Commitment ordering (CO) is a class of interoperable serializability techniques in concurrency control of databases, transaction processing, and related applications. It allows optimistic (non-blocking) implementations. With the proliferation of multi-core processors, CO has also been increasingly utilized in concurrent programming, transactional memory, and software transactional memory (STM) to achieve serializability optimistically. CO is also the name of the resulting transaction schedule (history) property, defined in 1988 with the name dynamic atomicity. In a CO compliant schedule, the chronological order of commitment events of transactions is compatible with the precedence order of the respective transactions. CO is a broad special case of conflict serializability and effective means (reliable, high-performance, distributed, and scalable) to achieve global serializability (modular serializability) across any collection of database systems that possibly use different concurrency control mechanisms (CO also makes each system serializability compliant, if not already). Each not-CO-compliant database system is augmented with a CO component (the commitment order coordinator—COCO) which orders the commitment events for CO compliance, with neither data-access nor any other transaction operation interference. As such, CO provides a low overhead, general solution for global serializability (and distributed serializability), instrumental for global concurrency control (and distributed concurrency control) of multi-database systems and other transactional objects, possibly highly distributed (e.g., within cloud computing, grid computing, and networks of smartphones). An atomic commitment protocol (ACP; of any type) is a fundamental part of the solution, utilized to break global cycles in the conflict (precedence, serializability) graph. CO is the most general property (a necessary condition) that guarantees global serializability, if the database systems involved do not share concurrency control information beyond atomic commitment protocol (unmodified) messages and have no knowledge of whether transactions are global or local (the database systems are autonomous). Thus CO (with its variants) is the only general technique that does not require the typically costly distribution of local concurrency control information (e.g., local precedence relations, locks, timestamps, or tickets). It generalizes the popular strong strict two-phase locking (SS2PL) property, which in conjunction with the two-phase commit protocol (2PC), is the de facto standard to achieve global serializability across (SS2PL based) database systems. As a result, CO compliant database systems (with any different concurrency control types) can transparently join such SS2PL based solutions for global serializability. In addition, locking based global deadlocks are resolved automatically in a CO based multi-database environment, a vital side-benefit (including the special case of a completely SS2PL based environment; a previously unnoticed fact for SS2PL). Furthermore, strict commitment ordering (SCO; Raz 1991c), the intersection of Strictness and CO, provides better performance (shorter average transaction completion time and resulting in better transaction throughput) than SS2PL whenever read-write conflicts are present (identical blocking behavior for write-read and write-write conflicts; comparable locking overhead). The advantage of SCO is especially during lock contention. Strictness allows both SS2PL and SCO to use the same effective database recovery mechanisms. Two major generalizing variants of CO exist, extended CO (ECO; Raz 1993a) and multi-version CO (MVCO; Raz 1993b). They also provide global serializability without local concurrency control information distribution, can be combined with any relevant concurrency control, and allow optimistic (non-blocking) implementations. Both use additional information for relaxing CO constraints and achieving better concurrency and performance. Vote ordering (VO or Generalized CO (GCO); Raz 2009) is a container schedule set (property) and technique for CO and all its variants. Local VO is necessary for guaranteeing global serializability if the atomic commitment protocol (ACP) participants do not share concurrency control information (have the generalized autonomy property). CO and its variants inter-operate transparently, guaranteeing global serializability and automatic global deadlock resolution together in a mixed, heterogeneous environment with different variants. == Overview == The Commitment ordering (CO; Raz 1990, 1992, 1994, 2009) schedule property has been referred to also as Dynamic atomicity (since 1988), commit ordering, commit order serializability, and strong recoverability (since 1991). The latter is a misleading name since CO is incomparable with recoverability, and the term "strong" implies a special case. This means that a substantial recoverability property does not necessarily have the CO property and vice versa. In 2009 CO has been characterized as a major concurrency control method, together with the previously known (since the 1980s) three major methods: Locking, Time-stamp ordering, and Serialization graph testing, and as an enabler for the interoperability of systems using different concurrency control mechanisms. In a federated database system or any other more loosely defined multidatabase system, which are typically distributed in a communication network, transactions span multiple and possibly Distributed databases. Enforcing global serializability in such system is problematic. Even if every local schedule of a single database is still serializable, the global schedule of a whole system is not necessarily serializable. The massive communication exchanges of conflict information needed between databases to reach conflict serializability would lead to unacceptable performance, primarily