LRE Map

The LRE Map (Language Resources and Evaluation) is a freely accessible large database on resources dedicated to Natural language processing. The original feature of LRE Map is that the records are collected during the submission of different major Natural language processing conferences. The records are then cleaned and gathered into a global database called "LRE Map". The LRE Map is intended to be an instrument for collecting information about language resources and to become, at the same time, a community for users, a place to share and discover resources, discuss opinions, provide feedback, discover new trends, etc. It is an instrument for discovering, searching and documenting language resources, here intended in a broad sense, as both data and tools. The large amount of information contained in the Map can be analyzed in many different ways. For instance, the LRE Map can provide information about the most frequent type of resource, the most represented language, the applications for which resources are used or are being developed, the proportion of new resources vs. already existing ones, or the way in which resources are distributed to the community. == Context == Several institutions worldwide maintain catalogues of language resources (ELRA, LDC, NICT Universal Catalogue, ACL Data and Code Repository, OLAC, LT World, etc.) However, it has been estimated that only 10% of existing resources are known, either through distribution catalogues or via direct publicity by providers (web sites and the like). The rest remains hidden, the only occasions where it briefly emerges being when a resource is presented in the context of a research paper or report at some conference. Even in this case, nevertheless, it might be that a resource remains in the background simply because the focus of the research is not on the resource per se. == History == The LRE Map originated under the name "LREC Map" during the preparation of LREC 2010 conference. More specifically, the idea was discussed within the FlaReNet project, and in collaboration with ELRA and the Institute of Computational Linguistics of CNR in Pisa, the Map was put in place at LREC 2010. The LREC organizers asked the authors to provide some basic information about all the resources (in a broad sense, i.e. including tools, standards and evaluation packages), either used or created, described in their papers. All these descriptors were then gathered in a global matrix called the LREC Map. The same methodology and requirements from the authors has been then applied and extended to other conferences, namely COLING-2010, EMNLP-2010, RANLP-2011, LREC 2012, LREC 2014 and LREC 2016. After this generalization to other conferences, the LREC Map has been renamed as the LRE Map. == Size and content == The size of the database increases over time. The data collected amount to 4776 entries. Each resource is described according to the following attributes: Resource type, e.g. lexicon, annotation tool, tagger/parser. Resource production status, e.g. newly created finished, existing-updated. Resource availability, e.g. freely available, from data center. Resource modality, e.g. speech, written, sign language. Resource use, e.g. named entity recognition, language identification, machine translation. Resource language, e.g. English, 23 European Union languages, official languages of India. == Uses == The LRE map is a very important tool to chart the NLP field. Compared to other studied based on subjective scorings, the LRE map is made of real facts. The map has a great potential for many uses, in addition to being an information gathering tool: It is a great instrument for monitoring the evolution of the field (useful for funders), if applied in different contexts and times. It can be seen as a huge joint effort, the beginning of an even larger cooperative action not just among few leaders but among all the researchers. It is also an "educational" means towards the broad acknowledgment of the need of meta-research activities with the active involvement of many. It is also instrumental in introducing the new notion of "citation of resources" that could provide an award and a means of scholarly recognition for researchers engaged in resource creation. It is used to help the organization of the conferences of the field like LREC. == Derived matrices == The data were then cleaned and sorted by Joseph Mariani (CNRS-LIMSI IMMI) and Gil Francopoulo (CNRS-LIMSI IMMI + Tagmatica) in order to compute the various matrices of the final FLaReNet reports. One of them, the matrix for written data at LREC 2010 is as follows: English is the most studied language. Secondly, come French and German languages and then Italian and Spanish. == Future == The LRE Map has been extended to Language Resources and Evaluation Journal and other conferences.

TSheets

TSheets was a web-based and mobile time tracking and employee scheduling app. The service was accessed via a web browser or a mobile app. TSheets was an alternative to a paper timesheet or punch cards. == History == Based in Eagle, Idaho, TSheets was co-founded in 2006 by CEO Matt Rissell and CTO Brandon Zehm. In 2008, TSheets released a native employee time tracking app for the iPhone. In 2012, TSheets released an integration with accounting and payroll software QuickBooks. In 2015, TSheets accepted $15 million in growth equity funding from Summit Partners, bought a building in Eagle, Idaho, and opened a second location in Sydney, Australia. On 5 December 2017, Intuit announced an agreement to acquire TSheets. The transaction was valued at approximately $340 million of cash and other consideration and closed on 11 January 2018. After the transaction closed, Time Capture became a new business unit within Intuit's Small Business and Self-Employed Group with Matt Rissell assuming the leader role reporting to Alex Chriss. TSheets's Eagle, Idaho site became an Intuit location.

