Photoacoustic imaging (PA) is based on the photoacoustic effect, in which optical absorption causes a rise in temperature, which causes a subsequent rise in pressure via thermo-elastic expansion. This pressure rise propagates through the tissue and is sensed via ultrasonic transducers. Due to the proportionality between the optical absorption, the rise in temperature, and the rise in pressure, the ultrasound pressure wave signal can be used to quantify the original optical energy deposition within the tissue. Photoacoustic imaging has applications of deep learning in both photoacoustic computed tomography (PACT) and photoacoustic microscopy (PAM). PACT utilizes wide-field optical excitation and an array of unfocused ultrasound transducers. Similar to other computed tomography methods, the sample is imaged at multiple view angles, which are then used to perform an inverse reconstruction algorithm based on the detection geometry (typically through universal backprojection, modified delay-and-sum, or time reversal ) to elicit the initial pressure distribution within the tissue. PAM on the other hand uses focused ultrasound detection combined with weakly focused optical excitation (acoustic resolution PAM or AR-PAM) or tightly focused optical excitation (optical resolution PAM or OR-PAM). PAM typically captures images point-by-point via a mechanical raster scanning pattern. At each scanned point, the acoustic time-of-flight provides axial resolution while the acoustic focusing yields lateral resolution. == Applications of deep learning in PACT == The first application of deep learning in PACT was by Reiter et al. in which a deep neural network was trained to learn spatial impulse responses and locate photoacoustic point sources. The resulting mean axial and lateral point location errors on 2,412 of their randomly selected test images were 0.28 mm and 0.37 mm respectively. After this initial implementation, the applications of deep learning in PACT have branched out primarily into removing artifacts from acoustic reflections, sparse sampling, limited-view, and limited-bandwidth. There has also been some recent work in PACT toward using deep learning for wavefront localization. There have been networks based on fusion of information from two different reconstructions to improve the reconstruction using deep learning fusion based networks. === Using deep learning to locate photoacoustic point sources === Traditional photoacoustic beamforming techniques modeled photoacoustic wave propagation by using detector array geometry and the time-of-flight to account for differences in the PA signal arrival time. However, this technique failed to account for reverberant acoustic signals caused by acoustic reflection, resulting in acoustic reflection artifacts that corrupt the true photoacoustic point source location information. In Reiter et al., a convolutional neural network (similar to a simple VGG-16 style architecture) was used that took pre-beamformed photoacoustic data as input and outputted a classification result specifying the 2-D point source location. ==== Deep learning for PA wavefront localization ==== Johnstonbaugh et al. was able to localize the source of photoacoustic wavefronts with a deep neural network. The network used was an encoder-decoder style convolutional neural network. The encoder-decoder network was made of residual convolution, upsampling, and high field-of-view convolution modules. A Nyquist convolution layer and differentiable spatial-to-numerical transform layer were also used within the architecture. Simulated PA wavefronts served as the input for training the model. To create the wavefronts, the forward simulation of light propagation was done with the NIRFast toolbox and the light-diffusion approximation, while the forward simulation of sound propagation was done with the K-Wave toolbox. The simulated wavefronts were subjected to different scattering mediums and Gaussian noise. The output for the network was an artifact free heat map of the targets axial and lateral position. The network had a mean error rate of less than 30 microns when localizing target below 40 mm and had a mean error rate of 1.06 mm for localizing targets between 40 mm and 60 mm. With a slight modification to the network, the model was able to accommodate multi target localization. A validation experiment was performed in which pencil lead was submerged into an intralipid solution at a depth of 32 mm. The network was able to localize the lead's position when the solution had a reduced scattering coefficient of 0, 5, 10, and 15 cm−1. The results of the network show improvements over standard delay-and-sum or frequency-domain beamforming algorithms and Johnstonbaugh proposes that this technology could be used for optical wavefront shaping, circulating melanoma cell detection, and real-time vascular surgeries. === Removing acoustic reflection artifacts (in the presence of multiple sources and channel noise) === Building on the work of Reiter et al., Allman et al. utilized a full VGG-16 architecture to locate point sources and remove reflection artifacts within raw photoacoustic channel data (in the presence of multiple sources and channel noise). This utilization of deep learning trained on simulated data produced in the MATLAB k-wave library, and then later reaffirmed their results on experimental data. === Ill-posed PACT reconstruction === In PACT, tomographic reconstruction is performed, in which the projections from