due to computer and communication latency. The problem of achieving global serializability effectively had been characterized as open until the public disclosure of CO in 1991 by its inventor Yoav Raz (Raz 1991a; see also Global serializability). Enforcing CO is an effective way to enforce conflict serializability globally in a distributed system since enforcing CO locally in each database (or other transactional objects) also enforces it globally. Each database may use any, possibly different, type of concurrency control mechanism. With a local mechanism that already provides conflict serializability, enforcing CO locally does not cause any other aborts, since enforcing CO locally does not affect the data access scheduling strategy of the mechanism (this scheduling determines the serializability related aborts; such a mechanism typically does not consider the commitment events or their order). The CO solution requires no communication overhead since it uses (unmodified) atomic commitment protocol messages only, already needed by each distributed transaction to reach atomicity. An atomic commitment protocol plays a central role in the distributed CO algorithm, which enforces CO globally by breaking global cycles (cycles that span two or more databases) in the global conflict graph. CO, its special cases, and its generalizations are interoperable and achieve global serializability while transparently being utilized together in a single heterogeneous distributed environment comprising objects with possibly different concurrency control mechanisms. As such, Commitment ordering, including its special cases, and together with its generalizations (see CO variants below), provides a general, high performance, fully distributed solution (no central processing component or central data structure are needed) for guaranteeing global serializability in heterogeneous environments of multidatabase systems and other multiple transactional objects (objects with states accessed and modified only by transactions; e.g., in the framework of transactional processes, and within Cloud computing and Grid computing). The CO solution scales up with network size and the number of databases without any negative impact on performance (assuming the statistics of a single distributed transaction, e.g., the average number of databases involved with a single transaction, are unchanged). With the proliferation of Multi-core processors, Optimistic CO (OCO) has also been increasingly utilized to achieve serializability in software transactional memory, and numerous STM articles and patents utilizing "commit order" have already been published (e.g., Zhang et al. 2006). == The commitment ordering solution for global serializability == === General characterization of CO === Commitment ordering (CO) is a special case of conflict serializability. CO can be enforced with non-blocking mechanisms (each transaction can complete its task without having its data-access blocked, which allows optimistic concurrency control; however, commitment could be blo
Patch management
Patch management (or patch management policy or patch policy or patch management process) is concerned with the identification, acquisition, distribution, testing and installation of patches to systems. Proper patch management can be a net productivity boost for an organization. Patches can be used to defend against and eliminate potential vulnerabilities of a system, so that no threats may exploit them. Problems can arise during patch management, including buggy patches that either fail to fix their problem or introduce new issues. Patch management tools help orchestrate all of the procedures involved in patch management. == Description == Patch management is defined as a sub-practice of various disciplines including vulnerability management (part of security management), lifecycle management (with further possible sub-classification into application lifecycle management and release management), change management, and systems management. The practice is broadly concerned with the identification, acquisition, distribution, and installation of patches to systems. Some definitions of patch management are as a software-level practice, while others are as a systems-level process: software, drivers, and firmware. == Cost–benefit analysis == While reserving time for patching takes up enterprise resources, there are balancing factors which can make proper patch management into a net productivity boost for an organization. Up-to-date systems often perform more efficiently, less costly, with less errors, less security risks, and better user workflow. Additionally, compliance with changing local and federal regulations are more likely to be satisfied. Patching security vulnerabilities has been one among many competing priorities for organizations, leading to longer periods before patching for some organizations. Equifax was too slow to implement its 2015 patch management plan to be able to mitigate or prevent the 2017 Equifax data breach, leading to scrutiny from regulators. == Relation to security management == Patches can be used to defend against and eliminate potential vulnerabilities of a system, so that no threats may exploit them; therefore, patch management can be considered a sub-discipline of vulnerability management. Every patchable device in a system presents an attack surface that must be secured. === Time plan === Automatic updates are where the patch is applied automatically with little to know actions or planning required. This approach is recommended for many individuals and organizations. Some organizations also have to prioritize which patches to prioritize given limited resources. Patch Tuesday is the most common process when major companies like Microsoft and Adobe release patches on a known date so that companies can plan resources around implementing the patches more quickly. Linux