Is an AI Logo Maker Worth It in 2026?

Looking for the best AI logo maker? An AI logo maker is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it can save you hours every week by automating repetitive work. Most options offer a generous free tier, with paid plans unlocking higher limits, faster processing, and team features. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI logo maker slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.

Nicolò Cesa-Bianchi

Nicolò Cesa-Bianchi (Italian pronunciation: [nikoˈlɔ tˈtʃɛːza ˈbjaŋki]) is an Italian computer scientist and Professor of Computer Science at the Department of Computer Science of the University of Milan. He is a researcher in the field of machine learning, and co-author of the books "Prediction, Learning, and Games" with Gabor Lugosi and "Regret analysis of stochastic and nonstochastic multi-armed bandit problems" with Sébastien Bubeck == Education and career == Cesa-Bianchi graduated in Computer Science from the University of Milan in 1988 where he received a PhD in Computer Science in 1993 supervised by Alberto Bertoni. During his PhD, he visited UC Santa Cruz where he worked with Manfred Warmuth and David Haussler. He did his postdoctoral studies at Graz University of Technology under the supervision of Wolfgang Maass. == Research == His research contributions focus on the following areas: design and analysis of machine learning algorithms, especially in online machine learning algorithms for multi-armed bandit problems, with applications to recommender systems and online auctions graph analytics, with applications to social networks and bioinformatics == Awards and honors == Cesa-Bianchi received a Google Research Award in 2010, a Xerox University Affairs Committee Award in 2011, a Criteo Faculty Award in 2017, a Google Faculty Award in 2018, and a IBM Academic Award in 2021. Since 2023 he is corresponding member of the Accademia dei Lincei.

