Outfit of the day (commonly abbreviated OOTD) is a phrase used online by users sharing what outfits (or "fits") they wear on a particular day or occasion. The video or post often mentions where each article of clothing, shoes, jewelry, and other accessories is from. OOTD posts are typically found on social media websites, such as Tumblr, Instagram, and Pinterest, and OOTD videos on YouTube and TikTok. Motives for sharing OOTD content vary, from encouraging viewers to buy a certain product, showing off personal style, or giving outfit inspiration. == History == "Outfit of the Day" videos started as early as 2010 but gained popularity in 2019. By 2016, the hashtag "OOTD" on Instagram had over 80 million posts. OOTD videos have become popular with the average internet user, as they express one's fashion sense and style to their followers. == Use in marketing == Brands will use famous influencers to promote their products using the "outfit of the day" tactic in hopes that users will buy the product to emulate the influencer. This tactic has increased sales for many brands. Creators of OOTD content can also profit, often through brand deals or affiliate links. Vogue has a recurring segment on YouTube that shows "Every outfit (fill in celebrity name here) wears in a week." == Variants == A variant is "outfit(s) of the week" (OOTW), where a user will share multiple outfits to be worn over the course of several days or a week. OOTDs are often seen in "Get ready with me" (GRWM) videos, where a user films their morning routine. In these videos, the filmers talk about their plans for the day, what makeup products they are using to get ready, and the "Outfit of the day" they are wearing. == Criticism == Some fashion writers have suggested that the proliferation of OOTD content encourages people to buy new clothing rather than to wear already owned items. Some stylists have also proposed that OOTD content encourages users to follow trends rather than explore and find their own style.
Microsoft Whiteboard
Microsoft Whiteboard is a free multi-platform application, as well as an online service and a feature in Microsoft Teams, which simulates a virtual whiteboard and enables real-time collaboration between users. == Overview and features == Microsoft Whiteboard allows users to draw on a virtual whiteboard using input methods such as a stylus pen or a mouse and keyboard, and write down notes, draw connections between shareable ideas, and interact in real time. Microsoft Whiteboard is available to download on the following platforms and devices: Microsoft Windows (on Windows 10 or above) Android Apple iOS Surface Hub devices It is also available on the web and as a feature in Microsoft Teams. Microsoft Whiteboard allows users with Microsoft accounts to view, edit, and share whiteboards using the provided tools and options. The feature set includes tools for drawing, shapes, and media. Drawing in Microsoft Whiteboard is called inking. It works both on mobile devices and computers. The inking toolbar has customizable pencils, a ruler, a highlighter, an eraser, and an object selector. Whiteboard can recognize shapes drawn by hand and straighten them. Holding the Shift key on a computer while inking draws straight lines. Microsoft Whiteboard has keyboard shortcuts for some functions. Additional features include inserting sticky notes, text boxes, stickers, as well as images. Grid lines and colors are adjustable. Different templates can be inserted into the whiteboard. Users can also share their reactions. A feature limited to boards created in Microsoft Teams, is the ability to make them read-only; other participants from the meeting cannot edit them. == Reviews == PC Magazine gave Microsoft Whiteboard a score of 3.5 out of 5, praising the app's free availability and plentiful templates. It compared it to other, paid whiteboarding solutions, and concluded that Microsoft offers the best free one. Some of the cons, described by PCMag, include the inability to view boards without a Microsoft account and the inability to create custom templates.