is open-sourced and patches can be released at any time, leading some to rely on mailing lists or other ways to be alerted to updates. === Inventory === Taking an inventory of software and hardware, including versions can make it easier to correlate with bugs or patches as they become known. Taking stock of how much education and support others in an organization need to install their patches can also help for planning how to implement the patch or design systems to begin with. Streamlining the process by using tools that can communicate with each other can also help to reduce the time of exposure to known vulnerabilities. == Challenges == There are a multitude of problems that can arise during patch management. A common issue is buggy patches, which either fail to fix their problem or introduce new issues. Another issue is deployment synchronization, since various subsystems may receive instructions to update at different times. Similarly, the difficulty of patch management across many devices may grow at an uncontrollable rate depending on organizational size. One prominent demonstration of the challenges facing proper patch management was the buggy Falcon Sensor patch by CrowdStrike which caused one of the worst IT outages of all time. == Implementations == A patch management tool (alternatively patch manager, patch management system, patch management software, or centralized patch management) help orchestrate all of the procedures involved in patch management. Tools can be in-house (applied locally by local administrators), or external, as with managed service providers (applied externally by a provider). === Patch management software === Windows Update for Business, System Center Configuration Manager, and Windows Server Update Services offer control over patch deployment, with features enabling testing, scheduling updates, and setting custom configurations on Windows platforms. === Managed service providers === == Regulatory requirements (United States) == Timely patching of software vulnerabilities is a requirement under multiple regulatory frameworks in the United States. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Security Rule requires covered entities to protect electronic protected health information by implementing security measures sufficient to reduce risks to a reasonable and appropriate level, which industry guidance has long interpreted to include timely patch management. A proposed new HIPAA Security Rule would make patch management requirements explicit, mandating that covered entities and business associates deploy security patches and updates within a defined risk-based timeline and maintain written procedures for prioritizing, testing, and applying patches to systems that store, process, or transmit ePHI. The 2025 proposal continues to receive industry pushback as of December 2025. HIPAA was last updated in 2013. The Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) requires organizations to protect system components from known vulnerabilities by installing applicable security patches within one month of release for critical patches. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) maintains a Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog that compels U.S. federal agencies to remediate listed vulnerabilities within specified timelines. Agencies are typically required to patch within 3 weeks, though some vulnerabilities must be fixed within 24 hours.
Sentiment analysis
Sentiment analysis (also known as opinion mining) is the use of natural language processing, text analysis, computational linguistics, and biometrics to systematically identify, extract, quantify, and study affective states and subjective information. Sentiment analysis is widely applied to voice of the customer materials such as reviews and survey responses, online and social media, and healthcare materials for applications that range from marketing to customer service to clinical medicine. With the rise of deep language models, such as RoBERTa, more difficult data domains can be analyzed, e.g., news texts where authors typically express their opinion/sentiment less explicitly. == Types == A basic task in sentiment analysis is classifying the polarity of a given text at the document, sentence, or feature/aspect level—whether the expressed opinion in a document, a sentence or an entity feature/aspect is positive, negative, or neutral. Advanced, "beyond polarity" sentiment classification looks, for instance, at emotional states such as enjoyment, anger, disgust, sadness, fear, and surprise. Precursors to sentimental analysis include the General Inquirer, which provided hints toward quantifying patterns in text and, separately, psychological research that examined a person's psychological state based on analysis of their verbal behavior. Subsequently, the method described in a patent by Volcani and Fogel, looked specifically at sentiment and identified individual words and phrases in text with respect to different emotional scales. A current system based on their work, called EffectCheck, presents synonyms that can be used to increase or decrease the level of evoked emotion in each scale. Many other subsequent efforts were less sophisticated, using a mere polar view of sentiment, from positive to negative, such as work by Turney, and Pang who applied different methods for detecting the polarity of product reviews and movie reviews respectively. This work is at the document level. One can also classify a document's polarity on a multi-way scale, which was attempted by Pang and Snyder among others: Pang and Lee expanded the basic task of classifying a movie review as either positive or negative to predict star ratings on either a 3- or a 4-star scale, while Snyder performed an in-depth analysis of restaurant reviews, predicting ratings for various aspects of the given restaurant, such as the food and atmosphere (on a five-star scale). First steps to bringing together various approaches—learning, lexical, knowledge-based, etc.