Regularization perspectives on support vector machines

Within mathematical analysis, Regularization perspectives on support-vector machines provide a way of interpreting support-vector machines (SVMs) in the context of other regularization-based machine-learning algorithms. SVM algorithms categorize binary data, with the goal of fitting the training set data in a way that minimizes the average of the hinge-loss function and L2 norm of the learned weights. This strategy avoids overfitting via Tikhonov regularization and in the L2 norm sense and also corresponds to minimizing the bias and variance of our estimator of the weights. Estimators with lower Mean squared error predict better or generalize better when given unseen data. Specifically, Tikhonov regularization algorithms produce a decision boundary that minimizes the average training-set error and constrain the Decision boundary not to be excessively complicated or overfit the training data via a L2 norm of the weights term. The training and test-set errors can be measured without bias and in a fair way using accuracy, precision, Auc-Roc, precision-recall, and other metrics. Regularization perspectives on support-vector machines interpret SVM as a special case of Tikhonov regularization, specifically Tikhonov regularization with the hinge loss for a loss function. This provides a theoretical framework with which to analyze SVM algorithms and compare them to other algorithms with the same goals: to generalize without overfitting. SVM was first proposed in 1995 by Corinna Cortes and Vladimir Vapnik, and framed geometrically as a method for finding hyperplanes that can separate multidimensional data into two categories. This traditional geometric interpretation of SVMs provides useful intuition about how SVMs work, but is difficult to relate to other machine-learning techniques for avoiding overfitting, like regularization, early stopping, sparsity and Bayesian inference. However, once it was discovered that SVM is also a special case of Tikhonov regularization, regularization perspectives on SVM provided the theory necessary to fit SVM within a broader class of algorithms. This has enabled detailed comparisons between SVM and other forms of Tikhonov regularization, and theoretical grounding for why it is beneficial to use SVM's loss function, the hinge loss. == Theoretical background == In the statistical learning theory framework, an algorithm is a strategy for choosing a function f : X → Y {\displaystyle f\colon \mathbf {X} \to \mathbf {Y} } given a training set S = { ( x 1 , y 1 ) , … , ( x n , y n ) } {\displaystyle S=\{(x_{1},y_{1}),\ldots ,(x_{n},y_{n})\}} of inputs x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} and their labels y i {\displaystyle y_{i}} (the labels are usually ± 1 {\displaystyle \pm 1} ). Regularization strategies avoid overfitting by choosing a function that fits the data, but is not too complex. Specifically: f = argmin f ∈ H { 1 n ∑ i = 1 n V ( y i , f ( x i ) ) + λ ‖ f ‖ H 2 } , {\displaystyle f={\underset {f\in {\mathcal {H}}}{\operatorname {argmin} }}\left\{{\frac {1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}V(y_{i},f(x_{i}))+\lambda \|f\|_{\mathcal {H}}^{2}\right\},} where H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} is a hypothesis space of functions, V : Y × Y → R {\displaystyle V\colon \mathbf {Y} \times \mathbf {Y} \to \mathbb {R} } is the loss function, ‖ ⋅ ‖ H {\displaystyle \|\cdot \|_{\mathcal {H}}} is a norm on the hypothesis space of functions, and λ ∈ R {\displaystyle \lambda \in \mathbb {R} } is the regularization parameter. When H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} is a reproducing kernel Hilbert space, there exists a kernel function K : X × X → R {\displaystyle K\colon \mathbf {X} \times \mathbf {X} \to \mathbb {R} } that can be written as an n × n {\displaystyle n\times n} symmetric positive-definite matrix K {\displaystyle \mathbf {K} } . By the representer theorem, f ( x i ) = ∑ j = 1 n c j K i j , and ‖ f ‖ H 2 = ⟨ f , f ⟩ H = ∑ i = 1 n ∑ j = 1 n c i c j K ( x i , x j ) = c T K c . {\displaystyle f(x_{i})=\sum _{j=1}^{n}c_{j}\mathbf {K} _{ij},{\text{ and }}\|f\|_{\mathcal {H}}^{2}=\langle f,f\rangle _{\mathcal {H}}=\sum _{i=1}^{n}\sum _{j=1}^{n}c_{i}c_{j}K(x_{i},x_{j})=c^{T}\mathbf {K} c.} == Special properties of the hinge loss == The simplest and most intuitive loss function for categorization is the misclassification loss, or 0–1 loss, which is 0 if f ( x i ) = y i {\displaystyle f(x_{i})=y_{i}} and 1 if f ( x i ) ≠ y i {\displaystyle f(x_{i})\neq y_{i}} , i.e. the Heaviside step function on − y i f ( x i ) {\displaystyle -y_{i}f(x_{i})} . However, this loss function is not convex, which makes the regularization problem very difficult to minimize computationally. Therefore, we look for convex substitutes for the 0–1 loss. The hinge loss, V ( y i , f ( x i ) ) = ( 1 − y f ( x ) ) + {\displaystyle V{\big (}y_{i},f(x_{i}){\big )}={\big (}1-yf(x){\big )}_{+}} , where ( s ) + = max ( s , 0 ) {\displaystyle (s)_{+}=\max(s,0)} , provides such a convex relaxation. In fact, the hinge loss is the tightest convex upper bound to the 0–1 misclassification loss function, and with infinite data returns the Bayes-optimal solution: f b ( x ) = { 1 , p ( 1 ∣ x ) > p ( − 1 ∣ x ) , − 1 , p ( 1 ∣ x ) < p ( − 1 ∣ x ) . {\displaystyle f_{b}(x)={\begin{cases}1,&p(1\mid x)>p(-1\mid x),\\-1,&p(1\mid x)

