The factored language model (FLM) is an extension of a conventional language model introduced by Jeff Bilmes and Katrin Kirchoff in 2003. In an FLM, each word is viewed as a vector of k factors: w i = { f i 1 , . . . , f i k } . {\displaystyle w_{i}=\{f_{i}^{1},...,f_{i}^{k}\}.} An FLM provides the probabilistic model P ( f | f 1 , . . . , f N ) {\displaystyle P(f|f_{1},...,f_{N})} where the prediction of a factor f {\displaystyle f} is based on N {\displaystyle N} parents { f 1 , . . . , f N } {\displaystyle \{f_{1},...,f_{N}\}} . For example, if w {\displaystyle w} represents a word token and t {\displaystyle t} represents a Part of speech tag for English, the expression P ( w i | w i − 2 , w i − 1 , t i − 1 ) {\displaystyle P(w_{i}|w_{i-2},w_{i-1},t_{i-1})} gives a model for predicting current word token based on a traditional Ngram model as well as the Part of speech tag of the previous word. A major advantage of factored language models is that they allow users to specify linguistic knowledge such as the relationship between word tokens and Part of speech in English, or morphological information (stems, root, etc.) in Arabic. Like N-gram models, smoothing techniques are necessary in parameter estimation. In particular, generalized back-off is used in training an FLM.
Fuse Mediation Router
Fuse Mediation Router is an open source tool for integrating services using Enterprise Integration Patterns based on Apache Camel for use in enterprise IT organizations. It is certified, productized and fully supported by the people who wrote the code. Fuse Mediation Router uses a standard method of notation to go from diagram to implementation without coding. Fuse Mediation Router is a rule-based routing and process mediation engine that combines the ease of basic POJO development with the clarity of the standard Enterprise Integration Patterns. It can be deployed inside any container or be used stand-alone, and works directly with any kind of transport or messaging model to rapidly integrate existing services and applications. Fuse Mediation Router is now a part of Red Hat JBoss Fuse. == Tooling == FuseSource offers graphical, Eclipse-based tooling for Apache Camel for download.
Stevens Award
The Stevens Award is a software engineering lecture award given by the Reengineering Forum, an industry association. The international Stevens Award was created to recognize outstanding contributions to the literature or practice of methods for software and systems development. The first award was given in 1995. The presentations focus on the current state of software methods and their direction for the future. This award lecture is named in memory of Wayne Stevens (1944-1993), a consultant, author, pioneer, and advocate of the practical application of software methods and tools. The Stevens Award and lecture is managed by the Reengineering Forum. The award was founded by International Workshop on Computer Aided Software Engineering (IWCASE), an international workshop association of users and developers of computer-aided software engineering (CASE) technology, which merged into The Reengineering Forum. Wayne Stevens was a charter member of the IWCASE executive board. == Recipients == 1995: Tony Wasserman 1996: David Harel 1997: Michael Jackson 1998: Thomas McCabe 1999: Tom DeMarco 2000: Gerald Weinberg 2001: Peter Chen 2002: Cordell Green 2003: Manny Lehman 2004: François Bodart 2005: Mary Shaw, Jim Highsmith 2006: Grady Booch 2007: Nicholas Zvegintzov 2008: Harry Sneed 2009: Larry Constantine 2010: Peter Aiken 2011: Jared Spool, Barry Boehm 2012: Philip Newcomb 2013: Jean-Luc Hainaut 2014: François Coallier 2015: Pierre Bourque
Observability (software)
In software engineering, more specifically in distributed computing, observability is the ability to collect data about programs' execution, modules' internal states, and the communication among components. To improve observability, software engineers use a wide range of logging and tracing techniques to gather telemetry information, and tools to analyze and use it. Observability is foundational to site reliability engineering, as it is the first step in triaging a service outage. One of the goals of observability is to minimize the amount of prior knowledge needed to debug an issue. == Etymology, terminology and definition == The term is borrowed from control theory, where the "observability" of a system measures how well its state can be determined from its outputs. Similarly, software observability measures how well a system's state can be understood from the obtained telemetry (metrics, logs, traces, profiling). The definition of observability varies by vendor: Observability is the process of making a system’s internal state more transparent. Systems are made observable by the data they produce, which in turn helps you to determine if your infrastructure or application is healthy and functioning normally. a measure of how well you can understand and explain any state your system can get into, no matter how novel or bizarre [...] without needing to ship new code software tools and practices for aggregating, correlating and analyzing a steady stream of performance data from a distributed application along with the hardware and network it runs onobservability starts by shipping all your raw data to central service before you begin analysisthe ability to measure a system’s current state based on the data it generates, such as logs, metrics, and traces Observability is tooling or a technical solution that allows teams to actively debug their system. Observability is based on exploring properties and