—were taken in the 2004 AAAI Spring Symposium where linguists, computer scientists, and other interested researchers first aligned interests and proposed shared tasks and benchmark data sets for the systematic computational research on affect, appeal, subjectivity, and sentiment in text. Even though in most statistical classification methods, the neutral class is ignored under the assumption that neutral texts lie near the boundary of the binary classifier, several researchers suggest that, as in every polarity problem, three categories must be identified. Moreover, it can be proven that specific classifiers such as the Max Entropy and SVMs can benefit from the introduction of a neutral class and improve the overall accuracy of the classification. There are in principle two ways for operating with a neutral class. Either, the algorithm proceeds by first identifying the neutral language, filtering it out and then assessing the rest in terms of positive and negative sentiments, or it builds a three-way classification in one step. This second approach often involves estimating a probability distribution over all categories (e.g. naive Bayes classifiers as implemented by the NLTK). Whether and how to use a neutral class depends on the nature of the data: if the data is clearly clustered into neutral, negative and positive language, it makes sense to filter the neutral language out and focus on the polarity between positive and negative sentiments. If, in contrast, the data are mostly neutral with small deviations towards positive and negative affect, this strategy would make it harder to clearly distinguish between the two poles. A different method for determining sentiment is the use of a scaling system whereby words commonly associated with having a negative, neutral, or positive sentiment are given an associated number on a −10 to +10 scale (most negative up to most positive) or simply from 0 to a positive upper limit such as +4. This makes it possible to adjust the sentiment of a given term relative to its environment (usually on the level of the sentence). When a piece of unstructured text is analyzed using natural language processing, each concept in the specified environment is given a score based on the way sentiment words relate to the concept and its associated score. This allows movement to a more sophisticated understanding of sentiment, because it is now possible to adjust the sentiment value of a concept relative to modifications that may surround it. Words, for example, that intensify, relax or negate the sentiment expressed by the concept can affect its score. Alternatively, texts can be given a positive and negative sentiment strength score if the goal is to determine the sentiment in a text rather than the overall polarity and strength of the text. There are various other types of sentiment analysis, such as aspect-based sentiment analysis, grading sentiment analysis (positive, negative, neutral), multilingual sentiment analysis and detection of emotions. === Subjectivity/objectivity identification === This task is commonly defined as classifying a given text (usually a sentence) into one of two classes: objective or subjective. This problem can sometimes be more difficult than polarity classification. The subjectivity of words and phrases may depend on their context and an objective document may contain subjective sentences (e.g., a news article quoting people's opinions). Moreover, as mentioned by Su, results are largely dependent on the definition of subjectivity used when annotating texts. However, Pang showed that removing objective sentences from a document before classifying its polarity helped improve performance. Subjective and objective identification, emerging subtasks of sentiment analysis to use syntactic, semantic features, and machine learning knowledge to identify if a sentence or document contains facts or opinions. Awareness of recognizing factual and opinions is not recent, having possibly first presented by Carbonell at Yale University in 1979. The term objective refers to the incident carrying factual information. Example of an objective sentence: 'To be elected president of the United States, a candidate must be at least thirty-five years of age.' The term subjective describes the incident contains non-factual information in various forms, such as personal opinions, judgment, and predictions, also known as 'private states'. In the example down below, it reflects a private states 'We Americans'. Moreover, the target entity commented by the opinions can take several forms from tangible product to intangible topic matters stated in Liu (2010). Furthermore, three types of attitudes were observed by Liu (2010), 1) positive opinions, 2) neutral opinions, and 3) negative opinions. Example of a subjective sentence: 'We Americans need to elect a president who is mature and who is able to make wise decisions.' This analysis is a classification problem. Each class's collections of words or phrase indicators are defined for to locate desirable patterns on unannotated text. For subjective expression, a different word list has been created. Lists of subjective indicators in words or phrases have been developed by multiple researchers in the linguist and natural language processing field states in Riloff et al. (2003). A dictionary of extraction rules has to be created for measuring given expressions. Over the years, in subjective detection, the features extraction progression from curating features by hand to automated features learning. At the moment, automated learning methods can further separate into supervised and unsupervised machine learning. Patterns extraction with machine learning process annotated and unannotated text have been explored extensively by academic researchers. However, researchers recognized several challenges in developing fixed sets of rules for expressions respectably. Much of the challenges in rule development stems from the nature of textual information. Six challenges have been recognized by several researchers: 1) metaphorical expressions, 2) discrepancies in writings, 3) context-sensitive, 4) represented words with fewer usages, 5) time-sensitive, and 6) ever-growing volume. Metaphorical expressions. The text contains metaphoric expression may impact on the performance on the extraction. Besides, metaphors take in different forms, which may have been contribu
