In statistics, naive (sometimes simple or idiot's) Bayes classifiers are a family of "probabilistic classifiers" which assume that the features are conditionally independent, given the target class. In other words, a naive Bayes model assumes the information about the class provided by each variable is unrelated to the information from the others, with no information shared between the predictors. The highly unrealistic nature of this assumption, called the naive independence assumption, is what gives the classifier its name. These classifiers are some of the simplest Bayesian network models. Naive Bayes classifiers generally perform worse than more advanced models like logistic regressions, especially at quantifying uncertainty (with naive Bayes models often producing wildly overconfident probabilities). However, they are highly scalable, requiring only one parameter for each feature or predictor in a learning problem. Maximum-likelihood training can be done by evaluating a closed-form expression (simply by counting observations in each group), rather than the expensive iterative approximation algorithms required by most other models. Despite the use of Bayes' theorem in the classifier's decision rule, naive Bayes is not (necessarily) a Bayesian method, and naive Bayes models can be fit to data using either Bayesian or frequentist methods. == Introduction == Naive Bayes is a simple technique for constructing classifiers: models that assign class labels to problem instances, represented as vectors of feature values, where the class labels are drawn from some finite set. There is not a single algorithm for training such classifiers, but a family of algorithms based on a common principle: all naive Bayes classifiers assume that the value of a particular feature is independent of the value of any other feature, given the class variable. For example, a fruit may be considered to be an apple if it is red, round, and about 10 cm in diameter. A naive Bayes classifier considers each of these features to contribute independently to the probability that this fruit is an apple, regardless of any possible correlations between the color, roundness, and diameter features. In many practical applications, parameter estimation for naive Bayes models uses the method of maximum likelihood; in other words, one can work with the naive Bayes model without accepting Bayesian probability or using any Bayesian methods. Despite their naive design and apparently oversimplified assumptions, naive Bayes classifiers have worked quite well in many complex real-world situations. In 2004, an analysis of the Bayesian classification problem showed that there are sound theoretical reasons for the apparently implausible efficacy of naive Bayes classifiers. Still, a comprehensive comparison with other classification algorithms in 2006 showed that Bayes classification is outperformed by other approaches, such as boosted trees or random forests. An advantage of naive Bayes is that it only requires a small amount of training data to estimate the parameters necessary for classification. == Probabilistic model == Abstractly, naive Bayes is a conditional probability model: it assigns probabilities p ( C k ∣ x 1 , … , x n ) {\displaystyle p(C_{k}\mid x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n})} for each of the K possible outcomes or classes C k {\displaystyle C_{k}} given a problem instance to be classified, represented by a vector x = ( x 1 , … , x n ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} =(x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n})} encoding some n features (independent variables). The problem with the above formulation is that if the number of features n is large or if a feature can take on a large number of values, then basing such a model on probability tables is infeasible. The model must therefore be reformulated to make it more tractable. Using Bayes' theorem, the conditional probability can be decomposed as: p ( C k ∣ x ) = p ( C k ) p ( x ∣ C k ) p ( x ) {\displaystyle p(C_{k}\mid \mathbf {x} )={\frac {p(C_{k})\ p(\mathbf {x} \mid C_{k})}{p(\mathbf {x} )}}\,} In plain English, using Bayesian probability terminology, the above equation can be written as posterior = prior × likelihood evidence {\displaystyle {\text{posterior}}={\frac {{\text{prior}}\times {\text{likelihood}}}{\text{evidence}}}\,} In practice, there is interest only in the numerator of that fraction, because the denominator does not depend on C {\displaystyle C} and the values of the features