In metadata, a vocabulary-based transformation (VBT) is a transformation aided by the use of a semantic equivalence statements within a controlled vocabulary. Many organizations today require communication between two or more computers. Although many standards exist to exchange data between computers such as HTML or email, there is still much structured information that needs to be exchanged between computers that is not standardized. The process of mapping one source of data into another is often a slow and labor-intensive process. VBT is a possible way to avoid much of the time and cost of manual data mapping using traditional extract, transform, load technologies. == History == The term vocabulary-based transformation was first defined by Roy Shulte of the Gartner Group around May 2003 and appeared in annual "hype-cycle" for integration. == Application == VBT allows computer systems integrators to more automatically "look up" the definitions of data elements in a centralized data dictionary and use that definition and the equivalent mappings to transform that data element into a foreign namespace. The Web Ontology Language (OWL) language also support three semantic equivalence statements. == Companies or products == IONA Technologies Contivo and Delta by Liaison Technologies enLeague Systems ItemField Unicorn Solutions Vitria Technology Zonar
ShowScoop
ShowScoop is a website and mobile app platform on which users can rate and review artists, concerts, and music festivals that they have seen/attended. The reviews and ratings are designed to be informative of how well such performances are live. This helps concert-goers decide which live music events they want to attend. == History == ShowScoop was founded in August 2012 by Micah Smurthwaite and is based out of San Diego, CA. In February 2013, ShowScoop launched its mobile app at the SF Music Tech Summit. The application is currently available on the iPhone, with plans to expand into the Android market in the future. == Services == ShowScoop uses crowdsourcing to provide accurate ratings of live concert experiences. In addition to viewing ratings, users are encouraged to rate and review concerts they have attended. The ShowScoop database includes nearly one million artists and over 2.5 million live music events. ShowScoop users can rate artists on four aspects of the performance: stage presence, crowd interaction, sound quality, and visual effects. The rating system uses an ascending scale from one to five in each of the aspects, with five being the highest score. In addition to the quantitative ratings, ShowScoop users are also free to write qualitative reviews in a provided comment section. This allows users to explain their ratings and add further insight or opinion. ShowScoop incorporates several facets of social media into its services. Users can create a user profile to share limited personal information and store their ratings and reviews. Users are also given the option of sharing their evaluations with their social networks on Facebook and Twitter. Users can "like" reviews, follow artists, and follow other ShowScoop users. The mobile app allows users to take photos, apply filters, and share the final image in conjunction with reviews and through Instagram. == Road Crew == ShowScoop's "Road Crew" is a group made up of top contributors within the ShowScoop community. The Road Crew assists in curating artist pages, assuring information quality and accuracy. In return, members of the Road Crew are given incentives, including free tickets to concerts and personal invitations to exclusive shows. Applicants to the Road Crew are judged on the number and quality of their reviews, the photos and videos they have posted, and their general engagement with the ShowScoop community in following and liking users and reviews.
Relief (feature selection)
Relief is an algorithm developed by Kenji Kira and Larry Rendell in 1992 that takes a filter-method approach to feature selection that is notably sensitive to feature interactions. It was originally designed for application to binary classification problems with discrete or numerical features. Relief calculates a feature score for each feature which can then be applied to rank and select top scoring features for feature selection. Alternatively, these scores may be applied as feature weights to guide downstream modeling. Relief feature scoring is based on the identification of feature value differences between nearest neighbor instance pairs. If a feature value difference is observed in a neighboring instance pair with the same class (a 'hit'), the feature score decreases. Alternatively, if a feature value difference is observed in a neighboring instance pair with different class values (a 'miss'), the feature score increases. The original Relief algorithm has since inspired a family of Relief-based feature selection algorithms (RBAs), including the ReliefF algorithm. Beyond the original Relief algorithm, RBAs have been adapted to (1) perform more reliably in noisy problems, (2) generalize to multi-class problems (3) generalize to numerical outcome (i.e. regression) problems, and (4) to make them robust to incomplete (i.e. missing) data. To date, the development of RBA variants and extensions has focused on four areas; (1) improving performance of the 'core' Relief algorithm, i.e. examining