In mathematics and computer science, the Krohn–Rhodes theory (or algebraic automata theory) is an approach to the study of finite semigroups and automata that seeks to decompose them in terms of elementary components. These components correspond to finite aperiodic semigroups and finite simple groups that are combined in a feedback-free manner (called a "wreath product" or "cascade"). Krohn and Rhodes found a general decomposition for finite automata. The authors discovered and proved an unexpected major result in finite semigroup theory, revealing a deep connection between finite automata and semigroups. Decidability of Krohn-Rhodes complexity long motivated much work in semigroup theory. In June 2024, Stuart Margolis, John Rhodes, and Anne Schilling announced a proof that the complexity is decidable. == Definitions and description of the Krohn–Rhodes theorem == Let T {\displaystyle T} be a semigroup. A semigroup S {\displaystyle S} that is a homomorphic image of a subsemigroup of T {\displaystyle T} is said to be a divisor of T {\displaystyle T} . The Krohn–Rhodes theorem for finite semigroups states that every finite semigroup S {\displaystyle S} is a divisor of a finite alternating wreath product of finite simple groups, each a divisor of S {\displaystyle S} , and finite aperiodic semigroups (which contain no nontrivial subgroups). In the automata formulation, the Krohn–Rhodes theorem for finite automata states that given a finite automaton A {\displaystyle A} with states Q {\displaystyle Q} and input alphabet I {\displaystyle I} , output alphabet U {\displaystyle U} , then one can expand the states to Q ′ {\displaystyle Q'} such that the new automaton A ′ {\displaystyle A'} embeds into a cascade of "simple", irreducible automata: In particular, A {\displaystyle A} is emulated by a feed-forward cascade of (1) automata whose transformation semigroups are finite simple groups and (2) automata that are banks of flip-flops running in parallel. The new automaton A ′ {\displaystyle A'} has the same input and output symbols as A {\displaystyle A} . Here, both the states and inputs of the cascaded automata have a very special hierarchical coordinate form. Moreover, each simple group (prime) or non-group irreducible semigroup (subsemigroup of the flip-flop monoid) that divides the transformation semigroup of A {\displaystyle A} must divide the transformation semigroup of some component of the cascade, and only the primes that must occur as divisors of the components are those that divide A {\displaystyle A} 's transformation semigroup. == Group complexity == The Krohn–Rhodes complexity (also called group complexity or just complexity) of a finite semigroup S is the least number of groups in a wreath product of finite groups and finite aperiodic semigroups of which S is a divisor. All finite aperiodic semigroups have complexity 0, while non-trivial finite groups have complexity 1. In fact, there are semigroups of every non-negative integer complexity. For example, for any n greater than 1, the multiplicative semigroup of all (n+1) × (n+1) upper-triangular matrices over any fixed finite field has complexity n (Kambites, 2007). A major open problem in finite semigroup theory is the decidability of complexity: is there an algorithm that will compute the Krohn–Rhodes complexity of a finite semigroup, given its multiplication table? Upper bounds and ever more precise lower bounds on complexity have been obtained (see, e.g. Rhodes & Steinberg, 2009). Rhodes has conjectured that the problem is decidable. In June 2024, Stuart Margolis, John Rhodes, and Anne Schilling announced a proof in the affirmative of the conjecture, though as of 2025 the result has yet to be confirmed. == History and applications == At a conference in 1962, Kenneth Krohn and John Rhodes announced a method for decomposing a (deterministic) finite automaton into "simple" components that are themselves finite automata. This joint work, which has implications for philosophy, comprised both Krohn's doctoral thesis at Harvard University and Rhodes' doctoral thesis at MIT. Simpler proofs, and generalizations of the theorem to infinite