x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} are given, so that the denominator is effectively constant. The numerator is equivalent to the joint probability model p ( C k , x 1 , … , x n ) {\displaystyle p(C_{k},x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n})\,} which can be rewritten as follows, using the chain rule for repeated applications of the definition of conditional probability: p ( C k , x 1 , … , x n ) = p ( x 1 , … , x n , C k ) = p ( x 1 ∣ x 2 , … , x n , C k ) p ( x 2 , … , x n , C k ) = p ( x 1 ∣ x 2 , … , x n , C k ) p ( x 2 ∣ x 3 , … , x n , C k ) p ( x 3 , … , x n , C k ) = ⋯ = p ( x 1 ∣ x 2 , … , x n , C k ) p ( x 2 ∣ x 3 , … , x n , C k ) ⋯ p ( x n − 1 ∣ x n , C k ) p ( x n ∣ C k ) p ( C k ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}p(C_{k},x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n})&=p(x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n},C_{k})\\&=p(x_{1}\mid x_{2},\ldots ,x_{n},C_{k})\ p(x_{2},\ldots ,x_{n},C_{k})\\&=p(x_{1}\mid x_{2},\ldots ,x_{n},C_{k})\ p(x_{2}\mid x_{3},\ldots ,x_{n},C_{k})\ p(x_{3},\ldots ,x_{n},C_{k})\\&=\cdots \\&=p(x_{1}\mid x_{2},\ldots ,x_{n},C_{k})\ p(x_{2}\mid x_{3},\ldots ,x_{n},C_{k})\cdots p(x_{n-1}\mid x_{n},C_{k})\ p(x_{n}\mid C_{k})\ p(C_{k})\\\end{aligned}}} Now the "naive" conditional independence assumptions come into play: assume that all features in x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } are mutually independent, conditional on the category C k {\displaystyle C_{k}} . Under this assumption, p ( x i ∣ x i + 1 , … , x n , C k ) = p ( x i ∣ C k ) . {\displaystyle p(x_{i}\mid x_{i+1},\ldots ,x_{n},C_{k})=p(x_{i}\mid C_{k})\,.} Thus, the joint model can be expressed as p ( C k ∣ x 1 , … , x n ) ∝ p ( C k , x 1 , … , x n ) = p ( C k ) p ( x 1 ∣ C k ) p ( x 2 ∣ C k ) p ( x 3 ∣ C k ) ⋯ = p ( C k ) ∏ i = 1 n p ( x i ∣ C k ) , {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}p(C_{k}\mid x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n})\varpropto \ &p(C_{k},x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n})\\&=p(C_{k})\ p(x_{1}\mid C_{k})\ p(x_{2}\mid C_{k})\ p(x_{3}\mid C_{k})\ \cdots \\&=p(C_{k})\prod _{i=1}^{n}p(x_{i}\mid C_{k})\,,\end{aligned}}} where ∝ {\displaystyle \varpropto } denotes proportionality since the denominator p ( x ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x} )} is omitted. This means that under the above independence assumptions, the conditional distribution over the class variable C {\displaystyle C} is: p ( C k ∣ x 1 , … , x n ) = 1 Z p ( C k ) ∏ i = 1 n p ( x i ∣ C k ) {\displaystyle p(C_{k}\mid x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n})={\frac {1}{Z}}\ p(C_{k})\prod _{i=1}^{n}p(x_{i}\mid C_{k})} where the evidence Z = p ( x ) = ∑ k p ( C k ) p ( x ∣ C k ) {\displaystyle Z=p(\mathbf {x} )=\sum _{k}p(C_{k})\ p(\mathbf {x} \mid C_{k})} is a scaling factor dependent only on x 1 , … , x n {\displaystyle x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n}} , that is, a constant if the values of the feature variables are known. Often, it is only necessary to discriminate between classes. In that case, the scaling factor is irrelevant, and it is sufficient to calculate the log-probability up to a factor: ln p ( C k ∣ x 1 , … , x n ) = ln p ( C k ) + ∑ i = 1 n ln p ( x i ∣ C k ) − ln Z ⏟ irrelevant {\displaystyle \ln p(C_{k}\mid x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n})=\ln p(C_{k})+\sum _{i=1}^{n}\ln p(x_{i}\mid C_{k})\underbrace {-\ln Z} _{\text{irrelevant}}} The scaling factor is irrelevant, since discrimination subtracts it away: ln p ( C k ∣ x 1 , … , x n ) p ( C l ∣ x 1 , … , x n ) = ( ln p ( C k ) + ∑ i = 1 n ln p ( x i ∣ C k ) ) − ( ln p ( C l ) + ∑ i = 1 n ln p ( x i ∣ C l ) ) {\displaystyle \ln {\frac {p(C_{k}\mid x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n})}{p(C_{l}\mid x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n})}}=\left(\ln p(C_{k})+\sum _{i=1}^{n}\ln p(x_{i}\mid C_{k})\right)-\left(\ln p(C_{l})+\sum _{i=1}^{n}\ln p(x_{i}\mid C_{l})\right)} There are two benefits of using log-probability. One is that it allows an interpretation in information theory, where log-probabilities are units of information in nats. Another is that it avoids arithmetic underflow. === Constructing a classifier from the probability model === The discussion so far has derived the independent feature model, that is, the naive Bayes probability model. The naive Bayes classifier combines this model with a decision rule. One common rule is to pick the hypothesis that is most probable so as to minimize the probability of misclassification; this is known as the maximum a posteriori or MAP decision rule. The corresponding classifier, a Bayes classifier, is the function that assigns a class label y ^ = C k {\displaystyle {\hat {y}}=C_{k}} for some k as follows: y ^ = argmax k ∈ { 1 , … , K } p ( C k ) ∏ i = 1 n p ( x i ∣ C k ) . {\displaystyle {\hat {y}}={\underset {k\in \{1,\ldots ,K\}}{\operatorname {argmax} }}\ p(C_{k})\displays