patterns not defined in advance. proactively collecting, visualizing, and applying intelligence to all of your metrics, events, logs, and traces—so you can understand the behavior of your complex digital system The term is frequently referred to as its numeronym o11y (where 11 stands for the number of letters between the first letter and the last letter of the word). This is similar to other computer science abbreviations such as i18n and l10n and k8s. === Observability vs. monitoring === Observability and monitoring are sometimes used interchangeably. As tooling, commercial offerings and practices evolved in complexity, "monitoring" was re-branded as observability in order to differentiate new tools from the old. The terms are commonly contrasted in that systems are monitored using predefined sets of telemetry, and monitored systems may be observable. Majors et al. suggest that engineering teams that only have monitoring tools end up relying on expert foreknowledge (seniority), whereas teams that have observability tools rely on exploratory analysis (curiosity). == Telemetry types == Observability relies on three main types of telemetry data: metrics, logs and traces. Those are often referred to as "pillars of observability". === Metrics === A metric is a point in time measurement (scalar) that represents some system state. Examples of common metrics include: number of HTTP requests per second; total number of query failures; database size in bytes; time in seconds since last garbage collection. Monitoring tools are typically configured to emit alerts when certain metric values exceed set thresholds. Thresholds are set based on knowledge about normal operating conditions and experience. Metrics are typically tagged to facilitate grouping and searchability. Application developers choose what kind of metrics to instrument their software with, before it is released. As a result, when a previously unknown issue is encountered, it is impossible to add new metrics without shipping new code. Furthermore, their cardinality can quickly make the storage size of telemetry data prohibitively expensive. Since metrics are cardinality-limited, they are often used to represent aggregate values (for example: average page load time, or 5-second average of the request rate). Without external context, it is impossible to correlate between events (such as user requests) and distinct metric values. === Logs === Logs, or log lines, are generally free-form, unstructured text blobs that are intended to be human readable. Modern logging is structured to enable machine parsability. As with metrics, an application developer must instrument the application upfront and ship new code if different logging information is required. Logs typically include a timestamp and severity level. An event (such as a user request) may be fragmented across multiple log lines and interweave with logs from concurrent events. === Traces === ==== Distributed traces ==== A cloud native application is typically made up of distributed services which together fulfill a single request. A distributed trace is an interrelated series of discrete events (also called spans) that track the progression of a single user request. A trace shows the causal and temporal relationships between the services that interoperate to fulfill a request. Instrumenting an application with traces means sending span information to a tracing backend. The tracing backend correlates the received spans to generate presentable traces. To be able to follow a request as it traverses multiple services, spans are labeled with unique identifiers that enable constructing a parent-child relationship between spans. Span information is typically shared in the HTTP headers of outbound requests. === Continuous profiling === Continuous profiling is another telemetry type used to precisely determine how an application consumes resources. === Instrumentation === To be able to observe an application, telemetry about the application's behavior needs to be collected or exported. Instrumentation means generating telemetry alongside the normal operation of the application. Telemetry is then collected by an independent backend for later analysis. In fast-changing systems, instrumentation itself is often the best possible documentation, since it combines intention (what are the dimensions that an engineer named and decided to collect?) with the real-time, up-to-date information of live status in production. Instrumentation can be automatic, or custom. Automatic instrumentation offers blanket coverage and immediate value; custom instrumentation brings higher value but requires more intimate involvement with the instrumented application. Instrumentation can be native - done in-code (modifying the code of the instrumented application) - or out-of-code (e.g. sidecar, eBPF). Verifying new features in production by shipping them together with custom instrumentation is a practice called "observability-driven development". == "Pillars of observability" == Metrics, logs and traces are most commonly listed as the pillars of observability. Majors et al. suggest that the pillars of observability are high cardinality, high-dimensionality, and explorability, arguing that runbooks and dashboards have little value because "modern systems rarely fail in precisely the same way twice." == Self monitoring == Self monitoring is a practice where observability stacks monitor each other, in order to reduce the risk of inconspicuous outages. Self monitoring may be put in place in addition to high availability and redundancy to further avoid correlated failures.