multiple solid angles are combined to form an image. When reconstruction methods like filtered backprojection or time reversal, are ill-posed inverse problems due to sampling under the Nyquist-Shannon's sampling requirement or with limited-bandwidth/view, the resulting reconstruction contains image artifacts. Traditionally these artifacts were removed with slow iterative methods like total variation minimization, but the advent of deep learning approaches has opened a new avenue that utilizes a priori knowledge from network training to remove artifacts. In the deep learning methods that seek to remove these sparse sampling, limited-bandwidth, and limited-view artifacts, the typical workflow involves first performing the ill-posed reconstruction technique to transform the pre-beamformed data into a 2-D representation of the initial pressure distribution that contains artifacts. Then, a convolutional neural network (CNN) is trained to remove the artifacts, in order to produce an artifact-free representation of the ground truth initial pressure distribution. ==== Using deep learning to remove sparse sampling artifacts ==== When the density of uniform tomographic view angles is under what is prescribed by the Nyquist-Shannon's sampling theorem, it is said that the imaging system is performing sparse sampling. Sparse sampling typically occurs as a way of keeping production costs low and improving image acquisition speed. The typical network architectures used to remove these sparse sampling artifacts are U-net and Fully Dense (FD) U-net. Both of these architectures contain a compression and decompression phase. The compression phase learns to compress the image to a latent representation that lacks the imaging artifacts and other details. The decompression phase then combines with information passed by the residual connections in order to add back image details without adding in the details associated with the artifacts. FD U-net modifies the original U-net architecture by including dense blocks that allow layers to utilize information learned by previous layers within the dense block. Another technique was proposed using a simple CNN based architecture for removal of artifacts and improving the k-wave image reconstruction. ==== Removing limited-view artifacts with deep learning ==== When a region of partial solid angles are not captured, generally due to geometric limitations, the image acquisition is said to have limited-view. As illustrated by the experiments of Davoudi et al., limited-view corruptions can be directly observed as missing information in the frequency domain of the reconstructed image. Limited-view, similar to sparse sampling, makes the initial reconstruction algorithm ill-posed. Prior to deep learning, the limited-view problem was addressed with complex hardware such as acoustic deflectors and full ring-shaped transducer arrays, as well as solutions like compressed sensing, weighted factor, and iterative filtered backprojection. The result of this ill-posed reconstruction is imaging artifacts that can be removed by CNNs. The deep learning algorithms used to remove limited-view artifacts include U-net and FD U-net, as well as generative adversarial networks (GANs) and volumetric versions of U-net. One GAN implementation of note improved upon U-net by using U-net as a generator and VGG as a discriminator, with the Wasserstein metric and gradient penalty to stabilize training (WGAN-GP). ==== Pixel-wise interpolation
Graphics processing unit
A graphics processing unit (GPU) is a specialized electronic circuit designed for digital image processing and to accelerate computer graphics, being present either as a component on a discrete graphics card or embedded on motherboards, mobile phones, personal computers, workstations, and game consoles. GPUs are increasingly being used for artificial intelligence (AI) processing due to linear algebra acceleration, which is also used extensively in graphics processing. Although there is no single definition of the term, and it may be used to describe any video display system, in modern use a GPU includes the ability to internally perform the calculations needed for various graphics tasks, like rotating and scaling 3D images, and often the additional ability to run custom programs known as shaders. This contrasts with earlier graphics controllers known as video display controllers which had no internal calculation capabilities, or blitters, which performed only basic memory movement operations. The modern GPU emerged during the 1990s, adding the ability to perform operations like drawing lines and text without CPU help, and later adding 3D functionality. Graphics functions are generally independent and this lends these tasks to being implemented on separate calculation engines. Modern GPUs include hundreds, or thousands, of calculation units. This made them useful for non-graphic calculations involving embarrassingly parallel problems due to their parallel structure. The ability of GPUs to rapidly perform vast numbers of calculations has led to their adoption in diverse fields including artificial intelligence (AI) where they excel at handling data-intensive and computationally demanding tasks. Other non-graphical uses include the training of neural networks and cryptocurrency mining. == History == === 1960s === Dedicated 3D graphics hardware dates back to graphic terminals such as the Adage AGT-30 from 1967 with analog matrix processors. In 1969 Evans & Sutherland (E&S) introduced the Line Drawing System-1 (LDS-1), which was the first all-digital system to provide matrix multiplication. Also in 1969, the low-cost graphics terminal IMLAC PDS-1 was introduced. It later saw use as an early 3D gaming machine with the likes of Maze War. === 1970s === In professional hardware, in 1972 PLATO IV system becomes operational at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. Between around 1973 and 1978, several networked multiplayer wireframe 3D games are implemented and popularized by users of the system. Also in 1972, the E&S Continuous Tone 1 (CT1) "Watkins box" system (consisting of an E&S LDS-2 and Shaded Picture System) is delivered to Case Western Reserve University. It offered the first real-time Gouraud shading. In 1975, a joint effort between Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation and the University of Utah's computer graphics department results in the first ever MOSFET video framebuffer, capable of color and smooth shading. E&S Continuous Tone 3 (CT3) system was delivered in 1977 to Lufthansa for pilot training using computer simulation. It was the first graphics system capable of real-time texture mapping. Ikonas made graphics systems with 8- and 24-bit graphics and 3D acceleration in the late 70s. Arcade system boards have used specialized 2D graphics circuits since the 1970s. In early video game hardware, RAM for frame buffers was expensive, so video chips composited data together as the display was being scanned out on the monitor. A specialized barrel shifter circuit helped the CPU animate the framebuffer graphics for various 1970s arcade video games from Midway and Taito, such as Gun Fight (1975), Sea Wolf (1976), and Space Invaders (1978). The Namco Galaxian arcade system in 1979 used specialized graphics hardware that supported RGB color, multi-colored sprites, and tilemap backgrounds. The Galaxian hardware was widely used during the golden age of arcade video games, by game companies such as Namco, Centuri, Gremlin, Irem, Konami, Midway, Nichibutsu, Sega, and Taito. The Atari 2600 in 1977 used a video shifter called the Television Interface Adaptor. Atari 8-bit computers (1979) had ANTIC, a video processor which interpreted instructions describing a "display list"—the way the scan lines map to specific bitmapped or character modes and where the memory is stored (so there did not need to be a contiguous frame buffer). 6502 machine code subroutines could be triggered on scan lines by setting a bit on a display list instruction. ANTIC also supported smooth vertical and horizontal scrolling independent of the CPU. === 1980s === In the 1980s significant advancements were made in professional 3D graphics hardware. Perhaps most impactful was the 1981 development of the Geometry Engine, a VLSI vector processor ASIC designed by Jim Clark and Marc Hannah at Stanford University. This processor is the forerunner of modern tensor cores and other similar processors marketed for graphics and AI. The Geometry Engine went on to be used in Silicon Graphics workstations for many years. Silicon Graphics's first product, shipped in November 1983, was the IRIS 1000, a terminal with hardware-accelerated 3D graphics based on the Geometry Engine. The Geometry Engine was capable of approximately 6 million operations per second. The 1981 NEC μPD7220 was the first implementation of a personal computer graphics display processor as a single large-scale integration (LSI) integrated circuit chip. This enabled the design of low-cost, high-performance video graphics cards such as those from Number Nine Visual Technology. It became the best-known GPU until the mid-1980s. It was the first fully integrated VLSI (very large-scale integration) metal–oxide–semiconductor (NMOS) graphics display processor for PCs, supported up to 1024×1024 resolution, and laid the foundations for the PC graphics market. It was used in a number of graphics cards and was licensed for clones such as the Intel 82720, the first of Intel's graphics processing units. The Williams Electronics arcade games Robotron: 2084, Joust, Sinistar, and Bubbles, all released in 1982, contain custom blitter chips for operating on 16-color bitmaps. In 1984, Hitachi released the ARTC HD63484, the first major CMOS graphics processor for personal computers. The ARTC could display up to 4K resolution when in monochrome mode. It was used in a number of graphics cards and terminals during the late 1980s. In 1985, the Amiga was released with a custom graphics chip called Agnus including a blitter for bitmap manipulation, line drawing, and area fill. It also included a coprocessor with its own simple instruction set, that was capable of manipulating graphics hardware registers in sync with the video beam (e.g. for per-scanline palette switches, sprite multiplexing, and hardware windowing), or driving the blitter. Also in 1985, IBM released the Professional Graphics Controller, designed by later to be Nvidia co-founder Curtis Priem, which was a rudimentary 3D card with 640 × 480 256-color graphics which used a dedicated CPU to draw graphics independently of the main system. It was used as the basis of cards by a number of makers (including Matrox) and its analog RGB signaling led directly to the VGA video standard. Priem later in the 80s worked on the influential Sun Microsystems GX (also known as cgsix) accelerated 2D graphics card. In 1986, Texas Instruments released the TMS34010, the first fully programmable