this size grows with complexity indices such as VC dimension or detail of a class to which the function we want to learn belongs. === Example === A sample of 1,000 independent bits is enough to ensure an absolute error of at most 0.081 on the estimation of the parameter p of the underlying Bernoulli variable with a confidence of at least 0.99. The same size cannot guarantee a threshold less than 0.088 with the same confidence 0.99 when the error is identified with the probability that a 20-year-old man living in New York does not fit the ranges of height, weight and waistline observed on 1,000 Big Apple inhabitants. The accuracy shortage occurs because both the VC dimension and the detail of the class of parallelepipeds, among which the one observed from the 1,000 inhabitants' ranges falls, are equal to 6. == The general inversion problem solving the Fisher question == With insufficiently large samples, the approach: fixed sample – random properties suggests inference procedures in three steps: === Definition === For a random variable and a sample drawn from it a compatible distribution is a distribution having the same sampling mechanism M X = ( Z , g θ ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {M}}_{X}=(Z,g_{\boldsymbol {\theta }})} of X with a value θ {\displaystyle {\boldsymbol {\theta }}} of the random parameter Θ {\displaystyle \mathbf {\Theta } } derived from a master equation rooted on a well-behaved statistic s. === Example === You may find the distribution law of the Pareto parameters A and K as an implementation example of the population bootstrap method as in the figure on the left. Implementing the twisting argument method, you get the distribution law F M ( μ ) {\displaystyle F_{M}(\mu )} of the mean M of a Gaussian variable X on the basis of the statistic s M = ∑ i = 1 m x i {\textstyle s_{M}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}x_{i}} when Σ 2 {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{2}} is known to be equal to σ 2 {\displaystyle \sigma ^{2}} (Apolloni, Malchiodi & Gaito 2006). Its expression is: F M ( μ ) = Φ ( m μ − s M σ m ) , {\displaystyle F_{M}(\mu )=\Phi {\left({\frac {m\mu -s_{M}}{\sigma {\sqrt {m}}}}\right)},} shown in the figure on the right, where Φ {\displaystyle \Phi } is the cumulative distribution function of a standard normal distribution. Computing a confidence interval for M given its distribution function is straightforward: we need only find two quantiles (for instance δ / 2 {\displaystyle \delta /2} and 1 − δ / 2 {\displaystyle 1-\delta /2} quantiles in case we are interested in a confidence interval of level δ symmetric in the tail's probabilities) as indicated on the left in the diagram showing the behavior of
OARnet
The Ohio Academic Resources Network (OARnet) is a state-funded IT organization that provides member organizations with intrastate networking, virtualization and cloud computing applications, advanced videoconferencing, connections to regional and international research networks and the commodity Internet, colocation services, and emergency web-hosting. The OARnet network (known for a time as Third Frontier Network and later, OSCnet) is a dedicated, statewide, high-speed fiber-optic network that serves Ohio K-12 schools, college and university campuses, academic medical centers, public broadcasting stations and state and local/state government. OARnet is connected in Cleveland and Cincinnati to Internet2, the United States' most advanced nationwide research and education network. OARnet also maintains direct connections to Michigan's Merit network and OmniPoP in Chicago. OARnet offices are located on the West Campus of Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio, United States. OARnet additionally serves as the delegated registrar for many third-level domains (both generic and locality-based) under .oh.us and some under .in.us and .ky.us. == History == A member-organization of the Ohio Technology Consortium, the technology and information division of the Ohio Board of Regents (now the Ohio Department of Higher Education), OARnet was created by the Ohio General Assembly in 1987 to provide Ohio researchers with network connectivity to the resources of the Ohio Supercomputer Center (OSC). It was recognized at the time that the network would serve a much broader audience, so when a network name was selected in early 1988, OARnet was chosen to emphasize the many uses of the network. The initial plan (1987) was to make use of a number of existing BITNET and CCnet (regional DECnet network) connections to get started. Three network (compatible) protocols were used, NJE, DECnet, and TCP/IP. The first OARnet-funded line was installed between Case Western Reserve University and John Carroll University in June 1987. Many subsequent lines at 9.6 kbit/s, 56 kbit/s, and T1 (1.544 Mbit/s) were installed with the aid of an Ohio Department of Administrative Services contract with Litel Corp. Internet (then NSFNET) connections were obtained in the spring of 1988. The non-TCP/IP protocols were soon phased out, and a process of upgrading connections took place regularly. In 1991, it was decided that OARnet would accept commercial business, at appropriate rates, for Internet connection services. Thus OARnet became one of the first Internet service providers (ISPs) in Ohio. After commercial ISPs entered the business extensively, OARnet stopped seeking new commercial accounts. A very large increase in backbone capacity occurred (planning 2000–02, installation 2003–04) when it became possible to lease optical fiber lines themselves ("dark fiber"). A new network backbone of 1,850 miles was installed at much higher capacity, and the eTech Ohio Commission and the Ohio Department of Education joined in funding and using OARnet. The fiber-optic backbone was launched in November 2004. In 2006, OARnet provided one of the first networks for delivery of live TV via Internet Protocol, known today as IPTV. OARnet served as the backbone for Ohio News Network to transmit Miami Redhawks hockey. The team finished the 2008-2009 season at the Frozen Four with a 4-3 OT loss to Boston University in the championship. It was one of the first live sports transmission deliveries over IPTV in the US. Another sharp jump in capacity occurred in 2012, when the State of Ohio funded an upgrade of the OARnet backbone to 100 Gigabits per second. Today, more than 1,500 miles of Ohio’s network backbone runs at an ultra-fast 100 Gbit/s, which was recognized by ComputerWorld in the Emerging Technology category of their 2013 Computerworld Honors Laureates program. In November 2012, Case Western Reserve University became the first member institution to connect at 100 Gbit/s to the OARnet backbone. The OARnet leaders have been: Russell M. Pitzer, director, 1987–88 Alison Brown, director, 1988–94 John Ritter, acting director, 1995 Larry Buell, acting director, 1996–97 Douglas Gale, director, 1998–2002 Alvin Stutz, director, 2002–05 Pankaj Shah, executive director, 2005–15 Paul Schopis, interim executive director, 2015–2018, executive director 2018–19 Denis Walsh, interim executive director, 2019–20 Pankaj Shah, executive director, 2020–