strategies for neighbor selection and instance weighting, (2) improving scalability of the 'core' Relief algorithm to larger feature spaces through iterative approaches, (3) methods for flexibly adapting Relief to different data types, and (4) improving Relief run efficiency. Their strengths are that they are not dependent on heuristics, they run in low-order polynomial time, and they are noise-tolerant and robust to feature interactions, as well as being applicable for binary or continuous data; however, it does not discriminate between redundant features, and low numbers of training instances fool the algorithm. == Relief Algorithm == Take a data set with n instances of p features, belonging to two known classes. Within the data set, each feature should be scaled to the interval [0 1] (binary data should remain as 0 and 1). The algorithm will be repeated m times. Start with a p-long weight vector (W) of zeros. At each iteration, take the feature vector (X) belonging to one random instance, and the feature vectors of the instance closest to X (by Euclidean distance) from each class. The closest same-class instance is called 'near-hit', and the closest different-class instance is called 'near-miss'. Update the weight vector such that W i = W i − ( x i − n e a r H i t i ) 2 + ( x i − n e a r M i s s i ) 2 , {\displaystyle W_{i}=W_{i}-(x_{i}-\mathrm {nearHit} _{i})^{2}+(x_{i}-\mathrm {nearMiss} _{i})^{2},} where i {\displaystyle i} indexes the components and runs from 1 to p. Thus the weight of any given feature decreases if it differs from that feature in nearby instances of the same class more than nearby instances of the other class, and increases in the reverse case. After m iterations, divide each element of the weight vector by m. This becomes the relevance vector. Features are selected if their relevance is greater than a threshold τ. Kira and Rendell's experiments showed a clear contrast between relevant and irrelevant features, allowing τ to be determined by inspection. However, it can also be determined by Chebyshev's inequality for a given confidence level (α) that a τ of 1/sqrt(αm) is good enough to make the probability of a Type I error less than α, although it is stated that τ can be much smaller than that. Relief was also described as generalizable to multinomial classification by decomposition into a number of binary problems. == ReliefF Algorithm == Kononenko et al. propose a number of updates to Relief. Firstly, they find the near-hit and near-miss instances using the Manhattan (L1) norm rather than the Euclidean (L2) norm, although the rationale is not specified. Furthermore, they found taking the absolute differences between xi and near-hiti, and xi and near-missi to be sufficient when updating the weight vector (rather than the square of those differences). === Reliable probability estimation === Rather than repeating the algorithm m times, implement it exhaustively (i.e. n times, once for each instance) for relatively small n (up to one thousand). Furthermore, rather than finding the single nearest hit and single nearest miss, which may cause redundant and noisy attributes to affect the selection of the nearest neighbors, ReliefF searches for k nearest hits and misses and averages their contribution to the weights of each feature. k can be tuned for any individual problem. === Incomplete data === In ReliefF, the contribution of missing values to the feature weight is determined using the conditional probability that two values should be the same or different, approximated with relative frequencies from the data set. This can be calculated if one or both features are missing. === Multi-class problems === Rather than use Kira and Rendell's proposed decomposition of a multinomial classification into a number of binomial problems, ReliefF searches for k near misses from each different class and averages their contributions for updating W, weighted with the prior probability of each class. == Other Relief-based Algorithm Extensions/Derivatives == The following RBAs are arranged chronologically from oldest to most recent. They include methods for improving (1) the core Relief algorithm concept, (2) iterative approaches for scalability, (3) adaptations to different data types, (4) strategies for computational efficiency, or (5) some combination of these goals. For more on RBAs see these book chapters or this most recent review paper. === RRELIEFF === Robnik-Šikonja and Kononenko propose further updates to ReliefF, making it appropriate for regression. === Relieved-F === Introduced deterministic neighbor selection approach and a new approach for incomplete data handling. === Iterative Relief === Implemented method to address bias against non-monotonic features. Introduced the first iterative Relief approach. For the first time, neighbors were uniquely determined by a radius threshold and instances were weighted by their distance from the target instance. === I-RELIEF === Introduced sigmoidal weighting based on distance from target instance. All instance pairs (not just a defined subset of neighbors) contributed to score updates. Proposed an on-line learning variant of Relief. Extended the iterative Relief concept. Introduced local-learning updates between iterations for improved convergence. === TuRF (a.k.a. Tuned ReliefF) === Specifically sought to address