AI nationalism
AI nationalism is the idea that nations should develop and control their own artificial intelligence technologies to advance their own interests and ensure technological sovereignty. This concept is gaining traction globally, leading countries to implement new laws, form strategic alliances, and invest significantly in domestic AI capabilities. == Global trends and national strategies == In 2018, British technology investor Ian Hogarth published an influential essay titled AI Nationalism. He argued that as AI gains more power and its economic and military significance expands, governments will take measures to bolster their own domestic AI industries, and predicted that the advancement of machine learning systems would lead to what he termed "AI nationalism." He anticipated that this rise in AI would accelerate a global arms race, resulting in more closed economies, restrictions on foreign acquisitions, and limitations on the movement of talent. Hogarth predicted that AI policy would become a central focus of government agendas. He also criticized Britain’s approach to AI strategy, citing the sale of London-based DeepMind—one of the leading AI laboratories, acquired by Google for a relatively modest £400 million in 2014—as a significant misstep. AI nationalism is chiefly reflected in the escalating rhetoric of an artificial intelligence arms race, portraying AI development as a zero-sum game where the winner gains significant economic, political, and military advantages. This mindset, as highlighted in a 2017 Pentagon report, warns that sharing AI technology could erode technological supremacy and enhance rivals' capabilities. The winner-takes-all mentality of AI nationalism poses risks including unsafe AI development, increased geopolitical tension, and potential military aggression (such as cyberattacks or targeting AI professionals). Several countries, including Canada, France, and India, have formulated national strategies to advance their positions in AI. In the United States, a leading player in the global AI arena, trade policies have been enacted to restrict China's access to critical microchips, reflecting a strategic effort to maintain a technological edge. The United States’ National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence (NSCAI) frames AI development as a critical aspect of a broader technology competition crucial for national success. It emphasizes the need to outpace China in AI to maintain strategic advantage, reflecting AI nationalism by linking geopolitical power directly to advancements in AI. France has seen notable governmental support for local AI startups, particularly those specializing in language technologies that cater to French and other non-English languages. In Saudi Arabia, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is investing billions in AI research and development. The country has actively collaborated with major technology firms such as Amazon, IBM, and Microsoft to establish itself as a prominent AI hub. == Historical and cultural context == AI nationalism is seen as deeply connected to historical racism and imperialism. It is viewed not merely as a technological competition but as a contest over racial and civilizational superiority. Historically, technological achievements were often used to justify colonialism and racial hierarchies, with Western societies perceiving their advancements as evidence of superiority. In the context of AI, this historical context continues to shape views on intelligence and development. Some argue that AI nationalism reinforces the idea of fundamental civilizational divides, especially between the Western world and China. This perspective often frames China's progress in AI as a direct challenge to Western values, presenting the AI competition as a struggle over values. AI nationalism is said to draw from long-standing anti-Asian stereotypes, such as the "Yellow Peril," which portray Asian nations as threats to Western civilization. This viewpoint links Asian technological advances with dehumanization and artificiality, reflecting persistent anxieties about China's growing role in the global tech landscape. == Implications == AI nationalism is seen as a component of a broader trend towards the fragmentation of the internet, where digital services are increasingly influenced by local regulations and national interests. This shift is creating a new technological landscape in which the impact of artificial intelligence on individuals' lives can vary significantly depending on their geographic location. J. Paul Goode argues that AI nationalism may exacerbate existing societal divisions by promoting the development of systems that embed cultural biases, thereby privileging certain groups while disadvantaging others.
Learning automaton
A learning automaton is one type of machine learning algorithm studied since 1970s. Learning automata select their current action based on past experiences from the environment. It will fall into the range of reinforcement learning if the environment is stochastic and a Markov decision process (MDP) is used. == History == Research in learning automata can be traced back to the work of Michael Lvovitch Tsetlin in the early 1960s in the Soviet Union. Together with some colleagues, he published a collection of papers on how to use matrices to describe automata functions. Additionally, Tsetlin worked on reasonable and collective automata behaviour, and on automata games. Learning automata were also investigated by researches in the United States in the 1960s. However, the term learning automaton was not used until Narendra and Thathachar introduced it in a survey paper in 1974. == Definition == A learning automaton is an adaptive decision-making unit situated in a random environment that learns the optimal action through repeated interactions with its environment. The actions are chosen according to a specific probability distribution which is updated based on the environment response the automaton obtains by performing a particular action. With respect to the field of reinforcement learning, learning automata are characterized as policy iterators. In contrast to other reinforcement learners, policy iterators directly manipulate the policy π. Another example for policy iterators are evolutionary algorithms. Formally, Narendra and Thathachar define a stochastic automaton to consist of: a set X of possible inputs, a set Φ = { Φ1, ..., Φs } of possible internal states, a set α = { α1, ..., αr } of possible outputs, or actions, with r ≤ s, an initial state probability vector p(0) = ≪ p1(0), ..., ps(0) ≫, a computable function A which after each time step t generates p(t+1) from p(t), the current input, and the current state, and a function G: Φ → α which generates the output at each time step. In their paper, they investigate only stochastic automata with r = s and G being bijective, allowing them to confuse actions and states. The states of such an automaton correspond to the states of a "discrete-state discrete-parameter Markov process". At each time step t=0,1,2,3,..., the automaton reads an input from its environment, updates p(t) to p(t+1) by A, randomly chooses a successor state according to the probabilities p(t+1) and outputs the corresponding action. The automaton's environment, in turn, reads the action and sends the next input to the automaton. Frequently, the input set X = { 0,1 } is used, with 0 and 1 corresponding to a nonpenalty and a penalty response of the environment, respectively; in this case, the automaton should learn to minimize the number of penalty responses, and the feedback loop of automaton and environment is called a "P-model". More generally, a "Q-model" allows an arbitrary finite input set X, and an "S-model" uses the interval [0,1] of real numbers as X. A visualised demo/ Art Work of a single Learning Automaton had been developed by μSystems (microSystems) Research Group at Newcastle University. == Finite action-set learning automata == Finite action-set learning automata (FALA) are a class of learning automata for which the number of possible actions is finite or, in more mathematical terms, for which the size of the action-set is finite.
