Ranking SVM

In machine learning, a ranking SVM is a variant of the support vector machine algorithm, which is used to solve certain ranking problems (via learning to rank). The ranking SVM algorithm was published by Thorsten Joachims in 2002. The original purpose of the algorithm was to improve the performance of an internet search engine. However, it was found that ranking SVM also can be used to solve other problems such as Rank SIFT. == Description == The ranking SVM algorithm is a learning retrieval function that employs pairwise ranking methods to adaptively sort results based on how 'relevant' they are for a specific query. The ranking SVM function uses a mapping function to describe the match between a search query and the features of each of the possible results. This mapping function projects each data pair (such as a search query and clicked web-page, for example) onto a feature space. These features are combined with the corresponding click-through data (which can act as a proxy for how relevant a page is for a specific query) and can then be used as the training data for the ranking SVM algorithm. Generally, ranking SVM includes three steps in the training period: It maps the similarities between queries and the clicked pages onto a certain feature space. It calculates the distances between any two of the vectors obtained in step 1. It forms an optimization problem which is similar to a standard SVM classification and solves this problem with the regular SVM solver. == Background == === Ranking method === Suppose C {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} } is a data set containing N {\displaystyle N} elements c i {\displaystyle c_{i}} . r {\displaystyle r} is a ranking method applied to C {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} } . Then the r {\displaystyle r} in C {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} } can be represented as a N × N {\displaystyle N\times N} binary matrix. If the rank of c i {\displaystyle c_{i}} is higher than the rank of c j {\displaystyle c_{j}} , i.e. r c i < r c j {\displaystyle r\ c_{i}

