Dendral

Dendral was a project in artificial intelligence (AI) of the 1960s, and the computer software expert system that it produced. Its primary aim was to study hypothesis formation and discovery in science. For that, a specific task in science was chosen: help organic chemists in identifying unknown organic molecules, by analyzing their mass spectra and using knowledge of chemistry. It was done at Stanford University by Edward Feigenbaum, Bruce G. Buchanan, Joshua Lederberg, and Carl Djerassi, along with a team of highly creative research associates and students. It began in 1964 and spans approximately half the history of AI research. The software program Dendral is considered the first expert system because it automated the decision-making process and problem-solving behavior of organic chemists. The project consisted of research on two main programs Heuristic Dendral and Meta-Dendral, and several sub-programs. It was written in the Lisp programming language, which was considered the language of AI because of its flexibility. Many systems were derived from Dendral, including MYCIN, MOLGEN, PROSPECTOR, XCON, and STEAMER. There are many other programs today for solving the mass spectrometry inverse problem, see List of mass spectrometry software, but they are no longer described as 'artificial intelligence', just as structure searchers. The name Dendral is an acronym of the term "Dendritic Algorithm". == Heuristic Dendral == Heuristic Dendral is a program that uses mass spectra or other experimental data together with a knowledge base of chemistry to produce a set of possible chemical structures that may be responsible for producing the data. A mass spectrum of a compound is produced by a mass spectrometer, and is used to determine its molecular weight, the sum of the masses of its atomic constituents. For example, the compound water (H2O), has a molecular weight of 18 since hydrogen has a mass of 1.01 and oxygen 16.00, and its mass spectrum has a peak at 18 units. Heuristic Dendral would use this input mass and the knowledge of atomic mass numbers and valence rules, to determine the possible combinations of atomic constituents whose mass would add up to 18. As the weight increases and the molecules become more complex, the number of possible compounds increases drastically. Thus, a program that is able to reduce this number of candidate solutions through the process of hypothesis formation is essential. New graph-theoretic algorithms were invented by Lederberg, Harold Brown, and others that generate all graphs with a specified set of nodes and connection-types (chemical atoms and bonds) -- with or without cycles. Moreover, the team was able to prove mathematically that the generator is complete, in that it produces all graphs with the specified nodes and edges, and that it is non-redundant, in that the output contains no equivalent graphs (e.g., mirror images). The CONGEN program, as it became known, was developed largely by computational chemists Ray Carhart, Jim Nourse, and Dennis Smith. It was useful to chemists as a stand-alone program to generate chemical graphs showing a complete list of structures that satisfy the constraints specified by a user. == Meta-Dendral == Meta-Dendral is a machine learning system that receives the set of possible chemical structures and corresponding mass spectra as input, and proposes a set of rules of mass spectrometry that correlate structural features with processes that produce the mass spectrum. These rules would be fed back to Heuristic Dendral (in the planning and testing programs described below) to test their applicability. Thus, "Heuristic Dendral is a performance system and Meta-Dendral is a learning system". The program is based on two important features: the plan-generate-test paradigm and knowledge engineering. === Plan-generate-test paradigm === The plan-generate-test paradigm is the basic organization of the problem-solving method, and is a common paradigm used by both Heuristic Dendral and Meta-Dendral systems. The generator (later named CONGEN) generates potential solutions for a particular problem, which are then expressed as chemical graphs in Dendral. However, this is feasible only when the number of candidate solutions is minimal. When there are large numbers of possible solutions, Dendral has to find a way to put constraints that rules out large sets of candidate solutions. This is the primary aim of Dendral planner, which is a “hypothesis-formation” program