Inauthentic text
An inauthentic text is a computer-generated expository document meant to appear as genuine, but which is actually meaningless. Frequently they are created in order to be intermixed with genuine documents and thus manipulate the results of search engines, as with Spam blogs. They are also carried along in email in order to fool spam filters by giving the spam the superficial characteristics of legitimate text. Sometimes nonsensical documents are created with computer assistance for humorous effect, as with Dissociated press or Flarf poetry. They have also been used to challenge the veracity of a publication—MIT students submitted papers generated by a computer program called SCIgen to a conference, where they were initially accepted. This led the students to claim that the bar for submissions was too low. With the amount of computer generated text outpacing the ability of people to humans to curate it, there needs some means of distinguishing between the two. Yet automated approaches to determining absolutely whether a text is authentic or not face intrinsic challenges of semantics. Noam Chomsky coined the phrase "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously" giving an example of grammatically correct, but semantically incoherent sentence; some will point out that in certain contexts one could give this sentence (or any phrase) meaning. The first group to use the expression in this regard can be found below from Indiana University. Their work explains in detail an attempt to detect inauthentic texts and identify pernicious problems of inauthentic texts in cyberspace. The site has a means of submitting text that assesses, based on supervised learning, whether a corpus is inauthentic or not. Many users have submitted incorrect types of data and have correspondingly commented on the scores. This application is meant for a specific kind of data; therefore, submitting, say, an email, will not return a meaningful score.
Autocommit
In the context of data management, autocommit is a mode of operation of a database connection. Each individual database interaction (i.e., each SQL statement) submitted through the database connection in autocommit mode will be executed in its own transaction that is implicitly committed. A SQL statement executed in autocommit mode cannot be rolled back. Autocommit mode incurs per-statement transaction overhead and can often lead to undesirable performance or resource utilization impact on the database. Nonetheless, in systems such as Microsoft SQL Server, as well as connection technologies such as ODBC and Microsoft OLE DB, autocommit mode is the default for all statements that change data, in order to ensure that individual statements will conform to the ACID (atomicity-consistency-isolation-durability) properties of transactions. The alternative to autocommit mode (non-autocommit) means that the SQL client application itself is responsible for ending transactions explicitly via the commit or rollback SQL commands. Non-autocommit mode enables grouping of multiple data manipulation SQL commands into a single atomic transaction. Some DBMS (e.g. MariaDB) force autocommit for every DDL statement, even in non-autocommit mode. In this case, before each DDL statement, previous DML statements in transaction are autocommitted. Each DDL statement is executed in its own new autocommit transaction.
TeaOnHer
TeaOnHer is a male-oriented dating surveillance mobile app that allows men to anonymously rate and comment on women they are dating. It was set up in response to the existence of Tea, a female-oriented dating app that allowed women to rate and comment on men. In 2025, Cosmopolitian magazine described it as America's second most popular mobile app, with it being the second most popular app in the lifestyle section of Apple's App Store. The TeaOnHer app has fewer features than the rival Tea app, focusing instead on anonymous commenting. It is listed as having been developed by a company called Newville Media Corporation. TechCrunch reported in 2025 that TeaOnHer had leaked credentials of some of its users.