noise in large feature spaces through the recursive elimination of features and the iterative application of ReliefF. === Evaporative Cooling ReliefF === Similarly seeking to address noise in large feature spaces. Utilized an iterative `evaporative' removal of lowest quality features using ReliefF scores in association with mutual information. === EReliefF (a.k.a. Extended ReliefF) === Addressing issues related to incomplete and multi-class data. === VLSReliefF (a.k.a. Very Large Scale ReliefF) === Dramatically improves the efficiency of detecting 2-way feature interactions in very large feature spaces by scoring random feature subsets rather than the entire feature space. === ReliefMSS === Introduced calculation of feature weights relative to average feature 'diff' between instance pairs. === SURF === SURF identifies nearest neighbors (both hits and misses) based on a distance threshold from the target instance defined by the average distance between all pairs of instances in the training data. Results suggest improved power to detect 2-way epistatic interactions over ReliefF. === SURF (a.k.a. SURFStar) === SURF extends the SURF algorithm to not only utilized 'near' neighbors in scoring updates, but 'far' instances as well, but employing inverted scoring updates for 'far instance pairs. Results suggest improved power to detect 2-way epistatic interactions over SURF, but an inability to detect simple main effects (i.e. univariate associations). === SWRF === SWRF extends the SURF algorithm adopting sigmoid weighting to take distance from the threshold into account. Also introduced a modular framework for further developing RBAs called MoRF. === MultiSURF (a.k.a. MultiSURFStar) === MultiSURF extends the SURF algorithm adapting the near/far neighborhood boundaries based on the average and standard deviation of distances from the target instance to all others. MultiSURF uses the standard deviation to define a dead-band zone where 'middle-distance' instances do not contribute to scoring. Evidence suggests MultiSURF performs best in detecting pure 2-way feature interactions. === Reli
Crossover (evolutionary algorithm)
Crossover in evolutionary algorithms and evolutionary computation, also called recombination, is a genetic operator used to combine the genetic information of two parents to generate new offspring. It is one way to stochastically generate new solutions from an existing population, and is analogous to the crossover that happens during sexual reproduction in biology. New solutions can also be generated by cloning an existing solution, which is analogous to asexual reproduction. Newly generated solutions may be mutated before being added to the population. The aim of recombination is to transfer good characteristics from two different parents to one child. Different algorithms in evolutionary computation may use different data structures to store genetic information, and each genetic representation can be recombined with different crossover operators. Typical data structures that can be recombined with crossover are bit arrays, vectors of real numbers, or trees. The list of operators presented below is by no means complete and serves mainly as an exemplary illustration of this dyadic genetic operator type. More operators and more details can be found in the literature. == Crossover for binary arrays == Traditional genetic algorithms store genetic information in a chromosome represented by a bit array. Crossover methods for bit arrays are popular and an illustrative example of genetic recombination. === One-point crossover === A point on both parents' chromosomes is picked randomly, and designated a 'crossover point'. Bits to the right of that point are swapped between the two parent chromosomes. This results in two offspring, each carrying some genetic information from both parents. === Two-point and k-point crossover === In two-point crossover, two crossover points are picked randomly from the parent chromosomes. The bits in between the two points are swapped between the parent organisms. Two-point crossover is equivalent to performing two single-point crossovers with different crossover points. This strategy can be generalized to k-point crossover for any positive integer k, picking k crossover points. === Uniform crossover === In uniform crossover, typically, each bit is chosen from either parent with equal probability. Other mixing ratios are sometimes used, resulting in offspring which inherit more genetic information from one parent than the other. In a uniform crossover, we don’t divide the chromosome into segments, rather we treat each gene separately. In this, we essentially flip a coin for each chromosome to decide whether or not it will be included in the off-spring. == Crossover for integer or real-valued genomes == For the crossover operators presented above and for most other crossover operators for bit strings, it holds that they can also be applied accordingly to integer or real-valued genomes whose genes each consist of an integer or real-valued number. Instead of individual bits, integer or real-valued numbers are then simply copied into the child genome. The offspring lie on the remaining corners of the hyperbody spanned by the two parents P 1 = ( 1.5 , 6 , 8 ) {\displaystyle P_{1}=(1.5,6,8)} and P 2 = ( 7 , 2 , 1 ) {\displaystyle P_{2}=(7,2,1)} , as