This is a list of data science software and platforms used in data science, which includes programming languages, programming environments, machine learning frameworks, data engineering tools, statistical software, data analysis, plotting, MLOps systems, and more. == Programming languages == == Development environments == These interactive notebooks, IDEs, and platforms provide specialised development environments. Apache Zeppelin Architect — Eclipse (software) CoCalc Dataiku Data Science Studio FreeMat GNU Octave Google Colab DataSpell Jupyter Notebook / JupyterLab Kaggle Notebooks MATLAB O-Matrix PyCharm RStudio SAS (software) and SAS Studio Spyder Visual Studio Code == Machine and deep learning software == The Machine learning / deep learning tools support development in those fields. == Data engineering == Examples of Data engineering tools. Apache Airflow Apache Flink Apache Hadoop Apache Kafka Apache NiFi Apache Spark Dask Data build tool (dbt) == Data mining == Examples of Data mining tools. === Free and open-source === === Proprietary === == Database management == === List of RDBMS === ==== Proprietary ==== == Data warehouses == Data warehouse environments include: Amazon Redshift Snowflake Google BigQuery Microsoft Azure Synapse Teradata Vertica == Data lakes == Data lake environments include: Apache Hadoop Cloudera Databricks Delta Lake Amazon S3 Google Cloud Storage Azure Data Lake == Algorithms == Apriori algorithm – frequent itemset mining and association rule learning in market basket analysis Backpropagation – algorithm for training artificial neural networks using gradient descent Decision Trees – tree-based algorithm for classification and regression Expectation–maximization algorithm – iterative procedure for maximum likelihood estimation with latent variables Gradient descent – iterative optimization algorithm for minimizing a loss function ID3 algorithm – used to generate a decision tree from a dataset K-Means – clustering algorithm based on minimizing within-cluster distances K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN) – instance-based learning and classification method Linear regression – estimation method for predicting a dependent variable based on independent variables Logistic regression – classification algorithm for predicting a binary outcome Naive Bayes – probabilistic classifier based on Bayes' theorem Ordinary least squares – estimation method for parameters in linear regression PageRank – graph-based algorithm for link analysis and search ranking Principal component analysis – technique to reduce high-dimensional data while preserving variance Q-learning – reinforcement learning algorithm for learning optimal actions Random forest – ensemble of decision trees for improved classification or regression Sequential minimal optimization – solver for training support vector machines Stochastic gradient descent – randomized variant of gradient descent for large-scale machine learning Support Vector Machines (SVM) – algorithm for finding a hyperplane to separate classes == Statistical software == === Open-source === === Public domain === CSPro Dataplot Epi Map X-13ARIMA-SEATS === Freeware === BV4.1 MINUIT WinBUGS Winpepi === Proprietary === == Data processing == Tools for Data processing and analysis: == Data and information visualization == Software for Data visualization: == Plotting software == Software for plotting data to support processing and visualise results. == Maps and geospatial visualization == ArcGIS Carto Epi Map GeoDA Google Earth Engine Leaflet Mapbox MountainsMap QGIS == Machine learning == MLOps and model deployment: BentoML Data Version Control (DVC) Kubeflow MLflow Seldon Core Streamlit TensorFlow Serving Weights & Biases == Data repositories == Kaggle – platform for data science competitions, datasets, and notebooks. OpenML – collaborative platform for sharing datasets, algorithms, and experiments. University of California, Irvine Machine Learning Repository Zenodo – open-access repository supported by CERN and the EU. == Educational data science software == Kaggle – online platform for data science education, competitions, datasets, and collaborative learning. KNIME – open-source data analytics platform used for teaching data science, machine learning, and workflow-based analysis. RapidMiner – used in academic research and education for data mining and machine learning. Statistics Online Computational Resource (SOCR) – online tools and instructional resources for statistics education. Tanagra (machine learning) – data mining software developed for research and teaching purposes. TinkerPlots – explore and analyze data through visual modeling.
