An AI notetaker is a tool using artificial intelligence to take notes during meetings. They are created by tech companies such as Microsoft and Google; by AI transcription services such Otter.ai, and by smaller firms such as Cluely and Krisp. Some business executives send AI notetakers to attend meetings not only to take notes, but also to answer questions on their behalf. The use of AI notetakers raises ethical questions, including recording meetings without the consent of all participants and the possibility that the notetaker will hallucinate and misrepresent what was said during meetings. There are also concerns when it comes to the privacy and security of meeting data and the sensitive information that lives inside meetings. Further controversies have developed from the use of AI notetakers such as Cluely to cheat in technical job interviews. == Technology == Large technology companies have integrated transcription capabilities into broader productivity and accessibility tools, including real-time captioning, dictation, and meeting documentation features embedded in operating systems and office platforms. Standalone transcription platforms, such as Transkriptor, focus specifically on automated transcription workflows and apply AI-based speech recognition to convert audio and video recordings into text. The software supports transcription in multiple languages and processes recordings uploaded via a web interface as well as through mobile and browser extensions. Tools of this type typically provide editable, time-aligned transcripts and export options for text and subtitle formats, cloud-based processing, multilingual support, and automation in transcription technology.
TAChart
TAChart is a component for the Lazarus IDE that provides charting services. Similar to Tchart and Teechart for Delphi it supports a collection of different chart types including bar charts, pie charts, line charts and point series. Apart from a screen canvas, output is possible in form of SVG, OpenGL, printer, WMF, and other formats. TAChart is bundled with the Lazarus Component Library. Although not intended to be a TChart clone, why its usage differs in certain points, its basic functionality is very similar and some source code written for TeeChart may be reused. == History == The first version of TAChart was developed by Philippe Martinole for the TeleAuto project, a program for automation of astronomic observations. Later functionality was introduced by Luis Rodrigues while porting the Epanet application from Delphi to Lazarus. In the ensuing years the code has extensively rewritten, expanded and is now maintained by Alexander Klenin. == Data sources == TAChart is able to use input from various sources. Examples include lists of real values, user defined buffers in the computer's memory, vectors of random values, fields in databases, calculated values provided by pre-defined functions and results of embedded code written in Pascal Script
Attention inequality
Attention inequality is the inequality of distribution of attention across users on social networks, people in general, and for scientific papers. Yun Family Foundation introduced "Attention Inequality Coefficient" as a measure of inequality in attention and arguments it by the close interconnection with wealth inequality. == Relationship to economic inequality == Attention inequality is related to economic inequality since attention is an economically scarce good. The same measures and concepts as in classical economy can be applied for attention economy. The relationship develops also beyond the conceptual level—considering the AIDA process, attention is the prerequisite for real monetary income on the Internet. On data of 2018, a significant relationship between likes and comments on Facebook to donations is proven for non-profit organizations. == Attention economy == The attention economy refers to the practice of maximizing the attention users give to a product for advertising-related reasons. Attention economy remains one of the most common forms of advertising, and has been steadily increasing thanks to new technologies such as television, internet and social media. It is one of the most widely-used approaches to economy for its effectiveness for maximising the noticeability of a certain product. == Attention inequality in social media == In social media, attention inequality refers to the unequal distribution of users' attention on social media platforms. This means that instead of an equal distribution of attention, fewer sources receive a disproportionate share of attention, leaving many unnoticed. This phenomenon is possibly the result of social media algorithms, which are commonly designed to drive maximum engagement. This phenomenon is a large factor in the polarization and creation of