Digital omnivore
A digital omnivore is a person who uses multiple modalities (devices) to access the Internet and other media content in their daily life. As people increasingly own mobile devices, cross-platform multimedia consumption has continued to shape the digital landscape, both in terms of the type of media content they consume and how they consume it. As of 2021, at least half of all global digital traffic is generated by mobile devices. == Connected devices and digital consumption == A 2015 study of digital media consumption showed that smartphones were primarily used for communication, and tablets were primarily used for entertainment – additionally, both were frequently used in conjuncture with other devices, like televisions. An earlier 2011 analysis of the way consumers in the U.S. viewed news content on their devices throughout the day demonstrated how people use different mobile devices for different functions. On a typical weekend morning, digital omnivores accessed their news using their tablet, favored their computer during the working day, and returned to tablet use in the evening, peaking between the hours of 9pm and midnight. Mobile phones were used for web-browsing throughout the day when users were away from their personal computer. Increased Wi-Fi availability and mobile broadband adoption have changed the way people are going online. In August 2011, more than a third (37.2%) of U.S. digital traffic coming from mobile phones occurred via a Wi-Fi connection while tablets, which traditionally required a Wi-Fi connection to access the Internet, are increasingly driving traffic using mobile broadband access. As of 2021, LTE, 5G, and other forms of mobile broadband access are available on the majority of mobile devices. Tablets contributed nearly 2% of all web browsing traffic in the United States in 2011. During this period, iPads also began to account for a higher share of Internet traffic than iPhones (46.8% vs. 42.6% of all iOS device traffic. == Implications for marketing, advertisers and publishers == As of 2021, the average amount of time spent daily consuming digital media was eight hours, an increase from 2020 and a further increase from 2019, partially as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Social media platforms such as Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, and TikTok, as well as other online platforms like YouTube, incorporate advertisements into the in-app or online experience, with some offering the ability to shop for and sell items through the app or website.
Digistar
Digistar is the first computer graphics-based planetarium projection and content system. It was designed by Evans & Sutherland and released in 1983. The technology originally focused on accurate and high quality display of stars, including for the first time showing stars from points of view other than Earth's surface, travelling through the stars, and accurately showing celestial bodies from different times in the past and future. Beginning with the Digistar 3 the system now projects full-dome video. == Projector == Unlike modern full-dome systems, which use LCD, DLP, SXRD, or laser projection technology, the Digistar projection system was designed for projecting bright pinpoints of light representing stars. This was accomplished using a calligraphic display, a form of vector graphics, rather than raster graphics. The heart of the Digistar projector is a large cathode-ray tube (CRT). A phosphor plate is mounted atop the tube, and light is then dispersed by a large lens with a 160 degree field of view to cover the planetarium dome. The original lens bore the inscription: "August 1979 mfg. by Lincoln Optical Corp., L.A., CA for Evans and Sutherland Computer Corp., SLC, UT, Digital planetarium CRT projection lens, 43mm, f2.8, 160 degree field of view". The coordinates of the stars and wire-frame models to be displayed by the projector were stored in computer RAM in a display list. The display would read each set of coordinates in turn and drive the CRT's electron beam directly to those coordinates. If the electron beam was enabled while being moved a line would be painted on the phosphor plate. Otherwise, the electron beam would be enabled once at its destination and a star would be painted. Once all coordinates in the display list had been processed, the display would repeat from the top of the display list. Thus, the shorter the display list the more frequently the electron beam would refresh the charge on a given point on the phosphor plate, making the projection of the points brighter. In this way, the stars projected by Digistar were substantially brighter than could be achieved using a raster display, which has to touch every point on the