Loebner Prize

The Loebner Prize was an annual competition in artificial intelligence that awarded prizes to the computer programs considered by the judges to be the most human-like. The format of the competition was that of a standard Turing test. In each round, a human judge simultaneously held textual conversations with a computer program and a human being via computer. Based upon the responses, the judge would attempt to determine which was which. The contest was launched in 1990 by Hugh Loebner in conjunction with the Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies, Massachusetts, United States. In 2004 and 2005, it was held in Loebner's apartment in New York City. Within the field of artificial intelligence, the Loebner Prize is somewhat controversial; the most prominent critic, Marvin Minsky, called it a publicity stunt that does not help the field along. Beginning in 2014, it was organised by the AISB at Bletchley Park. It has also been associated with Flinders University, Dartmouth College, the Science Museum in London, University of Reading and Ulster University, Magee Campus, Derry, UK City of Culture. For the final 2019 competition, the format changed. There was no panel of judges. Instead, the chatbots were judged by the public and there were to be no human competitors. The prize has been reported as defunct as of 2020. == Prizes == Originally, $2,000 was awarded for the most human-seeming program in the competition. The prize was $3,000 in 2005 and $2,250 in 2006. In 2008, $3,000 was awarded. In addition, there were two one-time-only prizes that have never been awarded. $25,000 is offered for the first program that judges cannot distinguish from a real human and which can convince judges that the human is the computer program. $100,000 is the reward for the first program that judges cannot distinguish from a real human in a Turing test that includes deciphering and understanding text, visual, and auditory input. The competition was planned to end after the achievement of this prize. == Competition rules and restrictions == The rules varied over the years and early competitions featured restricted conversation Turing tests but since 1995 the discussion has been unrestricted. For the three entries in 2007, Robert Medeksza, Noah Duncan and Rollo Carpenter, some basic "screening questions" were used by the sponsor to evaluate the state of the technology. These included simple questions about the time, what round of the contest it is, etc.; general knowledge ("What is a hammer for?"); comparisons ("Which is faster, a train or a plane?"); and questions demonstrating memory for preceding parts of the same conversation. "All nouns, adjectives and verbs will come from a dictionary suitable for children or adolescents under the age of 12." Entries did not need to respond "intelligently" to the questions to be accepted. For the first time in 2008 the sponsor allowed introduction of a preliminary phase to the contest opening up the competition to previously disallowed web-based entries judged by a variety of invited interrogators. The available rules do not state how interrogators are selected or instructed. Interrogators (who judge the systems) have limited time: 5 minutes per entity in the 2003 competition, 20+ per pair in 2004–2007 competitions, 5 minutes to conduct simultaneous conversations with a human and the program in 2008–2009, increased to 25 minutes of simultaneous conversation since 2010. == Criticisms == The prize has long been scorned by experts in the field, for a variety of reasons. It is regarded by many as a publicity stunt. Marvin Minsky scathingly offered a "prize" to anyone who could stop the competition. Loebner responded by jokingly observing that Minsky's offering a prize to stop the competition effectively made him a co-sponsor. The rules of the competition have encouraged poorly qualified judges to make rapid judgements. Interactions between judges and competitors was originally very brief, for example effectively 2.5 mins of questioning, which permitted only a few questions. Questioning was initially restricted to a single topic of the contestant's choice, such as "whimsical conversation", a domain suiting standard chatbot tricks. Competition entrants do not aim at understanding or intelligence but resort to basic ELIZA style tricks, and successful entrants find deception and pretense is rewarded. == Contests == See article history for more details of some earlier contests. A very incomplete listing of a few of the contests: === 2003 === In 2003, the contest was organised by Professor Richard H. R. Harper and Dr. Lynne Hamill from the Digital World Research Centre at the University of Surrey. Although no bot passed the Turing test, the winner was Jabberwock, created by Juergen Pirner. Second was Elbot (Fred Roberts, Artificial Solutions). Third was Jabberwacky, (Rollo Carpenter). === 2006 === In 2006, the contest was organised by Tim Child (CEO of Televirtual) and Huma Shah. On August 30, the four finalists were announced: Rollo Carpenter Richard Churchill and Marie-Claire Jenkins Noah Duncan Robert Medeksza The contest was held on 17 September in the VR theatre, Torrington Place campus of University College London. The judges included the University of Reading's cybernetics professor, Kevin Warwick, a professor of artificial intelligence, John Barnden (specialist in metaphor research at the University of Birmingham), a barrister, Victoria Butler-Cole and a journalist, Graham Duncan-Rowe. The latter's experience of the event can be found in an article in Technology Review. The winner was 'Joan', based on Jabberwacky, both created by Rollo Carpenter. === 2007 === The 2007 competition was held on October 21 in New York City. The judges were: computer science professor Russ Abbott, philosophy professor Hartry Field, psychology assistant professor Clayton Curtis and English lecturer Scott Hutchins. No bot passed the Turing test, but the judges ranked the three contestants as follows: 1st: Robert Medeksza, creator of Ultra Hal 2nd: Noah Duncan, a private entry, creator of Cletus 3rd: Rollo Carpenter from Icogno, creator of Jabberwacky The winner received $2,250 and the annual medal. The runners-up received $250 each. === 2008 === The 2008 competition was organised by professor Kevin Warwick, coordinated by Huma Shah and held on October 12 at the University of Reading, UK. After testing by over one hundred judges during the preliminary phase, in June and July 2008, six finalists were selected from thirteen original entrant artificial conversational entities (ACEs). Five of those invited competed in the finals: Brother Jerome, Peter Cole and Benji Adams Elbot, Fred Roberts / Artificial Solutions Eugene Goostman, Vladimir Veselov, Eugene Demchenko and Sergey Ulasen Jabberwacky, Rollo Carpenter Ultra Hal, Robert Medeksza In the finals, each of the judges was given five minutes to conduct simultaneous, split-screen conversations with two hidden entities. Elbot of Artificial Solutions won the 2008 Loebner Prize bronze award, for most human-like artificial conversational entity, through fooling three of the twelve judges who interrogated it (in the human-parallel comparisons) into believing it was human. This is coming very close to the 30% traditionally required to consider that a program has actually passed the Turing test. Eugene Goostman and Ultra Hal both deceived one judge each that it was the human. Will Pavia, a journalist for The Times, has written about his experience; a Loebner finals' judge, he was deceived by Elbot and Eugene. Kevin Warwick and Huma Shah have reported on the parallel-paired Turing tests. === 2009 === The 2009 Loebner Prize Competition was held September 6, 2009, at the Brighton Centre, Brighton UK in conjunction with the Interspeech 2009 conference. The prize amount for 2009 was $3,000. Entrants were David Levy, Rollo Carpenter, and Mohan Embar, who finished in that order. The writer Brian Christian participated in the 2009 Loebner Prize Competition as a human confederate, and described his experiences at the competition in his book The Most Human Human. === 2010 === The 2010 Loebner Prize Competition was held on October 23 at California State University, Los Angeles. The 2010 competition was the 20th running of the contest. The winner was Bruce Wilcox with Suzette. === 2011 === The 2011 Loebner Prize Competition was held on October 19 at the University of Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom. The prize amount for 2011 was $4,000. The four finalists and their chatterbots were Bruce Wilcox (Rosette), Adeena Mignogna (Zoe), Mohan Embar (Chip Vivant) and Ron Lee (Tutor), who finished in that order. That year there was an addition of a panel of junior judges, namely Georgia-Mae Lindfield, William Dunne, Sam Keat and Kirill Jerdev. The results of the junior contest were markedly different from the main contest, with chatterbots Tutor and Zoe tying for first place and Chip Vivant and Rosette coming in third and fourt