echo-chambers. Social media algorithms tend to note content that is already performing well and display it to more users, while content that is equally engaging or well-made is not recommended to users. Posts that trigger strong emotions usually out-perform more "uncontroversial" content. When many users interact with the post, it signals the algorithm that the specific post drives engagement. The algorithm then tends to recommend that type of content to an exponential number of people, potentially outperforming "un-emotional" content. These factors, when combined, tend to create an unequal social media environment. == Attention inequality in science == According to a recent 2025 study about research inequality among scientists published in Information Processing and Management, scientific discourse is restricted to a small group of connected scientists, and is frequently not an accurate representation of the whole scientific community. Using citation-network analysis in the fields of nanoscience and chemical physics, the study claims that a group of connected scientists has a significant notability in the scientific community. The calculated connection strength between these scientists is estimated to be about 4.5, the study also says that these authors cite each other four times more often than would be predicted in a random network, whereas ordinary scientists that exist outside of this group only reach an estimated connection strength of 0.9. The study findings suggest that that scientific attention is not distributed by merit, but rather by the connectedness of the scientists involved in the research. == Extent == As data of 2008 shows, 50% of the attention is concentrated on approximately 0.2% of all hostnames, and 80% on 5% of hostnames. The Gini coefficient of attention distribution lay in 2008 at over 0.921 for such commercial domains names as ac.jp and at 0.985 for .org-domains. The Gini coefficient was measured on Twitter in 2016 for the number of followers as 0.9412, for the number of mentions as 0.9133, and for the number of retweets as 0.9034. For comparison, the world's income Gini coefficient was 0.68 in 2005 and 0.904 in 2018. More than 96% of all followers, 93% of the retweets, and 93% of all mentions are owned by 20% of Twitter. == Causes == At least for scientific papers, today's consensus states that inequality is unexplainable by variations of quality and individual talent. The Matthew effect plays a significant role in the emergence of attention inequality—those who already enjoy large amounts of attention get even more attention, and those who do not lose even more. Ranking algorithms based on relevance to the user have been found to alleviate the inequality of the number of posts across topics.
Harmonic
In physics, acoustics, and telecommunications, a harmonic is a sinusoidal wave with a frequency that is a positive integer multiple of the fundamental frequency of a periodic signal. The fundamental frequency is also called the 1st harmonic; the other harmonics are known as higher harmonics. As all harmonics are periodic at the fundamental frequency, the sum of harmonics is also periodic at that frequency. The set of harmonics forms a harmonic series. The term is employed in various disciplines, including music, physics, acoustics, electronic power transmission, radio technology, and other fields. For example, if the fundamental frequency is 50 Hz, a common AC power supply frequency, the frequencies of the first three higher harmonics are 100 Hz (2nd harmonic), 150 Hz (3rd harmonic), 200 Hz (4th harmonic) and any addition of waves with these frequencies is periodic at 50 Hz. An n {\displaystyle \ n} th characteristic mode, for n > 1 , {\displaystyle \ n>1\ ,} will have nodes that are not vibrating. For example, the 3rd characteristic mode will have nodes at 1 3 L {\displaystyle \ {\tfrac {1}{3}}\ L\ } and 2 3 L , {\displaystyle \ {\tfrac {2}{3}}\ L\ ,} where L {\displaystyle \ L\ } is the length of the string. In fact, each n {\displaystyle \ n} th characteristic mode, for n {\displaystyle \ n\ } not a multiple of 3, will not have nodes at these points. These other characteristic modes will be vibrating at the positions 1 3 L {\displaystyle \ {\tfrac {1}{3}}\ L\ } and 2 3 L . {\displaystyle \ {\tfrac {2}{3}}\ L~.