Question answering
Question answering (QA) is a computer science discipline within the fields of information retrieval and natural language processing (NLP) that is concerned with building systems that automatically answer questions that are posed by humans in a natural language. A question-answering implementation, usually a computer program, may construct its answers by querying a structured database of knowledge or information, usually a knowledge base. More commonly, question-answering systems can pull answers from an unstructured collection of natural language documents. Some examples of natural language document collections used for question answering systems include reference texts, compiled newswire reports, Wikipedia pages and other World Wide Web pages. == History == Two early question answering systems were BASEBALL and LUNAR. BASEBALL answered questions about Major League Baseball over a period of one year. LUNAR answered questions about the geological analysis of rocks returned by the Apollo Moon missions. Both question answering systems were very effective in their chosen domains. LUNAR was demonstrated at a lunar science convention in 1971 and it was able to answer 90% of the questions in its domain that were posed by people untrained on the system. Further restricted-domain question answering systems were developed in the following years. The common feature of all these systems is that they had a core database or knowledge system that was hand-written by experts of the chosen domain. The language abilities of BASEBALL and LUNAR used techniques similar to ELIZA and DOCTOR, the first chatterbot programs. SHRDLU was a successful question-answering program developed by Terry Winograd in the late 1960s and early 1970s. It simulated the operation of a robot in a toy world (the "blocks world"), and it offered the possibility of asking the robot questions about the state of the world. The strength of this system was the choice of a very specific domain and a very simple world with rules of physics that were easy to encode in a computer program. In the 1970s, knowledge bases were developed that targeted narrower domains of knowledge. The question answering systems developed to interface with these expert systems produced more repeatable and valid responses to questions within an area of knowledge. These expert systems closely resembled modern question answering systems except in their internal architecture. Expert systems rely heavily on expert-constructed and organized knowledge bases, whereas many modern question answering systems rely on statistical processing of a large, unstructured, natural language text corpus. The 1970s and 1980s saw the development of comprehensive theories in computational linguistics, which led to the development of ambitious projects in text comprehension and question answering. One example was the Unix Consultant (UC), developed by Robert Wilensky at U.C. Berkeley in the late 1980s. The system answered questions pertaining to the Unix operating system. It had a comprehensive, hand-crafted knowledge base of its domain, and it aimed at phrasing the answer to accommodate various types of users. Another project was LILOG, a text-understanding system that operated on the domain of tourism information in a German city. The systems developed in the UC and LILOG projects never went past the stage of simple demonstrations, but they helped the development of theories on computational linguistics and reasoning. Specialized natural-language question answering systems have been developed, such as EAGLi for health and life scientists. Question answering systems have been extended in recent years to encompass additional domains of knowledge For example, systems have been developed to automatically answer temporal and geospatial questions, questions of definition and terminology, biographical questions, multilingual questions, and questions about the content of audio, images, and video. Current question answering research topics include: interactivity—clarification of questions or answers answer reuse or caching semantic parsing answer presentation knowledge representation and semantic entailment social media analysis with question answering systems sentiment analysis utilization of thematic roles Image captioning for visual question answering Embodied question answering In 2011, Watson, a question answering computer system developed by IBM, competed in two exhibition matches of Jeopardy! against Brad Rutter and Ken Jennings, winning by a significant margin. Facebook Research made their DrQA system available under an open source license. This system uses Wikipedia as knowledge source. The open source framework Haystack by deepset combines open-domain question answering with generative question answering and supports the domain adaptation of the underlying language models for industry use cases. Large Language Models (LLMs)[36] like GPT-4[37], Gemini[38] are examples of successful QA systems that are enabling more sophisticated understanding and generation of text. When coupled with Multimodal[39] QA Systems, which can process and understand information from various modalities like text, images, and audio, LLMs significantly improve the capabilities of QA systems. == Types == Question-answering research attempts to develop ways of answering a wide range of question types, including fact, list, definition, how, why, hypothetical, semantically constrained, and cross-lingual questions. Answering questions related to an article in order to evaluate reading comprehension is one of the simpler form of question answering, since a given article is relatively short compared to the domains of other types of question-answering problems. An example of such a question is "What did Albert Einstein win