In theoretical computer science and formal language theory, a tree transducer (TT) is an abstract machine taking as input a tree, and generating output – generally other trees, but models producing words or other structures exist. Roughly speaking, tree transducers extend tree automata in the same way that word transducers extend word automata. Manipulating tree structures instead of words enable TT to model syntax-directed transformations of formal or natural languages. However, TT are not as well-behaved as their word counterparts in terms of algorithmic complexity, closure properties, etcetera. In particular, most of the main classes are not closed under composition. The main classes of tree transducers are: == Top-Down Tree Transducers (TOP) == A TOP T is a tuple (Q, Σ, Γ, I, δ) such that: Q is a finite set, the set of states; Σ is a finite ranked alphabet, called the input alphabet; Γ is a finite ranked alphabet, called the output alphabet; I is a subset of Q, the set of initial states; and δ is a set of rules of the form q ( f ( x 1 , … , x n ) ) → u {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}))\to u} , where f is a symbol of Σ, n is the arity of f, q is a state, and u is a tree on Γ and Q × 1.. n {\displaystyle Q\times 1..n} , such pairs being nullary. === Examples of rules and intuitions on semantics === For instance, q ( f ( x 1 , … , x 3 ) ) → g ( a , q ′ ( x 1 ) , h ( q ″ ( x 3 ) ) ) {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},\dots ,x_{3}))\to g(a,q'(x_{1}),h(q''(x_{3})))} is a rule – one customarily writes q ( x i ) {\displaystyle q(x_{i})} instead of the pair ( q , x i ) {\displaystyle (q,x_{i})} – and its intuitive semantics is that, under the action of q, a tree with f at the root and three children is transformed into g ( a , q ′ ( x 1 ) , h ( q ″ ( x 3 ) ) ) {\displaystyle g(a,q'(x_{1}),h(q''(x_{3})))} where, recursively, q ′ ( x 1 ) {\displaystyle q'(x_{1})} and q ″ ( x 3 ) {\displaystyle q''(x_{3})} are replaced, respectively, with the application of q ′ {\displaystyle q'} on the first child and with the application of q ″ {\displaystyle q''} on the third. === Semantics as term rewriting === The semantics of each state of the transducer T, and of T itself, is a binary relation between input trees (on Σ) and output trees (on Γ). A way of defining the semantics formally is to see δ {\displaystyle \delta } as a term rewriting system, provided that in the right-hand sides the calls are written in the form q ( x i ) {\displaystyle q(x_{i})} , where states q are unary symbols. Then the semantics [ [ q ] ] {\displaystyle [\![q]\!]} of a state q is given by [ [ q ] ] = { u ↦ v ∣ u is a tree on Σ , v is a tree on Γ , and q ( u ) → δ ∗ v } . {\displaystyle [\![q]\!]=\{u\mapsto v\mid u{\text{ is a tree on }}\Sigma ,\ v{\text{ is a tree on }}\Gamma {\text{, and }}q(u)\to _{\delta }^{}v\}.} The semantics of T is then defined as the union of the semantics of its initial states: [ [ T ] ] = ⋃ q ∈ I [ [ q ] ] . {\displaystyle [\![T]\!]=\bigcup _{q\in I}[\![q]\!].} === Determinism and domain === As with tree automata, a TOP is said to be deterministic (abbreviated DTOP) if no two rules of δ share the same left-hand side, and there is at most one initial state. In that case, the semantics of the DTOP is a partial function from input trees (on Σ) to output trees (on Γ), as are the semantics of each of the DTOP's states. The domain of a transducer is the domain of its semantics. Likewise, the image of a transducer is the image of its semantics. === Properties of DTOP === DTOP are not closed under union: this is already the case for deterministic word transducers. The domain of a DTOP is a regular tree language. Furthermore, the domain is recognisable by a deterministic top-down tree automaton (DTTA) of size at most exponential in that of the initial DTOP. That the domain is DTTA-recognizable is not surprising, considering that the left-hand sides of DTOP rules are the same as for DTTA. As for the reason for the exponential explosion in the worst case (that does not exist in the word case), consider the rule q ( f ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) → g ( p 1 ( x 1 ) , p 2 ( x 1 ) , p 3 ( x 2 ) ) {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},x_{2}))\to