Intelligent database
Until the 1980s, databases were viewed as computer systems that stored record-oriented and business data such as manufacturing inventories, bank records, and sales transactions. A database system was not expected to merge numeric data with text, images, or multimedia information, nor was it expected to automatically notice patterns in the data it stored. In the late 1980s the concept of an intelligent database was put forward as a system that manages information (rather than data) in a way that appears natural to users and which goes beyond simple record keeping. The term was introduced in 1989 by the book Intelligent Databases by Kamran Parsaye, Mark Chignell, Setrag Khoshafian and Harry Wong. The concept postulated three levels of intelligence for such systems: high level tools, the user interface and the database engine. The high level tools manage data quality and automatically discover relevant patterns in the data with a process called data mining. This layer often relies on the use of artificial intelligence techniques. The user interface uses hypermedia in a form that uniformly manages text, images and numeric data. The intelligent database engine supports the other two layers, often merging relational database techniques with object orientation. In the twenty-first century, intelligent databases have now become widespread, e.g. hospital databases can now call up patient histories consisting of charts, text and x-ray images just with a few mouse clicks, and many corporate databases include decision support tools based on sales pattern analysis.
Pixel binning
Pixel binning, also known as binning, is a process image sensors of digital cameras use to combine adjacent pixels throughout an image, by summing or averaging their values, during or after readout. It improves low-light performance while still allowing for highly detailed photographs in good light. Charge from adjacent pixels in CCD or charge-coupled device image sensors and some other image sensors can be combined during readout, increasing the line rate or frame rate. In the context of image processing, binning is the procedure of combining clusters of adjacent pixels, throughout an image, into single pixels. For example, in 2×2 binning, an array of 4 pixels becomes a single larger pixel, reducing the number of pixels to 1/4 and halving the image resolution in each dimension. The result can be the sum, average, median, minimum, or maximum value of the cluster. Some systems use more advanced algorithms such as considering the values of nearby pixels, edge detection, self-claimed "AI", etc. to increase the perceived visual quality of the final downsized image. This aggregation, although associated with loss of information, reduces the amount of data to be processed, facilitating analysis. The binned image has lower resolution, but the relative noise level in each pixel is generally reduced. == History == Normally, an increase in megapixel count on a constant image sensor size would lead to a sacrifice of the surface size of the individual pixels, which would result in each pixel being able to catch less light in the same time, thus leading to a darker and/or noisier image in low light (given the same exposure time). In the past, camera manufacturers had to compromise between low-light performance and the amount of detail in good light, by dropping the megapixel count like HTC did in 2013 with their four-megapixel "UltraPixel" camera. However, this results in less detailed images in daylight where enough light is available. With pixel binning, the camera has "the best of both worlds", meaning both the benefit of high detail in good light and the benefit of high brightness in low light. In low light, the surfaces of four or more pixels can act as one large pixel that catches far more light. For example, some smartphones such as the Samsung Galaxy A15 are able to capture photographs with up to fifty megapixels in daylight. However, in low light, the individual pixels would be too small to capture the light needed for a bright image with the short exposure time available for handheld shooting. Therefore, with pixel binning activated, the 50-megapixel image sensor acts as a 12.5-megapixel image sensor, a quarter of its original resolution, with an accordingly larger surface area per pixel.