Sysomos
Sysomos Inc. is a Toronto-based social media analytics company owned by Outside Insight market leaders Meltwater. The company developed text analytics and machine learning technologies for user generated content, and served 80% of the top agencies and Fortune 500. == History == Sysomos was founded by Nilesh Bansal and Nick Koudas. The company is a spinoff of the University of Toronto research project BlogScope. The BlogScope project, which started in 2005, resulted in creation of the underlying content aggregation and analysis engine commercialized by Sysomos. The company raised venture capital in 2008 and was acquired by Marketwire in 2010. The company's original flagship product, Media Analysis Platform (MAP), mines and analyzes content from social media or user-generated content to create a picture of media coverage. Sysomos launched its flagship offering MAP in Sept 2007, followed by addition of Heartbeat to its product suite in 2009. In addition to the two main products, the company released FourWhere, a free location-based social search service that mashes up Foursquare in March 2010. The company also offers Sysomos Heartbeat which provides social media monitoring and engagement capabilities to communication professionals, brand managers and customer support groups. In 2013, Heartbeat was extended to add publishing components to deliver a complete end-to-end social media marketing platform. On July 6, 2010, it was announced that Marketwire, a press release distribution company, had acquired Sysomos. After the acquisition, Sysomos founders Nick Koudas and Nilesh Bansal, left Sysomos to start Aislelabs. In February 2015, Sysomos split from Marketwired, as an independent company, and appointed Adnan Ahmed as the new CEO. In March 2015, newly independent Sysomos launched a redesign for its Heartbeat product and a new API for its MAP product. In the same year, the company acquired Expion. In September 2016, Peter Heffring was announced as the new CEO. In April 2017, Sysomos showcased a new unified platform offering new insights. In April 2018, media monitoring firm Meltwater announced it had acquired Sysomos. The CEO of Sysomos, Peter Heffring, said the company will continue to operate as an independent unit of Meltwater. Heffring will run the social analytics division of Meltwater. == Reports == Inside Twitter series of reports is the most extensive third-party survey on Twitter's growth and demographics. Another extensive survey regarding the top 5% of most active Twitter users found that over 25% of all tweets are machine created. The report also confirms Twitter's international growth. Inside Facebook Pages report found that only four percent of pages have more than 10,000 fans, 0.76% of pages have more than 100,000 fans, and 0.05% of pages (or 297 in total) have more than a million fans. Inside YouTube reports focus more on video hosting services and YouTube.
TikTokification
TikTokification (also written TikTok-ification) is a term used to describe the widespread adoption of TikTok's short-form, vertical video format and its algorithmic content-delivery model across the broader social media landscape. The phenomenon encompasses the strategic and cultural changes made by competing platforms such as Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, Snapchat, and LinkedIn in response to TikTok's global dominance. Beyond platform design, the term is also used more broadly to describe shifts in media consumption habits, advertising strategies, and, more critically, the potential cognitive and psychological effects associated with constant short-form video consumption. == Background == === Origins of short-form video === The short-form video format predates TikTok. Vine, launched in 2013, popularised six-second looping videos before shutting down in 2017. TikTok itself, known as Douyin in the Chinese market, was created by the Chinese technology company ByteDance in September 2016. Following its international expansion and its 2018 merger with Musical.ly, TikTok grew rapidly. By 2020, the application had surpassed two billion total downloads worldwide, with over 800 million monthly active users. A key driver of TikTok's success was its recommendation algorithm. The platform's "For You Page" (FYP) serves content to users based on behaviour rather than follower count, making it possible for unknown creators to achieve widespread reach organically. Analysts noted that TikTok serves "fast, visually engaging, and authentic videos that feel more like entertainment than advertising," fundamentally reshaping consumer expectations of digital content. TikTok has been described as "the center of the internet for young people," where users go for entertainment, news, trends, and shopping. As of the mid-2020s, TikTok had approximately 1.12 billion monthly active users. == Platform responses == TikTok's success compelled nearly every major social media platform to restructure its product around short-form video. In 2020, Instagram launched Reels and YouTube launched Shorts, both directly in response to TikTok's growth. Platforms like Meta's Instagram Reels and Google's YouTube Shorts subsequently expanded aggressively, launching new features, creator tools, and even considering separate standalone