graphics processor. It could run general-purpose code but also had a graphics-oriented instruction set. During 1990–1992, this chip became the basis of the Texas Instruments Graphics Architecture ("TIGA") Windows accelerator cards. Following in 1987, the IBM 8514 graphics system was released. It was one of the first video cards for IBM PC compatibles that implemented fixed-function 2D primitives in electronic hardware. Sharp's X68000, released in 1987, used a custom graphics chipset with a 65,536 color palette and hardware support for sprites, scrolling, and multiple playfields. It served as a development machine for Capcom's CP System arcade board. Fujitsu's FM Towns computer, released in 1989, had support for a 16,777,216 color palette. For context, IBM also introduced its Video Graphics Array (VGA) display system in 1987, with a maximum resolution of 640 × 480 pixels. Unlike 8514/A, VGA had no hardware acceleration features. In November 1988, NEC Home Electronics announced its creation of the Video Electronics Standards Association (VESA) to develop and promote a Super VGA (SVGA) computer display standard as a successor to VGA. Super VGA enabled graphics display resolutions up to 800 × 600 pixels, a 56% increase. In 1988 SGI sold IRIS workstation graphics with 10-12 Geometry Engines and introduced the IrisVision add-in board for IBM MicroChannel bus (RS/6000) based on the Geometry Engine as well. In 1988 as well, the first dedicated polygonal 3D graphics boards in arcade machines were introduced wit
Dating app
An online dating application, commonly known as a dating app, is an online dating service presented through a mobile phone application. These apps often take advantage of a smartphone's GPS location capabilities, always on-hand presence, and access to mobile wallets. These apps aim to speed up the online dating process of sifting through potential dating partners, chatting, flirting, and potentially meeting or becoming romantically involved. Online dating apps are now mainstream in the United States. As of 2017, online dating (which included both apps and other online dating services) was the principal method by which new couples in the U.S. met. The percentage of couples meeting online is predicted to increase to 70% by 2040. == Origins == The first computerized dating service was launched in 1964, the St. James Computer Dating Service, which became known as Com-Pat. The first U.S. dating service that used computerized match making was Operation Match. It required men and women to complete a questionnaire and was launched in 1965. Operation Match inspired the methodology of Dateline, which became popular in the 1970s and 1980s. Match.com was launched in 1995 and turned computerized match making into a profitable business. Grindr targeted gay and bisexual men at launch. Tinder, launched in 2012, led to a growth of online dating applications by both new providers and existing online dating services that expanded into the mobile app market. == Usage by demographic group == Online dating applications typically target a younger demographic group, though some apps, like Senior Match and Silver Singles are geared toward the 50 and up demographic. In 2016, almost 50% of people knew of someone who use the services or had met their loved one through the service. After the iPhone launch in 2007, online dating data has mushroomed as application usage increased. In 2005, only 10% of 18-24 year olds reported to have used online dating services; this number quickly grew to over 27%, making this target demographic the largest number of users for most applications. When Pew Research Center conducted a study in 2016, they found that 59% of U.S. adults agreed that online dating is a good way to meet people compared to 44% in 2005. This explosion in usage can be explained by the increased use of smartphones. By the end of 2022, it is expected there will be 413 million active users of online dating services worldwide. A 2023 Pew Research Center survey of 6,034 American adults found that 30% had ever used an online dating site or app, including 53% of those aged 18 to 29, 37% of those aged 30 to 49, and 17% of those aged 50 and over. Lesbian, gay and bisexual respondents reported using dating apps at nearly twice the rate of straight respondents (51% versus 28%), and 36% of divorced, separated or widowed adults had used one, compared with 16% of married adults. The increased use of smartphones by those 65 and older has also driven that population to the use dating apps. The Pew Research Center found that usage increase by 8 points since last surveyed in 2012. A study in 2021 found that more than one-third of seniors have dated in the past 5 years, and roughly one-third of those dating seniors have turned to dating apps. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Morning Consult found that more Americans were using online dating apps than ever before. In one survey in April 2020, the company discovered that 53% of U.S. adults who use online dating apps have been using them more during the pandemic. As of February 2021, that share increased to 71 percent. Research using Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory has indicated that norms about online dating applications tend to differ across cultures. A study published in the Journal of Creative Communications looked into the relationships between dating-app advertisements from over 51 countries and the cultural dimensions of these countries. The results revealed that dating-app advertisements appealed to multiple cultural needs, including the needs for relationships, friendship, entertainment, sex, status, design and identity. The use of these appeals was found to be 'congruent with ... the individualism/collectivism and uncertainty avoidance cultural dimensions.' == Popular applications == Following Tinder's success, other companies released dating applications. Raya was released in 2015 as a membership-based dating app, allowing entrance only through referrals, which was marketed as a dating app for celebrities. In early 2026, Hily surpassed Bumble to become the third most-used dating application in the United States and the fifth highest-grossing overall, driven largely by growing popularity among Generation Z users, while remaining behind Tinder and Hinge, both owned by Match Group. A number of dating apps have been created targeting adherents of particular religions seeking partners of the same religion, such as Muzmatch for Muslims, Christian Mingle, SALT, and Christian Connection for Christians, and JSwipe and JDate for Jews. === VR Dating === VR Dating is an application of Social VR where people can exist, collaborate, and perform various activities together. Virtual reality apps use virtual and augmented realities to make the dating experience more lifelike and more effective, as well as allow people to expand what is already possible in the world of online dating. There are several online platforms of VR Dating. The VR dating app Nevermet is the VR equivalent of Tinder, where people can search and find on dates. However, instead of actual real-life pictures, users will update pictures of virtual selves and will be interacting with avatars rather than real faces. Flirtual is a self-contained social VR app that serves to match users who then decide where and how to meet in VR. Flirtual hosts speed dating and social events in VR. == Effects on dating == The usage of online dating applications can have both advantages and disadvantages: === Advantages === Many of the applications provide personality tests for matching or use algorithms to match users. These factors enhance the possibility of users getting matched with a compatible candidate. Users are in control; they are provided with many options so there are enough matches that fit their particular type. Users can simply choose to not match the candidates that they know they are not interested in. Narrowing down options is easy. Once users think they are interested, they are able to chat and get to know the potential candidate. This form of communication can reduce the time, cost, and uncertainty often associated with traditional dating methods. Online dating offers convenience; people want dating to work around their schedules. Online dating can also increase self-confidence; even if users get rejected, they know there are hundreds of other candidates that will want to match with them so they can simply move on to the next option. In fact, 60% of U.S. adults agree that online dating is a good way to meet people and 66% say they have gone on a real date with someone they met through an application. Today, 5% of married Americans or Americans in serious relationships said they met their significant other online. The 39% of online dating users (representing 12% of all U.S. adults) say they have been in a committed relationship or married someone they met on a dating site or app. ==== Rejection sensitive individuals ==== Individuals high in rejection sensitivity are more likely to use online dating applications. As they tend to expect, perceive and overreact to rejection, rejection sensitive individuals struggle with traditional dating. Online dating applications allow for them to better reveal their true selves, potentially increasing their dating success. Online dating applications also obscure rejection cues, alleviating the rejection-related distress experienced by rejection sensitive individuals. ==== Anxiously attached individuals ==== Individuals high in attachment anxiety are also more likely to use online dating applications. While they harbour negative self-views, anxiously attached individuals are also more eager to enter and commit to relationships. Online dating applications allow for them to present "an authentic yet ideal version of themselves", mitigating their tendencies to view themselves as undesirable. This increases their romantic confidence, and potentially alleviates their anxiety when searching for a romantic partner. === Disadvantages === Sometimes having too many options can be overwhelming. With so many options available, users can get lost in their choices and end up spending too much time looking for the "perfect" candidate instead of using that time to start a real relationship. In addition, the algorithms and matching systems put in place may not always be as accurate as users think. There is no perfect system that can match two people's personalities perfectly every time. Communication online also lacks the physical chemistry aspec
Lawbot