Psychology in cybersecurity

The psychology of cybersecurity (often intersecting with usable security and cyberpsychology) is an interdisciplinary field studying how human behavior, cognitive biases, and social dynamics influence information security. While traditional cybersecurity focuses on hardware and software vulnerabilities, this discipline addresses the "human factor," which is exploited in cyberattacks. Psychology in cybersecurity draws from cognitive psychology and human–computer interaction. == History and evolution == The challenge of human behavior in computing was noted as early as the 1960s with multi-user mainframes like the Compatible Time-Sharing System (CTSS). In 1966, a software error on CTSS caused the system's master password file to be displayed to every user upon login—one of the earliest documented security incidents attributable to a combination of system design and human factors. These behaviors gained broader significance in the 1990s as the Internet became widely accessible. High-profile incidents involving figures like Kevin Mitnick demonstrated how human trust could be exploited through social engineering such as pretexting over the phone. == Cognitive and behavioral factors == Much of the psychology of cybersecurity focuses on decision-making under stress or uncertainty. Researchers apply frameworks like dual process theory to explain why humans fall for phishing or business email compromise. Threat actors design malicious communications to trigger fast, emotional "System 1" thinking—using urgency, authority, or panic, which prompts users to click a link or wire funds before their analytical "System 2" can assess the situation's legitimacy. Industry research has consistently documented the effectiveness of these techniques at scale, pointing to several recurring psychological phenomena that influence daily security practices: Cognitive biases: The optimism bias leads users to believe they are unlikely to be targeted by cybercriminals, resulting in lax password practices or delayed software updates. The availability heuristic causes individuals to focus on highly publicized, sophisticated threats while ignoring common, statistically probable risks like credential reuse. Social influence: Attackers leverage established principles of persuasion, such as those categorized by Robert Cialdini. Impersonating a CEO leverages the psychological trigger of authority, while fake tech support scams use reciprocity (offering to fix a problem before asking for network credentials). == Neurological and pre-cognitive factors == Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies show that neural activation in visual and attentional regions decreases with repeated exposure to the same stimulus, a phenomenon termed repetition suppression. Experiments have confirmed this effect in the context of security warnings: static warning designs produce declines in user attention and adherence. Information processing research on phishing indicates that affective cues, such as artificial urgency or fear, increase cognitive load and elicit automatic heuristic processing, reducing the likelihood of analytical evaluation and facilitating compliance with malicious requests. == Security fatigue and organizational dynamics == Aggressive cybersecurity postures can sometimes lead to mental and emotional exhaustion, a phenomenon known as security fatigue. === Alert fatigue === One example is alert fatigue, which most frequently affects both end-users and security operations center analysts. Continuous exposure to browser warnings or antivirus pop-ups, particularly those that are false positives, conditions users to dismiss alerts automatically due to the volume of notifications rather than their repetitive appearance (see § Neurological and pre-cognitive factors). The scale of this problem is significant in enterprise: SOC teams in large organizations receive thousands of alerts daily, and a survey published in ACM Computer Surveys found that analysts spend over 25% of their time handling false positives, meaning that malicious indicators can be buried in the noise. === Password fatigue === Similarly, password fatigue is the feeling experienced by many people who are required to remember an excessive number of passwords as part of their daily routine, such as to log in to a computer at work. Users cope with the memory burden by making predictable, iterative changes to their passwords (such as updating "Password01!" to "Password02!"), which decreases password security.