that employs “task-specific knowledge to find constraints for the generator”. Last but not least, the tester analyzes each proposed candidate solution and discards those that fail to fulfill certain criteria. This mechanism of plan-generate-test paradigm is what holds Dendral together. === Knowledge Engineering === The primary aim of knowledge engineering is to attain a productive interaction between the available knowledge base and problem solving techniques. This is possible through development of a procedure in which large amounts of task-specific information is encoded into heuristic programs. Thus, the first essential component of knowledge engineering is a large “knowledge base.” Dendral has specific knowledge about the mass spectrometry technique, a large amount of information that forms the basis of chemistry and graph theory, and information that might be helpful in finding the solution of a particular chemical structure elucidation problem. This “knowledge base” is used both to search for possible chemical structures that match the input data, and to learn new “general rules” that help prune searches. The benefit Dendral provides the end user, even a non-expert, is a minimized set of possible solutions to check manually. == Heuristics == A heuristic is a rule of thumb, an algorithm that does not guarantee a solution, but reduces the number of possible solutions by discarding unlikely and irrelevant solutions. The use of heuristics to solve problems is called "heuristics programming", and was used in Dendral to allow it to replicate in machines the process through which human experts induce the solution to problems via rules of thumb and specific information. Heuristics programming was a major approach and a giant step forward in artificial intelligence, as it allowed scientists to finally automate certain traits of human intelligence. It became prominent among scientists in the late 1940s through George Polya’s book, How to Solve It: A New Aspect of Mathematical Method. As Herbert A. Simon said in The Sciences of the Artificial, "if you take a heuristic conclusion as certain, you may be fooled and disappointed; but if you neglect heuristic conclusions altogether you will make no progress at all." == History == During the mid 20th century, the question "can machines think?" became intriguing and popular among scientists, primarily to add humanistic characteristics to machine behavior. John McCarthy, who was one of the prime researchers of this field, termed this concept of machine intelligence as "artificial intelligence" (AI) during the Dartmouth summer in 1956. AI is usually defined as the capacity of a machine to perform operations that are analogous to human cognitive capabilities. Much research to create AI was done during the 20th century. Also around the mid 20th century, science, especially biology, faced a fast-increasing need to develop a "man-computer symbiosis", to aid scientists in solving problems. For example, the structural analysis of myoglobin, hemoglobin, and other proteins relentlessly needed instrumentation development due to its complexity. In the early 1960s, Joshua Lederberg started working with computers and quickly became tremendously interested in creating interactive computers to help him in his exobiology research. Specifically, he was interested in designing computing systems to help him study alien organic compounds. Lederberg had been heading a team designing instruments for the Mars Viking lander to search for precursor molecules of life in samples of the Mars surface, using a mass spectrometer coupled with a minicomputer. As he was not an expert in either chemistry or computer programming, he collaborated with Stanford chemist Carl Djerassi to help him with chemistry, and Edward Feigenbaum with programming, to automate the process of determining chemical structures from raw mass spectrometry data. Feigenbaum was an expert in programming languages and heuristics, and helped Lederberg design a system that replicated the way Djerassi solved structure elucidation problems. They devised a system called Dendritic Algorithm (Dendral) that was able to generate possible chemical structures corresponding to the mass spectrometry data as an output. Dendral then was still very inaccurate in assessing spectra of ketones, alcohols, and isomers of chemical compounds. Thus, Djerassi "taught" general rules to Dendral that could help eliminate most of the "chemically implausible" structures, and p