Intrinsic dimension

In mathematics, the intrinsic dimension of a subset can be thought of as the minimal number of variables needed to represent the subset. The concept has widespread applications in geometry, dynamical systems, signal processing, statistics, and other fields. Due to its widespread applications and vague conceptualization, there are many different ways to define it rigorously. Consequently, the same set might have different intrinsic dimensions according to different definitions. The intrinsic dimension can be used as a lower bound of what dimension it is possible to compress a data set into through dimension reduction, but it can also be used as a measure of the complexity of the data set or signal. For a data set or signal of N variables, its intrinsic dimension M satisfies 0 ≤ M ≤ N, although estimators may yield higher values. == Exact dimension == === Differential === In differential geometry, given a differentiable manifold N and a submanifold M, the intrinsic dimension of M is its dimension. Suppose N has n dimensions and M has m dimensions, then that means around any point in M, there exists a local coordinate system ( x 1 , … , x m , x m + 1 , … , x n ) {\displaystyle (x_{1},\dots ,x_{m},x_{m+1},\dots ,x_{n})} of N, such that the manifold M is simply the subset of N defined by x m + 1 = 0 , … , x n = 0 {\displaystyle x_{m+1}=0,\dots ,x_{n}=0} . === Metric === Given a mere metric space, we can still define its intrinsic dimension. The most general case is the Hausdorff dimension, though for metric spaces occurring in practice, the box-counting dimension and the packing dimension often are identical to the Hausdorff dimension. Let X , d {\textstyle X,d} be a metric space and A ⊂ X {\textstyle A\subset X} be totally bounded. Define the covering number N ( A , ε ) = min { k : A ⊂ ⋃ i = 1 k B ( x i , ε ) } . {\displaystyle N(A,\varepsilon )=\min \left\{k:A\subset \bigcup _{i=1}^{k}B\left(x_{i},\varepsilon \right)\right\}.} The metric entropy is H ( A , ε ) = log ⁡ N ( A , ε ) {\textstyle H(A,\varepsilon )=\log N(A,\varepsilon )} (any log base). The upper and lower metric entropy dimensions are dim ¯ E A = lim sup ε ↓ 0 H ( A , ε ) log ⁡ ( 1 / ε ) , dim _ E A = lim inf ε ↓ 0 H ( A , ε ) log ⁡ ( 1 / ε ) . {\displaystyle {\overline {\dim }}_{E}A=\limsup _{\varepsilon \downarrow 0}{\frac {H(A,\varepsilon )}{\log(1/\varepsilon )}},\quad {\underline {\dim }}_{E}A=\liminf _{\varepsilon \downarrow 0}{\frac {H(A,\varepsilon )}{\log(1/\varepsilon )}}.} If they are equal, then dim E ⁡ A {\textstyle \operatorname {dim} _{E}A} is that common value, called the metric entropy dimension. The entropy dimensions are usually used in information theory, and especially coding theory, since entropy is involved in its definition. === Topological === If X {\displaystyle X} is merely a topological space, then we can still define its intrinsic dimension, using the topological dimension or Lebesgue covering dimension. An open cover of a topological space X is a family of open sets Uα such that their union is the whole space, ∪ α {\displaystyle \cup _{\alpha }} Uα = X. The order or ply of an open cover A {\displaystyle {\mathfrak {A}}} = {Uα} is the smallest number m (if it exists) for which each point of the space belongs to at most m open sets in the cover: in other words Uα1 ∩ ⋅⋅⋅ ∩ Uαm+1 = ∅ {\displaystyle \emptyset } for α1, ..., αm+1 distinct. A refinement of an open cover A {\displaystyle {\mathfrak {A}}} = {Uα} is another open cover B {\displaystyle {\mathfrak {B}}} = {Vβ}, such that each Vβ is contained in some Uα. The covering dimension of a topological space X is defined to be the minimum value of n such that every finite open cover A {\displaystyle {\mathfrak {A}}} of X has an open refinement B {\displaystyle {\mathfrak {B}}} with order n + 1. The refinement B {\displaystyle {\mathfrak {B}}} can always be chosen to be finite. Thus, if n is finite, Vβ1 ∩ ⋅⋅⋅ ∩ Vβn+2 = ∅ {\displaystyle \emptyset } for β1, ..., βn+2 distinct. If no such minimal n exists, the space is said to have infinite covering dimension. == Introductory example == Let f ( x 1 , x 2 ) {\textstyle f(x_{1},x_{2})} be a two-variable function (or signal) which is of the form f ( x 1 , x 2 ) = g ( x 1 ) {\textstyle f(x_{1},x_{2})=g(x_{1})} for some one-variable function g which is not constant. This means that f varies, in accordance to g, with the first variable or along the first coordinate. On the other hand, f is constant with respect to the second variable