StyleGAN
The Style Generative Adversarial Network, or StyleGAN for short, is an extension to the GAN architecture introduced by Nvidia researchers in December 2018, and made source available in February 2019. StyleGAN depends on Nvidia's CUDA software, GPUs, and Google's TensorFlow, or Meta AI's PyTorch, which supersedes TensorFlow as the official implementation library in later StyleGAN versions. The second version of StyleGAN, called StyleGAN2, was published on February 5, 2020. It removes some of the characteristic artifacts and improves the image quality. Nvidia introduced StyleGAN3, described as an "alias-free" version, on June 23, 2021, and made source available on October 12, 2021. == History == A direct predecessor of the StyleGAN series is the Progressive GAN, published in 2017. In December 2018, Nvidia researchers distributed a preprint with accompanying software introducing StyleGAN, a GAN for producing an unlimited number of (often convincing) portraits of fake human faces. StyleGAN was able to run on Nvidia's commodity GPU processors. In February 2019, Uber engineer Phillip Wang used the software to create the website This Person Does Not Exist, which displayed a new face on each web page reload. Wang himself has expressed amazement, given that humans are evolved to specifically understand human faces, that nevertheless StyleGAN can competitively "pick apart all the relevant features (of human faces) and recompose them in a way that's coherent." In September 2019, a website called Generated Photos published 100,000 images as a collection of stock photos. The collection was made using a private dataset shot in a controlled environment with similar light and angles. Similarly, two faculty at the University of Washington's Information School used StyleGAN to create Which Face is Real?, which challenged visitors to differentiate between a fake and a real face side by side. The faculty stated the intention was to "educate the public" about the existence of this technology so they could be wary of it, "just like eventually most people were made aware that you can Photoshop an image". The second version of StyleGAN, called StyleGAN2, was published on February 5, 2020. It removes some of the characteristic artifacts and improves the image quality. In 2021, a third version was released, improving consistency between fine and coarse details in the generator. Dubbed "alias-free", this version was implemented with PyTorch. === Illicit use === In December 2019, Facebook took down a network of accounts with false identities, and mentioned that some of them had used profile pictures created with machine learning techniques. == Architecture == === Progressive GAN === Progressive GAN is a method for training GAN for large-scale image generation stably, by growing a GAN generator from small to large scale in a pyramidal fashion. Like SinGAN, it decomposes the generator as G = G 1 ∘ G 2 ∘ ⋯ ∘ G N {\displaystyle G=G_{1}\circ G_{2}\circ \cdots \circ G_{N}} , and the discriminator as D = D N ∘ D N − 1 ∘ ⋯ ∘ D 1 {\displaystyle D=D_{N}\circ D_{N-1}\circ \cdots \circ D_{1}} . During training, at first only G N , D N {\displaystyle G_{N},D_{N}} are used in a GAN game to generate 4x4 images. Then G N − 1 , D N − 1 {\displaystyle G_{N-1},D_{N-1}} are added to reach the second stage of GAN game, to generate 8x8 images, and so on, until we reach a GAN game to generate 1024x1024 images. To avoid discontinuity between stages of the GAN game, each new layer is "blended in" (Figure 2 of the paper). For example, this is how the second stage GAN game starts: Just before, the GAN game consists of the pair G N , D N {\displaystyle G_{N},D_{N}} generating and discriminating 4x4 images. Just after, the GAN game consists of the pair ( ( 1 − α ) + α ⋅ G N − 1 ) ∘ u ∘ G N , D N ∘ d ∘ ( ( 1 − α ) + α ⋅ D N − 1 ) {\displaystyle ((1-\alpha )+\alpha \cdot G_{N-1})\circ u\circ G_{N},D_{N}\circ d\circ ((1-\alpha )+\alpha \cdot D_{N-1})} generating and discriminating 8x8 images. Here, the functions u , d {\displaystyle u,d} are image up- and down-sampling functions, and α {\displaystyle \alpha } is a blend-in factor (much like an alpha in image composing) that smoothly glides from 0 to 1. === StyleGAN === StyleGAN is designed as a combination of Progressive GAN with neural style transfer. The key architectural choice of StyleGAN-1 is a progressive growth mechanism, similar to Progressive GAN. Each generated image starts as a constant 4 × 4 × 512 {\displaystyle 4\times 4\times 512} array, and repeatedly passed through style blocks. Each style block applies a "style latent vector" via affine transform ("adaptive instance normalization"), similar to how neural style transfer uses Gramian matrix. It then adds noise, and normalize (subtract the mean, then divide by the variance). At training time, usually only one style latent vector is used per image generated, but sometimes two ("mixing regularization") in order to encourage each style block to independently perform its stylization without expecting help from other style blocks (since they might