g(p_{1}(x_{1}),p_{2}(x_{1}),p_{3}(x_{2}))} . In order for the computation to succeed, it must succeed for both children. That means that the right child must be in the domain of p 3 {\displaystyle p_{3}} . As for the left child, it must be in the domain of both p 1 {\displaystyle p_{1}} and p 2 {\displaystyle p_{2}} . Generally, since subtrees can be copied, a single subtree can be evaluated by multiple states during a run, despite the determinism, and unlike DTTA. Thus the construction of the DTTA recognising the domain of a DTOP must account for sets of states and compute the intersections of their domains, hence the exponential. In the special case of linear DTOP, that is to say DTOP where each x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} appears at most once in the right-hand side of each rule, the construction is linear in time and space. The image of a DTOP is not a regular tree language. Consider the transducer coding the transformation f ( x ) → g ( x , x ) {\displaystyle f(x)\to g(x,x)} ; that is, duplicate the child of the input. This is easily done by a rule q ( f ( x 1 ) ) → g ( p ( x 1 ) , p ( x 1 ) ) {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1}))\to g(p(x_{1}),p(x_{1}))} , where p encodes the identity. Then, absent any restrictions on the first child of the input, the image is a classical non-regular tree language. However, the domain of a DTOP cannot be restricted to a regular tree language. That is to say, given a DTOP T and a language L, one cannot in general build a DTOP T ′ {\displaystyle T'} such that the semantics of T ′ {\displaystyle T'} is that of T, restricted to L. This property is linked to the reason deterministic top-down tree automata are less expressive than bottom-up automata: once you go down a given path, information from other paths is inaccessible. Consider the transducer coding the transformation f ( x , y ) → y {\displaystyle f(x,y)\to y} ; that is, output the right child of the input. This is easily done by a rule q ( f ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) → p ( x 2 ) {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},x_{2}))\to p(x_{2})} , where p encodes the identity. Now let's say we want to restrict this transducer to the finite (and thus, in particular, regular) domain { f ( c , a ) , f ( c , b ) } {\displaystyle \{f(c,a),\ f(c,b)\}} . We must use the rules q ( f ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) → p ( x 2 ) , p ( a ) → a , p ( b ) → b {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},x_{2}))\to p(x_{2}),\ p(a)\to a,\ p(b)\to b} . But in the first rule, x 1 {\displaystyle x_{1}} does not appear at all, since nothing is produced from the left child. Thus, it is not possible to test that the left child is c. In contrast, since we produce from the right child, we can test that it is a or b. In general, the criterion is that DTOP cannot test properties of subtrees from which they do not produce output. DTOP are not closed under composition. However this problem can be solved by the addition of a lookahead: a tree automaton, coupled to the transducer, that can perform tests on the domain which the transducer is incapable of. This follows from the point about domain restriction: composing the DTOP encoding identity on { f ( c , a ) , f ( c , b ) } {\displaystyle \{f(c,a),\ f(c,b)\}} with the one encoding f ( x , y ) → y {\displaystyle f(x,y)\to y} must yield a transducer with the semantics { f ( c , a ) ↦ a , f ( c , b ) ↦ b } {\displaystyle \{f(c,a)\mapsto a,\ f(c,b)\mapsto b\}} , which we know is not expressible by a DTOP. The typechecking problem—testing whether the image of a regular tree language is included in another regular tree language—is decidable. The equivalence problem—testing whether two DTOP define the same functions—is decidable. == Bottom-Up Tree Transducers (BOT) == As in the simpler case of tree automata, bottom-up tree transducers are defined similarly to their top-down counterparts, but proceed from the leaves of the tree to the root, instead of from the root to the leaves. Thus the main difference is in the form of the rules, which are of the form f ( q 1 ( x 1 ) , … , q n ( x n ) ) → q ( u ) {\displaystyle f(q_{1}(x_{1}),\dots ,q_{n}(x_{n}))\to q(u)} .