Lawbots are a broad class of customer-facing legal AI applications that are used to automate specific legal tasks, such as document automation and legal research. The terms robot lawyer and lawyer bot are used as synonyms to lawbot. A robot lawyer or a robo-lawyer refers to a legal AI application that can perform tasks that are typically done by paralegals or young associates at law firms. However, there is some debate on the correctness of the term. Some commentators say that legal AI is technically speaking neither a lawyer nor a robot and should not be referred to as such. Other commentators believe that the term can be misleading and note that the robot lawyer of the future will not be one all-encompassing application but a collection of specialized bots for various tasks. Lawbots use various artificial intelligence techniques or other intelligent systems to limit humans' direct ongoing involvement in certain steps of a legal matter. The user interfaces on lawbots vary from smart searches and step-by-step forms to chatbots. Consumer and enterprise-facing lawbot solutions often do not require direct supervision from a legal professional. Depending on the task, some client-facing solutions used at law firms operate under an attorney supervision. == Levels of autonomy == The following levels of autonomy (LoA) are suggested for automated AI legal reasoning: Level 0 (LoA0): No automation for AI legal reasoning Level 1 (LoA1): Simple assistance automation Level 2 (LoA2): Advanced assistance automation Level 3 (LoA3): Semi-autonomous automation Level 4 (LoA4): Domain automation Level 5 (LoA5): Fully-autonomous automation Level 6 (LoA6): Superhuman automation == Examples == Some legal AI solutions are developed and marketed directly to the customers or consumers, whereas other applications are tools for the attorneys at law firms. There are already hundreds of legal AI solutions that operate in multitude of ways varying in sophistication and dependence on scripted algorithms. One notable legal technology chatbot application is DoNotPay. It had started off as an app for contesting parking tickets, but has since expanded to include features that help users with many different types of legal issues, ranging from consumer protection to immigration rights and other social issues. == Impact on the legal industry == In the 2016 report, Deloitte estimated that more than 110,000 law jobs in just the United Kingdom alone could disappear within the next twenty years due to automation. This change could result in the creation of more highly skilled jobs and in the reduction of paralegal and temporary positions. Deloitte's report asserts that "there is significant potential for high-skilled roles that involve repetitive processes to be automated by smart and self-learning algorithms". According to Lawyers to Engage, between 22% of a lawyer’s work and 35% of a legal assistant’s work can be automated in the US. Top law schools like Harvard have already begun to integrate Artificial Intelligence into the curriculum. Legal tech start-up companies have begun developing applications that assist law firms with completing low-risk legal processes. These applications can enable lawyers to focus on more work that requires their specific expertise. The automation of processes like contract reviewing, enforcement of negotiations (smart contracts) and client intake (expert systems) allows law firms to streamline their procedures and improve efficiency. In addition, automation benefits small-to-medium law firms that do not have the resources to utilize junior talent on such routine tasks. The increase of law firms utilizing automated applications could result into legal tech becoming a necessity in the industry. Digital Reason CEO, Tim Estes, stated that those who refuse the opportunity to integrate AI in their workflow are “most at risk.” In 2018, Forbes reported a 713% increase in investments in legal tech. This rapid growth is reflective of law firms beginning to “cede business to… new model legal providers… that meld technological, business and legal expertise.” == Access to law and justice == It has been widely estimated for at least the last generation that all the programs and resources devoted to ensuring access to justice address only 20% of the civil legal needs of low-income people in the United States. Drawing on this experience, in late 2011, the U.S. government-funded Legal Services Corporation decided to convene a summit of leaders to explore how best to use technology in the access-to-justice community. The group adopted a mission for The Summit on the Use of Technology to Expand Access to Justice (Summit) consistent with the magnitude of the challenge: "to explore the potential of technology to move the United States toward providing some form of effective assistance to 100% of persons otherwise unable to afford an attorney for dealing with essential civil legal needs". In April 2017, joined by Microsoft and Pro Bono Net, the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) announced a pilot program to develop online, statewide legal portals to direct individuals with civil legal needs to the most appropriate forms of assistance. == Technological limitations == Current research in subjects such as computational privacy, explainable machine learning, Bayesian deep learning, knowledge-intensive machine learning, and transfer learning reveals that we do not yet have the technology to enable Level 4 to 6 AI lawbots. In 2023, OpenLaw began developing a model called Law Bot, which interacts in a conversational way as an attorney. The dialogue format makes it possible for Law Bot to answer follow-up questions, challenge incorrect premises, and reject inappropriate requests. Currently, they try to ensure it is in full compliance with all laws and regulations while conducting further beta testing before releasing it to the general public.