receive an entirely different style latent vector). After training, multiple style latent vectors can be fed into each style block. Those fed to the lower layers control the large-scale styles, and those fed to the higher layers control the fine-detail styles. Style-mixing between two images x , x ′ {\displaystyle x,x'} can be performed as well. First, run a gradient descent to find z , z ′ {\displaystyle z,z'} such that G ( z ) ≈ x , G ( z ′ ) ≈ x ′ {\displaystyle G(z)\approx x,G(z')\approx x'} . This is called "projecting an image back to style latent space". Then, z {\displaystyle z} can be fed to the lower style blocks, and z ′ {\displaystyle z'} to the higher style blocks, to generate a composite image that has the large-scale style of x {\displaystyle x} , and the fine-detail style of x ′ {\displaystyle x'} . Multiple images can also be composed this way. === StyleGAN2 === StyleGAN2 improves upon StyleGAN in two ways. One, it applies the style latent vector to transform the convolution layer's weights instead, thus solving the "blob" problem. The "blob" problem roughly speaking is because using the style latent vector to normalize the generated image destroys useful information. Consequently, the generator learned to create a "distraction" by a large blob, which absorbs most of the effect of normalization (somewhat similar to using flares to distract a heat-seeking missile). Two, it uses residual connections, which helps it avoid the phenomenon where certain features are stuck at intervals of pixels. For example, the seam between two teeth may be stuck at pixels divisible by 32, because the generator learned to generate teeth during stage N-5, and consequently could only generate primitive teeth at that stage, before scaling up 5 times (thus intervals of 32). This was updated by the StyleGAN2-ADA ("ADA" stands for "adaptive"), which uses invertible data augmentation. It also tunes the amount of data augmentation applied by starting at zero, and gradually increasing it until an "overfitting heuristic" reaches a target level, thus the name "adaptive". === StyleGAN3 === StyleGAN3 improves upon StyleGAN2 by solving the "texture sticking" problem, which can be seen in the official videos. They analyzed the problem by the Nyquist–Shannon sampling theorem, and argued that the layers in the generator learned to exploit the high-frequency signal in the pixels they operate upon. To solve this, they proposed imposing strict lowpass filters between each generator's layers, so that the generator is forced to operate on the pixels in a way faithful to the continuous signals they represent, rather than operate on them as merely discrete signals. They further imposed rotational and translational invariance by using more signal filters. The resulting StyleGAN-3 is able to generate images that rotate and translate smoothly, and without texture sticking.
Productivity software
Productivity software (also called personal productivity software or office productivity software) is application software used for producing information (such as documents, presentations, worksheets, databases, charts, graphs, digital paintings, electronic music and digital video). Its names arose from it increasing productivity, especially of individual office workers, from typists to knowledge workers, although its scope is now wider than that. Office suites, which brought word processing, spreadsheet, and relational database programs to the desktop in the 1980s, are the core example of productivity software. They revolutionized the office with the magnitude of the productivity increase they brought as compared with the pre-1980s office environments of typewriters, paper filing, and handwritten lists and ledgers. In the United States, as of 2015, some 78% of "middle-skill" occupations (those that call for more than a high school diploma but less than a bachelor's degree) required the use of productivity software. == Details == Productivity software traditionally runs directly on a computer. For example, Plus/4 model of computer contains in ROM for applications of productivity software. Productivity software is one of the reasons people use personal computers. == Office suite == An office suite is a bundle of productivity software (a software suite) intended to be used by office workers. The components are generally distributed together, have a consistent user interface and usually can interact with each other, sometimes in ways that the operating system would not normally allow. The earliest office suite for personal computers was MicroPro International's StarBurst in the early 1980s, comprising the WordStar word processor, the CalcStar spreadsheet and the DataStar database software. Other suites arose in the 1980s, and Microsoft Office came to dominate the market in the 1990s, a position it retains as of 2024. During the 1990s, office suite products gained popularity by offering bundles of applications that, when bought as part of a suite, effectively discounted the individual applications, with four or five applications being bundled for the price