exemplified in the accompanying image for the three-dimensional case. === Discrete recombination === If the rules of the uniform crossover for bit strings are applied during the generation of the offspring, this is also called discrete recombination. === Intermediate recombination === In this recombination operator, the allele values of the child genome a i {\displaystyle a_{i}} are generated by mixing the alleles of the two parent genomes a i , P 1 {\displaystyle a_{i,P_{1}}} and a i , P 2 {\displaystyle a_{i,P_{2}}} : α i = α i , P 1 ⋅ β i + α i , P 2 ⋅ ( 1 − β i ) w i t h β i ∈ [ − d , 1 + d ] {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}=\alpha _{i,P_{1}}\cdot \beta _{i}+\alpha _{i,P_{2}}\cdot \left(1-\beta _{i}\right)\quad {\mathsf {with}}\quad \beta _{i}\in \left[-d,1+d\right]} randomly equally distributed per gene i {\displaystyle i} The choice of the interval [ − d , 1 + d ] {\displaystyle [-d,1+d]} causes that besides the interior of the hyperbody spanned by the allele values of the parent genes additionally a certain environment for the range of values of the offspring is in question. A value of 0.25 {\displaystyle 0.25} is recommended for d {\displaystyle d} to counteract the tendency to reduce the allele values that otherwise exists at d = 0 {\displaystyle d=0} . The adjacent figure shows for the two-dimensional case the range of possible new alleles of the two exemplary parents P 1 = ( 3 , 6 ) {\displaystyle P_{1}=(3,6)} and P 2 = ( 9 , 2 ) {\displaystyle P_{2}=(9,2)} in intermediate recombination. The offspring of discrete recombination C 1 {\displaystyle C_{1}} and C 2 {\displaystyle C_{2}} are also plotted. Intermediate recombination satisfies the arithmetic calculation of the allele values of the child genome required by virtual alphabet theory. Discrete and intermediate recombination are used as a standard in the evolution strategy. == Crossover for permutations == For combinatorial tasks, permutations are usually used that are specifically designed for genomes that are themselves permutations of a set. The underlying set is usually a subset of N {\displaystyle \mathbb {N} } or N 0 {\displaystyle \mathbb {N} _{0}} . If 1- or n-point or uniform crossover for integer genomes is used for such genomes, a child genome may contain some values twice and others may be missing. This can be remedied by genetic repair, e.g. by replacing the redundant genes in positional fidelity for missing ones from the other child genome. In order to avoid the generation of invalid offspring, special crossover operators for permutations have been developed which fulfill the basic requirements of such operators for permutations, namely that all elements of the initial permutation are also present in the new one and only the order is changed. It can be distinguished between combinatorial tasks, where all sequences are admissible, and those where there are constraints in the form of inadmissible partial sequences. A well-known representative of the first task type is the traveling salesman problem (TSP), where the goal is to visit a set of cities exactly once on the shortest tour. An example of the constrained task type is the scheduling of multiple workflows. Workflows involve sequence constraints on some of the individual work steps. For example, a thread cannot be cut until the corresponding hole has been drilled in a workpiece. Such problems are also called order-based permutations. In the following, two crossover operators are presented as examples, the partially mapped crossover (PMX) motivated by the TSP and the order crossover (OX1) designed for order-based permutations. A second offspring can be produced in each case by exchanging the parent chromosomes. === Partially mapped crossover (PMX) === The PMX operator was designed as a recombination operator for TSP like Problems. The explanation of the procedure is illustrated by an example: === Order crossover (OX1) === The order crossover goes back to Davis in its original form and is presented here in a slightly generalized version with more than two crossover points. It transfers information about the relative order from the second parent to the offspring. First, the number and position of the crossover points are determined randomly. The resulting gene sequences are then processed as described below: Among other things, order crossover is well suited for scheduling multiple workflows, when used in conjunction with 1- and n-point crossover. === Further crossover operators for permutations === Over time, a large number of crossover operators for permutations have been proposed, so the following list is only a small selection. For more information, the reader is referred to the literature. cycle crossover (CX) order-based crossover (OX2) position-based crossover (POS) edge recombination voting recombination (VR) alternating-positions crossover (AP) maximal preservative crossover (MPX) merge crossover (MX) sequential constructive crossover operator (SCX) The usual approach to solving TSP-like problems by genetic or, more generally, evolutionary algorithms, presented earlier, is either to repair illegal descendants or to adjust the operators appropriately so that illegal offspring do not arise in the first place. Alternatively, Riazi suggests the use of a double chromosome representation, which avoids illegal offspring.