applications to compete. LinkedIn, traditionally a professional networking site, began experimenting with TikTok-style short-form vertical video feeds. Facebook launched a singular unified video feed combining Reels, long videos, and live videos, similar in structure to TikTok's feed. Snapchat redesigned its application to combine Stories and Spotlight into a unified entertainment feed. YouTube extended its Shorts format to allow videos up to three minutes in length, up from the previous limit of sixty seconds, as of October 2024. Despite these adaptations, experts noted that none of TikTok's rivals had matched its algorithmic precision as of mid-2025. == Societal and cultural impact == === Media and journalism === News organisations have also been affected by TikTokification. Short-form video grew rapidly as a format for news content, driven in large part by TikTok's popularity. According to Pew Research Center, 17% of adults in the United States reported regularly getting news from TikTok in 2024, with 63% of teenagers saying they used the platform as a news source. In response, major publishers began creating bespoke short-form content for TikTok's audience, with organisations such as the BBC building dedicated internal TikTok teams. === Advertising and commerce === TikTokification has had significant effects on the advertising industry. US social video advertising spending was projected to surpass linear television advertising spending for the first time in 2025. Global social commerce sales were projected to reach approximately $900 billion in 2025, with platforms like Douyin and TikTok driving a large share of that growth. TikTok itself generated an estimated $23.6 billion in advertising revenue in 2024. Short-form video has been described as bridging the gap between brand awareness and direct conversion. Surveys have found that consumers trust user-generated content 8.7 times more than influencer content and 6.6 times more than branded content, prompting brands to favour creator-led video formats. === Attention spans and cognitive effects === A growing body of research has examined the cognitive consequences of heavy short-form video consumption, a set of effects sometimes referred to as "TikTok Brain." A large systematic review and meta-analysis published in Psychological Bulletin, analysing data from 98,299 participants across 71 studies, found that the more short-form video content a person watches, the poorer their cognitive performance in attention and inhibitory control. The review also found that greater engagement with short-form video was associated with higher levels of anxiety, depression, and stress, as well as sleep disturbances. The platform's inherent demand for engaging content has resulted in the proliferation of sludge content, a genre of split screen video with the main video on the top and an unrelated attention-grabbing video on the bottom, typically repetitive gameplay (notably of the endless runner mobile game Subway Surfers) or oddly satisfying videos, designed to maximize viewer retention in cases where the main video may appear uninteresting and would normally cause the viewer to skip it. Sludge content is often described as overstimulating, reflecting and contributing to declining attention spans, though the scholarly evidence supporting such claims is not conclusive. Dr. Yann Poncin, associate professor at the Child Study Center at Yale University, noted that "infinite scrolling and short-form video are designed to capture your attention in short bursts," contrasting this with earlier entertainment formats that guided audiences through longer narratives. Research suggests that children and teenagers may be particularly vulnerable, with early exposure to rapid frame changes potentially conditioning the brain's neural pathways to require constant stimulation, making it more challenging to engage with slower-paced activities. A separate study published in Nature Communications by researchers at the Technical University of Denmark documented a notable decrease in collective attention span over time, attributing it in part to the increasing volume and pace of content production and consumption online. Researchers caution, however, that the majority of relevant studies are cross-sectional, meaning they capture data at a single point in time and cannot establish causality. It remains possible that individuals with pre-existing conditions such as anxiety or attention deficits may be more likely to engage heavily with these platforms as a coping mechanism. === Academic and sociological analysis === Scholars have framed TikTokification within the context of the attention economy. A 2024 academic analysis described TikTok as representing "a new paradigm of social media communication" shaped by youth culture, mobile technology, and the economics of attention, in which spectators become active contributors to a shared content pipeline. The same analysis noted that TikTok "reflects a new mode of communication influenced by avant-garde cinema, the use of mobile technology, and the social habits of particular social groups." US social media users were projected to spend 61.1% of their time on social networks watching videos in 2025, up from 33.3% in 2019, before TikTok became widely popular, underscoring the scale of the behavioural shift. == Monetisation challenges == Despite high engagement levels, monetising short-form video has remained difficult for platforms and creators alike. Unlike long-form YouTube content, short clips offer limited space for advertisers to insert advertisements. YouTube Shorts pays approximately four cents per 1,000 views, considerably less than its long-form counterpart. From 2025 onward, platforms began introducing creator funds, advertisements, and AI-driven content recommendations as part of broader efforts to make short-form video economically sustainable for creators.
