Carrenza

Carrenza

Carrenza was a cloud-computing company based in London, United Kingdom. The company was acquired by Six Degrees Technology Group in 2016. == Operations == Carrenza was a UK-based IT company that provides Cloud computing technologies. It offered a range of public cloud, private cloud and hybrid cloud services, including Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), enterprise application integration and system integration. Carrenza partnered with several enterprise IT providers and was an accredited VMware Enterprise Service Partner and HP (Hewlett-Packard) Cloud Agile Partner. The company was based on Commercial Street, in the heart of the East London Tech City district, which is host to a large number of technology companies. == History == Carrenza was formed in 2001 as a consultancy by chief executive and founder Dan Sutherland. It began trading in 2004 and launched its first enterprise cloud computing platform in 2006, becoming one of the first companies in Europe to provide this type of hosting service. In 2009, it formed a partnership with Comic Relief and its affiliated campaigns Red Nose Day Sport Relief to provide IT infrastructure services to the charity, an arrangement that has won industry recognition. In 2013 it launched its first overseas services, with a mainland Europe cloud node based in Amsterdam. == Partnerships and customers == Carrenza had formed partnerships with a range of IT providers. It was one of the first companies in Europe to become a HP Cloud Agile partner., using HP blade servers and HP 3PAR SAN technology to power its cloud computing services. The company's products also use VMware vCloud IaaS tools and it is taking part in the VMware lighthouse initiative helping develop the next generation of VMware products and services. Other technology companies that Carrenza has worked closely with include Cisco, for enterprise security and loadblancing services, and Oracle. The company was the first to deploy Oracle Database 11g stretched RAC in production. It has also won two Oracle partner awards, including a Special Recognition award for its work with Comic Relief. The company has also been recognised by the UK IT Industry, receiving awards in 2009 for Community Project of the Year and in 2010 for best small business project for its Monopoly City Streets Work. Other companies that have partnered with Carrenza for their cloud-based IT services include Age UK, Haymarket Media Group, the World Wide Fund for Nature, Royal Bank of Scotland, eBay and Cineworld. == Accreditations == Carrenza's services are accredited for their compliance with several key international IT security and quality standards. These include: ISO27001:2005, Information Security Management System for all Carrenza services. UK Government G-Cloud, Carrenza has been awarded a place on the UK government's G-Cloud iii framework as an Infrastructure as a Service provider.

VideoPoet

VideoPoet is a large language model developed by Google Research in 2023 for video making. It can be asked to animate still images. The model accepts text, images, and videos as inputs, with a program to add feature for any input to any format generated content. VideoPoet was publicly announced on December 19, 2023. It uses an autoregressive language model.

