UMBEL (Upper Mapping and Binding Exchange Layer) is a logically organized knowledge graph of 34,000 concepts and entity types that can be used in information science for relating information from disparate sources to one another. It was retired at the end of 2019. UMBEL was first released in July 2008. Version 1.00 was released in February 2011. Its current release is version 1.50. The grounding of this information occurs by common reference to the permanent URIs for the UMBEL concepts; the connections within the UMBEL upper ontology enable concepts from sources at different levels of abstraction or specificity to be logically related. Since UMBEL is an open-source extract of the OpenCyc knowledge base, it can also take advantage of the reasoning capabilities within Cyc. UMBEL has two means to promote the semantic interoperability of information:. It is: An ontology of about 35,000 reference concepts, designed to provide common mapping points for relating different ontologies or schema to one another, and A vocabulary for aiding that ontology mapping, including expressions of likelihood relationships distinct from exact identity or equivalence. This vocabulary is also designed for interoperable domain ontologies. UMBEL is written in the Semantic Web languages of SKOS and OWL 2. It is a class structure used in Linked Data, along with OpenCyc, YAGO, and the DBpedia ontology. Besides data integration, UMBEL has been used to aid concept search, concept definitions, query ranking, ontology integration, and ontology consistency checking. It has also been used to build large ontologies and for online question answering systems. Including OpenCyc, UMBEL has about 65,000 formal mappings to DBpedia, PROTON, GeoNames, and schema.org, and provides linkages to more than 2 million Wikipedia pages (English version). All of its reference concepts and mappings are organized under a hierarchy of 31 different "super types", which are mostly disjoint from one another. Each of these "super types" has its own typology of entity classes to provide flexible tie-ins for external content. 90% of UMBEL is contained in these entity classes.
History of natural language processing
The history of natural language processing describes the advances of natural language processing. There is some overlap with the history of machine translation, the history of speech recognition, and the history of artificial intelligence. == Early history == The history of machine translation dates back to the seventeenth century, when philosophers such as Leibniz and Descartes put forward proposals for codes which would relate words between languages. All of these proposals remained theoretical, and none resulted in the development of an actual machine. The first patents for "translating machines" were applied for in the mid-1930s. One proposal, by Georges Artsrouni, was simply an automatic bilingual dictionary using paper tape. The other proposal, by Peter Troyanskii, a Russian, was more detailed. Troyanskii’s proposal included both the bilingual dictionary and a method for dealing with grammatical roles between languages, based on Esperanto. == Logical period == In 1950, Alan Turing published his famous article "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" which proposed what is now called the Turing test as a criterion of intelligence. This criterion depends on the ability of a computer program to impersonate a human in a real-time written conversation with a human judge, sufficiently well that the judge is unable to distinguish reliably — on the basis of the conversational content alone — between the program and a real human. In 1957, Noam Chomsky’s Syntactic Structures revolutionized Linguistics with 'universal grammar', a rule-based system of syntactic structures. The Georgetown experiment in 1954 involved fully automatic translation of more than sixty Russian sentences into English. The authors claimed that within three or five years, machine translation would be a solved problem. However, real progress was much slower, and after the ALPAC report in 1966, which found that ten years long research had failed to fulfill the expectations, funding for machine translation was dramatically reduced. Little further research in machine translation was conducted until the late 1980s, when the first statistical machine translation systems were developed. Some notably successful NLP systems developed in the 1960s were SHRDLU, a natural language system working in restricted "blocks worlds" with restricted vocabularies. In 1969 Roger Schank introduced the conceptual dependency theory for natural language understanding. This model, partially influenced by the work of Sydney Lamb, was extensively used by Schank's students at Yale University, such as Robert Wilensky, Wendy Lehnert, and Janet Kolodner. In 1970, William A. Woods introduced the augmented transition network (ATN) to represent natural language input. Instead of phrase structure rules ATNs used an equivalent set of finite-state automata that were called recursively. ATNs and their more general format called "generalized ATNs" continued to be used for a number of years. During the 1970s many programmers began to write 'conceptual ontologies', which structured real-world information into computer-understandable data. Examples are MARGIE (Schank, 1975), SAM (Cullingford, 1978), PAM (Wilensky, 1978), TaleSpin (Meehan, 1976), QUALM (Lehnert, 1977), Politics (Carbonell, 1979), and Plot Units (Lehnert 1981). During this time, many chatterbots