structures, have been published since then (see Chapter 4 of Rhodes and Steinberg's 2009 book The q-Theory of Finite Semigroups for an overview). In the 1965 paper by Krohn and Rhodes, the proof of the theorem on the decomposition of finite automata (or, equivalently sequential machines) made extensive use of the algebraic semigroup structure. Later proofs contained major simplifications using finite wreath products of finite transformation semigroups. The theorem generalizes the Jordan–Hölder decomposition for finite groups (in which the primes are the finite simple groups), to all finite transformation semigroups (for which the primes are again the finite simple groups plus all subsemigroups of the "flip-flop" (see above)). Both the group and more general finite automata decomposition require expanding the state-set of the general, but allow for the same number of input symbols. In the general case, these are embedded in a larger structure with a hierarchical "coordinate system". One must be careful in understanding the notion of "prime" as Krohn and Rhodes explicitly refer to their theorem as a "prime decomposition theorem" for automata. The components in the decomposition, however, are not prime automata (with prime defined in a naïve way); rather, the notion of prime is more sophisticated and algebraic: the semigroups and groups associated to the constituent automata of the decomposition are prime (or irreducible) in a strict and natural algebraic sense with respect to the wreath product (Eilenberg, 1976). Also, unlike earlier decomposition theorems, the Krohn–Rhodes decompositions usually require expansion of the state-set, so that the expanded automaton covers (emulates) the one being decomposed. These facts have made the theorem difficult to understand and challenging to apply in a practical way—until recently, when computational implementations became available (Egri-Nagy & Nehaniv 2005, 2008). H.P. Zeiger (1967) proved an important variant called the holonomy decomposition (Eilenberg 1976). The holonomy method appears to be relatively efficient and has been implemented computationally by A. Egri-Nagy (Egri-Nagy & Nehaniv 2005). Meyer and Thompson (1969) give a version of Krohn–Rhodes decomposition for finite automata that is equivalent to the decomposition previously developed by Hartmanis and Stearns, but for useful decompositions, the notion of expanding the state-set of the original automaton is essential (for the non-permutation automata case). Many proofs and constructions now exist of Krohn–Rhodes decompositions (e.g., [Krohn, Rhodes & Tilson 1968], [Ésik 2000], [Diekert et al. 2012]), with the holonomy method the most popular and efficient in general (although not in all cases). [Zimmermann 2010] gives an elementary proof of the theorem. Owing to the close relation between monoids and categories, a version of the Krohn–Rhodes theorem is applicable to category theory. This observation and a proof of an analogous result were offered by Wells (1980). The Krohn–Rhodes theorem for semigroups/monoids is an analogue of the Jordan–Hölder theorem for finite groups (for semigroups/monoids rather than groups). As such, the theorem is a deep and important result in semigroup/monoid theory. The theorem was also surprising to many mathematicians and computer scientists since it had previously been widely believed that the semigroup/monoid axioms were too weak to admit a structure theorem of any strength, and prior work (Hartmanis & Stearns) was only able to show much more rigid and less general decomposition results for finite automata. Work by Egri-Nagy and Nehaniv (2005, 2008–) continues to further automate the holonomy version of the Krohn–Rhodes decomposition extended with the related decomposition for finite groups (so-called Frobenius–Lagrange coordinates) using the computer algebra system GAP. Applications outside of the semigroup and monoid theories are now computationally feasible. They include computations in biology and biochemical systems (e.g. Egri-Nagy & Nehaniv 2008), artificial intelligence, finite-state physics, psychology, and game theory (see, for example, Rhodes 2009).