phosphor plate before repeating. Likewise, the calligraphic technology allowed Digistar to have a darker black-level than full-dome projectors, since the portions of the phosphor plate representing dark sky were never hit by the electron beam. As it is only one tube, with no pixelated color filter screen, the Digistar projector is monochromatic. The Digistar projects a bright, phosphorescent green, though many (including both visitors and planetarians) report they cannot distinguish between this green and white. Additionally, unlike a raster display, the calligraphic display is not discretized into pixels, so the displayed stars were a more realistic single spot of light, without the blocky or ropy artifacts that are hard to avoid with raster graphics. Due to the use of vector graphics, as opposed to raster imaging, the Digistar does not have the resolution issues that many full-dome systems have. Thanks to this, and the brightness of the CRT, only one projector is needed to project on the entire dome, whereas most full-dome systems require up to six raster projectors, depending on dome size. The projector in the original Digistar was housed in a square pyramid-shaped sheathing. When powered on, the four sides at the tip of the pyramid would recede into the housing, exposing the lens and appearing as a cut-off pyramid. As Digistar II was being developed, many planetaria were sold Digistar LEA projectors. The LEA, called Digistar 1.5 by many users, was effectively a prototype of the D2 projector, compatible with Digistar and upgradable to Digistar II. There are no significant differences in performance between the LEA and the true D2. == History == Digistar was the brainchild of Stephen McAllister and Brent Watson, both of whom were long-time amateur astronomers and computer graphics engineers. In 1977, E&S had been consulting with Johnson Space Center regarding training simulators for astronauts. McAllister had been writing proof-of-concept software for this consultation and in summer 1977 entered the data for 400 bright stars and wrote the software to display them. Steve and Brent both originally saw the system's purpose as celestial navigation training. Brent, who had until recently worked at Hansen planetarium, asked his planetarium coworkers what they thought of a potential digital planetarium system, and then Steve and Brent both targeted the system toward planetaria. The primary goal of the planetarium system was to use computer graphics to overcome the limitation of traditional star ball technology that only allowed display of star fields from the point of view of Earth's surface. By using computer graphics the stars could be displayed from viewpoints in space, including simulating the appearance of space flight. Likewise, planets and moons within the Solar System could be displayed accurately for any time in history, from any point of view. The system used the location of real stars from the Yale Bright Star Catalogue, as well as random stars. A laboratory prototype of Digistar was used to generate the star fields and tactical displays in the 1982 science fiction film Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Filming was done directly from the Digistar display in the lab. ILM projected the effort would take two weeks, but in fact it took from late November 1981 until mid-February 1982. The last shot recorded was what became the first entirely computer generated feature film sequence. It was the opening scene of the film, a rotating forward translation through a star field that lasted 3.5 minutes. It was recorded in one take, at a rate of one frame every 3.5 seconds, taking four hours for the shoot. The Digistar team members are credited in the film. After prototyping in labs at Evans and Sutherland the team repeatedly used Salt Lake City's Hansen planetarium to beta test the system at the planetarium at night. The Digistar team performed one week of shows at the planetarium as a fund raiser to benefit the planetarium. The company also later gave the planetarium an improved prototype Digistar to replace "Jake", the planetarium's aging Spitz planetarium projector. The first customer installation was to the newly constructed Universe Planetarium at the Science Museum of Virginia in 1983, the largest planetarium dome in the world at the time, for $595,000. By September 1986 there were four installed Digistars. Even at this point the long-term success of the product was very much in doubt, but as of 2019 Digistar has an installed base of over 550 planetaria. === Versions === Digistar (1983) Digistar II (1995) Digistar 3 (2002) Digistar 4 (2010?) Digistar 5 (2012) Digistar 6 (2016) Digistar 7 (2021) == Hardware == Digistar was driven by a VAX-11/780 minicomputer, with