} If the player gently touches one of these positions, then these other characteristic modes will be suppressed. The tonal harmonics from these other characteristic modes will then also be suppressed. Consequently, the tonal harmonics from the n {\displaystyle \ n} th characteristic characteristic modes, where n {\displaystyle \ n\ } is a multiple of 3, will be made relatively more prominent. In music, harmonics are used on string instruments and wind instruments as a way of producing sound on the instrument, particularly to play higher notes and, with strings, obtain notes that have a unique sound quality or "tone colour". On strings, bowed harmonics have a "glassy", pure tone. On stringed instruments, harmonics are played by touching (but not fully pressing down the string) at an exact point on the string while sounding the string (plucking, bowing, etc.); this allows the harmonic to sound, a pitch which is always higher than the fundamental frequency of the string. == Terminology == Harmonics may be called "overtones", "partials", or "upper partials", and in some music contexts, the terms "harmonic", "overtone" and "partial" are used fairly interchangeably. But more precisely, the term "harmonic" includes all pitches in a harmonic series (including the fundamental frequency) while the term "overtone" only includes pitches above the fundamental. == Characteristics == A whizzing, whistling tonal character, distinguishes all the harmonics both natural and artificial from the firmly stopped intervals; therefore their application in connection with the latter must always be carefully considered. Most acoustic instruments emit complex tones containing many individual partials (component simple tones or sinusoidal waves), but the untrained human ear typically does not perceive those partials as separate phenomena. Rather, a musical note is perceived as one sound, the quality or timbre of that sound being a result of the relative strengths of the individual partials. Many acoustic oscillators, such as the human voice or a bowed violin string, produce complex tones that are more or less periodic, and thus are composed of partials that are nearly matched to the integer multiples of fundamental frequency and therefore resemble the ideal harmonics and are called "harmonic partials" or simply "harmonics" for convenience (although it's not strictly accurate to call a partial a harmonic, the first being actual and the second being theoretical). Oscillators that produce harmonic partials behave somewhat like one-dimensional resonators, and are often long and thin, such as a guitar string or a column of air open at both ends (as with the metallic modern orchestral transverse flute). Wind instruments whose air column is open at only one end, such as trumpets and clarinets, also produce partials resembling harmonics. However they only produce partials matching the odd harmonics—at least in theory. In practical use, no real acoustic instrument behaves as perfectly as the simplified physical models predict; for example, instruments made of non-linearly elastic wood, instead of metal, or strung with gut instead of brass or steel strings, tend to have not-quite-integer partials. Partials whose frequencies are not integer multiples of the fundamental are referred to as inharmonic partials. Some acoustic instruments emit a mix of harmonic and inharmonic partials but still produce an effect on the ear of having a definite fundamental pitch, such as pianos, strings plucked pizzicato, vibraphones, marimbas, and certain pure-sounding bells or chimes. Antique singing bowls are known for producing multiple harmonic partials or multiphonics. Other oscillators, such as cymbals, drum heads, and most percussion instruments, naturally produce an abundance of inharmonic partials and do not imply any particular pitch, and therefore cannot be used melodically or harmonically in the same way other instruments can. Building on of Sethares (2004), dynamic tonality introduces the notion of pseudo-harmonic partials, in which the frequency of each partial is aligned to match the pitch of a corresponding note in a pseudo-just tuning, thereby maximizing the consonance of that pseudo-harmonic timbre with notes of that pseudo-just tuning. == Partials, overtones, and harmonics == An overtone is any partial higher than the lowest partial in a compound tone. The relative strengths and frequency relationships of the component partials determine the timbre of an instrument. The similarity between the terms overtone and partial sometimes leads to their being loosely used interchangeably in a musical context, but they are counted differently, leading to some possible confusion. In the special case of instrumental timbres whose component partials closely match a harmonic series (such as with most strings and winds) rather than being inharmonic partials (such as with most pitched percussion instruments), it is also convenient to call the component partials "harmonics", but not strictly correct, because harmonics are numbered the same even when missing, while partials and overtones are only counted when present. This chart demonstrates how the three types of names (partial, overtone, and harmonic) are counted (assuming that the harmonics are present): In many musical instruments, it is possible to play the