Pixel-art scaling algorithms
Pixel art scaling algorithms are graphical filters that attempt to enhance the appearance of hand-drawn 2D pixel art graphics. These algorithms are a form of automatic image enhancement. Pixel art scaling algorithms employ methods significantly different than the common methods of image rescaling, which have the goal of preserving the appearance of images. As pixel art graphics are commonly used at very low resolutions, they employ careful coloring of individual pixels. This results in graphics that rely on a high amount of stylized visual cues to define complex shapes. Several specialized algorithms have been developed to handle re-scaling of such graphics. These specialized algorithms can improve the appearance of pixel-art graphics, but in doing so they introduce changes. Such changes may be undesirable, especially if the goal is to faithfully reproduce the original appearance. Since a typical application of this technology is improving the appearance of fourth-generation and earlier video games on arcade and console emulators, many pixel art scaling algorithms are designed to run in real-time for sufficiently small input images at 60-frames per second. This places constraints on the type of programming techniques that can be used for this sort of real-time processing. Many work only on specific scale factors. 2× is the most common scale factor, while 3×, 4×, 5×, and 6× exist but are less used. == Algorithms == === SAA5050 'Diagonal Smoothing' === The Mullard SAA5050 Teletext character generator chip (1980) used a primitive pixel scaling algorithm to generate higher-resolution characters on the screen from a lower-resolution representation from its internal ROM. Internally, each character shape was defined on a 5 × 9 pixel grid, which was then interpolated by smoothing diagonals to give a 10 × 18 pixel character, with a characteristically angular shape, surrounded to the top and the left by two pixels of blank space. The algorithm only works on monochrome source data, and assumes the source pixels will be logically true or false depending on whether they are 'on' or 'off'. Pixels 'outside the grid pattern' are assumed to be off. The algorithm works as follows: A B C --\ 1 2 D E F --/ 3 4 1 = B | (A & E & !B & !D) 2 = B | (C & E & !B & !F) 3 = E | (!A & !E & B & D) 4 = E | (!C & !E & B & F) Note that this algorithm, like the Eagle algorithm below, has a flaw: If a pattern of 4 pixels in a hollow diamond shape appears, the hollow will be obliterated by the expansion. The SAA5050's internal character ROM carefully avoids ever using this pattern. The degenerate case: becomes: === EPX/Scale2×/AdvMAME2× === Eric's Pixel Expansion (EPX) is an algorithm developed by Eric Johnston at LucasArts around 1992, when porting the SCUMM engine games from the IBM PC (which ran at 320 × 200 × 256 colors) to the early color Macintosh computers, which ran at more or less double that resolution. The algorithm works as follows, expanding P into 4 new pixels based on P's surroundings: 1=P; 2=P; 3=P; 4=P; IF C==A => 1=A IF A==B => 2=B IF D==C => 3=C IF B==D => 4=D IF of A, B, C, D, three or more are identical: 1=2=3=4=P Later implementations of this same algorithm (as AdvMAME2× and Scale2×, developed around 2001) are slightly more efficient but functionally identical: 1=P; 2=P; 3=P; 4=P; IF C==A AND C!=D AND A!=B => 1=A IF A==B AND A!=C AND B!=D => 2=B IF D==C AND D!=B AND C!=A => 3=C IF B==D AND B!=A AND D!=C => 4=D AdvMAME2× is available in DOSBox via the scaler=advmame2x dosbox.conf option. The AdvMAME4×/Scale4× algorithm is just EPX applied twice to get 4× resolution. ==== Scale3×/AdvMAME3× and ScaleFX ==== The AdvMAME3×/Scale3× algorithm (available in DOSBox via the scaler=advmame3x dosbox.conf option) can be thought of as a generalization of EPX to the 3× case. The corner pixels are calculated identically to EPX. 1=E; 2=E; 3=E; 4=E; 5=E; 6=E; 7=E; 8=E; 9=E; IF D==B AND D!=H AND B!=F => 1=D IF (D==B AND D!=H AND B!=F AND E!=C) OR (B==F AND B!=D AND F!=H AND E!=A) => 2=B IF B==F AND B!=D AND F!=H => 3=F IF (H==D AND H!=F AND D!=B AND E!=A) OR (D==B AND D!=H AND B!=F AND E!=G) => 4=D 5=E IF (B==F AND B!=D AND F!=H AND E!=I) OR (F==H AND F!=B AND H!=D AND E!=C) => 6=F IF H==D AND H!=F AND D!=B => 7=D IF (F==H AND F!=B AND H!=D AND E!=G) OR (H==D AND H!=F AND D!=B AND E!=I) => 8=H IF F==H AND F!=B AND H!