Ho–Kashyap algorithm
The Ho–Kashyap algorithm is an iterative method in machine learning for finding a linear decision boundary that separates two linearly separable classes. It was developed by Yu-Chi Ho and Rangasami L. Kashyap in 1965, and usually presented as a problem in linear programming. == Setup == Given a training set consisting of samples from two classes, the Ho–Kashyap algorithm seeks to find a weight vector w {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} } and a margin vector b {\displaystyle \mathbf {b} } such that: Y w = b {\displaystyle \mathbf {Yw} =\mathbf {b} } where Y {\displaystyle \mathbf {Y} } is the augmented data matrix with samples from both classes (with appropriate sign conventions, e.g., samples from class 2 are negated), w {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} } is the weight vector to be determined, and b {\displaystyle \mathbf {b} } is a positive margin vector. The algorithm minimizes the criterion function: J ( w , b ) = | | Y w − b | | 2 {\displaystyle J(\mathbf {w} ,\mathbf {b} )=||\mathbf {Yw} -\mathbf {b} ||^{2}} subject to the constraint that b > 0 {\displaystyle \mathbf {b} >\mathbf {0} } (element-wise). Given a problem of linearly separating two classes, we consider a dataset of elements { ( x i , y i ) } i ∈ 1 : N {\displaystyle \{(\mathbf {x_{i}} ,y_{i})\}_{i\in 1:N}} where y i ∈ { − 1 , + 1 } {\displaystyle y_{i}\in \{-1,+1\}} . Linearly separating them by a perceptron is equivalent to finding weight and bias w , b {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} ,b} for a perceptron, such that: [ y 1 x 1 1 ⋮ ⋮ y N x N 1 ] [ w b ] > 0 {\displaystyle {\begin{bmatrix}y_{1}\mathbf {x} _{1}&1\\\vdots &\vdots \\y_{N}\mathbf {x} _{N}&1\\\end{bmatrix}}{\begin{bmatrix}\mathbf {w} \\b\end{bmatrix}}>0} == Algorithm == The idea of the Ho–Kashyap algorithm is as follows: Given any b {\displaystyle \mathbf {b} } , the corresponding w {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} } is known: It is simply w = Y + b {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} =\mathbf {Y} ^{+}\mathbf {b} } , where Y + {\displaystyle \mathbf {Y} ^{+}} denotes the Moore–Penrose pseudoinverse of Y {\displaystyle \mathbf {Y} } . Therefore, it only remains to find b {\displaystyle \mathbf {b} } by gradient descent. However, the gradient descent may sometimes decrease some of the coordinates of b {\displaystyle \mathbf {b} } , which may cause some coordinates of b {\displaystyle \mathbf {b} } to become negative, which is undesirable. Therefore, whenever some coordinates of b {\displaystyle \mathbf {b} } would have decreased, those coordinates are unchanged instead. As for the coordinates of b {\displaystyle \mathbf {b} } that would increase, those would increase without issue. Formally, the algorithm is as follows: Initialization: Set b ( 0 ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {b} (0)} to an arbitrary positive vector, typically b ( 0 ) = 1 {\displaystyle \mathbf {b} (0)=\mathbf {1} } (a vector of ones). Set the iteration counter k = 0 {\displaystyle k=0} . Set w ( 0 ) = Y + b ( 0 ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} (0)=\mathbf {Y} ^{+}\mathbf {b} (0)} Loop until convergence, or until iteration counter exceeds some k m a x {\displaystyle k_{max}} . Error calculation: Compute the error vector: e ( k ) = Y w ( k ) − b ( k ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} (k)=\mathbf {Yw} (k)-\mathbf {b} (k)} . Margin update: Update the margin vector: b ( k + 1 ) = b ( k ) + 2 η k ( e ( k ) + | e ( k ) | ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {b} (k+1)=\mathbf {b} (k)+2\eta _{k}(\mathbf {e} (k)+|\mathbf {e} (k)|)} where η k {\displaystyle \eta _{k}} is a positive learning rate parameter, and | e ( k ) | {\displaystyle |\mathbf {e} (k)|} denotes the element-wise absolute value. Weight calculation: Compute the weight vector using the pseudoinverse: w ( k + 1 ) = Y + b ( k + 1 ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} (k+1)=\mathbf {Y} ^{+}\mathbf {b} (k+1)} . Convergence check: If | | e ( k ) | | ≤ θ {\displaystyle ||\mathbf {e} (k)||\leq \theta } for some predetermined threshold θ {\displaystyle \theta } (close to zero), then return b ( k + 1 ) , w ( k + 1 ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {b} (k+1),\mathbf {w} (k+1)} . if e ( k ) ≤ 0 {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} (k)\leq \mathbf {0} } (all components non-positive), return "Samples not separable.". Return "Algorithm failed to converge in time.". == Properties == If the training data is linearly separable, the algorithm converges to a solution (where e ( k ) = 0 {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} (k)=\mathbf {0} } ) in a finite number of iterations. If the data is not linearly separable, the algorithm may or may not ever reach the point where e ( k ) = 0 {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} (k)=\mathbf {0} } . However, if it does happen that e ( k ) ≤ 0 {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} (k)\leq \mathbf {0} } at some iteration, this proves non-separability. The convergence rate depends on the choice of the learning rate parameter ρ {\displaystyle \rho } and the degree of linear separability of the data. == Relationship to other algorithms == Perceptron algorithm: Both seek linear separators. The perceptron updates weights incrementally based on individual misclassified samples, while Ho–Kashyap is a batch method that processes all samples to compute the pseudoinverse and updates based on an overall error vector. Linear discriminant analysis (LDA): LDA assumes underlying Gaussian distributions with equal covariances for the classes and derives the decision boundary from these statistical assumptions. Ho–Kashyap makes no explicit distributional assumptions and instead tries to solve a system of linear inequalities directly. Support vector machines (SVM): For linearly separable data, SVMs aim to find the maximum-margin hyperplane. The Ho–Kashyap algorithm finds a separating hyperplane but not necessarily the one with the maximum margin. If the data is not separable, soft-margin SVMs allow for some misclassifications by optimizing a trade-off between margin size and misclassification penalty, while Ho–Kashyap provides a least-squares solution. == Variants == Modified Ho–Kashyap algorithm changes weight calculation step w ( k + 1 ) = Y + b ( k + 1 ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} (k+1)=\mathbf {Y} ^{+}\mathbf {b} (k+1)} to w ( k + 1 ) = w ( k ) + η k Y + | e ( k ) | {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} (k+1)=\mathbf {w} (k)+\eta _{k}\mathbf {Y} ^{+}|\mathbf {e} (k)|} . Kernel Ho–Kashyap algorithm: Applies kernel methods (the "kernel trick") to the Ho–Kashyap framework to enable non-linear classification by implicitly mapping data to a higher-dimensional feature space.