Super-resolution imaging
Super-resolution imaging (SR) is a class of techniques that improve the resolution of an imaging system. In optical SR the diffraction limit of systems is transcended, while in geometrical SR the resolution of digital imaging sensors is enhanced. In some radar and sonar imaging applications (e.g. magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), high-resolution computed tomography), subspace decomposition-based methods (e.g. MUSIC) and compressed sensing-based algorithms (e.g., SAMV) are employed to achieve SR over standard periodogram algorithm. Super-resolution imaging techniques are used in general image processing and in super-resolution microscopy. == Super-resolution principles == Several concepts are fundamental to super-resolution imaging: Diffraction limit: the capacity of an optical instrument to reproduce the details of an object in an image has limits that are imposed by laws of physics: the diffraction equations in the wave theory of light, or the uncertainty principle for photons in quantum mechanics. Information transfer can never be increased beyond this boundary, but packets outside the limits can be cleverly swapped for (or multiplexed with) some inside it. Super-resolution microscopy does not so much “break” as “circumvent” the diffraction limit. New procedures probing electro-magnetic disturbances at the molecular level (in the so-called near field) remain fully consistent with Maxwell's equations. Spatial frequency domain: A succinct expression of the diffraction limit is given in the spatial frequency domain. In Fourier optics light distributions are expressed as superpositions of a series of grating light patterns in a range of fringe widths - these widths represent the spatial frequencies. It is generally taught that diffraction theory stipulates an upper limit, the cut-off spatial-frequency, beyond which pattern elements fail to be transferred into the optical image, i.e., are not resolved. But in fact what is set by diffraction theory is the width of the passband, not a fixed upper limit. No laws of physics are broken when a spatial frequency band beyond the cut-off spatial frequency is swapped for one inside it: this has long been implemented in dark-field microscopy. Nor are information-theoretical rules broken when superimposing several bands, disentangling them in the received image needs assumptions of object invariance during multiple exposures, i.e., the substitution of one kind of uncertainty for another. Information: When the term super-resolution is used in techniques based on the inference of object details using a statistical treatment of the image within standard resolution limits (for example, averaging multiple exposures), it involves an exchange of one kind of information (extracting signal from noise) for another (the assumption that the target has remained invariant). Recent breakthroughs incorporate quantum-transformer hybrids into super-resolution, such as QUIET‑SR, a 2025 model that employs shifted quantum window attention within a transformer to enhance image detail while respecting diffraction and information-theory limits Similarly, frequency-integrated transformers (e.g., FIT) enrich super-resolution by explicitly combining spatial and frequency-domain information via FFT-based attention, improving reconstruction across scales Resolution and localization: True resolution involves the distinction of whether a target, e.g. a star or a spectral line, is single or double, ordinarily requiring separable peaks in the image. When a target is known to be single, its location can be determined with higher precision than the image width by finding the centroid (center of gravity) of its image light distribution. The word ultra-resolution had been proposed for this process but it did not catch on, and the high-precision localization procedure is typically referred to as super-resolution. == Techniques == === Optical or diffractive super-resolution === Substituting spatial-frequency bands: Though the bandwidth allowable by diffraction is fixed, it can be positioned anywhere in the spatial-frequency spectrum. Dark-field illumination in microscopy is an example. See also aperture synthesis. ==== Multiplexing spatial-frequency bands ==== An image is formed using the normal passband of the optical device. Then, some known light structure (for example, a set of light fringes) is superimposed on the target. The image now contains components resulting from the combination of the target and the superimposed light structure, e.g. moiré fringes, and carries information about target detail which simple unstructured illumination does not. The “superresolved” components, however, need disentangling to be revealed. For an example, see structured illumination (figure to left). ==== Multiple parameter use within traditional diffraction limit ==== If a target has no special polarization or wavelength properties, two polarization states or non-overlapping wavelength regions can be used to encode target details, one in a spatial-frequency band inside the cut-off limit the other beyond it. Both would use normal passband transmission but are then separately decoded to reconstitute target structure with extended resolution. ==== Probing near-field electromagnetic disturbance ==== Super-resolution microscopy is generally discussed within the realm of conventional optical imagery. However, modern technology allows the probing of electromagnetic disturbance within molecular distances of the source, which has superior resolution properties. See also evanescent waves and the development of the new super lens. === Geometrical or image-processing super-resolution === ==== Multi-exposure image noise reduction ==== When an image is degraded by noise, the resolution may be