No Fakes Act

The NO FAKES Act or the Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe Act, is proposed United States federal legislation concerning digital replicas. The bill was first introduced in 2023 as a discussion draft, formally introduced in 2024, and reintroduced in 2025. If enacted, the bill would establish a federal right of publicity, giving public figures and private individuals greater control over the creation and use of digital replicas of their likenesses, including artificial intelligence (AI)-generated content. If passed, the NO FAKES Act would create a legal framework for licensing digital replicas, including provisions for liability, safe harbors, and statutory exceptions. The proposal has received broad support from the entertainment and technology industries. However, digital rights organizations have raised concerns that the Act risks chilling protected speech. == Background == === Entertainment industry concerns === Actors’ concerns over studios' use of their digital likeness were one of the primary drivers of the Screen Actors Guild–American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) strike in 2023. Negotiators for SAG-AFTRA alleged that the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) sought to use the digital likenesses of actors in perpetuity and would try to replace union members, especially background actors. The AMPTP denied SAG-AFTRA's interpretation of its proposal. In November 2023, AMPTP and SAG-AFTRA reached an agreement on the use of actors’ digital replicas, which included requirements for consent and compensation. Recording labels have also expressed concerns over unauthorized digital replicas of their performers' likeness. In 2023, TikTok user Ghostwriter977 released "Heart on My Sleeve," an AI-produced song in the styles of Drake and the Weeknd. After the song received millions of streams, the Universal Music Group (UMG) initiated takedown requests to TikTok and YouTube, which removed the song from their platforms. The legal arguments attorneys made were not disclosed; however, commentators noted that they likely used the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). This presented a novel scenario, since UMG did not have licensing rights to "Heart on My Sleeve." According to The Verge, UMG based its DMCA takedown request on an unauthorized sample used at the start of the song for the producer tag. While legal commentators noted that UMG could have asserted a violation of the artists’ rights of publicity, existing state right of publicity laws do not provide notice-and-takedown mechanisms comparable to those under the DMCA. === Legal landscape === Legal scholars have observed that AI-generated digital replicas raise questions under existing copyright and intellectual property law. U.S. copyright law generally requires that original authorship be attributable to a human; however, the extent of human intervention needed to satisfy this requirement is not clear. Copyright holders have filed lawsuits against AI companies alleging unauthorized usage of copyrighted material to train their models, though many of these cases remain pending. In terms of outputs, record labels often hold rights to artists’ musical works but do not necessarily control the artists’ voice, appearance, or likeness in the same way. As a result, AI-generated recordings such as "Heart on My Sleeve" may fall outside the scope of certain traditional copyright protections. Individuals' likenesses have historically been governed under the Lanham Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act, and right of publicity laws. The right of publicity, recognized in many state-level statutes and common law, allows individuals to bring legal claims against unauthorized commercial use of their identities. It has often, but not exclusively, been applied to celebrities or other recognizable individuals. There is no federal-level right to publicity, and state-level protections vary, especially on issues relating to digital replicas and posthumous rights, which makes it difficult for creators or other individuals to prevent unauthorized use of their likenesses. In July 2024, the U.S. Copyright Office released a report on digital replicas and recommended that Congress create a federal law to protect individuals from unauthorized uses of their digital replicas, noting the inadequacy, narrowness, and inconsistency of existing laws. == Provisions == Under the NO FAKES Act of 2025, a digital replica is