were written including PARRY, Racter, and Jabberwacky. == Statistical period == Up to the 1980s, most NLP systems were based on complex sets of hand-written rules. Starting in the late 1980s, however, there was a revolution in NLP with the introduction of machine learning algorithms for language processing. This was due both to the steady increase in computational power resulting from Moore's law and the gradual lessening of the dominance of Chomskyan theories of linguistics (e.g. transformational grammar), whose theoretical underpinnings discouraged the sort of corpus linguistics that underlies the machine-learning approach to language processing. Some of the earliest-used machine learning algorithms, such as decision trees, produced systems of hard if-then rules similar to existing hand-written rules. Increasingly, however, research has focused on statistical models, which make soft, probabilistic decisions based on attaching real-valued weights to the features making up the input data. The cache language models upon which many speech recognition systems now rely are examples of such statistical models. Such models are generally more robust when given unfamiliar input, especially input that contains errors (as is very common for real-world data), and produce more reliable results when integrated into a larger system comprising multiple subtasks. === Datasets === The emergence of statistical approaches was aided by both increase in computing power and the availability of large datasets. At that time, large multilingual corpora were starting to emerge. Notably, some were produced by the Parliament of Canada and the European Union as a result of laws calling for the translation of all governmental proceedings into all official languages of the corresponding systems of government. Many of the notable early successes occurred in the field of machine translation. In 1993, the IBM alignment models were used for statistical machine translation. Compared to previous machine translation systems, which were symbolic systems manually coded by computational linguists, these systems were statistical, which allowed them to automatically learn from large textual corpora. Though these systems do not work well in situations where only small corpora is available, so data-efficient methods continue to be an area of research and development. In 2001, a one-billion-word large text corpus, scraped from the Internet, referred to as "very very large" at the time, was used for word disambiguation. To take advantage of large, unlabelled datasets, algorithms were developed for unsupervised and self-supervised learning. Generally, this task is much more difficult than supervised learning, and typically produces less accurate results for a given amount of input data. However, there is an enormous amount of non-annotated data available (including, among other things, the entire content of the World Wide Web), which can often make up for the inferior results. == Neural period == Neural language models were developed in 1990s. In 1990, the Elman network, using a recurrent neural network, encoded each word in a training set as a vector, called a word embedding, and the whole vocabulary as a vector database, allowing it to perform such tasks as sequence-predictions that are beyond the power of a simple multilayer perceptron. A shortcoming of the static embeddings was that they didn't differentiate between multiple meanings of homonyms. Yoshua Bengio developed the first neural probabilistic language model in 2000. Novel algorithms, availability of larger datasets and higher processing power made possible training of larger and larger language models. Attention mechanism was introduced by Bahdanau et al. in 2014. This work laid the foundations for the famous "Attention Is All You Need" paper that introduced the Transformer architecture in 2017. The concept of large language model (LLM) emerged in late 2010s. LLM is a language model trained with self-supervised learning on vast amount of text. Earliest public LLMs had hundreds of millions of parameters, but this number quickly rose to billion and even trillions. In recent years, advancements in deep learning and large language models have significantly enhanced the capabilities of natural language processing, leading to widespread applications in areas such as healthcare, customer service, and content generation. == Software ==
Computer Science Ontology
The Computer Science Ontology (CSO) is an automatically generated taxonomy of research topics in the field of Computer Science. It was produced by the Open University in collaboration with Springer Nature by running an information extraction system over a large corpus of scientific articles. Several branches were manually improved by domain experts. The current version (CSO 3.2) includes about 14K research topics and 160K semantic relationships. CSO is available in OWL, Turtle, and N-Triples. It is aligned with several other knowledge graphs, including DBpedia, Wikidata, YAGO, Freebase, and Cyc. New versions of CSO are regularly released on the CSO Portal. CSO is mostly used to characterise scientific papers and other documents according to their research areas, in order to enable different kinds of analytics. The CSO Classifier is an open-source python tool for automatically annotating documents with CSO. == Applications == Recommender Systems. Computing the semantic similarity of documents. Extracting metadata from video lecture subtitles. Performing bibliometrics analysis.
Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act
The Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act, also referred to as SB-53, is a 2025 California law which mandates increased transparency for companies building artificial intelligence. SB-53 is primarily focused on assessing and reducing potential catastrophic risks from AI, and is the first bill addressing such risks to be passed into law in America. The bill requires companies to create publicly accessible documents assessing potential "catastrophic risk[s]" from their AI models, as well as publishing documentation on how the model incorporates national and international safety standards. SB-53 also sets up whistleblower protections and procedures for alerting the government to a "critical safety incident". == History == SB-53 was preceded in 2024 by the unsuccessful Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act ("SB-1047"), a proposed bill authored by Senator Scott Wiener which was vetoed by Governor Gavin Newsom. Afterwords, Newsom created a "Joint California AI Policy Working Group" to provide recommendations for AI regulation, which guided the drafting of SB-53. Senator Scott Wiener introduced the bill on January 7, 2025, and after a series of amendments, SB-53 passed the Senate 29-8 on September 13. Governor Gavin Newsom approved the bill on September 25, passing it into law. == Provisions == SB-53 applies primarily to companies making at least $500 million in yearly gross revenue. It defines a “frontier model” as any AI trained with over 1026 FLOPS (including fine-tuning), including unreleased internal models. Both the financial and computational thresholds must be met before most of the law is applied, although the threshold can be lowered or otherwise updated by the California Department of Technology in an annual review starting in 2027. Most of the bill's provisions are focused on "catastrophic risks" from AI, which are defined as incidents in which a model contributes to more than 50 deaths or serious injuries, or causes more than one billion dollars ($1,000,000,000) in economic damage from AI-assisted acts (such as cyberattacks or the creation of biological weapons). The bill requires companies to provide publicly accessible safety frameworks for frontier AI models, describing how the company tests for catastrophic risk from its AI, and how it implements protections against such risks. This includes addressing the possibility that the AI may attempt to circumvent internal guardrails or oversight mechanisms. (Certain safety incidents, such as dangerously deceptive model behavior, physical injury, or death, must be reported to California Office of Emergency Services (OES) within 15 days, unless the incident poses imminent physical risk, in which case it must be reported immediately.) The company must follow its published framework, and if any changes are made, the framework should be updated within 30 days, and justification for said changes must also be made public. Additionally, all frontier companies are required to publish basic information about newly released frontier models (such as terms of service, supported languages, and intended use), although only large companies (making over $500 million annually) need to publish full safety frameworks. SB-53 also establishes various whistleblower protections for covered employees. Large companies must have anonymous whistleblowing channels in place which protect employees from retaliation from reporting risks to state or federal authorities if they have reasonable cause to believe that their employer is substantially risking public health and safety.