Sequence labeling
In machine learning, sequence labeling is a type of pattern recognition task that involves the algorithmic assignment of a categorical label to each member of a sequence of observed values. A common example of a sequence labeling task is part of speech tagging, which seeks to assign a part of speech to each word in an input sentence or document. Sequence labeling can be treated as a set of independent classification tasks, one per member of the sequence. However, accuracy is generally improved by making the optimal label for a given element dependent on the choices of nearby elements, using special algorithms to choose the globally best set of labels for the entire sequence at once. As an example of why finding the globally best label sequence might produce better results than labeling one item at a time, consider the part-of-speech tagging task just described. Frequently, many words are members of multiple parts of speech, and the correct label of such a word can often be deduced from the correct label of the word to the immediate left or right. For example, the word "sets" can be either a noun or verb. In a phrase like "he sets the books down", the word "he" is unambiguously a pronoun, and "the" unambiguously a determiner, and using either of these labels, "sets" can be deduced to be a verb, since nouns very rarely follow pronouns and are less likely to precede determiners than verbs are. But in other cases, only one of the adjacent words is similarly helpful. In "he sets and then knocks over the table", only the word "he" to the left is helpful (cf. "...picks up the sets and then knocks over..."). Conversely, in "... and also sets the table" only the word "the" to the right is helpful (cf. "... and also sets of books were ..."). An algorithm that proceeds from left to right, labeling one word at a time, can only use the tags of left-adjacent words and might fail in the second example above; vice versa for an algorithm that proceeds from right to left. Most sequence labeling algorithms are probabilistic in nature, relying on statistical inference to find the best sequence. The most common statistical models in use for sequence labeling make a Markov assumption, i.e. that the choice of label for a particular word is directly dependent only on the immediately adjacent labels; hence the set of labels forms a Markov chain. This leads naturally to the hidden Markov model (HMM), one of the most common statistical models used for sequence labeling. Other common models in use are the maximum entropy Markov model and conditional random field.
Dashboard (computing)
In computer information systems, a dashboard is a type of graphical user interface which often provides at-a-glance views of data relevant to a particular objective or process through a combination of visualizations and summary information. In other usage, "dashboard" is another name for "progress report" or "report" and is considered a form of data visualization. The dashboard is often accessible by a web browser and is typically linked to regularly updating data sources. Dashboards are often interactive and facilitate users to explore the data themselves, usually by clicking into elements to view more detailed information. The term dashboard originates from the automobile dashboard where drivers monitor the major functions at a glance via the instrument panel. == History == The idea of digital dashboards followed the study of decision support systems in the 1970s. Early predecessors of the modern business dashboard were first developed in the 1980s in the form of Executive Information Systems (EISs). Due to problems primarily with data refreshing and handling, it was soon realized that the approach wasn't practical as information was often incomplete, unreliable, and spread across too many disparate sources. Thus, EISs hibernated until the 1990s when the information age quickened pace and data warehousing, and online analytical processing (OLAP) allowed dashboards to function adequately. Despite the availability of enabling technologies, the dashboard use didn't become popular until later in that decade, with the rise of key performance indicators (KPIs), and the introduction of Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton's balanced scorecard. In the late 1990s, Microsoft promoted a concept known as the Digital Nervous System and "digital dashboards" were described as being one leg of that concept. Today, the use of dashboards forms an important part of Business Performance Management (BPM). Initially dashboards were used for monitoring purposes, now with the advancement of technology, dashboards are being used for more analytical purposes. The use of dashboards has now been incorporating; scenario analysis, drill down capabilities, and presentation format flexibility. == Benefits == Digital dashboards allow managers to monitor the contribution of the various departments in their organization. In addition, they enable “rolling up” of information to present a consolidated view across an organization. To gauge exactly how well an organization is performing overall, digital dashboards allow you to capture and report specific data points from each department within the organization, thus providing a "snapshot" of performance. Benefits of using digital dashboards include: Visual presentation of performance measures Ability to identify and correct negative trends Measure efficiencies/inefficiencies Ability to generate detailed reports showing new trends Ability to make more informed decisions based on collected business intelligence Dashboards offers a holistic view of the entire business as it gives the manager a bird's eye view into the performance of sales, data inventory, web traffic, social media analytics and other associated