Drop shadow
In graphic design and computer graphics, a drop shadow is a visual effect consisting of a drawing element which looks like the shadow of an object, giving the impression that the object is raised above the objects behind it. The drop shadow is often used for elements of a graphical user interface such as windows or menus, and for simple text. The text label for icons on desktops in many desktop environments has a drop shadow, as this effect effectively distinguishes the text from any colored background it may be in front of. A simple way of drawing a drop shadow of a rectangular object is to draw a gray or black area underneath and offset from the object. In general, a drop shadow is a copy in black or gray of the object, drawn in a slightly different position. Realism may be increased by: Darkening the colors of the pixels where the shadow casts instead of making them gray. This can be done with alpha blending the shadow with the area it is cast on. Softening the edges of the shadow. This can be done by adding Gaussian blur to the shadow's alpha channel before blending. Inset drop shadows are a type which draws the shadows inside the element. This allows the interface element to appear as if it is sunken into the interface. == Photo editing == In photo editing or photography post-production, a drop shadow may be added right beneath a model or product in the image. It is used to create contrast between the background and the subject. To add a drop shadow, retouchers use graphic editing tools like Adobe Photoshop. Drop shadows are often used as a visual effect in e-commerce. This is done to improve the presentation of product images and create depth in the image. == Use == Generally, window managers which are capable of compositing allow drop shadow effects, whereas incapable window managers do not. In some operating systems like macOS, drop shadow is used to differentiate between active and inactive windows. Websites are able to use drop shadow effects through the CSS properties box-shadow, text-shadow, and drop-shadow() filter function in filter. The first two are used for elements and text respectively, while the filter applies to the element's content, letting it support oddly shaped elements or transparent images.
AI Paraphrasing Tools: Free vs Paid (2026)
In search of the best AI paraphrasing tool? An AI paraphrasing tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI paraphrasing tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.
Yun Sing Koh
Yun Sing Koh (born 1978) is a New Zealand computer science academic, and is a full professor at the University of Auckland, specialising in machine learning and artificial intelligence. She is a co-director of the Centre of Machine Learning for Social Good, and the Advanced Machine Learning and Data Analytics Research (MARS) Lab at Auckland. == Academic career == Koh earned a Bachelor of Science with Honours and a Master of Software Engineering at the University of Malaya. She then completed a PhD titled Generating sporadic association rules at the University of Otago in 2007. Koh joined the faculty of the University of Auckland in 2010, rising to full professor. As of 2024, she is director of the Centre of Machine Learning for Social Good at Auckland, alongside Gillian Dobbie and Daniel Wilson, and is director of the Master of AI course at the university. Koh also co-directs the Advanced Machine Learning and Data Analytics Research (MARS) Lab. Koh's research covers machine learning and artificial intelligence. She is especially interested in designing machine learning algorithms for data streams, and has led research using AI systems to identify individual stoats for pest population research. In 2018 she was awarded a Marsden grant for a research project "An Adaptive Predictive System for Life-long Learning on Data Streams", and has been part of three MBIE projects. In 2025 the stoat identification project Koh co-leads with Daniel Wilson was awarded $1 million per annum by the MBIE Smart Ideas fund. Koh was a finalist in the AI in Climate section of the Women in AI Australia and New Zealand Awards in 2022. She was a 2023 Fellow at the United States National Science Foundation-funded Convergence Research (CORE) Institute. Koh has chaired a number of sessions at international conferences on data mining. In March 2026 it was announced that Koh would be a member of the New Zealand Human Rights Commission's Expert Advisory Group on Artificial Intelligence, Emerging Digital Technologies and Human Rights. == Selected works == Philippe Fournier-Viger; Jerry Chun-Wei Lin; Rage Uday Kiran; Yun Sing Koh; Rincy Thomas (2017). "A Survey of Sequential Pattern Mining". Data Science and Pattern Recognition. 