Image tracing

In computer graphics, image tracing, raster-to-vector conversion or raster vectorization is the conversion of raster graphics into vector graphics. == Background == An image does not have any structure: it is just a collection of marks on paper, grains in film, or pixels in a bitmap. While such an image is useful, it has some limits. If the image is magnified enough, its artifacts appear. The halftone dots, film grains, and pixels become apparent. Images of sharp edges become fuzzy or jagged. See, for example, pixelation. Ideally, a vector image does not have the same problem. Edges and filled areas are represented as mathematical curves or gradients, and they can be magnified arbitrarily (though of course the final image must also be rasterized in to be rendered, and its quality depends on the quality of the rasterization algorithm for the given inputs). The task in vectorization is to convert a two-dimensional image into a two-dimensional vector representation of the image. It is not examining the image and attempting to recognize or extract a three-dimensional model that may be depicted; i.e. it is not a vision system. For most applications, vectorization also does not involve optical character recognition; characters are treated as lines, curves, or filled objects without attaching any significance to them. In vectorization, the shape of the character is preserved, so artistic embellishments remain. Vectorization is the inverse operation corresponding to rasterization, as integration is to differentiation. And, just as with these other operations, while rasterization is fairly straightforward and algorithmic, vectorization involves the reconstruction of lost information and therefore requires heuristic methods. Synthetic images such as maps, cartoons, logos, clip art, and technical drawings are suitable for vectorization. Those images could have been originally made as vector images because they are based on geometric shapes or drawn with simple curves. Continuous tone photographs (such as live portraits) are not good candidates for vectorization. The input to vectorization is an image, but an image may come in many forms such as a photograph, a drawing on paper, or one of several raster file formats. Programs that do raster-to-vector conversion may accept bitmap formats such as TIFF, BMP and PNG. The output is a vector file format. Common vector formats are SVG, DXF, EPS, EMF and AI. Vectorization can be used to update images or recover work. Personal computers often come with a simple paint program that produces a bitmap output file. These programs allow users to make simple illustrations by adding text, drawing outlines, and filling outlines with a specific color. Only the results of these operations (the pixels) are saved in the resulting bitmap; the drawing and filling operations are discarded. Vectorization can be used to recapture some of the information that was lost. Vectorization is also used to recover information that was originally in a vector format but has been lost or has become unavailable. A company may have commissioned a logo from a graphic arts firm. Although the graphics firm used a vector format, the client company may not have received a copy of that format. The company may then acquire a vector format by scanning and vectorizing a paper copy of the logo. == Process == Vectorization starts with an image. === Manual === The image can be vectorized manually. A person could look at the image, make some measurements, and then write the output file by hand. That was the case for the vectorization of a technical illustration about neutrinos. The illustration has a few geometric shapes and a lot of text; it was relatively easy to convert the shapes, and the SVG vector format allows the text (even subscripts and superscripts) to be entered easily. The original image did not have any curves (except for the text), so the conversion is straightforward. Curves make the conversion more complicated. Manual vectorization of complicated shapes can be facilitated by the tracing function built into some vector graphics editing programs. If the image is not yet in machine readable form, then it has to be scanned into a usable file format. Once there is a machine-readable bitmap, the image can be imported into a graphics editing program (such as Adobe Illustrator, CorelDRAW, or Inkscape). Then a person can manually trace the elements of the image using the program's editing features. Curves in the original image can be approximated with lines, arcs, and Bézier curves. An illustration program allows spline knots to be adjusted for a close fit. Manual vectorization is possible, but it can be tedious. Although graphics drawing programs have been around for a long time, artists may find the freehand drawing facilities awkward even when a drawing tablet is used. Instead of using a program, Pepper recommends making an initial sketch on paper. Instead of scanning the sketch and tracing it freehand in the computer, Pepper states: "Those proficient with a graphic tablet and stylus could make the following changes directly in CorelDRAW by using a scan of the sketch as an underlay and drawing over it. I prefer to use pen and ink, and a light table"; most of the final image was traced by hand in ink. Later the line-drawing image was scanned at 600 dpi, cleaned up in a paint program, and then automatically traced with a program. Once the black and white image was in the graphics program, some other elements were added and the figure was colored. Similarly, Ploch recreated a design from a digital photograph. The JPEG was imported and some "basic shapes" were traced by hand and colored in the graphics drawing program; more complex shapes were handled differently. Ploch used a bitmap editor to remove the background and crop the more complex image components. He then printed the image and traced it by hand onto tracing paper to get a clean black and white line drawing. That drawing was scanned and then vectorized with a program. === Automatic === Some programs automate the vectorization process. Example programs are Adobe Illustrator, Inkscape, Corel's PowerTRACE, and Potrace. Some of these programs have a command line interface while others are interactive that allow the user to adjust the conversion settings and view the result. Adobe Streamline is not only an interactive program, but it also allows a user to manually edit the input bitmap and the output curves. Corel's PowerTRACE is accessed through CorelDRAW; CorelDRAW can be used to modify the input bitmap and edit the output curves. Adobe Illustrator has a facility to trace individual curves. Automated programs can have mixed results. A program (PowerTRACE) was used to convert a PNG map to SVG. The program did a good job on the map boundaries (the most tedious task in the tracing) and the settings dropped out all the text (small objects). The text was manually re-inserted. Other conversions may not go as well. The results depend on having high-quality scans, reasonable settings, and good algorithms. Scanned images often have a lot of noise, which can require additional work to clean up. == Options == There are many different image styles and possibilities, and no single vectorization method works well on all images. Consequently, vectorization programs have many options that influence the result. One issue is what the predominant shapes are. If the image is of a fill-in form, then it will probably have just vertical and horizontal lines of a constant width. The program's vectorization should take that into account. On the other hand, a CAD drawing may have lines at any angle, there may be curved lines, and there may be several line weights (thick for objects and thin for dimension lines). Instead of (or in addition to) curves, the image may contain outlines filled with the same color. Adobe Streamline allows users to select a combination of line recognition (horizontal and vertical lines), centerline recognition, or outline recognition. Streamline also allows small outline shapes to be thrown out; the notion is such small shapes are noise. The user may set the noise level between 0 and 1000; an outline that has fewer pixels than that setting is discarded. Another issue is the number of colors in the image. Even images that were created as black on white drawings may end up with many shades of gray. Some line-drawing routines employ anti-aliasing; a pixel completely covered by the line will be black, but a pixel that is only partially covered will be gray. If the original image is on paper and is scanned, there is a similar result: edge pixels will be gray. Sometimes images are compressed (e.g., JPEG images), and the compression will introduce gray levels. Many of the vectorization programs will group same-color pixels into lines, curves, or outlined shapes. If each possible color is grouped into its object, there can be an enormous number of objects. Instead, the user is asked to s