upper harmonics without the fundamental note being present. In a simple case (e.g., recorder) this has the effect of making the note go up in pitch by an octave, but in more complex cases many other pitch variations are obtained. In some cases it also changes the timbre of the note. This is part of the normal method of obtaining higher notes in wind instruments, where it is called overblowing. The extended technique of playing multiphonics also produces harmonics. On string instruments it is possible to produce very pure sounding notes, called harmonics or flageolets by string players, which have an eerie quality, as well as being high in pitch. Harmonics may be used to check at a unison the tuning of strings that are not tuned to the unison. For example, lightly fingering the node found halfway down the highest string of a cello produces the same pitch as lightly fingering the node 1 / 3 of the way down the second highest string. For the human voice see Overtone singing, which uses harmonics. While it is true that electronically produced periodic tones (e.g. square waves or other non-sinusoidal waves) have "harmonics" that are whole number multiples of the fundamental frequency, practical instruments do not all have this characteristic. For example, higher "harmonics" of piano notes are not true harmonics but are "overtones" and can be very sharp, i.e. a higher frequency than given by a pure harmonic series. This is especially true of instruments other than strings, brass, or woodwinds. Examples of these "other" instruments are xylophones, drums, bells, chimes, etc.; not all of their overtone frequencies make a simple whole number ratio with the fundamental frequency. (The fundamental frequency is the reciprocal of the longest time period of the collection of vibrations in some single periodic phenomenon.) == On stringed instruments == Harmonics may be singly produced [on stringed instruments] (1) by varying the point of contact with the bow, or (2) by slightly pressing the string at the nodes, or divisions of its aliquot parts ( 1 2 {\displaystyle {\tfrac {1}{2}}} , 1
Atomtronics
Atomtronics is an emerging field concerning the quantum technology of matter-wave circuits which coherently guide propagating ultra-cold atoms. The systems typically include components analogous to those found in electronics, quantum electronics or optical systems, such as beam splitters, transistors, and atomic counterparts of superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUIDs). Applications range from studies of fundamental physics to the development of practical devices such as quantum superfluids for the computation of large models for artificial general intelligence. == Etymology == Atomtronics is a portmanteau of "atom" and "electronics", in reference to the creation of atomic analogues of electronic components, such as transistors and diodes, and also electronic materials such as semiconductors. The field itself has considerable overlap with atom optics and quantum simulation, and is not strictly limited to the development of electronic-like components. However, this field develops into the research of ultra-cold atoms for the applied research implications of computations in quantum science. == Methodology == Three major elements are required for an atomtronic circuit. The first is a Bose-Einstein condensate, which is needed for its coherent and superfluid properties, although an ultracold Fermi gas may also be used for certain applications. The second is a tailored trapping potential, which can be generated optically, magnetically, or using a combination of both. The final element is a method to induce the movement of atoms within the potential, which can be achieved in several ways, for various research advancements around fields not limited to distributed computing, supercomputing, and quantum computing. For example, a transistor-like atomtronic circuit may be realized by a ring-shaped trap divided into two by two moveable weak barriers, with the two separate parts of the ring acting as the drain and the source and the barriers acting as the gate. As the barriers move, atoms flow from the source to the drain. It is now possible to coherently guide matterwaves over distances of up to 40 cm in ring-shaped atomtronic matterwave guide measurement. == Applications == The field of atomtronics is still very nascent and any schemes realized thus far are proof-of-concept. Applications include: gravimetry rotational sensing via the Sagnac effect quantum computing Obstacles to the development of practical sensing devices are largely due to the technical challenges of creating Bose-Einstein condensates. They require bulky lab-based setups not easily suitable for transportation. However, creating portable experimental setups is an active area of research.