or along the second coordinate. It is only necessary to know the value of one, namely the first, variable in order to determine the value of f. Hence, it is a two-variable function but its intrinsic dimension is one. A slightly more complicated example is f ( x 1 , x 2 ) = g ( x 1 + x 2 ) {\textstyle f(x_{1},x_{2})=g(x_{1}+x_{2})} . f is still intrinsic one-dimensional, which can be seen by making a variable transformation y 1 = x 1 + x 2 {\textstyle y_{1}=x_{1}+x_{2}} and y 2 = x 1 − x 2 {\textstyle y_{2}=x_{1}-x_{2}} which gives f ( y 1 + y 2 2 , y 1 − y 2 2 ) = g ( y 1 ) {\textstyle f\left({\frac {y_{1}+y_{2}}{2}},{\frac {y_{1}-y_{2}}{2}}\right)=g\left(y_{1}\right)} . Since the variation in f can be described by the single variable y1 its intrinsic dimension is one. For the case that f is constant, its intrinsic dimension is zero since no variable is needed to describe variation. For the general case, when the intrinsic dimension of the two-variable function f is neither zero or one, it is two. In the literature, functions which are of intrinsic dimension zero, one, or two are sometimes referred to as i0D, i1D or i2D, respectively. == Signal processing == In signal processing of multidimensional signals, the intrinsic dimension of the signal describes how many variables are needed to generate a good approximation of the signal. For an N-variable function f, the set of variables can be represented as an N-dimensional vector x: f = f ( x ) where x = ( x 1 , … , x N ) {\textstyle f=f\left(\mathbf {x} \right){\text{ where }}\mathbf {x} =\left(x_{1},\dots ,x_{N}\right)} . If for some M-variable function g and M × N matrix A it is the case that for all x; f ( x ) = g ( A x ) , {\textstyle f(\mathbf {x} )=g(\mathbf {Ax} ),} M is the smallest number for which the above relation between f and g can be found, then the intrinsic dimension of f is M. The intrinsic dimension is a characterization of f, it is not an unambiguous characterization of g nor of A. That is, if the above relation is satisfied for some f, g, and A, it must also be satisfied for the same f and g′ and A′ given by g ′ ( y ) = g ( B y ) {\textstyle g'\left(\mathbf {y} \right)=g\left(\mathbf {By} \right)} and A ′ = B − 1 A {\textstyle \mathbf {A'} =\mathbf {B} ^{-1}\mathbf {A} } where B is a non-singular M × M matrix, since f ( x ) = g ′ ( A ′ x ) = g ( B A ′ x ) = g ( A x ) {\textstyle f\left(\mathbf {x} \right)=g'\left(\mathbf {A'x} \right)=g\left(\mathbf {BA'x} \right)=g\left(\mathbf {Ax} \right)} . == The Fourier transform of signals of low intrinsic dimension == An N variable function which has intrinsic dimension M < N has a characteristic Fourier transform. Intuitively, since this type of function is constant along one or several dimensions its Fourier transform must appear like an impulse (the Fourier transform of a constant) along the same dimension in the frequency domain. === A simple example === Let f be a two-variable function which is i1D. This means that there exists a normalized vector n ∈ R 2 {\textstyle \mathbf {n} \in \mathbb {R} ^{2}} and a one-variable function g such that f ( x ) = g ( n T x ) {\textstyle f(\mathbf {x} )=g(\mathbf {n} ^{\operatorname {T} }\mathbf {x} )} for all x ∈ R 2 {\textstyle \mathbf {x} \in \mathbb {R} ^{2}} . If F is the Fourier transform of f (both are two-variable functions) it must be the case that F ( u ) = G ( n T u ) ⋅ δ ( m T u ) {\textstyle F\left(\mathbf {u} \right)=G\left(\mathbf {n} ^{\mathrm {T} }\mathbf {u} \right)\cdot \delta \left(\mathbf {m} ^{\mathrm {T} }\mathbf {u} \right)} . Here G is the Fourier transform of g (both are one-variable functions), δ is the Dirac impulse function and m is a normalized vector in R 2 {\textstyle \mathbb {R} ^{2}} perpendicular to n. This means that F vanishes everywhere except on a line which passes through the origin of the frequency domain and is parallel to m. Along this line F varies according to G. === The general case === Let f be an N-variable function which has intrinsic dimension M, that is, there exists an M-variable function g and M × N matrix A such that f ( x ) = g ( A x ) ∀ x {\textstyle f(\mathbf {x} )=g(\mathbf {Ax} )\quad \forall \mathbf {x} } . Its Fourier transform F can then be described as follows: F vanishes everywhere except for a subspace of dimension M The subspace M is spanned by the rows of the matrix A In the subspace, F varies according to G the Fourier transform of g == Generalizations == The type of intrinsic dimension described above assume