Coolgorilla
Coolgorilla was one of the earliest software developers that created 3rd party native applications for Apple iPod devices. Coolgorilla was an early adopter of using a sponsorship business model to enable mobile applications to be given away freely. Coolgorilla developed a series of Talking Phrasebooks for iPods in 2006. They partnered with online travel company lastminute.com who sponsored the applications enabling them to be made available to download completely free of charge. As mobile devices became more sophisticated, Coolgorilla developed the Talking Phrasebooks for Sony Ericsson and Nokia Mobile Devices which at the time were considerably noteworthy since the applications used real voice audio translations. With Apple's introduction of the iPhone in 2007, Coolgorilla developed a Web App before having four of the iPhone Talking Phrasebooks available to download from Apple's App Store on the day it opened in 2008. == Almanac in Chronological Order == On 23 December 2005, CoolGorilla, a new start-up, launched a trivia game for the iPod. It was titled "Rock and Pop Quiz". It was a quiz game that tested users' knowledge on bands such as U2, Metallica, Beyonce, and the Beatles. The quiz contained twenty megabytes of audible trivia questions. The free game was compatible with 3rd, 4th and 5th generation iPods, iPod mini and nano. In March 2006, Coolgorilla released "Movie Quiz for iPods" with a price of $5. It was an audio game narrated by New York's DJ Thomas, a radio and television host, voice over artist and event Master of Ceremonies. There were questions on Star Wars, Spiderman, The Godfather, Pulp Fiction, The Matrix, James Bond, and others. The user could keep track of their score. The game included a secret code for players who answered all questions correctly which enabled users to enter their name on the Coolgorilla Hall of Fame. In May 2006, Coolgorilla launched a World Cup Encyclopedia which was released prior to the 2006 FIFA World Cup. It had information on the World Cup schedule, details of every player from every team, every score from every world cup game ever played, stadium details, and manager profiles. It was a free download. In June 2006, Coolgorilla released a series of iPod Phrasebooks in German, Greek, French and Spanish. They were sponsored by lastminute.com and were free. The phrasebooks included common words and phrases for tourists with 750 sound files. They were accessed through the iPod's Notes feature. In April 2007, Coolgorilla released a downloadable version of the Talking Phrasebooks for Nokia and Sony Ericsson mobile devices. French, Spanish, German, Greek, Italian, and Portuguese were produced. The application provided real voice translations. They initially sold for £3 but 3 months later were offered for free. The branding was lastminute.com branding. Apple's iPhone was released at the end of June 2007. Soon after, Coolgorilla released an online all-in-one version of their Talking Phrasebooks for iPhone (Web App). The Phrasebooks were made available online in the form of a web app as iPhone did not yet allow for the download of additional apps. The app provided both text and audio translations in French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, German, and Greek. The iPhone translated the phrases using the recordings of real, native voice-over artists. A text translation on screen was also displayed. Apple's App Store opened in July 2008 with approximately 500 native apps available. Four of these Apps were Coolgorilla's Talking Phrasebooks for iPhone (Native Apps). There was French, German, Italian, and Spanish. These Apps carried lastminute.com branding and were available for free download. In the first three weeks following their release, the phrasebooks had over 350,000 downloads. Subsequently, Dutch, Arabic, Mandarin and Cantonese were also released. In October 2008, Coolgorilla released an iPhone London Travel Guide. Coolgorilla featured on NBC News in August 2009. In 2010, FIAT used the Italian Phrasebook to help promote the release of their FIAT 500 in the US. There has been no further activity since.
Prescription monitoring program
In the United States, prescription monitoring programs (PMPs) or prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) are state-run programs which collect and distribute data about the prescription and dispensation of federally controlled substances and, depending on state requirements, other potentially abusable prescription drugs. PMPs are meant to help prevent adverse drug-related events such as opioid overdoses, drug diversion, and substance abuse by decreasing the amount and/or frequency of opioid prescribing, and by identifying those patients who are obtaining prescriptions from multiple providers (i.e., "doctor shopping") or those physicians overprescribing opioids. Most US health care workers support the idea of PMPs, which intend to assist physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, dentists and other prescribers, the pharmacists, chemists and support staff of dispensing establishments. The database, whose use is required by State law, typically requires prescribers and pharmacies dispensing controlled substances to register with their respective state PMPs and (for pharmacies and providers who dispense from their offices) to report the dispensation of such prescriptions to an electronic online database. The majority of PMPs are authorized to notify law enforcement agencies or licensing boards or physicians when a prescriber, or patients receiving prescriptions, exceed thresholds established by the state or prescription recipient exceeds thresholds established by the State. All states have implemented PDMPs, although evidence for the effectiveness of these programs is mixed. While prescription of opioids has decreased with PMP use, overdose deaths in many states have actually increased, with those states sharing data with neighboring jurisdictions or requiring reporting of more drugs experiencing highest increases in deaths. This may be because those declined opioid prescriptions turn to street