=D => 9=F There is also a variant improved over Scale3× called ScaleFX, developed by Sp00kyFox, and a version combined with Reverse-AA called ScaleFX-Hybrid. === Eagle === Eagle works as follows: for every in pixel, we will generate 4 out pixels. First, set all 4 to the color of the pixel we are currently scaling (as nearest-neighbor). Next look at the three pixels above, to the left, and diagonally above left: if all three are the same color as each other, set the top left pixel of our output square to that color in preference to the nearest-neighbor color. Work similarly for all four pixels, and then move to the next one. Assume an input matrix of 3 × 3 pixels where the centermost pixel is the pixel to be scaled, and an output matrix of 2 × 2 pixels (i.e., the scaled pixel) first: |Then . . . --\ CC |S T U --\ 1 2 . C . --/ CC |V C W --/ 3 4 . . . |X Y Z | IF V==S==T => 1=S | IF T==U==W => 2=U | IF V==X==Y => 3=X | IF W==Z==Y => 4=Z Thus if we have a single black pixel on a white background it will vanish. This is a bug in the Eagle algorithm but is solved by other algorithms such as EPX, 2xSaI, and HQ2x. === 2×SaI === 2×SaI, short for 2× Scale and Interpolation engine, was inspired by Eagle. It was designed by Derek Liauw Kie Fa, also known as Kreed, primarily for use in console and computer emulators, and it has remained fairly popular in this niche. Many of the most popular emulators, including ZSNES and VisualBoyAdvance, offer this scaling algorithm as a feature. Several slightly different versions of the scaling algorithm are available, and these are often referred to as Super 2×SaI and Super Eagle. The 2xSaI family works on a 4 × 4 matrix of pixels where the pixel marked A below is scaled: I E F J G A B K --\ W X H C D L --/ Y Z M N O P For 16-bit pixels, they use pixel masks which change based on whether the 16-bit pixel format is 565 or 555. The constants colorMask, lowPixelMask, qColorMask, qLowPixelMask, redBlueMask, and greenMask are 16-bit masks. The lower 8 bits are identical in either pixel format. Two interpolation functions are described: INTERPOLATE(uint32 A, UINT32 B). -- linear midpoint of A and B if (A == B) return A; return ( ((A & colorMask) >> 1) + ((B & colorMask) >> 1) + (A & B & lowPixelMask) ); Q_INTERPOLATE(uint32 A, uint32 B, uint32 C, uint32 D) -- bilinear interpolation; A, B, C, and D's average x = ((A & qColorMask) >> 2) + ((B & qColorMask) >> 2) + ((C & qColorMask) >> 2) + ((D & qColorMask) >> 2); y = (A & qLowPixelMask) + (B & qLowPixelMask) + (C & qLowPixelMask) + (D & qLowPixelMask); y = (y >> 2) & qLowPixelMask; return x + y; The algorithm checks A, B, C, and D for a diagonal match such that A==D and B!=C, or the other way around, or if they are both diagonals or if there is no diagonal match. Within these, it checks for three or four identical pixels. Based on these conditions, the algorithm decides whether to use one of A, B, C, or D, or an interpolation among only these four, for each output pixel. The 2xSaI arbitrary scaler can enlarge any image to any resolution and uses bilinear filtering to interpolate pixels. Since Kreed released the source code under the GNU General Public License, it is freely available to anyone wishing to utilize it in a project released under that license. Developers wishing to use it in a non-GPL project would be required to rewrite the algorithm without using any of Kreed's existing code. It is available in DOSBox via scaler=2xsai option. === hqnx family === Maxim Stepin's hq2x, hq3x, and hq4x are for scale factors of 2:1, 3:1, and 4:1 respectively. Each work by comparing the color value of each pixel to those of its eight immediate neighbors, marking the neighbors as close or distant, and using a pre-generated lookup table to find the proper proportion of input pixels' values for each of the 4, 9 or 16 corresponding output pixels. The hq3x family will perfectly smooth any diagonal line whose slope is ±0.5, ±1, or ±2 and which is not anti-aliased in the input; one with any other slope will alternate between two slopes in the output. It will also smooth very tight curves. Unlike 2xSaI, it anti-aliases the output. hqnx was initially created for the Super NES emulator ZSNES. The author of bsnes has released a space-efficient implementation of hq2x to the public domain. A port to shaders, which has comparable quality to the early versions of xBR, is available. Before the port, a shader called "scalehq" has often been confused for hqx. === xBR family === There are 6 filters in this family: xBR , xBRZ, xBR-Hybrid, Super xBR, xBR+3D and Super xBR+3D. xBR ("scale by rules"), cre
Read Along
Read Along, formerly known as Bolo, is an Android language-learning app for children developed by Google for the Android operating system. The application was released on the Play Store on March 7, 2019. It features a character named Diya helping children learn to read through illustrated stories. It has the facility to learn English and Indian major languages i.e. Hindi, Bengali, Tamil, Telugu, Marathi and Urdu, as well as Spanish, Portuguese and Arabic. == Technology == The app uses text-to-speech technology, through which the character named Dia reads the story, as well as speech-to-text technology, which mechanically identifies the matches between the text and the reading of the user. The story of Chhota Bheem and Katha Kids was added in September 2019. In April 2020, a new version of the application was released. In September 2020, it added Arabic language to its language option. A web version was launched in August 2022.