1 (1): 54–77. Wikidata Q138719481. Yun Sing Koh; Nathan Rountree; Richard O’Keefe (1 April 2006). "Finding Non-Coincidental Sporadic Rules Using Apriori-Inverse". International Journal of Data Warehousing and Mining (in Ndonga). 2 (2): 38–54. doi:10.4018/JDWM.2006040102. ISSN 1548-3924. Wikidata Q125185222. Russel Pears; Sripirakas Sakthithasan; Yun Sing Koh (11 January 2014). "Detecting concept change in dynamic data streams". Machine Learning. 97 (3): 259–293. doi:10.1007/S10994-013-5433-9. ISSN 1573-0565. Zbl 1319.68186. Wikidata Q125185156. David Tse Jung Huang; Yun Sing Koh; Gillian Dobbie; Russel Pears (December 2014), Detecting Volatility Shift in Data Streams, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, doi:10.1109/ICDM.2014.50, Wikidata Q125185151 Sidney Tsang; Yun Sing Koh; Gillian Dobbie (2011). "RP-Tree: Rare Pattern Tree Mining". Lecture Notes in Computer Science: 277–288. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-23544-3_21. ISSN 0302-9743. Wikidata Q125185206. Yun Sing Koh; Sri Devi Ravana (24 May 2016). "Unsupervised Rare Pattern Mining". ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data. 10 (4): 1–29. doi:10.1145/2898359. ISSN 1556-4681. Wikidata Q125185136. Jack Julian; Yun Sing Koh; Albert Bifet (1 October 2025), Building adaptive knowledge bases for evolving continual learning models (PDF), vol. 1, doi:10.1038/S44387-025-00028-4, Wikidata Q138719496
Is an AI Headshot Generator Worth It in 2026?
In search of the best AI headshot generator? An AI headshot generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI headshot generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.
Concurrent MetateM
Concurrent MetateM is a multi-agent language in which each agent is programmed using a set of (augmented) temporal logic specifications of the behaviour it should exhibit. These specifications are executed directly to generate the behaviour of the agent. As a result, there is no risk of invalidating the logic as with systems where logical specification must first be translated to a lower-level implementation. The root of the MetateM concept is Gabbay's separation theorem; any arbitrary temporal logic formula can be rewritten in a logically equivalent past → future form. Execution proceeds by a process of continually matching rules against a history, and firing those rules when antecedents are satisfied. Any instantiated future-time consequents become commitments which must subsequently be satisfied, iteratively generating a model for the formula made up of the program rules. == Temporal Connectives == The Temporal Connectives of Concurrent MetateM can divided into two categories, as follows: Strict past time connectives: '●' (weak last), '◎' (strong last), '◆' (was), '■' (heretofore), 'S' (since), and 'Z' (zince, or weak since). Present and future time connectives: '◯' (next), '◇' (sometime), '□' (always), 'U' (until), and 'W' (unless). The connectives {◎,●,◆,■,◯,◇,□} are unary; the remainder are binary. === Strict past time connectives === ==== Weak last ==== ●ρ is satisfied now if ρ was true in the previous time. If ●ρ is interpreted at the beginning of time, it is satisfied despite there being no actual previous time. Hence "weak" last. ==== Strong last ==== ◎ρ is satisfied now if ρ was true in the previous time. If ◎ρ is interpreted at the beginning of time, it is not satisfied because there is no actual previous time. Hence "strong" last. ==== Was ==== ◆ρ is satisfied now if ρ was true in any previous moment in time. ==== Heretofore ==== ■ρ is satisfied now if ρ was true in every previous moment in time. ==== Since ==== ρSψ is satisfied now if ψ is true at any previous moment and ρ is true at every moment after that moment. ==== Zince, or weak since ==== ρZψ is satisfied now if (ψ is true at any previous moment and ρ is true at every moment after that moment) OR ψ has not happened in the past. === Present and future time connectives === ==== Next ==== ◯ρ is satisfied now if ρ is true in the next moment in time. ==== Sometime ==== ◇ρ is satisfied now if ρ is true now or in any future moment in time. ==== Always ==== □ρ is satisfied now if ρ is true now and in every future moment in time. ==== Until ==== ρUψ is satisfied now if ψ is true at any future moment and ρ is true at every moment prior. ==== Unless ==== ρWψ is satisfied now if (ψ is true at any future moment and ρ is true at every moment prior) OR ψ does not happen in the future.
Best AI Essay Writers in 2026
Comparing the best AI essay writer? An AI essay writer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI essay writer slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.