the Nobel Prize for?" after an article about this subject is given to the system. Closed-book question answering is when a system has memorized some facts during training and can answer questions without explicitly being given a context. This is similar to humans taking closed-book exams. Closed-domain question answering deals with questions under a specific domain (for example, medicine or automotive maintenance) and can exploit domain-specific knowledge frequently formalized in ontologies. Alternatively, "closed-domain" might refer to a situation where only a limited type of questions are accepted, such as questions asking for descriptive rather than procedural information. Question answering systems in the context of machine reading applications have also been constructed in the medical domain, for instance related to Alzheimer's disease. Open-domain question answering deals with questions about nearly anything and can only rely on general ontologies and world knowledge. Systems designed for open-domain question answering usually have much more data available from which to extract the answer. An example of an open-domain question is "What did Albert Einstein win the Nobel Prize for?" while no article about this subject is given to the system. Another way to categorize question-answering systems is by the technical approach used. There are a number of different types of QA systems, including: rule-based systems, statistical systems, and hybrid systems. Rule-based systems use a set of rules to determine the correct answer to a question. Statistical systems use statistical methods to find the most likely answer to a question. Hybrid systems use a combination of rule-based and statistical methods. == Architecture == As of 2001, question-answering systems typically included a question classifier module that determined the type of question and the type of answer. Different types of question-answering systems employ different architectures. For example, modern open-domain question answering systems may use a retriever-reader architecture. The retriever is aimed at retrieving relevant documents related to a given question, while the reader is used to infer the answer from the retrieved documents. Systems such as GPT-3, T5, and BART use an end-to-end architecture in which a transformer-based architecture stores large-scale textual data in the underlying parameters. Such models can answer questions without accessing any external knowledge sources. == Methods == Question answering is dependent on a good search corpus; without documents containing the answer, there is little any question answering system can do. Larger collections generally mean better question answering performance, unless the question domain is orthogonal to the collection. Data redundancy in massive collections, such as the web, means that nuggets of information are likely to be phrased in many different ways in differing contexts and documents, leading to two benefits: If the right information appears in many forms, the question answering system needs to perform fewer complex NLP techniques to understand the text. Correct answers can be filtered from false positives because the syst
Sentential decision diagram
In artificial intelligence, a sentential decision diagram (SDD) is a type of knowledge representation used in knowledge compilation to represent Boolean functions. SDDs can be viewed as a generalization of the influential ordered binary decision diagram (OBDD) representation, by allowing decisions on multiple variables at once. Like OBDDs, SDDs allow for tractable Boolean operations, while being exponentially more succinct. For this reason, they have become an important representation in knowledge compilation. == Properties == SDDs are defined with respect to a generalization of variable ordering known as a variable tree (vtree). Provided that they satisfy additional properties known as compression and trimming (which are analogous to ROBDDs), SDDs are a canonical representation of Boolean functions; that is, they are unique given a vtree. Like OBDDs, they allow for operations such as conjunction, disjunction and negation to be computed directly on the representation in polynomial time, while being potentially more compact. They also allow for polynomial-time model counting. SDDs are known to be exponentially more succinct than OBDDs. == Applications == SDDs are used as a compilation target for probabilistic logic programs by the ProbLog 2 system since they support tractable (weighted) model counting as well as tractable negation, conjunction and disjunction while being more succinct than BDDs. SDDs have also been extended to model probability distributions, in which context they are known as probabilistic sentential decision diagrams (PSDD).
Lisp machine
Lisp machines are general-purpose computers designed to efficiently run Lisp as their main software and programming language, usually via hardware support. They are an example of a high-level language computer architecture. In a sense, they were the first commercial single-user workstations. Despite being modest in number (perhaps 7,000 units total as of 1988) Lisp machines commercially pioneered some now-commonplace technologies, including networking innovations such as Chaosnet, and effective garbage collection. Several firms built and sold Lisp machines in the 1980s: Symbolics (3600, 3640, XL1200, MacIvory, and other models), Lisp Machines Incorporated (LMI Lambda), Texas Instruments (Explorer, MicroExplorer), and Xerox (Interlisp-D workstations). The operating systems were written in Lisp Machine Lisp, Interlisp (Xerox), and later partly in Common Lisp. == History == === Historical context === Artificial intelligence (AI) computer programs of the 1960s and 1970s intrinsically required