Alliance for Secure AI
The Alliance for Secure AI is a U.S.-based nonprofit organization which educates the public about the risks of advanced artificial intelligence (AI). Politico has described the Alliance as a "bipartisan nonprofit trying to push a middle-ground approach to AI guardrails." == History == In June 2025, the Alliance was launched as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit watchdog in Washington, D.C. That same month, the organization rolled out a six-figure advertising campaign featuring bipartisan warnings about advanced AI. The ad campaign presented different messages for different political audiences. The Alliance opposed the idea of a moratorium on state AI laws as part of the July 2025 budget bill, in addition to President Donald Trump's December 2025 executive order on the issue. The group has also criticized AI companies like Meta and OpenAI for what it says are failures to prevent harms to children. In addition, the Alliance has criticized OpenAI for subpoenaing nonprofit organizations in the AI safety space. In March 2026, the Alliance launched JobLoss.ai, a website that tracks the jobs that have been eliminated with AI cited as a contributing factor. As of April 2026, JobLoss.ai has tracked more than 127,000 lost jobs. == Leadership == Brendan Steinhauser, a longtime political and communications strategist, is the founder and CEO of the Alliance. He was an early Tea Party movement organizer, and ran campaigns for multiple members of Congress, including Sen. John Cornyn, Rep. Dan Crenshaw, and Rep. Michael McCaul. Peyton Hornberger is the group's communications director. In July 2025, Hornberger criticized Palantir for its use of AI in a USA Today op-ed column.
Microsoft To Do
Microsoft To Do (previously styled as Microsoft To-Do) is a cloud-based task management application. It allows users to manage their tasks from a smartphone, tablet and computer. The technology is produced by the team behind Wunderlist, which was acquired by Microsoft, and the stand-alone apps feed into the existing Tasks feature of the Outlook product range. == History == Microsoft To Do was first launched as a preview with basic features in April 2017. Later more features were added including Task list sharing in June 2018. In September 2019, a major update to the app was unveiled, adopting a new user interface with a closer resemblance to Wunderlist. The name was also slightly updated by removing the hyphen from To-Do. In May 2020, Microsoft officially closed the doors on Wunderlist, ending its active service in favor of improving and expanding Microsoft To Do.
Reification (computer science)
In computer science, reification is the process by which an abstract idea about a program is turned into an explicit data model or other object created in a programming language. A computable/addressable object—a resource—is created in a system as a proxy for a non computable/addressable object. By means of reification, something that was previously implicit, unexpressed, and possibly inexpressible is explicitly formulated and made available to conceptual (logical or computational) manipulation. Informally, reification is often referred to as "making something a first-class citizen" within the scope of a particular system. Some aspect of a system can be reified at language design time, which is related to reflection in programming languages. It can be applied as a stepwise refinement at system design time. Reification is one of the most frequently used techniques of conceptual analysis and knowledge representation. == Reflective programming languages == In the context of programming languages, reification is the process by which a user program or any aspect of a programming language that was implicit in the translated program and the run-time system, are expressed in the language itself. This process makes it available to the program, which can inspect all these aspects as ordinary data. In reflective languages, reification data is causally connected to the related reified aspect such that a modification to one of them affects the other. Therefore, the reification data is always a faithful representation of the related reified aspect . Reification data is often said to be made a first class object. Reification, at least partially, has been experienced in many languages to date: in early Lisp dialects and in current Prolog dialects, programs have been treated as data, although the causal connection has often been left to the responsibility of the programmer. In Smalltalk-80, the compiler from the source text to bytecode has been part of the run-time system since the very first implementations of the language. The C programming language reifies the low-level detail of memory addresses.Many programming language designs encapsulate the details of memory allocation in the compiler and the run-time system. In the design of the C programming language, the memory address is reified and is available for direct manipulation by other language constructs. For example, the following code may be used when implementing a memory-mapped device driver. The buffer pointer is a proxy for the memory address 0xB8000000. Functional programming languages based on lambda-calculus reify the concept of a procedure abstraction and procedure application in the form of the Lambda expression. The Scheme programming language reifies continuations (approximately, the call stack). In C#, reification is used to make parametric polymorphism implemented in the form of generics as a first-class feature of the language. In the Java programming language, there exist "reifiable types" that are "completely available at run time" (i.e. their information is not erased during compilation). REBOL reifies code as data and vice versa. Many languages, such as