defined as "a newly created, computer-generated, highly realistic electronic representation that is readily identifiable as the voice or visual likeness of an individual," living or dead. A digital replica can be embodied in sound recordings, images, or audiovisual works in which the individual did not perform or in which the individual did perform but the "fundamental character of the performance or appearance has been materially altered." The Act specifies that digital replicas do not include reproduced samples of works authorized by the copyright holder. The Act defines a "right holder" as either the individual who is the subject of a digital replica or an entity that has acquired the rights to that individual’s likeness. The Act grants right holders the exclusive right to authorize the use of an individual’s likeness in a digital replica. This right is not assignable during the individual’s lifetime; however, it can be licensed to a living individual for up to 10 years under certain conditions. Postmortem rights The Act provides that the right does not automatically expire upon an individual’s death. It may be transferred to executors, heirs, or other parties designated by the individual. The right is held by the right holder for 10 years following the individual’s death. If the right holder demonstrates active use of the digital replica within the 2 years preceding the end of the 10-year term, the right may be extended for an additional 5-year period. These five-year extensions may be renewed for up to 70 years after the individual’s death. Liability The Act establishes liability for individuals who knowingly distribute a digital replica without authorization from the right holder, as well as for entities that make available a service primarily designed to produce unlawful digital replicas. Safe harbor provisions Similar to the Communications Decency Act and the DMCA, the Act establishes safe harbor provisions for online service providers. Providers are shielded from liability if they adopt and inform users of a policy for terminating accounts that repeatedly violate the Act. The NO FAKES Act does not require online services to proactively monitor content. Instead, it creates a notice-and-takedown mechanism under which providers must promptly respond to notifications seeking the removal of unauthorized digital replicas. These safe harbor protections apply only if the online service provider designates an agent with the U.S. Copyright Office to receive notifications of alleged violations. Remedies The NO FAKES Act provides remedies that are similar to those available under U.S. copyright law. Under the Act, individuals may be held liable for either statutory damages of $5,000 or actual damages for creating or distributing an unauthorized digital replica. The legislation also establishes a tiered liability framework for online service providers. Those that make good faith efforts to comply with the Act may face statutory damages of up to $25,000 per work for violations or actual damages. Providers that do not undertake such compliance efforts may be liable for $5,000 per unauthorized display or transmission of a digital replica, with damages capped at $750,000 per work. Exclusions The Act includes several exceptions to liability that are modeled in part on fair use principles. Digital replicas are excluded from liability when "used in a bona fide news, public affairs, or sports broadcast or account;" in a documentary or historical context; or in a way that is "consistent with the public interest." These exclusions do not apply to de minimis uses or to digital replicas that are sexually explicit in nature. The Act further states that licensing requirements do not apply to licenses established through collective bargaining agreements that contain provisions governing the use of digital replicas. The Act does not impose secondary liability on providers of generative artificial intelligence tools or services whose primary purpose is not the creation of unauthorized digital replicas. Preemption The NO FAKES Act preempts laws that protect "an individual's voice and visual likeness rights in connection with a digital replica, as defined in this Act, in an expressive work." However, the Act preserves state laws governing digital replicas enacted before January 2, 2025, as well as state laws addressing digital replicas that portray sexually explicit conduct. == History == In 2023, Senators Marsha Blackburn, Chris Coons, Amy Klobuchar, and Th