data that is visually presented on a single dashboard. Dashboards lead to better management of marketing/financial strategies as a dashboard for the display of marketing data makes the process of marketing easier and more reliable as compared to doing it manually. Web analytics play a crucial role in shaping the marketing strategy of many businesses. Dashboards also facilitate for better tracking of sales and financial reporting as the data is more precise and in one area. Lastly, dashboards offer for better customer service through monitoring because they keep both the managers and the clients updated on the project progress through automated emails and notifications. == Align strategies and organizational goals == Gain total visibility of all systems instantly Quick identification of data outliers and correlations Consolidated reporting into one location Available on mobile devices to quickly access metrics == Classification == Dashboards can be broken down according to role and are either strategic, analytical, operational, or informational. Dashboards are the 3rd step on the information ladder, demonstrating the conversion of data to increasingly valuable insights. Strategic dashboards support managers at any level in an organization and provide the quick overview that decision-makers need to monitor the health and opportunities of the business. Dashboards of this type focus on high-level measures of performance and forecasts. Strategic dashboards benefit from static snapshots of data (daily, weekly, monthly, and quarterly) that are not constantly changing from one moment to the next. Dashboards for analytical purposes often include more context, comparisons, and history, along with subtler performance evaluators. In addition, analytical dashboards typically support interactions with the data, such as drilling down into the underlying details. Dashboards for monitoring operations are often designed differently from those that support strategic decision making or data analysis and often require monitoring of activities and events that are constantly changing and might require attention and response at a moment's notice. == Types of dashboards == Digital dashboards may be laid out to track the flows inherent in the business processes that they monitor. Graphically, users may see the high-level processes and then drill down into low-level data. This level of detail is often buried deep within the corporate enterprise and otherwise unavailable to the senior executives. Three main types of digital dashboards dominate the market today: desktop software applications, web-browser-based applications, and desktop applications are also known as desktop widgets. The last are driven by a widget engine. Both Desktop and Browser-based providers enable the distribution of dashboards via a web browser. An example of the latter is web-based-browser Asana, which helps teams orchestrate their work, from daily tasks to strategic cross-functional initiatives. With it, teams can manage everything from company objectives to digital transformation to product launches and marketing campaigns. Specialized dashboards may track all corporate functions. Examples include human resources, recruiting, sales, operations, security, information technology, project management, customer relationship management, digital marketing and many more departmental dashboards. For a smaller organization like a startup a compact startup scorecard dashboard tracks important activities across lot of domains ranging from social media to sales. Digital dashboard projects involve business units as the driver and the information technology department as the enabler. Therefore, the success of dashboard projects depends on the relevancy/importance of information provided within the dashboard. This includes the metrics chosen to monitor and the timeliness of the data forming those metrics; data must be up to date and accurate. Key performance indicators, balanced scorecards, and sales performance figures are some of the content appropriate on business dashboards. === Performance Dashboards === Dashboards involve the combination of visual and functional features. This combination of features helps improve cognition and interpretation. A performance dashboard sits at the intersection of two powerful disciplines: business intelligence and performance management. Therefore, there are different users who could use these dashboards for different reasons. For example, a level of workers could look at monitoring inventory while those in more managerial roles can look at lagging measure. Then executives could utilize the dashboard to evaluate strategic performance against objectives. == Dashboards and scorecards == Balanced scorecards and dashboards have been linked together as if they were interchangeable. However, although both visually display critical information, the difference is in the format: Scorecards can open the quality of an operation while dashboards provide calculated direction. A balanced scorecard has what they called a "prescriptive" format. It should always contain these components: Perspectives – group Objectives – verb-noun phrases pulled from a strategy plan Measures – also called metric or key performance indicators (KPIs) Spotlight indicators – red, yellow, or green symbols that provide an at-a-glance view of a measure's performance. Each of these sections ensures that a Balanced Scorecard is essentially connected to the businesses critical strategic needs. The design of a dashboard is more loosely defined. Dashboards are usually a series of graphics, charts, gauges and other visual indicators that can be monitored and interpreted. Even when there is a strategic link, on a dashboard, it may not be noticed as such since objectives are not normally pre