Inception score

The Inception Score (IS) is an algorithm used to assess the quality of images created by a generative image model such as a generative adversarial network (GAN). The score is calculated based on the output of a separate, pretrained Inception v3 image classification model applied to a sample of (typically around 30,000) images generated by the generative model. The Inception Score is maximized when the following conditions are true: The entropy of the distribution of labels predicted by the Inceptionv3 model for the generated images is minimized. In other words, the classification model confidently predicts a single label for each image. Intuitively, this corresponds to the desideratum of generated images being "sharp" or "distinct". The predictions of the classification model are evenly distributed across all possible labels. This corresponds to the desideratum that the output of the generative model is "diverse". It has been somewhat superseded by the related Fréchet inception distance. While the Inception Score only evaluates the distribution of generated images, the FID compares the distribution of generated images with the distribution of a set of real images ("ground truth"). == Definition == Let there be two spaces, the space of images Ω X {\displaystyle \Omega _{X}} and the space of labels Ω Y {\displaystyle \Omega _{Y}} . The space of labels is finite. Let p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} be a probability distribution over Ω X {\displaystyle \Omega _{X}} that we wish to judge. Let a discriminator be a function of type p d i s : Ω X → M ( Ω Y ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}:\Omega _{X}\to M(\Omega _{Y})} where M ( Ω Y ) {\displaystyle M(\Omega _{Y})} is the set of all probability distributions on Ω Y {\displaystyle \Omega _{Y}} . For any image x {\displaystyle x} , and any label y {\displaystyle y} , let p d i s ( y | x ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}(y|x)} be the probability that image x {\displaystyle x} has label y {\displaystyle y} , according to the discriminator. It is usually implemented as an Inception-v3 network trained on ImageNet. The Inception Score of p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} relative to p d i s {\displaystyle p_{dis}} is I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) := exp ⁡ ( E x ∼ p g e n [ D K L ( p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ‖ ∫ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) p g e n ( x ) d x ) ] ) {\displaystyle IS(p_{gen},p_{dis}):=\exp \left(\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}\left[D_{KL}\left(p_{dis}(\cdot |x)\|\int p_{dis}(\cdot |x)p_{gen}(x)dx\right)\right]\right)} Equivalent rewrites include ln ⁡ I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) := E x ∼ p g e n [ D K L ( p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ‖ E x ∼ p g e n [ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ] ) ] {\displaystyle \ln IS(p_{gen},p_{dis}):=\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}\left[D_{KL}\left(p_{dis}(\cdot |x)\|\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}[p_{dis}(\cdot |x)]\right)\right]} ln ⁡ I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) := H [ E x ∼ p g e n [ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ] ] − E x ∼ p g e n [ H [ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ] ] {\displaystyle \ln IS(p_{gen},p_{dis}):=H[\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}[p_{dis}(\cdot |x)]]-\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}[H[p_{dis}(\cdot |x)]]} ln ⁡ I S {\displaystyle \ln IS} is nonnegative by Jensen's inequality. Pseudocode:INPUT discriminator p d i s {\displaystyle p_{dis}} . INPUT generator g {\displaystyle g} . Sample images x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} from generator. Compute p d i s ( ⋅ | x i ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}(\cdot |x_{i})} , the probability distribution over labels conditional on image x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} . Sum up the results to obtain p ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {p}}} , an empirical estimate of ∫ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) p g e n ( x ) d x {\displaystyle \int p_{dis}(\cdot |x)p_{gen}(x)dx} . Sample more images x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} from generator, and for each, compute D K L ( p d i s ( ⋅ | x i ) ‖ p ^ ) {\displaystyle D_{KL}\left(p_{dis}(\cdot |x_{i})\|{\hat {p}}\right)} . Average the results, and take its exponential. RETURN the result. === Interpretation === A higher inception score is interpreted as "better", as it means that p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} is a "sharp and distinct" collection of pictures. ln ⁡ I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) ∈ [ 0 , ln ⁡ N ] {\displaystyle \ln IS(p_{gen},p_{dis})\in [0,\ln N]} , where N {\displaystyle N} is the total number of possible labels. ln ⁡ I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) = 0 {\displaystyle \ln IS(p_{gen},p_{dis})=0} iff for almost all x ∼ p g e n {\displaystyle x\sim p_{gen}} p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) = ∫ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) p g e n ( x ) d x {\displaystyle p_{dis}(\cdot |x)=\int p_{dis}(\cdot |x)p_{gen}(x)dx} That means p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} is completely "indistinct". That is, for any image x {\displaystyle x} sampled from p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} , discriminator returns exactly the same label predictions p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}(\cdot |x)} . The highest inception score N {\displaystyle N} is achieved if and only if the two conditions are both true: For almost all x ∼ p g e n {\displaystyle x\sim p_{gen}} , the distribution p d i s ( y | x ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}(y|x)} is concentrated on one label. That is, H y [ p d i s ( y | x ) ] = 0 {\displaystyle H_{y}[p_{dis}(y|x)]=0} . That is, every image sampled from p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} is exactly classified by the discriminator. For every label y {\displaystyle y} , the proportion of generated images labelled as y {\displaystyle y} is exactly E x ∼ p g e n [ p d i s ( y | x ) ] = 1 N {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}[p_{dis}(y|x)]={\frac {1}{N}}} . That is, the generated images are equally distributed over all labels.