what was then considered a huge amount of computer power, as measured in processor time and memory space. The power requirements of AI research were exacerbated by the Lisp symbolic programming language, when commercial hardware was designed and optimized for assembly- and Fortran-like programming languages. At first, the cost of such computer hardware meant that it had to be shared among many users. As integrated circuit technology shrank the size and cost of computers in the 1960s and early 1970s, and the memory needs of AI programs began to exceed the address space of the most common research computer, the Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) PDP-10, researchers considered a new approach: a computer designed specifically to develop and run large artificial intelligence programs, and tailored to the semantics of the Lisp language. To provide consistent performance for interactive programs, these machines would often not be shared, but would be dedicated to a single user at a time. === Initial development === In 1973, Richard Greenblatt and Thomas Knight, programmers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (AI Lab), began what would become the MIT Lisp Machine Project when they first began building a computer hardwired to run certain basic Lisp operations, rather than run them in software, in a 24-bit tagged architecture. The machine also did incremental (or Arena) garbage collection. More specifically, since Lisp variables are typed at runtime rather than compile time, a simple addition of two variables could take five times as long on conventional hardware, due to test and branch instructions. Lisp Machines ran the tests in parallel with the more conventional single instruction additions. If the simultaneous tests failed, then the result was discarded and recomputed; this meant in many cases a speed increase by several factors. This simultaneous checking approach was used as well in testing the bounds of arrays when referenced, and other memory management necessities (not merely garbage collection or arrays). Type checking was further improved and automated when the conventional byte word of 32 bits was lengthened to 36 bits for Symbolics 3600-model Lisp machines and eventually to 40 bits or more (usually, the excess bits not accounted for by the following were used for error-correcting codes). The first group of extra bits were used to hold type data, making the machine a tagged architecture, and the remaining bits were used to implement compressed data representation (CDR) coding (wherein the usual linked list elements are compressed to occupy roughly half the space), aiding garbage collection by reportedly an order of magnitude. A further improvement was two microcode instructions which specifically supported Lisp functions, reducing the cost of calling a function to as little as 20 clock cycles, in some Symbolics implementations. The first machine was called the CONS machine (named after the list construction operator cons in Lisp). Often it was affectionately referred to as the Knight machine, perhaps since Knight wrote his master's thesis on the subject; it was extremely well received. It was subsequently improved into a version called CADR (a pun; in Lisp, the cadr function, which returns the second item of a list, is pronounced /ˈkeɪ.dəɹ/ or /ˈkɑ.dəɹ/, as some pronounce the word "cadre") which was based on essentially the same architecture. About 25 of what were essentially prototype CADRs were sold within and without MIT for ~$50,000; it quickly became the favorite machine for hacking – many of the most favored software tools were quickly ported to it (e.g. Emacs was ported from ITS in 1975). It was so well received at an AI conference held at MIT in 1978 that Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) began funding its development. === Commercializing MIT Lisp machine technology === In 1979, Russell Noftsker, being convinced that Lisp machines had a bright commercial future due to the strength of the Lisp language and the enabling factor of hardware acceleration, proposed to Greenblatt that they commercialize the technology. In a counter-intuitive move for an AI Lab hacker, Greenblatt acquiesced, hoping perhaps that he could recreate the informal and productive atmosphere of the Lab in a real business. These ideas and goals were considerably different from those of Noftsker. The two negotiated at length, but neither would compromise. As the proposed firm could succeed only with the full and undivided assistance of the AI Lab hackers as a group, Noftsker and Greenblatt decided that the fate of the enterprise was up to them, and so the choice should be left to the hackers. The ensuing discussions of the choice divided the lab into two factions. In February 1979, matters came to a head. The hackers sided with Noftsker, believing that a commercial venture-fund-backed firm had a better chance of surviving and commercializing Lisp machines than Greenblatt's proposed self-sustaining start-up. Greenblatt lost the battle. It was at this juncture that Symbolics, Noftsker's enterprise, slowly came together. While Noftsker was paying his staff a salary, he had no building or any equipment for the hackers to work on. He bargained with Patrick Winston that, in exchange for allowing Symbolics' staff to keep working out of MIT, Symbolics would let MIT use internally and freely all the software Symbolics developed. A consultant from CDC, who was trying to put together a natural language computer application with a group of West-coast programmers, came to Greenblatt, seeking a Lisp machine for his group to work with, about eight months after the disastrous conference with Noftsker. Greenblatt had decided to start his own rival Lisp machine firm, but he had done nothing. The