drugs, whose potency and contaminants carry greater overdose risk. == History == Prescription drug monitoring programs, or PDMPs, are an example of one initiative proposed to alleviate effects of the opioid crisis. The programs are designed to restrict prescription drug abuse by limiting a patient's ability to obtain similar prescriptions from multiple providers (i.e. “doctor shopping”) and reducing diversion of controlled substances. This is meant to reduce risk of fatal overdose caused by high doses of opioids or interactions between opioids and benzodiazepenes, and to enable better decision making on the part of healthcare providers who may be unaware of a patient's prescription drug use, history or other prescriptions. PDMPs have been implemented in state legislations since 1939 in California, a time before electronic medical records, though implementation rose alongside increased awareness of overprescribing of opioids and overdose. A later New York state program was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in Whalen v. Roe. But, by 2019, 49 states, the District of Columbia, and Guam had enacted PDMP legislation. In 2021 Missouri, the last State to not use a PMP, adopted legislation to create one. PMPs are constantly being updated to increase speed of data collection, sharing of data across States, and ease of interpretation. This is being done by integrating PDMP reports with other health information technologies such as health information exchanges (HIE), electronic health record (EHR) systems, and/ or pharmacy dispensing software systems. One program that has been implemented in nine states is called the PDMP Electronic Health Records Integration and Interoperability Expansion, also known as PEHRIIE. Another software, marketed by Bamboo Health and integrated with PMPs in 43 states, uses an algorithm to track factors thought to increase risk of diversion, abuse or overdose, and assigns patients a three digit score based on presumed indicators of risk. While some studies have suggested that PDMP-HIT integration and sharing of interstate data brings benefits such as reduced opioid-related inpatient morbidity, others have found no or negative impact on mortality compared to states without PMP data sharing. Patient and media reports suggest need for testing and evaluation of algorithmic software used to score risk, with some patients reporting denial of prescriptions without c explanation or clarity of data. == Goals == Most health care workers support PMPs which intend to assist physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, dentists and other prescribers, the pharmacists, chemists and support staff of dispensing establishments, as well as law-enforcement agencies. The collaboration supports the legitimate medical use of controlled substances while limiting their abuse and diversion. Pharmacies dispensing controlled substances and prescribers typically must register with their respective state PMPs and (for pharmacies and providers who dispense controlled substances from their offices) report the dispensation to an electronic online database. Some pharmacy software can submit these reports automatically to multiple states. == Usage == === List of programs by state === === Software systems === NarxCare is a prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) run by Bamboo Health. Bamboo Health was formerly known as Appriss. It is widely used across the United States by pharmacies including Rite Aid as well as those at Walmart and Sam’s Club. The NarxCare software allows doctors to view data about a patient, combining data from the prescription registries of various U.S. states to make the registries interoperable nationally. It also uses machine learning to generate an "Overdose Risk Score" that potentially includes EMS and criminal justice data; these scores have been criticized by researchers and patient advocates for the lack of transparency in the process as well as the potential for disparate treatment of women and minority groups. Advertised as an "analytics tool and care management platform", the NarxCare software allows doctors to view data about a patient including how many pharmacies they have visited and the combinations of medication they are prescribed. It combines data from the prescription registries of various U.S. states, making the registries interoperable nationally. It additionally uses machine learning to generate various three-digit "risk scores" and an overall "Overdose Risk Score", collectively referred to as Narx Scores, in a process that potentially includes EMS and criminal justice data as well as court records. == Controversy == Many doctors and researchers support the idea of PDMPs as a tool in combatting the opioid epidemic. Opioid prescribing, opioid diversion and supply, opioid misuse, and opioid-related morbidity and mortality are common elements in data entered into PDMPs. Prescription Monitoring Programs are purported to offer economic benefits for the states who implement them by decreasing overall health care costs, lost productivity, and investigation times. However, there are many studies that conclude the impact of PDMPs is unclear. While use of PMPs has been accompanied by decrease in opioid prescribing, few analyses consider corresponding use of street opioids, extramedical use, or diversion, which might provide a more holistic method for evaluation of PMP intent and efficacy. Evidence for PDMP impact on fatal overdoses is decidedly mixed, with multiple studies finding increased overdose rates in some states, decreases in others, or no clear impact. Interestingly, an increase in heroin overdoses after PDMP implementation has been commonly reported, presumably as denial of prescription opioids sends patients in search of street drugs. Narx Scores have been criticized by researchers and patient advocates for the lack of transparency in the generation process as well as the potential for disparate treatment of women and minority groups. Writing in Duke Law Journal, Jennifer Oliva stated that "black-box algorithms" are used to generate the scores.