Representation collapse

Representation collapse is a phenomenon in machine learning and representation learning where a model maps different inputs to the same or very similar embeddings, which means it loses important information about how the data is spread out. It is frequently encountered in self-supervised learning, especially within contrastive and non-contrastive frameworks, when training objectives or model architectures do not maintain variance across representations. Collapse results in degenerate solutions characterized by uninformative learned features, significantly impairing downstream task performance. Various techniques have been proposed to mitigate representation collapse, including the use of negative samples, architectural asymmetry, stop-gradient operations, variance regularization, and redundancy reduction objectives, as seen in methods such as SimCLR, BYOL, and VICReg. Comprehending and averting representation collapse is regarded as a fundamental challenge in the advancement of stable and efficient self-supervised learning systems.

Singularity studies

Singularity studies is an interdisciplinary academic field which examines the idea of technological singularity — the hypothesised point at which artificial intelligence may surpass human intelligence, might be attained by artificial intelligence (AI), robotics, and other technologies and sciences, and its social impacts. In this academic field, the study and research are conducted across a broad array of terrains such as information science, robotics, social informatics, economics, philosophy, and ethics. The primary aim of singularity studies is to gain an integrative understanding of the transformation of social systems occurring in tandem with the explosive evolution of AI and also the changes to be effected by such transformation in the view of humans, ethics, and legal systems. == History == An academic work on technological singurality has appeared in computer science, philosophy, sociology, and law since the early 1990s. Early discussions of an intelligence explosion were popularised by science-fiction writer Vernor Vinge in 1993 and later systematised by futurist Ray Kurzweil. Since the 2010s, universities such as Oxford, Stanford, and Keio have established dedicated programmes, while peer-reviewed journals have begun to publish scenario analyses and policy studies. Ongoing debates question the predictive value of singularity scenarios and warn against a deterministic view of technology. == Characteristics of research == Singularity studies extends beyond mere future predictions and offer an intellectual foundation for proactively designing and creating a desirable future. Principal research themes in this realm include: Ethics of AI; Social implications of technologies; Possibility of harmonious coexistence of humans and AI; Communication with AI; and Redesign of social systems. == Technologists and academics == Vernor Vinge: Propounded the concept of singularity in 1993, making a massive impact on the academic and science-fiction spheres. Ray Kurzweil: Predicted the advent around 2045 of the technological singularity in his 2005 book The Singularity Is Near. Nick Bostrom: Offered philosophical reflections on superintelligence and the risks posed by AI. He is the founding director of the now-dissolved Future of Humanity Institute at the University of Oxford. === Japan === Kento Sasano: A social informatician, AI educator, and inventor. He is the president of the Japan Society of Singularity Studies. == Challenges and outlook == Singularity studies is still evolving as an academic field, and quite a few challenges remain unresolved in regard to the systematization of their theories, research methods, and educational curricula. That said, in this day and age of accelerating technological and societal shifts, interdisciplinary approaches have gained in importance and are drawing much attention in the arenas of scholarly research, intercorporate collaboration, and policy planning.

Croissant (metadata format)

Croissant is a metadata format design to support sharing of datasets for machine learning applications. It is a platform-agnostic schema used to standardize metadata in data repositories like Hugging Face, kaggle, Dataverse and OpenML. == Structure == Croissant builds upon schema.org, uses primarily JSON-LD, and divides metadata in four "layers": Dataset Metadata, Resource, Structure and Semantic: The Dataset Metadata layer constrains which schema.org properties should be used, including additional properties, linking together the resources (files) of the dataset with general metadata, like licensing and citation information. The Resource layer describes the individual files and sets of those using two new classes, FileObject and FileSet. A FileSet may be a collection of related images. The Structure layer specifies how the files are organized in the dataset. A RecordSet class describes how resources are present, configurations that may very a lot between modality. This specification facilitates interoperability of the datasets. Finally, the Semantic layer adds information for practical reuse of the dataset, such as splits for train, test and validation subsets. It also provides a default extension for metadata related to responsible AI. The use of a standard machine-readable structure increases, for example, the discoverability of datasets in search engines such as Google Dataset Search. == History == Croissant was shared in arXiv in March 2024 and published in the proceedings of NeurIPS 2024. It started as community driven as a MLCommons Croissant Working Group, including stakeholders organizations from academia and industry, including Google, the open data institute, Sage Bionetworks and King's College London. Variations of Croissant are developed to support datasets in different areas of research, such as Geo-Croissant for geospatial datasets. Other technical extensions, such as support for RDF, soon followed.