Quotient automaton

In computer science, in particular in formal language theory, a quotient automaton can be obtained from a given nondeterministic finite automaton by joining some of its states. The quotient recognizes a superset of the given automaton; in some cases, handled by the Myhill–Nerode theorem, both languages are equal. == Formal definition == A (nondeterministic) finite automaton is a quintuple A = ⟨Σ, S, s0, δ, Sf⟩, where: Σ is the input alphabet (a finite, non-empty set of symbols), S is a finite, non-empty set of states, s0 is the initial state, an element of S, δ is the state-transition relation: δ ⊆ S × Σ × S, and Sf is the set of final states, a (possibly empty) subset of S. A string a1...an ∈ Σ is recognized by A if there exist states s1, ..., sn ∈ S such that ⟨si-1,ai,si⟩ ∈ δ for i=1,...,n, and sn ∈ Sf. The set of all strings recognized by A is called the language recognized by A; it is denoted as L(A). For an equivalence relation ≈ on the set S of A’s states, the quotient automaton A/≈ = ⟨Σ, S/≈, [s0], δ/≈, Sf/≈⟩ is defined by the input alphabet Σ being the same as that of A, the state set S/≈ being the set of all equivalence classes of states from S, the start state [s0] being the equivalence class of A’s start state, the state-transition relation δ/≈ being defined by δ/≈([s],a,[t]) if δ(s,a,t) for some s ∈ [s] and t ∈ [t], and the set of final states Sf/≈ being the set of all equivalence classes of final states from Sf. The process of computing A/≈ is also called factoring A by ≈. == Example == For example, the automaton A shown in the first row of the table is formally defined by ΣA = {0,1}, SA = {a,b,c,d}, sA0 = a, δA = { ⟨a,1,b⟩, ⟨b,0,c⟩, ⟨c,0,d⟩ }, and SAf = { b,c,d }. It recognizes the finite set of strings { 1, 10, 100 }; this set can also be denoted by the regular expression "1+10+100". The relation (≈) = { ⟨a,a⟩, ⟨a,b⟩, ⟨b,a⟩, ⟨b,b⟩, ⟨c,c⟩, ⟨c,d⟩, ⟨d,c⟩, ⟨d,d⟩ }, more briefly denoted as a≈b,c≈d, is an equivalence relation on the set {a,b,c,d} of automaton A’s states. Building the quotient of A by that relation results in automaton C in the third table row; it is formally defined by ΣC = {0,1}, SC = {a,c}, sC0 = a, δC = { ⟨a,1,a⟩, ⟨a,0,c⟩, ⟨c,0,c⟩ }, and SCf = { a,c }. It recognizes the finite set of all strings composed of arbitrarily many 1s, followed by arbitrarily many 0s, i.e. { ε, 1, 10, 100, 1000, ..., 11, 110, 1100, 11000, ..., 111, ... }; this set can also be denoted by the regular expression "10". Informally, C can be thought of resulting from A by glueing state a onto state b, and glueing state c onto state d. The table shows some more quotient relations, such as B = A/a≈b, and D = C/a≈c. == Properties == For every automaton A and every equivalence relation ≈ on its states set, L(A/≈) is a superset of (or equal to) L(A). Given a finite automaton A over some alphabet Σ, an equivalence relation ≈ can be defined on Σ by x ≈ y if ∀ z ∈ Σ: xz ∈ L(A) ↔ yz ∈ L(A). By the Myhill–Nerode theorem, A/≈ is a deterministic automaton that recognizes the same language as A. As a consequence, the quotient of A by every refinement of ≈ also recognizes the same language as A.