Adversarial stylometry
Adversarial stylometry is the practice of altering writing style to reduce the potential for stylometry to discover the author's identity or their characteristics. This task is also known as authorship obfuscation or authorship anonymisation. Stylometry poses a significant privacy challenge in its ability to unmask anonymous authors or to link pseudonyms to an author's other identities, which, for example, creates difficulties for whistleblowers, activists, and hoaxers and fraudsters. The privacy risk is expected to grow as machine learning techniques and text corpora develop. All adversarial stylometry shares the core idea of faithfully paraphrasing the source text so that the meaning is unchanged but the stylistic signals are obscured. Such a faithful paraphrase is an adversarial example for a stylometric classifier. Several broad approaches to this exist, with some overlap: imitation, substituting the author's own style for another's; translation, applying machine translation with the hope that this eliminates characteristic style in the source text; and obfuscation, deliberately modifying a text's style to make it not resemble the author's own. Manually obscuring style is possible, but laborious; in some circumstances, it is preferable or necessary. Automated tooling, either semi- or fully-automatic, could assist an author. How best to perform the task and the design of such tools is an open research question. While some approaches have been shown to be able to defeat particular stylometric analyses, particularly those that do not account for the potential of adversariality, establishing safety in the face of unknown analyses is an issue. Ensuring the faithfulness of the paraphrase is a critical challenge for automated tools. It is uncertain if the practice of adversarial stylometry is detectable in itself. Some studies have found that particular methods produced signals in the output text, but a stylometrist who is uncertain of what methods may have been used may not be able to reliably detect them. == History == Rao & Rohatgi (2000), an early work in adversarial stylometry, identified machine translation as a possibility, but noted that the quality of translators available at the time presented severe challenges. Kacmarcik & Gamon (2006) is another early work. Brennan, Afroz & Greenstadt (2012) performed the first evaluation of adversarial stylometric methods on actual texts. Brennan & Greenstadt (2009) introduced the first corpus of adversarially authored texts specifically for evaluating stylometric methods; other corpora include the International Imitation Hemingway Competition, the Faux Faulkner contest, and the hoax blog A Gay Girl in Damascus. == Motivations == Rao & Rohatgi (2000) suggest that short, unattributed documents (i.e., anonymous posts) are not at risk of stylometric identification, but pseudonymous authors who have not practiced adversarial stylometry in producing corpuses of thousands of words may be vulnerable. Narayanan et al. (2012) attempted large-scale deanonymisation of 100,000 blog authors with mixed results: the identifications were significantly better than chance, but only accurately matched the blog and author a fifth of the time; identification improved with the number of posts written by the author in the corpus. Even if an author is not identified, some of their characteristics may still be deduced stylometrically, or stylometry may narrow the anonymity set of potential authors sufficiently for other information to complete the identification. Detecting author characteristics (e.g., gender or age) is often simpler than identifying an author from a large, possibly open, set of candidates. Modern machine learning techniques offer powerful tools for identification; further development of corpora and computational stylometric techniques are likely to raise further privacy issues. Gröndahl & Asokan (2020a) say that the general validity of the hypothesis underlying stylometry—that authors have invariant, content-independent 'style fingerprints'—is uncertain, but "the deanonymisation attack is a real privacy concern". Those interested in practicing adversarial stylometry and stylistic deception include whistleblowers avoiding retribution; journalists and activists; perpetrators of frauds and hoaxes; authors of fake reviews; literary forgers; criminals disguising their identity from investigators; and, generally, anyone with a desire for anonymity or pseudonymity. Authors, or agents acting on behalf of authors, may also attempt to remove stylistic clues to author characteristics (e.g., race or gender) so that knowledge of those characteristics cannot be used for discrimination (e.g., through algorithmic bias). Another possible use for adversarial stylometry is in disguising automatically generated text as human-authored. == Methods == With imitation, the author attempts to mislead stylometry by matching their style to another author's. An incomplete imitation, where some of the true author's unique characteristics appear alongside the imitated author's, can be a detectable signal for the use of adversarial stylometry. Imitation can be performed automatically with style transfer systems, though this typically requires a large corpus in the target style for the system to learn from. Another approach is translation, which employs machine translation of a source text to eliminate characteristic style, often through multiple translators in sequence to produce a round-trip