Coupled pattern learner
Coupled Pattern Learner (CPL) is a machine learning algorithm which couples the semi-supervised learning of categories and relations to forestall the problem of semantic drift associated with boot-strap learning methods. == Coupled Pattern Learner == Semi-supervised learning approaches using a small number of labeled examples with many unlabeled examples are usually unreliable as they produce an internally consistent, but incorrect set of extractions. CPL solves this problem by simultaneously learning classifiers for many different categories and relations in the presence of an ontology defining constraints that couple the training of these classifiers. It was introduced by Andrew Carlson, Justin Betteridge, Estevam R. Hruschka Jr. and Tom M. Mitchell in 2009. == CPL overview == CPL is an approach to semi-supervised learning that yields more accurate results by coupling the training of many information extractors. Basic idea behind CPL is that semi-supervised training of a single type of extractor such as ‘coach’ is much more difficult than simultaneously training many extractors that cover a variety of inter-related entity and relation types. Using prior knowledge about the relationships between these different entities and relations CPL makes unlabeled data as a useful constraint during training. For e.g., ‘coach(x)’ implies ‘person(x)’ and ‘not sport(x)’. == CPL description == === Coupling of predicates === CPL primarily relies on the notion of coupling the learning of multiple functions so as to constrain the semi-supervised learning problem. CPL constrains the learned function in two ways. Sharing among same-arity predicates according to logical relations Relation argument type-checking === Sharing among same-arity predicates === Each predicate P in the ontology has a list of other same-arity predicates with which P is mutually exclusive. If A is mutually exclusive with predicate B, A’s positive instances and patterns become negative instances and negative patterns for B. For example, if ‘city’, having an instance ‘Boston’ and a pattern ‘mayor of arg1’, is mutually exclusive with ‘scientist’, then ‘Boston’ and ‘mayor of arg1’ will become a negative instance and a negative pattern respectively for ‘scientist.’ Further, Some categories are declared to be a subset of another category. For e.g., ‘athlete’ is a subset of ‘person’. === Relation argument type-checking === This is a type checking information used to couple the learning of relations and categories. For example, the arguments of the ‘ceoOf’ relation are declared to be of the categories ‘person’ and ‘company’. CPL does not promote a pair of noun phrases as an instance of a relation unless the two noun phrases are classified as belonging to the correct argument types. === Algorithm description === Following is a quick summary of the CPL algorithm. Input: An ontology O, and a text corpus C Output: Trusted instances/patterns for each predicate for i=1,2,...,∞ do foreach predicate p in O do EXTRACT candidate instances/contextual patterns using recently promoted patterns/instances; FILTER candidates that violate coupling; RANK candidate instances/patterns; PROMOTE top candidates; end end ==== Inputs ==== A large corpus of Part-Of-Speech tagged sentences and an initial ontology with predefined categories, relations, mutually exclusive relationships between same-arity predicates, subset relationships between some categories, seed instances for all predicates, and seed patterns for the categories. ==== Candidate extraction ==== CPL finds new candidate instances by using newly promoted patterns to extract the noun phrases that co-occur with those patterns in the text corpus. CPL extracts, Category Instances Category Patterns Relation Instances Relation Patterns ==== Candidate filtering ==== Candidate instances and patterns are filtered to maintain high precision, and to avoid extremely specific patterns. An instance is only considered for assessment if it co-occurs with at least two promoted patterns in the text corpus, and if its co-occurrence count with all promoted patterns is at least three times greater than its co-occurrence count with negative patterns. ==== Candidate ranking ==== CPL ranks candidate instances using the number of promoted patterns that they co-occur with so that candidates that occur with more patterns are ranked higher. Patterns are ranked using an estimate of the precision of each pattern. ==== Candidate promotion ==== CPL ranks the candidates according to their assessment scores and promotes at most 100 instances and 5 patterns for each predicate. Instances and patterns are only promoted if they co-occur with at least two promoted patterns or instances, respectively. == Meta-Bootstrap Learner == Meta-Bootstrap Learner (MBL) was also proposed by the authors of CPL. Meta-Bootstrap learner couples the training of multiple extraction techniques with a multi-view constraint, which requires the extractors to agree. It makes addition of coupling constraints on top of existing extraction algorithms, while treating them as black boxes, feasible. MBL assumes that the errors made by different extraction techniques are independent. Following is a quick summary of MBL. Input: An ontology O, a set of extractors ε Output: Trusted instances for each predicate for i=1,2,...,∞ do foreach predicate p in O do foreach extractor e in ε do Extract new candidates for p using e with recently promoted instances; end FILTER candidates that violate mutual-exclusion or type-checking constraints; PROMOTE candidates that were extracted by all extractors; end end Subordinate algorithms used with MBL do not promote any instance on their own, they report the evidence about each candidate to MBL and MBL is responsible for promoting instances. == Applications == In their paper authors have presented results showing the potential of CPL to contribute new facts to existing repository of semantic knowledge, Freebase