of two applications bought separately. When faced with such potential savings, customers could be "tempted by the suite, rather than the value of a particular product", and by 1994 more than 60 percent of the sales of Microsoft Word and around 70 percent of the sales of Microsoft Excel were as part of sales of Microsoft Office. Such considerations had an impact on vendors of individual applications, often smaller companies, raising concerns that office suites were "stifling innovation", and even established vendors such as Borland and WordPerfect were having to adapt to the suite phenomenon, Borland ultimately deciding to sell its Quattro Pro spreadsheet to WordPerfect as the latter sought to assemble its own suite product. The dominant suite vendors, Microsoft and Lotus, downplayed competition and innovation concerns, claiming that users were still able to exercise choice and that "user-driven development" was guiding the evolution of office suites. Another view was that component-based software would eventually emerge, focusing development on more specialised components used by productivity software, empowering "a plethora of third-party developers", and that a "mix and match" approach of such components would adapt to the user's way of working. === Office suite components === The base components of office suites are: Word processor Spreadsheet Presentation program Other components include: Database software Graphics suite (raster graphics editor, vector graphics editor, image viewer) Desktop publishing software Formula editor Diagramming software Email client Communication software Personal information manager Notetaking Groupware Project management software Table (information) Web log analysis software
DUAL table
The DUAL table is a special one-row, one-column table present by default in Oracle and other database installations. In Oracle, the table has a single VARCHAR2(1) column called DUMMY that has a value of 'X'. It is suitable for use in selecting a pseudo column such as SYSDATE or USER. == Example use == Oracle's SQL syntax requires the FROM clause but some queries don't require any tables - DUAL can be used in these cases. == History == Charles Weiss explains why he created DUAL: I created the DUAL table as an underlying object in the Oracle Data Dictionary. It was never meant to be seen itself, but instead used inside a view that was expected to be queried. The idea was that you could do a JOIN to the DUAL table and create two rows in the result for every one row in your table. Then, by using GROUP BY, the resulting join could be summarized to show the amount of storage for the DATA extent and for the INDEX extent(s). The name, DUAL, seemed apt for the process of creating a pair of rows from just one. == Optimization == Beginning with 10g Release 1, Oracle no longer performs physical or logical I/O on the DUAL table, though the table still exists. DUAL is readily available for all authorized users in a SQL database. == In other database systems == Several other databases (including Microsoft SQL Server, MySQL, PostgreSQL, SQLite, and Teradata) enable one to omit the FROM clause entirely if no table is needed. This avoids the need for any dummy table. ClickHouse has a one-row system table system.one with a single column named "dummy" of type UInt8 and value 0. This table is implicitly used when no table is specified in the SELECT query. Firebird has a one-row system table RDB$DATABASE that is used in the same way as Oracle's DUAL, although it also has a meaning of its own. IBM Db2 has a view that resolves DUAL when using Oracle Compatibility. It also has a table called sysibm.sysdummy1 that has similar properties to the Oracle DUAL one. Informix: Informix version 11.50 and later has a table named sysmaster:"informix".sysdual with the same functionality but a more verbose name. You can use CREATE PUBLIC SYNONYM dual FOR sysmaster:"informix".sysdual to create a name dual in the current database with the same functionality. Microsoft Access: A table named DUAL may be created and the single-row constraint enforced via ADO (Table-less UNION query in MS Access) Microsoft SQL Server: SQL Server does not require a dummy table. Queries like 'select 1 + 1' can be run without a "from" clause/table name. MySQL allows DUAL to be specified as a table in queries that do not need data from any tables. It is suitable for use in selecting a result function such as SYSDATE() or USER(), although it is not essential. PostgreSQL: A DUAL-view can be added to ease porting from Oracle. Snowflake: DUAL is supported, but not explicitly documented. It appears in sample SQL for other operations in the documentation. SQLite: A VIEW named "dual" that works the same as the Oracle "dual" table can be created as follows: CREATE VIEW dual AS SELECT 'x' AS dummy; SAP HANA has a table called DUMMY that works the same as the Oracle "dual" table. Teradata database does not require a dummy table. Queries like 'select 1 + 1' can be run without a "from" clause/table name. Vertica has support for a DUAL table in their official documentation.