Mustafa Suleyman

Mustafa Suleyman (born in August 1984) is a British artificial intelligence (AI) entrepreneur. He is the CEO of Microsoft AI, and the co-founder and former head of applied AI at DeepMind, an AI company which was acquired by Google. After leaving DeepMind, he co-founded Inflection AI, a machine learning and generative AI company, in 2022. == Early life and education == Suleyman's Syrian father worked as a taxi driver and his English mother was a nurse. He grew up off Caledonian Road, London, where he lived with his parents and his two younger brothers. Suleyman went to Thornhill Primary School, a state school in Islington, followed by Queen Elizabeth's School, Barnet, a boys' grammar school. Around that time, he met his DeepMind co-founder, Demis Hassabis, through his best friend, who was Demis's younger brother. Suleyman shared that he and Hassabis often discussed how they could make a positive impact on the world. Suleyman enrolled to study philosophy and theology at the University of Oxford where he was an undergraduate student at Mansfield College, Oxford, before dropping out at 19. == Career == In August 2001, while still a teenager and a "strong atheist", Suleyman helped Mohammed Mamdani establish a telephone counselling service called the Muslim Youth Helpline. The organization would later become one of the largest mental health support services. Suleyman subsequently worked as a policy officer on human rights for Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, before going on to start Reos Partners, a "systemic change" consultancy that uses methods from conflict resolution to navigate social problems. As a negotiator and facilitator, Mustafa worked for a wide range of clients such as the United Nations, the Dutch government, and the World Wide Fund for Nature. === DeepMind and Google === In 2010 Suleyman co-founded DeepMind Technologies, an artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning company, and became its chief product officer. The company quickly established itself as one of the leaders in the AI sector. In 2014 DeepMind was acquired by Google for a reported £400 million, the company's largest acquisition in Europe at that time. Following the acquisition, Suleyman became head of applied AI at DeepMind, taking on responsibility for integrating the company's technology across a wide range of Google products. In February 2016 Suleyman launched DeepMind Health at the Royal Society of Medicine. DeepMind Health builds clinician-led technology for the National Health Service (NHS) and other partners to improve frontline healthcare services. Under Suleyman, DeepMind also developed research collaborations with healthcare organizations in the United Kingdom, including Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS foundation trust. In 2016, Suleyman led an effort to apply DeepMind's machine learning algorithms to help reduce the energy required to cool Google's data centres. The system evaluated the billions of possible combinations of actions that the data centre operators could take, and came up with recommendations based on the predicted power usage. The system discovered novel methods of cooling, leading to a reduction of up to 40% of the amount of energy used for cooling, and a 15% improvement in the buildings' overall energy efficiency. Since June 2019, Suleyman has served on the board of The Economist Group, which publishes The Economist newspaper. In August 2019, Suleyman was placed on administrative leave following allegations of bullying employees. The company hired an external lawyer to investigate, and shortly thereafter Suleyman left to take a VP role at parent company Google. An email circulated by DeepMind's leadership to staff after the story broke, as well as additional details published by Business Insider, said Suleyman's "management style fell short" of expected standards. In December 2019, Suleyman announced he would be leaving DeepMind to join Google, working in a policy role. === Inflection AI === Suleyman left Google in January 2022 and joined Greylock Partners as a venture partner and in March 2022, Suleyman co-founded Inflection AI, a new AI lab venture with Greylock's Reid Hoffman. The company was founded with the goal of leveraging "AI to help humans 'talk' to computers," recruited former staff from companies such as Google and Meta and raised $225 million in its first funding round. In 2023, Inflection AI launched a chatbot named “Pi” for Personal Intelligence. The bot “remembers” past conversations and seems to get to know its users over time. According to Suleyman, the long-term goal for Pi is to be a digital “Chief of Staff”, with the initial design focused on maintaining conversational dialogue with users, asking questions, and offering emotional support. === Microsoft AI === In March 2024, Microsoft appointed Suleyman as Executive Vice President (EVP) and CEO of its newly created consumer AI unit, Microsoft AI. Several members of Inflection AI's team were also appointed to the division, including co-founder Karen Simonyan. === Awards and honours === Suleyman was appointed a Commander of the British Empire (CBE) in the 2019 New Year Honours. Suleyman was named by Time as one of the 100 most influential people in artificial intelligence in 2023 and in 2024. === Views on AI ethics === Suleyman is prominent in the debate over the ethics of AI and has spoken widely about the need for companies, governments and civil society to join in holding technologists accountable for the impacts of their work. He has advocated redesigning incentives in the technology industry to steer business leaders toward prioritising social responsibility alongside their fiduciary duties. Within DeepMind he set up a research unit called DeepMind Ethics & Society to study the real-world impacts of AI and help technologists put ethics into practice. Suleyman is also a founding co-chair of the Partnership on AI – an organisation that includes representatives from companies such as Amazon, Apple, DeepMind, Meta, Google, IBM, and Microsoft. The organisation studies and formulates best practices for AI technologies, advances the public's understanding of AI, and serves as an open platform for discussion and engagement about AI and how it affects people and society. Its board of directors has equal representation from non-profit and for profit entities. In September 2023, Suleyman, in collaboration with researcher Michael Bhaskar, published The Coming Wave, Technology, Power and the 21st Century's Greatest Dilemma, a book that examines the transformative and potentially perilous impact of advanced technologies, particularly AI and synthetic biology. According to Suleyman, AI notably has the potential to bring "radical abundance", address climate change and empower people with its cheap problem-solving capabilities. But it may also improve its own design and manufacturing processes, leading to a period of dangerously rapid AI progress. And it could enable catastrophic misuse, from bioengineered pathogens to autonomous weapons, making global oversight and containment essential to avoid unintended consequences. It was shortlisted for the 2023 Financial Times Business Book of the Year Award. In June 2024, in an interview with Andrew Ross Sorkin at the Aspen Ideas Festival, Suleyman expressed the view that unless a website explicitly specifies otherwise, for "content that is already on the open web, the social contract of that content since the 90s has been that it is fair use. Anyone can copy it, recreate with it, reproduce with it. That has been freeware, if you like. That's been the understanding." The statement sparked controversy over the use of Internet data for training AI models. == Personal life == A Business Insider profile in 2017 described Suleyman as being liberal.