Index locking

In databases an index is a data structure, part of the database, used by a database system to efficiently navigate access to user data. Index data are system data distinct from user data, and consist primarily of pointers. Changes in a database (by insert, delete, or modify operations), may require indexes to be updated to maintain accurate user data accesses. Index locking is a technique used to maintain index integrity. A portion of an index is locked during a database transaction when this portion is being accessed by the transaction as a result of attempt to access related user data. Additionally, special database system transactions (not user-invoked transactions) may be invoked to maintain and modify an index, as part of a system's self-maintenance activities. When a portion of an index is locked by a transaction, other transactions may be blocked from accessing this index portion (blocked from modifying, and even from reading it, depending on lock type and needed operation). Index Locking Protocol guarantees that phantom read phenomenon won't occur. Index locking protocol states: Every relation must have at least one index. A transaction can access tuples only after finding them through one or more indices on the relation A transaction Ti that performs a lookup must lock all the index leaf nodes that it accesses, in S-mode, even if the leaf node does not contain any tuple satisfying the index lookup (e.g. for a range query, no tuple in a leaf is in the range) A transaction Ti that inserts, updates or deletes a tuple ti in a relation r must update all indices to r and it must obtain exclusive locks on all index leaf nodes affected by the insert/update/delete The rules of the two-phase locking protocol must be observed. Specialized concurrency control techniques exist for accessing indexes. These techniques depend on the index type, and take advantage of its structure. They are typically much more effective than applying to indexes common concurrency control methods applied to user data. Notable and widely researched are specialized techniques for B-trees (B-Tree concurrency control) which are regularly used as database indexes. Index locks are used to coordinate threads accessing indexes concurrently, and typically shorter-lived than the common transaction locks on user data. In professional literature, they are often called latches.