consultant, Alexander Jacobson, decided that the only way Greenblatt was going to start the firm and build the Lisp machines that Jacobson desperately needed was if Jacobson pushed and otherwise helped Greenblatt launch the firm. Jacobson pulled together business plans, a board, a partner for Greenblatt (one F. Stephen Wyle). The newfound firm was named LISP Machine, Inc. (LMI), and was funded by CDC orders, via Jacobson. Around this time Symbolics (Noftsker's firm) began operating. It had been hindered by Noftsker's promise to give Greenblatt a year's head start, and by severe delays in procuring venture capital. Symbolics still had the major advantage that while 3 or 4 of the AI Lab hackers had gone to work for Greenblatt, 14 other hackers had signed onto Symbolics. Two AI Lab people were not hired by either: Richard Stallman and Marvin Minsky. Stallman, however, blamed Symbolics for the decline of the hacker community that had centered around the AI lab. For two years, from 1982 to the end of 1983, Stallman worked by himself to clone the output of the Symbolics programmers, with the aim of preventing them from gaining a monopoly on the lab's computers. Regardless, after a series of internal battles, Symbolics did get off the ground in 1980/1981, selling the CADR as the LM-2, while Lisp Machines, Inc. sold it as the LMI-CADR. Symbolics did not intend to produce many LM-2s, since the 3600 family of Lisp machines was supposed to ship quickly, but the 3600s were repeatedly delayed, and Symbolics ended up producing ~100 LM-2s, each of which sold for $70,000. Both firms developed second-generation products based on the CADR: the Symbolics 3600 and the LMI-LAMBDA (of which LMI managed to sell ~200). The 3600, which shipped a year late, expanded on the CADR by widening the machine word to 36-bits, expanding the address space to 28-bits, and adding hardware to accelerate certain common functions that were implemented in microcode on the CADR. The LMI-LAMBDA, which came out a year after the 3600, in 1983, was compatible with the CADR (it could run CADR microcode), but hardware differences existed. Texas Instruments (TI) joined the fray whe
Leela Zero
Leela Zero is a free and open-source computer Go program released on 25 October 2017. It is developed by Belgian programmer Gian-Carlo Pascutto, the author of chess engine Sjeng and Go engine Leela. Leela Zero's algorithm is based on DeepMind's 2017 paper about AlphaGo Zero. Unlike the original Leela, which has a lot of human knowledge and heuristics programmed into it, the program code in Leela Zero only knows the basic rules and nothing more. The knowledge that makes Leela Zero a strong player is contained in a neural network, which is trained based on the results of previous games that the program played. Leela Zero is trained by a distributed effort, which is coordinated at the Leela Zero website. Members of the community provide computing resources by running the client, which generates self-play games and submits them to the server. The self-play games are used to train newer networks. Generally, over 500 clients have connected to the server to contribute resources. The community has provided high quality code contributions as well. == Version history == Leela Zero finished third at the BerryGenomics Cup World AI Go Tournament in Fuzhou, Fujian, China on 28 April 2018. The New Yorker at the end of 2018 characterized Leela and Leela Zero as "the world’s most successful open-source Go engines". In early 2018, another team branched Leela Chess Zero from the same code base, also to verify the methods in the AlphaZero paper as applied to the game of chess. AlphaZero's use of Google TPUs was replaced by a crowd-sourcing infrastructure and the ability to use graphics card GPUs via the OpenCL library. Even so, it is expected to take a year of crowd-sourced training to make up for the dozen hours that AlphaZero was allowed to train for its chess match in the paper. The distributed training server was shut down on 2021-02-15, marking the end of Leela Zero project. The page now directs visitors to KataGo and SAI. The model sizes increased steadily over time. The first released model has hash name d645af97, size 1x8 (1 layer, 8 channels), and released at 2017-11-10 13:04. The last released model has hash name 0e9ea880, size 40x256, and was released at 2021-02-15 09:04. == Technology == Leela Zero is an (almost) exact replication of AlphaGo Zero in both training process and architecture. The training process is Monte-Carlo Tree Search with self-play, exactly the same as AlphaGo Zero. The architecture is the same as AlphaGo Zero (with one difference). Consider the last released model, 0e9ea880. It has 47 million parameters, and the following architecture: The stem of the network takes as input a 18x19x19 tensor representation of the Go board. 8 channels are the positions of the current player's stones from the last eight time steps. (1 if there is a stone, 0 otherwise. If the time step go before the beginning of the game, then 0 in all positions.) 8 channels are the positions of the other player's stones from the last eight time steps. 1 channel is all 1 if black is to move, and 0 otherwise. 1 channel is all 1 if white is to move, and 0 otherwise. (This channel is not present in the original AlphaGo Zero) The body is a ResNet with 40 residual blocks and 256 channels. There are two heads, a policy head and a value head. Policy head outputs a logit array of size 19 × 19 + 1 {\displaystyle 19\times 19+1} , representing the logit of making a move in one of the points, plus the logit of passing. Value head outputs a number in the range ( − 1 , + 1 ) {\displaystyle (-1,+1)} , representing the expected score for the current player. -1 represents current player losing, and +1 winning.