ChessMachine

The ChessMachine was a chess computer sold between 1991 and 1995 by TASC (The Advanced Software Company). It was unique at the time for incorporating both an ARM2 coprocessor for the chess engine on an ISA card which plugged into an IBM PC and a software interface running on the PC to display a chess board and control the engine. The ISA card was sold with a CPU running at either 16 MHz or 32 MHz, and 128 KB, 512 KB, or 1 MB of onboard memory for transposition tables. This made economic sense at the time of introduction because mainstream PCs were only running from 10 MHz to 25 MHz. Two engines were sold with the card: The King by Johann de Koning and Gideon by Ed Schröder. Gideon was famed for winning two World Computer Chess Championships on this hardware. The King later became the engine used in the popular Chessmaster series of chess programs. TASC later incorporated the technology into a dedicated unit, sold from 1993 to 1997. There were two models, the R30 and R40, running at 30 MHz and 40 MHz respectively, and having 512 KB and 1 MB of transposition tables, respectively. The SmartBoard, a wooden sensory board, was connected to the units, which were in tiny boxes approximately the size of chess clocks. They were only sold with The King chess engine. This was the end of the era of strong dedicated chess computers, and these two models are acknowledged as the strongest dedicated chess computers that were ever sold. At the height of its strength, the R30 attained a rating over 2350 on computer rating lists, higher than any other dedicated unit. According to the SSDF rating list, the R30 held its own against its contemporary programs running a Pentium-90 MHz and won against other dedicated units.

Active learning (machine learning)