translation. Such chained translation can lead to texts being significantly altered, even to the point of incomprehensibility; improved translation tools reduce this risk. More simply-structured texts can be easier to machine translate without losing the original meaning. Machine translation blurs into direct stylistic imitation or obfuscation achieved through automated style transfer, which can be viewed as a "translation" with the same language as input and output. With low-quality translation tools, an author can be required to manually correct major translation errors while avoiding the hazard of re-introducing stylistic characteristics. Wang, Juola & Riddell (2022) found that gross errors introduced by Google Translate were rare, but more common with several intermediate translations—however, occasional simple or short sentences and misspellings in the source text appeared verbatim in the output, potentially providing an identifying signal. Chain translation can leave characteristic traces of its application in a document, which may allow reconstruction of the intermediate languages used and the number of translation steps performed. Obfuscation involves deliberately changing the style of a text to reduce its similarity to other texts by some metric; this may be performed at the time of writing by conscious modification, or as part of a revision process with feedback from the metric being targeted as an input to decide when the text has been sufficiently obfuscated. In contrast to translation, complex texts can offer more opportunities for effective obfuscation without altering meaning, and likewise genres with more permissible variation allow more obfuscation. However, longer texts are harder to thoroughly obfuscate. Obfuscation can blend into imitation if the author develops a novel target style, distinct from their original style. With respect to masking author characteristics, obfuscation may aim to achieve a union (adding signals for imitated characteristics) or an intersection (removing signals and normalising) of other authors' styles. Avoiding the author's own idiosyncrasies and producing a "normalised" text is a critical obfuscatory step: an author may have a unique tendency to misspell certain words, use particular variants, or to format a document in a characteristic way. Stylometric signals vary in how simply they can be adversarially masked; an author may easily change their vocabulary by conscious choice, but altering the pattern of grammar or the letter frequency in their text may be harder to achieve, though Juola & Vescovi (2011) report that imitation typically succeeds at masking more characteristics than obfuscation. Automated obfuscation may require large amounts of training data written by the author. Concerning automated implementations of adversarial stylometry, two possible implementations are rule-based systems for paraphrasing; and encoder–decoder architectures, where the text passes through an intermediate format that is (intended to be) style-neutral. Another division in automated methods is whether there is feedback from an identification system or not. With such feedback, finding paraphrases for author masking has been characterised as a heuristic search problem, exploring textual variants until the result is stylistically sufficiently far (in the case of obfuscation) or near (in the case of imitation), which then constitutes an adversarial example for that identification system. == Evaluation == How
Gnowit
Gnowit (pronounced "know it") is a Canadian software company that provides automated, near-real-time monitoring of legislative, regulatory, and political activity across Canada. Its platform aggregates and analyzes information from government publications, parliamentary debates, committee, and proceedings to provide searchable alerts and reports for organizations monitoring public policy and regulatory developments. The system uses natural-language processing and machine learning techniques to organize and filter large volumes of public information.; the company reports that new publication documents are captured and millions of items are added to its repository daily. == History, Founders and Leadership == Gnowit was co-founded in Ottawa in 2010 by Shahzad Khan and Mohammad Al-Azzouni; Khan serves as chief executive officer. Khan holds a PhD in Computer Science from the University of Cambridge, has more than two decades of experience in AI/ML and computational linguistics, and has authored or co-authored 37 peer-reviewed publications and five patents. Traditionally, companies performed this analysis manually; Gnowit has delivered efficiencies achieved through AI innovations. The company has participated in several Canadian startup and accelerator programs, including Carleton University's Lead To Win initiative, the University of Ottawa's Startup Garage, the Invest Ottawa incubator, and the League of Innovators' BOOST program. === Kubernetes validation (2019–2020) === As part of a Canada's Centre of Excellence in Next Generation Networks (CENGN) project, Gnowit validated a containerized version of its web-intelligence software on Kubernetes. Between 2019 and 2020, Gnowit participated in a project with Canada’s Centre of Excellence in Next Generation Networks (CENGN) to test and scale its platform using containerized infrastructure based on Kubernetes. The initiative focused on improving scalability and supporting the company’s transition from a monolithic software architecture to a cloud-native