Lisp, JavaScript, and Curl, provide an eval or evaluate procedure that effectively reifies the language interpreter. Smalltalk and Actor languages permit the reification of blocks and messages, which are equivalent of lambda expressions in Lisp, and thisContext in Smalltalk, which is a reification of the current executing block. Homoiconic languages reify the syntax of the language as data that is understood by the language itself. This allows the user to write programs whose inputs and outputs are code (see macros, eval). Common representations of code include S-expressions (e.g. Clojure, Lisp), and abstract syntax trees (e.g. Rust). == Data reification vs. data refinement == Data reification (stepwise refinement) involves finding a more concrete representation of the abstract data types used in a formal specification. Data reification is the terminology of the Vienna Development Method (VDM) that most other people would call data refinement. An example is taking a step towards an implementation by replacing a data representation without a counterpart in the intended implementation language, such as sets, by one that does have a counterpart (such as maps with fixed domains that can be implemented by arrays), or at least one that is closer to having a counterpart, such as sequences. The VDM community prefers the word "reification" over "refinement", as the process has more to do with concretising an idea than with refining it. For similar usages, see Reification (linguistics). == In conceptual modeling == Reification is widely used in conceptual modeling. Reifying a relationship means viewing it as an entity. The purpose of reifying a relationship is to make it explicit, when additional information needs to be added to it. Consider the relationship type IsMemberOf(member:Person, Committee). An instance of IsMemberOf is a relationship that represents the fact that a person is a member of a committee. The figure below shows an example population of IsMemberOf relationship in tabular form. Person P1 is a member of committees C1 and C2. Person P2 is a member of committee C1 only. The same fact, however, could also be viewed as an entity. Viewing a relationship as an entity, one can say that the entity reifies the relationship. This is called reification of a relationship. Like any other entity, it must be an instance of an entity type. In the present example, the entity type has been named Membership. For each instance of IsMemberOf, there is one and only one instance of Membership, and vice versa. Now, it becomes possible to add more information to the original relationship. As an example, we can express the fact that "person p1 was nominated to be the member of committee c1 by person p2". Reified relationship Membership can be used as the source of a new relationship IsNominatedBy(Membership, Person). For related usages see Reification (knowledge representation). == In Unified Modeling Language (UML) == UML provides an association class construct for defining reified relationship types. The association class is a single model element that is both a kind of association and a kind of class. The association and the entity type that reifies are both the same model element. Note that attributes cannot be reified. == On Semantic Web == === RDF and OWL === In Semantic Web languages, such as Resource Description Framework (RDF) and Web Ontology Language (OWL), a statement is a binary relation. It is used to link two individuals or an individual and a value. Applications sometimes need to describe other RDF statements, for instance, to record information like when statements were made, or who made them, which is sometimes called "provenance" information. As an example, we may want to represent properties of a relation, such as our certainty about it, severity or strength of a relation, relevance of a relation, and so on. The example from the conceptual modeling section describes a particular person with URIref person:p1, who is a member of the committee:c1. The RDF triple from that description is Consider to store two further facts: (i) to record who nominated this particular person to this committee (a statement about the membership itself), and (ii) to record who added the fact to the database (a statement about the statement). The first case is a case of classical reification like above in UML: reify the membership and store its attributes and roles etc.: Additionally, RDF provides a built-in vocabulary intended for describing RDF statements. A description of a statement using this vocabulary is called a reification of the statement. The RDF reification vocabulary consists of the type rdf:Statement, and the properties rdf:subject, rdf:predicate, and rdf:object. Using the reification vocabulary, a reification of the statement about the person's membership would be given by assigning the statement a URIref such as committee:membership12345 so that describing statements can be written as follows: These statements say that the resource identified by the URIref committee:membership12345Stat is an RDF statement, that the subject of the statement refers to the resource identified by person:p1, the predicate of the statement refers to the resource identified by committee:isMemberOf, and the object of the statement refers to the resource committee:c1. Assuming that the original statement is actually identified by committee:membership12345, it should be clear by comparing the original statement with the reification that the reification actually does describe it. The conventional use of the RDF reification vocabulary always involves describing a statement using four statements in this pattern. Therefore, they are sometimes referred to as the "reification quad". Using reification according to this convention, we could record the fact that pe