custom graphics hardware related to the E&S Picture System 2. Later versions of Digistar 1 used a DEC MicroVAX 2, driving a custom version of a PS/300. The original Digistar and Digistar 2 had a physical control panel that was used for running the star shows. This control panel was approximately 3' x 4' and contained a keyboard, a 6 DOF joystick, and a large array of back-lit buttons. One button that was used for moving the viewpoint forward in space was labeled "Boldly Go". Later iterations of Digistar replaced the physical control panel with a common graphical user interface. Digistar 3 was the first Digistar system to offer full-dome video in 2002, using six projectors. Digistar 4 was able to cover the dome using only two projectors. == System limitations == Though technologically advanced in its day, and the closest system to true full-dome video at the time of its release, the original Digistar and Digistar 2 are limited to only projecting dots and lines—meaning only wireframe models can be projected. To compensate for this, the projector is capable of defocusing specific models, blurring lines and dots together. An example of this is in the Digistar 2's built-in Milky Way model. The model is a circle of parallel lines that, when defocused, appear as the continuous band of the Milky Way across the sky. On more complex models, especially three-dimensional ones, brightness and details may be lost in this process, so it is not useful in all situations. The Digistar and Digistar 2 also suffer focus limitations. Because they use a single lens to cover the entire dome, it is difficult to gain perfect focus across the dome. Coupled with this, stars greater than a certain brightness are "multihit" points, meaning the projector draws two dots at the given position to accommodate the brightness of the star. Errors in the projector can lead the second dot to be slightly out-of-place with the first one. These two issues together, along with other issues that can occur within the projector's focus system, give the stars a blobby look. Some p
ShareMethods
ShareMethods is a Web 2.0 document management and collaboration service with a focus on sales, marketing, and the extended selling network. It offers a software as a service (SaaS) subscription to companies and is available as a stand-alone application or as an integrated program with CRM tools such as Oracle CRM On Demand or salesforce.com. == History == ShareMethods was launched in 2004 to provide collaboration and communication services for sales and marketing teams, business partners, and customers. The founders have a background of building software-as-a-service applications and creating digital media applications. In September 2005, ShareMethods launched "ShareNow" as one of the first applications on the salesforce.com AppExchange. In September 2006, ShareMethods moved its operations into a SAS 70 Type II data center owned by SunGard. In March 2009, ShareMethods launched "ShareSpaces" to provide on-demand portals or workspaces. In 2013, ShareMethods announced that its platform is available in a private cloud (on-premises) version. == Products == ShareMethods: Combines document management, collaboration, analytics, and CRM integration into a single solution. Key content can be centrally managed and delivered to sales channels, while providing feedback to marketing. ShareMethods is often used as a sales portal for internal sales and a partner portal for external partners. ShareNow: Integrates ShareMethods with salesforce.com providing Single Sign On for salesforce.com users and access to files related to accounts opportunities, etc. including custom objects. Also facilitates collaboration between salesforce.com users and non-users. ShareMethods for Oracle CRM On Demand: Integrates ShareMethods with Oracle CRM On Demand providing Single Sign On for Oracle users and easy access to files related to accounts opportunities, etc. ShareOffice: An on-demand intranet/extranet solution. Features include full-text search, version history, server sync-up, email updates, audit trail/analytics, check-in/check-out, multilingual user interface. ShareSpaces: Independent workspaces or portals where users can collaborate with business partners, teammates, or individuals to work together on content and documents. == Integration and interoperability == ShareMethods is available on Salesforce.com's AppExchange platform. ShareMethods also integrates with Oracle CRM On Demand to provide document management within the CRM application. Customers also can integrate proprietary systems via single-sign-on and self-registration. In addition, developers can make use of the ShareMethods API based on WebDAV to integrate document management functionality.