Deep image prior

Deep image prior is a type of convolutional neural network used to enhance a given image with no prior training data other than the image itself. A neural network is randomly initialized and used as prior to solve inverse problems such as noise reduction, super-resolution, and inpainting. Image statistics are captured by the structure of a convolutional image generator rather than by any previously learned capabilities. == Method == === Background === Inverse problems such as noise reduction, super-resolution, and inpainting can be formulated as the optimization task x ∗ = m i n x E ( x ; x 0 ) + R ( x ) {\displaystyle x^{}=min_{x}E(x;x_{0})+R(x)} , where x {\displaystyle x} is an image, x 0 {\displaystyle x_{0}} a corrupted representation of that image, E ( x ; x 0 ) {\displaystyle E(x;x_{0})} is a task-dependent data term, and R(x) is the regularizer. Deep neural networks learn a generator/decoder x = f θ ( z ) {\displaystyle x=f_{\theta }(z)} which maps a random code vector z {\displaystyle z} to an image x {\displaystyle x} . The image corruption method used to generate x 0 {\displaystyle x_{0}} is selected for the specific application. === Specifics === In this approach, the R ( x ) {\displaystyle R(x)} prior is replaced with the implicit prior captured by the neural network (where R ( x ) = 0 {\displaystyle R(x)=0} for images that can be produced by a deep neural networks and R ( x ) = + ∞ {\displaystyle R(x)=+\infty } otherwise). This yields the equation for the minimizer θ ∗ = a r g m i n θ E ( f θ ( z ) ; x 0 ) {\displaystyle \theta ^{}=argmin_{\theta }E(f_{\theta }(z);x_{0})} and the result of the optimization process x ∗ = f θ ∗ ( z ) {\displaystyle x^{}=f_{\theta ^{}}(z)} . The minimizer θ ∗ {\displaystyle \theta ^{}} (typically a gradient descent) starts from a randomly initialized parameters and descends into a local best result to yield the x ∗ {\displaystyle x^{}} restoration function. ==== Overfitting ==== A parameter θ may be used to recover any image, including its noise. However, the network is reluctant to pick up noise because it contains high impedance while useful signal offers low impedance. This results in the θ parameter approaching a good-looking local optimum so long as the number of iterations in the optimization process remains low enough not to overfit data. === Deep Neural Network Model === Typically, the deep neural network model for deep image prior uses a U-Net like model without the skip connections that connect the encoder blocks with the decoder blocks. The authors in their paper mention that "Our findings here (and in other similar comparisons) seem to suggest that having deeper architecture is beneficial, and that having skip-connections that work so well for recognition tasks (such as semantic segmentation) is highly detrimental." == Applications == === Denoising === The principle of denoising is to recover an image x {\displaystyle x} from a noisy observation x 0 {\displaystyle x_{0}} , where x 0 = x + ϵ {\displaystyle x_{0}=x+\epsilon } . The distribution ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } is sometimes known (e.g.: profiling sensor and photon noise) and may optionally be incorporated into the model, though this process works well in blind denoising. The quadratic energy function E ( x , x 0 ) = | | x − x 0 | | 2 {\displaystyle E(x,x_{0})=||x-x_{0}||^{2}} is used as the data term, plugging it into the equation for θ ∗ {\displaystyle \theta ^{}} yields the optimization problem m i n θ | | f θ ( z ) − x 0 | | 2 {\displaystyle min_{\theta }||f_{\theta }(z)-x_{0}||^{2}} . === Super-resolution === Super-resolution is used to generate a higher resolution version of image x. The data term is set to E ( x ; x 0 ) = | | d ( x ) − x 0 | | 2 {\displaystyle E(x;x_{0})=||d(x)-x_{0}||^{2}} where d(·) is a downsampling operator such as Lanczos that decimates the image by a factor t. === Inpainting === Inpainting is used to reconstruct a missing area in an image x 0 {\displaystyle x_{0}} . These missing pixels are defined as the binary mask m ∈ { 0 , 1 } H × V {\displaystyle m\in \{0,1\}^{H\times V}} . The data term is defined as E ( x ; x 0 ) = | | ( x − x 0 ) ⊙ m | | 2 {\displaystyle E(x;x_{0})=||(x-x_{0})\odot m||^{2}} (where ⊙ {\displaystyle \odot } is the Hadamard product). The intuition behind this is that the loss is computed only on the known pixels in the image, and the network is going to learn enough about the image to fill in unknown parts of the image even though the computed loss doesn't include those pixels. This strategy is used to remove image watermarks by treating the watermark as missing pixels in the image. === Flash–no-flash reconstruction === This approach may be extended to multiple images. A straightforward example mentioned by the author is the reconstruction of an image to obtain natural light and clarity from a flash–no-flash pair. Video reconstruction is possible but it requires optimizations to take into account the spatial differences. == Implementations == A reference implementation rewritten in Python 3.6 with the PyTorch 0.4.0 library was released by the author under the Apache 2.0 license: deep-image-prior A TensorFlow-based implementation written in Python 2 and released under the CC-SA 3.0 license: deep-image-prior-tensorflow A Keras-based implementation written in Python 2 and released under the GPLv3: machine_learning_denoising == Example == See Astronomy Picture of the Day (APOD) of 2024-02-18