Active learning is a special case of machine learning in which a learning algorithm can interactively query a human user (or some other information source) to label new data points with the desired outputs. The human user must possess expertise in the problem domain, including the ability to consult authoritative sources when necessary. In statistics literature, it is sometimes also called optimal experimental design. The information source is also called teacher or oracle. There are situations in which unlabeled data is abundant but manual labeling is expensive. In such a scenario, learning algorithms can actively query the teacher for labels. Since the learner chooses the examples, the number of examples to learn a concept can often be much lower than the number required in normal supervised learning. However, there is a risk that the algorithm is overwhelmed by uninformative examples. Recent developments are dedicated to multi-label active learning, hybrid active learning and active learning in a single-pass (on-line) context, combining concepts from the field of machine learning (e.g. conflict and ignorance) with adaptive, incremental learning policies in the field of online machine learning. Using active learning allows for faster development of a machine learning algorithm, when comparative updates would require a quantum or super computer. Large-scale active learning projects may benefit from crowdsourcing frameworks such as Amazon Mechanical Turk that include many humans in the active learning loop. == Definitions == Let T be the total set of all data under consideration. For example, in a protein engineering problem, T would include all proteins that are known to have a certain interesting activity and all additional proteins that one might want to test for that activity. During each iteration, i, T is broken up into three subsets T K , i {\displaystyle \mathbf {T} _{K,i}} : Data points where the label is known. T U , i {\displaystyle \mathbf {T} _{U,i}} : Data points where the label is unknown. T C , i {\displaystyle \mathbf {T} _{C,i}} : A subset of TU,i that is chosen to be labeled. Most of the current research in active learning involves the best method to choose the data points for TC,i. == Scenarios == Pool-based sampling: In this approach, which is the most well known scenario, the learning algorithm attempts to evaluate the entire dataset before selecting data points (instances) for labeling. It is often initially trained on a fully labeled subset of the data using a machine-learning method such as logistic regression or SVM that yields class-membership probabilities for individual data instances. The candidate instances are those for which the prediction is most ambiguous. Instances are drawn from the entire data pool and assigned a confidence score, a measurement of how well the learner "understands" the data. The system then selects the instances for which it is the least confident and queries the teacher for the labels. The theoretical drawback of pool-based sampling is that it is memory-intensive and is therefore limited in its capacity to handle enormous datasets, but in practice, the rate-limiting factor is that the teacher is typically a (fatiguable) human expert who must be paid for their effort, rather than computer memory. Stream-based selective sampling: Here, each consecutive unlabeled instance is examined one at a time with the machine evaluating the informativeness of each item against its query parameters. The learner decides for itself whether to assign a label or query the teacher for each datapoint. As contrasted with Pool-based sampling, the obvious drawback of stream-based methods is that the learning algorithm does not have sufficient information, early in the process, to make a sound assign-label-vs ask-teacher decision, and it does not capitalize as efficiently on the presence of already labeled data. Therefore, the teacher is likely to spend more effort in supplying labels than with the pool-based approach. Membership query synthesis: This is where the learner generates synthetic data from an underlying natural distribution. For example, if the dataset are pictures of humans and animals, the learner could send a clipped image of a leg to the teacher and query if this appendage belongs to an animal or human. This is particularly useful if the dataset is small. The challenge here, as with all synthetic-data-generation efforts, is in ensuring that the synthetic data is consistent in terms of meeting the constraints on real data. As the number of variables/features in the input data increase, and strong dependencies between variables exist, it becomes increasingly difficult to generate synthetic data with sufficient fidelity. For example, to create a synthetic data set for human laboratory-test values, the sum of the various white blood cell (WBC) components in a white blood cell differential must equal 100, since the component numbers are really percentages. Similarly, the enzymes alanine transaminase (ALT) and aspartate transaminase (AST) measure liver function (though AST is also produced by other tissues, e.g., lung, pancreas) A synthetic data point with AST at the lower limit of normal range (8–33 units/L) with an ALT several times above normal range (4–35 units/L) in a simulated chronically ill patient would be physiologically impossible. == Query strategies == Algorithms for determining which data points should be labeled can be organized into a number of different categories, based upon their purpose: Balance exploration and exploitation: the choice of examples to label is seen as a dilemma between the exploration and the exploitation over the data space representation. This strategy manages this compromise by modelling the active learning problem as a contextual bandit problem. For example, Bouneffouf et al. propose a sequential algorithm named Active Thompson Sampling (ATS), which, in each round, assigns a sampling distribution on the pool, samples one point from this distribution, and queries the oracle for this sample point label. Expected model change: label those points that would most change the current model. Expected error reduction: label those points that would most reduce the model's generalization error. Exponentiated Gradient Exploration for Active Learning: In this paper, the author proposes a sequential algorithm named exponentiated gradient (EG)-active that can improve any active learning algorithm by an optimal random exploration. Uncertainty sampling: label those points for which the current model is least certain as to what the correct output should be. Query by committee: a variety of models are trained on the current labeled data, and vote on the output for unlabeled data; label those points for which the "committee" disagrees the most Querying from diverse subspaces or partitions: When the underlying model is a forest of trees, the leaf nodes might represent (overlapping) partitions of the original feature space. This offers the possibility of selecting instances from non-overlapping or minimally overlapping partitions for labeling. Variance reduction: label those points that would minimize output variance, which is one of the components of error. Conformal prediction: predicts that a new data point will have a label similar to old data points in some specified way and degree of the similarity within the old examples is used to estimate the confidence in the prediction. Mismatch-first farthest-traversal: The primary selection criterion is the prediction mismatch between the current model and nearest-neighbour prediction. It targets on wrongly predicted data points. The second selection criterion is the distance to previously selected data, the farthest first. It aims at optimizing the diversity of selected data. User-centered labeling strategies: Learning is accomplished by applying dimensionality reduction to graphs and figures like scatter plots. Then the user is asked to label the compiled data (categorical, numerical, relevance scores, relation between two instances). A wide variety of algorithms have been studied that fall into these categories. While the traditional AL strategies can achieve remarkable performance, it is often challenging to predict in advance which strategy is the most suitable in a particular situation. In recent years, meta-learning algorithms have been gaining in popularity. Some of them have been proposed to tackle the problem of learning AL strategies instead of relying on manually designed strategies. A benchmark which compares 'meta-learning approaches to active learning' to 'traditional heuristic-based Active Learning' may give intuitions if 'Learning active learning' is at the crossroads == Minimum marginal hyperplane == Some active learning algorithms are built upon support-vector machines (SVMs) and exploit the structure of the SVM to determine which data points to label. Such methods usually calculate the margin, W, of each u