Artificial intelligence of things

Artificial Intelligence of Things (AIoT) is the combination of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies with the Internet of things (IoT) infrastructure to create systems capable of sensing, learning, and acting on data without continuous human intervention. While IoT focuses on connectivity and sensor data collection, AI enables IoT devices to analyse data in real time and produce actionable outputs, including automated decisions at the edge. == Applications == === Manufacturing and predictive maintenance === Manufacturing accounts for the largest share of AIoT adoption by industry vertical. A common application is predictive maintenance, where sensors measuring vibration, temperature, current draw, and acoustic emissions feed machine learning models trained to detect signatures that precede equipment failure. These systems can flag developing faults weeks or months in advance, and in more advanced deployments can autonomously adjust machine parameters such as motor speed or cooling cycles to delay or prevent failure. === Other industries === In healthcare, AIoT enables remote patient monitoring through wearable devices that collect vital signs and apply AI models to detect anomalies or predict deterioration. In logistics, GPS and telematics sensors combined with AI models support real-time route optimisation, vehicle maintenance prediction, and fuel cost forecasting. Smart building systems use occupancy, temperature, and energy sensors with AI to dynamically adjust HVAC and lighting, reducing energy consumption. == Architecture == AIoT systems typically operate across three layers: a device layer of sensors and actuators that collect data, a connectivity layer that transmits data via protocols such as MQTT or HTTP, and a compute layer where AI models process the data either in the cloud or at the edge. The trend toward edge-based processing, where inference runs on low-cost processors near the data source rather than in a centralised cloud, has accelerated as hardware costs have fallen and applications increasingly require sub-second response times. == Market == Market sizing estimates for AIoT vary significantly depending on scope and definition. Fortune Business Insights valued the AIoT market at USD 35.65 billion in 2023, projecting growth to USD 253.86 billion by 2030 at a compound annual growth rate of 32.4%. Grand View Research estimated the broader market at USD 171.4 billion in 2024 with a CAGR of 31.7% through 2030, reflecting a wider definition that includes AI-integrated hardware components. North America accounted for approximately 40% of global market share in 2024, with the Asia-Pacific region projected as the fastest-growing market.

Mixed raster content

Mixed raster content (MRC) is a method for compressing images that contain both binary-compressible text and continuous-tone components, using image segmentation methods to improve the level of compression and the quality of the rendered image. By separating the image into components with different compressibility characteristics, the most efficient and accurate compression algorithm for each component can be applied. MRC-compressed images are typically packaged into a hybrid file format such as DjVu and sometimes PDF. This allows for multiple images, and the instructions to properly render and reassemble them, to be stored within a single file. Some image scanners optionally support MRC when scanning to PDF. A typical manual states that without MRC, the image is generated in a single process, with text and graphics not distinguished. With MRC, separate processes are used for text, graphics, and other elements, producing clearer graphics and sharper text, at the price of slightly slower processing. MRC is recommended to optimise the scanning of documents with harder-to-read text or lower-quality graphics. MRC can also reduce the size of the scanned file, though higher compression using JBIG2 can sometimes lead to character substitution errors in scanned documents. == File format == A form of MRC is defined by international standard bodies as ISO/IEC 16485, or ITU recommendation T.44 (accessible free of charge). It defines a file format with bilevel masks and two data layers in each "stripe" of the image. The mask can be encoded in ITU T.4, JBIG1, or JBIG2, while the images can be JPEG, JBIG1, or run-length encoded color. The format is loosely based on JPEG, with a APP13 segment registered for this purpose. It is not known whether this file format is actually used, as formats like DjVu and PDF have their own ways of defining layers and masks.