deployment model. == Products and services == Gnowit markets several modules for public-affairs, compliance, and market-intelligence teams. Legislative & Regulatory Monitoring (vAnalyst). vAnalyst is a monitoring platform that tracks legislative and regulatory activity across Canadian federal, provincial, and territorial jurisdictions. The system aggregates parliamentary debates, bills, committee proceedings, and regulatory publications and provides searchable alerts and reporting tools. The product monitors more than two million web sources to surface relevant items quickly. Parliamentary Live (vAnalyst). Monitors live video feeds from parliamentary sessions and committees with same-day transcripts, AI-generated summaries, witness summaries, and motion detection; municipal coverage is offered as an option. Gnowit can avail transcripts up to two weeks before official releases. These transcripts enable users to navigate and review lengthy parliamentary sittings and committee discussions through searchable text. Municipal Monitoring (vAnalyst). The platform also tracks council meetings, agendas, bylaws, and other municipal government publications from hundreds of Canadian municipalities. The platform aggregates these sources into a single searchable interface for reviewing local government decisions. Curation Edge (analyst service). Curation Edge is an add-on service in which expert analysts work and collaborate with clients to develop a tailored curation guide and deliver daily newsletters or briefs on legislation and media. These reports provide concise summaries, relevant links, and optional metadata, prioritizing key updates with additional context and analysis. The service is customizable, including branding and formatting for executive audiences, and is intended to reduce information overload, support decision-making, and streamline the synthesis and distribution of information. === Coverage and sources === Gnowit monitors sources span Canadian government materials across federal, provincial, and territorial jurisdictions Hansard transcripts (All Jurisdictions, including committees), order papers, committee transcripts, gazettes, bills, acts and regulations, consultations, regulatory-agency publications, and global news media as well as press releases and council-meeting materials from hundreds of municipalities. == Partnerships and support == Gnowit reports collaborations with Canadian academic and ecosystem partners, including: Algonquin College Carleton University McGill University University of Ottawa Université du Québec en Outaouais (UQO) Queen's University The company also participated in the accelerator program at Invest Ottawa and has received support from Canadian research and innovation programs, including: NRC Industrial Research Assistance Program (NRC-IRAP) Mitacs Ontario Centre of Innovation (OCI) (formerly OCE) Gnowit has also referenced membership in the Southern Ontario Smart Computing Innovation Platform (Government of Canada profile: FedDev Ontario – SOSCIP overview). == Technology == Gnowit develops technology intended to support timely decision-making by delivering updates from monitored web sources as they are published. The platform applies artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) techniques to monitor, capture, clean, analyze, filter, and organize text, and to generate concise briefs. Its technical approach combines Boolean queries, shallow language processing techniques, and machine learning classifiers within a self-service interface. The company has described its longer-term development framework in relation to a belief–desire–intention (BDI) model of intelligent agents on the web. Gnowit and its founder are listed as inventors/assignees on patents concerning multi-document clustering, salient-content extraction, and sentiment analysis methods that are consistent with these features: US 9,600,470 – Method and system relating to re-labelling multi-document clusters (assignee: Whyz Technologies Ltd.). US 9,336,202 – Method and system relating to salient content extraction for information retrieval (assignee: Whyz Technologies Ltd.). CA 2,865,184 C – Method and system relating to re-labelling multi-document clusters. CA 2,865,186 C – Procédé et système concernant l'analyse de sentiment d'un contenu (sentiment analysis; French record). CA 2,865,187 C – Method and system relating to salient content extraction for information retrieval. == Research and community == In January 2025, Gnowit personnel contributed to regulatory NLP by co-authoring a peer-reviewed paper at the 1st Regulatory NLP Workshop (RegNLP 2025), co-located with COLING in Abu Dhabi. Titled Unifying Large Language Models and Knowledge Graphs for Efficient Regulatory Information Retrieval and Answer Generation, the work introduces PolicyInsight, a framework that joins a dynamic policy data model and knowledge graph with LLMs to monitor policy texts, detect changes, and support retrieval and answer generation; the author list includes Shahzad Khan (CEO, Gnowit Inc.). (ACL Anthology, aclweb.org). Similar information-retrieval technologies are widely used for competitive intelligence, policy monitoring, and media analysis. == White paper == Gnowit has published a practical guide, Automated Government Information Monitoring, which outlines how GR and regulatory teams can design a monitoring and briefing workflow and describes Gnowit's automation features and export options (PDF, email, dashboards, CSV/JSON/XML/API).