Ishikawa diagram

Ishikawa diagrams (also called fishbone diagrams, herringbone diagrams, cause-and-effect diagrams) are causal diagrams created by Kaoru Ishikawa that show the potential causes of a specific event. Common uses of the Ishikawa diagram are product design and quality defect prevention to identify potential factors causing an overall effect. Each cause or reason for imperfection is a source of variation. Causes are usually grouped into major categories to identify and classify these sources of variation. == Overview == The defect, or the problem to be solved, is shown as the fish's head, facing to the right, with the causes extending to the left as fishbones; the ribs branch off the backbone for major causes, with sub-branches for root-causes, to as many levels as required. Ishikawa diagrams were popularized in the 1960s by Kaoru Ishikawa, who pioneered quality management processes in the Kawasaki shipyards, and in the process became one of the founding fathers of modern management. The basic concept was first used in the 1920s, and is considered one of the seven basic tools of quality control. It is known as a fishbone diagram because of its shape, similar to the side view of a fish skeleton. Mazda Motors famously used an Ishikawa diagram in the development of the Miata (MX5) sports car. == Root causes == Root-cause analysis is intended to reveal key relationships among various variables, and the possible causes provide additional insight into process behavior. It shows high-level causes that lead to the problem encountered by providing a snapshot of the current situation. There can be confusion about the relationships between problems, causes, symptoms and effects. Smith highlights this and the common question “Is that a problem or a symptom?” which mistakenly presumes that problems and symptoms are mutually exclusive categories. A problem is a situation that bears improvement; a symptom is the effect of a cause: a situation can be both a problem and a symptom. At a practical level, a cause is whatever is responsible for, or explains, an effect - a factor "whose presence makes a critical difference to the occurrence of an outcome". The causes emerge by analysis, often through brainstorming sessions, and are grouped into categories on the main branches off the fishbone. To help structure the approach, the categories are often selected from one of the common models shown below, but may emerge as something unique to the application in a specific case. Each potential cause is traced back to find the root cause, often using the 5 Whys technique. Typical categories include: === The 5 Ms (used in manufacturing) === Originating with lean manufacturing and the Toyota Production System, the 5 Ms is one of the most common frameworks for root-cause analysis: Manpower / Mindpower (physical or knowledge work, includes: kaizens, suggestions) Machine (equipment, technology) Material (includes raw material, consumables, and information) Method (process) Measurement / medium (inspection, environment) These have been expanded by some to include an additional three, and are referred to as the 8 Ms: Mission / mother nature (purpose, environment) Management / money power (leadership) Maintenance === The 8 Ps (used in product marketing) === This common model for identifying crucial attributes for planning in product marketing is often also used in root-cause analysis as categories for the Ishikawa diagram: Product (or service) Price Place Promotion People (personnel) Process Physical evidence (proof) Performance === The 4 or 5 Ss (used in service industries) === An alternative used for service industries, uses four categories of possible cause: Surroundings: Refers to the environment in which the process occurs. Suppliers: Refers to external parties that provide inputs—raw materials, components, or services. Systems: Refers to the procedures, processes, and technologies used to perform the work. Skill: Refers to the human factor, particularly the knowledge and abilities of employees. Safety: Refers to physical and psychological well-being in the workplace. == Use in specific industries == The Ishikawa diagram has been widely adopted across various industries as an effective tool for root cause analysis in quality, efficiency, and safety-related issues. Its versatility allows it to be applied in both manufacturing and service contexts. In the manufacturing industry, particularly in the automotive and electronics sectors, the diagram is frequently used in continuous improvement initiatives such as Six Sigma and Lean Manufacturing. Quality teams use it to identify causes related to materials, methods, machinery, manpower, environment, and measurement, facilitating informed decision-making to reduce defects and optimize processes. In the food industry, the Ishikawa diagram is applied to analyze issues related to food safety, temperature control, cross-contamination, and regulatory compliance. Its use enables companies to identify improvement opportunities in production, packaging, and distribution stages. In the pharmaceutical sector, it is a key tool in process validation, quality control, and compliance with Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP). It helps visualize factors affecting product quality from formulation to storage. It has also been successfully implemented in sectors such as aerospace, pulp and paper, construction, education, and healthcare, where it supports structured problem-solving and promotes continuous improvement and a culture of quality.