Coherent extrapolated volition

Coherent extrapolated volition (CEV) is a theoretical framework in the field of AI alignment describing an approach by which an artificial superintelligence (ASI) would act on a benevolent supposition of what humans would want if they were more knowledgeable, more rational, had more time to think, and had matured together as a society, as opposed to humanity's current individual or collective preferences. It was proposed by Eliezer Yudkowsky in 2004 as part of his work on friendly AI. == Concept == CEV proposes that an advanced AI system should derive its goals by extrapolating the idealized volition of humanity. This means aggregating and projecting human preferences into a coherent utility function that reflects what people would desire under ideal epistemic and moral conditions. The aim is to ensure that AI systems are aligned with humanity's true interests, rather than with transient or poorly informed preferences. In poetic terms, our coherent extrapolated volition is our wish if we knew more, thought faster, were more the people we wished we were, had grown up farther together; where the extrapolation converges rather than diverges, where our wishes cohere rather than interfere; extrapolated as we wish that extrapolated, interpreted as we wish that interpreted. == Debate == Yudkowsky and Nick Bostrom note that CEV has several interesting properties. It is designed to be humane and self-correcting, by capturing the source of human values instead of trying to list them. It avoids the difficulty of laying down an explicit, fixed list of rules. It encapsulates moral growth, preventing flawed current moral beliefs from getting locked in. It limits the influence that a small group of programmers can have on what the ASI would value, thus also reducing the incentives to build ASI first. And it keeps humanity in charge of its destiny. CEV also faces significant theoretical and practical challenges. Bostrom notes that CEV has "a number of free parameters that could be specified in various ways, yielding different versions of the proposal." One such parameter is the extrapolation base (whose extrapolated volition is taken into account). For example, whether it should include people with severe dementia, patients in a vegetative state, foetuses, or embryos. He also notes that if CEV's extrapolation base only includes humans, there is a risk that the result would be ungenerous toward other animals and digital minds. One possible solution would be to include a mechanism to expand CEV's extrapolation base. == Variants and alternatives == A proposed theoretical alternative to CEV is to rely on an artificial superintelligence's superior cognitive capabilities to figure out what is morally right, and let it act accordingly. It is also possible to combine both techniques, for instance with the ASI following CEV except when it is morally impermissible. In another review, a philosophical analysis explores CEV through the lens of social trust in autonomous systems. Drawing on Anthony Giddens' concept of "active trust", the author proposes an evolution of CEV into "Coherent, Extrapolated and Clustered Volition" (CECV). This formulation aims to better reflect the moral preferences of diverse cultural groups, thus offering a more pragmatic ethical framework for designing AI systems that earn public trust while accommodating societal diversity.