improved by averaging multiple exposures. See example on the right. ==== Single-frame deblurring ==== Known defects in a given imaging situation, such as defocus or aberrations, can sometimes be mitigated in whole or in part by suitable spatial-frequency filtering of even a single image. Such procedures all stay within the diffraction-mandated passband, and do not extend it. ==== Sub-pixel image localization ==== The location of a single source can be determined by computing the "center of gravity" (centroid) of the light distribution extending over several adjacent pixels (see figure on the left). Provided that there is enough light, this can be achieved with arbitrary precision, very much better than pixel width of the detecting apparatus and the resolution limit for the decision of whether the source is single or double. This technique, which requires the presupposition that all the light comes from a single source, is at the basis of what has become known as super-resolution microscopy, e.g. stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy (STORM), where fluorescent probes attached to molecules give nanoscale distance information. It is also the mechanism underlying visual hyperacuity. ==== Bayesian induction beyond traditional diffraction limit ==== Some object features, though beyond the diffraction limit, may be known to be associated with other object features that are within the limits and hence contained in the image. Then conclusions can be drawn, using statistical methods, from the available image data about the presence of the full object. The classical example is Toraldo di Francia's proposition of judging whether an image is that of a single or double star by determining whether its width exceeds the spread from a single star. This can be achieved at separations well below the classical resolution bounds, and requires the prior limitation to the choice "single or double?" The approach can take the form of extrapolating the image in the frequency domain, by assuming that the object is an analytic function, and that we can exactly know the function values in some interval. This method is severely limited by the ever-present noise in digital imaging systems, but it can work for radar, astronomy, microscopy or magnetic resonance imaging. More recently, a fast single image super-resolution algorithm based on a closed-form solution to ℓ 2 − ℓ 2 {\displaystyle \ell _{2}-\ell _{2}} problems has been proposed and demonstrated to accelerate most of the existing Bayesian super-resolution methods significantly. == Aliasing == Geometrical SR reconstruction algorithms are possible if and only if the input low resolution images have been under-sampled and therefore contain aliasing. Because of this aliasing, the high-frequency content of the desired reconstruction image is embedded in the low-frequency content of each of the observed images. Given a sufficient number of observation images, and if the set of observations vary in their phase (i.e. if the images of the scene are shifted by a sub-pixel amount), then the phase information can be used to separate the aliased high-frequency content from the true low-frequency content, and the full-resolution image can be accurate
Cloud-to-cloud integration
Cloud-to-Cloud Integration ( C2I ) allows users to connect disparate cloud computing platforms. While Paas (Platform as a service) and Saas (Software as a service) continue to gain momentum, different vendors have different implementations for cloud computing, e.g. Database, REST, SOAP API. Another name for Cloud-to-Cloud Integration is Cloud-Surfing. See also Cloud-based integration
Pixelmator Pro
Pixelmator Pro is a photo, video, and vector graphic editor developed by Apple for macOS and iPadOS as part of its Pixelmator and pro apps platforms and as a part of their Apple Creator Studio suite of applications. Pixelmator Pro relies heavily on technologies from Apple platforms such as Metal, CoreML, Core Image, AVFoundation, GCD, and SwiftUI. == Features == GPU accelerated with Metal 50+ standard image editing tools Layer-based image editor Video editing support Vector graphic support (including SVG support) AI-powered editing features such as background removal ML Super Resolution and Smart Replace Supports a variety of media formats (JPEG, RAW, Apple ProRAW, PSD, PNG, GIF, MP4, HEIF, etc) == Reception == Pixelmator Pro was generally well-received by reviewers who praised its deep use of machine learning, fully macOS-native design, and relatively affordable one-time purchase compared to subscription software such as Adobe Photoshop. Some reviewers criticized that some features are hard to find or hard to use. It was awarded Apple's Mac App of the Year in 2018. Pixelmator Pro does not have support for panorama stitching. == Acquisition by Apple == On November 1, 2024, the Pixelmator Team announced that they were to be acquired by Apple, subject to regulatory approval. Their site promises "There will be no material changes to the Pixelmator Pro, Pixelmator for iOS, and Photomator apps at this time." The acquisition was completed in February 2025. On January 13, 2026, Apple announced that a new version of Pixelmator Pro with AI features would be included in its new Apple Creator Studio subscription, the app would be brought to the iPad and the Mac app would be redesigned with Liquid Glass. == Version history == == Applescript == In 2020 Pixelmator Pro added the ability to leverage Apple's automation language 'AppleScript' to automate many tasks in version 1.8 (Lynx). This enabled simple and advanced automation activities such as image resize, crop, color adjustments, format change, moving layers around, and more advanced actions like removing background, Gaussian blur, text replacement, shadows, color replacement, etc.