VoxForge
VoxForge is a free speech corpus and acoustic model repository for open source speech recognition engines. VoxForge was set up to collect transcribed speech to create a free GPL speech corpus in order to be uses with open source speech recognition engines. The speech audio files will be 'compiled' into acoustic models for use with open source speech recognition engines such as Julius, ISIP, and Sphinx and HTK (note: HTK has distribution restrictions). VoxForge has used LibriVox as a source of audio data since 2007.
Scan line
A scan line (also scanline) is one line, or row, in a raster scanning pattern, such as a line of video on a cathode-ray tube (CRT) display of a television set or computer monitor. On CRT screens the horizontal scan lines are visually discernible, even when viewed from a distance, as alternating colored lines and black lines, especially when a progressive scan signal with below maximum vertical resolution is displayed. This is sometimes used today as a visual effect in computer graphics. The term is used, by analogy, for a single row of pixels in a raster graphics image. Scan lines are important in representations of image data, because many image file formats have special rules for data at the end of a scan line. For example, there may be a rule that each scan line starts on a particular boundary (such as a byte or word; see for example BMP file format). This means that even otherwise compatible raster data may need to be analyzed at the level of scan lines in order to convert between formats.
Tabletopia
Tabletopia is an online portal for users to play and create virtual tabletop games. The platform is developed by Tabletopia Inc and initially was released as a web browser based service after a successful crowdfunding campaign in August 2015. In December 2016 Tabletopia was released on Steam, and later in 2018 became available in AppStore and Google Play. == Gameplay == Tabletopia is a sandbox system for running any game. That means no AI or rules enforcement. Participating players will have to know how to play the game. Nevertheless, the platform has some automated actions available, like card-shuffling and dealing, dice-rolling, magnetic placement of components in special zones, hand management, and some others. Tabletopia also features ready game setups for various player numbers to facilitate gameplay. It also has customisable camera controls which let players save camera positions and switch between them using hot keys. People can use the Game Designer mode to design and create their own board games using the component library. They can then monetise the games with a 70/30 split to the game designer. == Development == Tabletopia was created in early 2014, by Tim Bokarev and his partners Artem Zinoviev and Dmitry Sergeev. These co-founders already had experience in the video and board games industry. Their other projects include Promo Interactive, an internet advertising agency, Playtox, a mobile MMORPG, Igrology, a game studio, and Tesera.ru, the main Russian-speaking board gaming portal. By Spring 2014, Artem, Dmitry and Tim created Tabletopia Inc. USA and started development. Tabletopia is a multinational crew that includes professionals from USA, Ukraine, Australia, Ireland, and Germany. The Kickstarter campaign in August 2015 earned $133,721 by 2,545 backers. Tabletopia received Green Light on Steam in September 2015 and was released on Steam in March 2016. The platform remained in Early Access until December 2016, when it was officially released on Steam and on the web. In February 2018 it was released as a stand-alone app for iOS tablets, and in September 2018 for Android tablets.
Time-inhomogeneous hidden Bernoulli model
Time-inhomogeneous hidden Bernoulli model (TI-HBM) is an alternative to hidden Markov model (HMM) for automatic speech recognition. Contrary to HMM, the state transition process in TI-HBM is not a Markov-dependent process, rather it is a generalized Bernoulli (an independent) process. This difference leads to elimination of dynamic programming at state-level in TI-HBM decoding process. Thus, the computational complexity of TI-HBM for probability evaluation and state estimation is O ( N L ) {\displaystyle O(NL)} (instead of O ( N 2 L ) {\displaystyle O(N^{2}L)} in the HMM case, where N {\displaystyle N} and L {\displaystyle L} are number of states and observation sequence length respectively). The TI-HBM is able to model acoustic-unit duration (e.g. phone/word duration) by using a built-in parameter named survival probability. The TI-HBM is simpler and faster than HMM in a phoneme recognition task, but its performance is comparable to HMM. For details, see [1] or [2].