MoFA Mitra
MoFA Mitra is a mobile application launched by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Nepal to provide digital consular services, emergency support, rescue coordination, and complaint registration facilities for Nepali citizens living and working abroad. The application allows Nepali migrant workers, students, tourists, and Non-Resident Nepalis (NRNs) to access embassy services, emergency help, and official information directly from their smartphones. == Background == The need for a centralized digital support platform for Nepalis abroad had been discussed for several years due to increasing complaints related to labor exploitation, rescue delays, documentation problems, and lack of communication with Nepali diplomatic missions. Media organizations and migrant rights advocates had continuously highlighted issues faced by Nepali workers abroad, including human trafficking, fraudulent recruitment, delayed repatriation, and difficulties in receiving emergency assistance. In response, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs developed the MoFA Mitra app to digitize complaint handling, improve communication between embassies and citizens, and make emergency response faster and more accessible. == Features == The app includes several services and features for Nepali citizens abroad, including complaint registration, rescue coordination, embassy communication, and digital consular support services. Features of the application include: Online complaint registration Emergency rescue request system Direct contact with Nepali embassies and consulates Digital consular information Passport and document-related assistance Labor and migration support information Emergency hotline access Real-time notifications and alerts Location-based embassy information Tracking and coordination support for stranded citizens According to reports, the application was designed to simplify access to diplomatic services and strengthen emergency response coordination for Nepalis abroad. == Launch == The application was officially launched by Nepal’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Kathmandu in May 2026. Government officials stated that the app would strengthen Nepal’s digital governance system and improve support mechanisms for Nepali citizens residing overseas. Officials said the platform would help improve communication between Nepali diplomatic missions and citizens during emergencies and rescue operations. == Reception == The launch of the app received positive coverage from Nepali and international media outlets. Commentators described the initiative as a significant step toward modernization of Nepal’s diplomatic and consular services and digital governance infrastructure. Some observers also emphasized the importance of effective implementation, rapid response mechanisms, and continuous monitoring to ensure practical benefits for migrant workers abroad.
CatBoost
CatBoost is an open-source software library developed by Yandex. It provides a gradient boosting framework which, among other features, attempts to solve for categorical features using a permutation-driven alternative to the classical algorithm. It works on Linux, Windows, macOS, and is available in Python, R, and models built using CatBoost can be used for predictions in C++, Java, C#, Rust, Core ML, ONNX, and PMML. The source code is licensed under Apache License and available on GitHub. InfoWorld magazine awarded the library "The best machine learning tools" in 2017. along with TensorFlow, Pytorch, XGBoost and 8 other libraries. Kaggle listed CatBoost as one of the most frequently used machine learning (ML) frameworks in the world. It was listed as the top-8 most frequently used ML framework in the 2020 survey and as the top-7 most frequently used ML framework in the 2021 survey. As of April 2022, CatBoost is installed about 100000 times per day from PyPI repository == Features == CatBoost has gained popularity compared to other gradient boosting algorithms primarily due to the following features Native handling for categorical features Fast GPU training Visualizations and tools for model and feature analysis Using oblivious trees or symmetric trees for faster execution Ordered boosting to overcome overfitting == History == In 2009 Andrey Gulin developed MatrixNet, a proprietary gradient boosting library that was used in Yandex to rank search results. Since 2009 MatrixNet has been used in different projects at Yandex, including recommendation systems and weather prediction. In 2014–2015 Andrey Gulin worked with a team of researchers to start a new project called Tensornet which was aimed at solving the problem of "how to work with categorical data". Their work resulted in several proprietary Gradient Boosting libraries with different approaches to handling categorical data. In 2016 the Machine Learning Infrastructure team led by Anna Dorogush started working on Gradient Boosting in Yandex, including Matrixnet and Tensornet. They implemented and open-sourced the next version of Gradient Boosting library called CatBoost, which has support for categorical and text data, GPU training, model analysis, and visualization tools. CatBoost was open-sourced in July 2017 and is under active development in Yandex and the open-source community. == Application == JetBrains uses CatBoost for code completion Cloudflare uses CatBoost for bot detection Careem uses CatBoost to predict future destinations of the rides