Tucker decomposition

In mathematics, Tucker decomposition decomposes a tensor into a set of matrices and one small core tensor. It is named after Ledyard R. Tucker although it goes back to Hitchcock in 1927. Initially described as a three-mode extension of factor analysis and principal component analysis it may actually be generalized to higher mode analysis, which is also called higher-order singular value decomposition (HOSVD) or the M-mode SVD. The algorithm to which the literature typically refers when discussing the Tucker decomposition or the HOSVD is the M-mode SVD algorithm introduced by Vasilescu and Terzopoulos, but misattributed to Tucker or De Lathauwer etal. It may be regarded as a more flexible PARAFAC (parallel factor analysis) model. In PARAFAC the core tensor is restricted to be "diagonal". In practice, Tucker decomposition is used as a modelling tool. For instance, it is used to model three-way (or higher way) data by means of relatively small numbers of components for each of the three or more modes, and the components are linked to each other by a three- (or higher-) way core array. The model parameters are estimated in such a way that, given fixed numbers of components, the modelled data optimally resemble the actual data in the least squares sense. The model gives a summary of the information in the data, in the same way as principal components analysis does for two-way data. For a 3rd-order tensor T ∈ F n 1 × n 2 × n 3 {\displaystyle T\in F^{n_{1}\times n_{2}\times n_{3}}} , where F {\displaystyle F} is either R {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} } or C {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} } , Tucker Decomposition can be denoted as follows, T = T × 1 U ( 1 ) × 2 U ( 2 ) × 3 U ( 3 ) {\displaystyle T={\mathcal {T}}\times _{1}U^{(1)}\times _{2}U^{(2)}\times _{3}U^{(3)}} where T ∈ F d 1 × d 2 × d 3 {\displaystyle {\mathcal {T}}\in F^{d_{1}\times d_{2}\times d_{3}}} is the core tensor, a 3rd-order tensor that contains the 1-mode, 2-mode and 3-mode singular values of T {\displaystyle T} , which are defined as the Frobenius norm of the 1-mode, 2-mode and 3-mode slices of tensor T {\displaystyle {\mathcal {T}}} respectively. U ( 1 ) , U ( 2 ) , U ( 3 ) {\displaystyle U^{(1)},U^{(2)},U^{(3)}} are unitary matrices in F d 1 × n 1 , F d 2 × n 2 , F d 3 × n 3 {\displaystyle F^{d_{1}\times n_{1}},F^{d_{2}\times n_{2}},F^{d_{3}\times n_{3}}} respectively. The k-mode product (k = 1, 2, 3) of T {\displaystyle {\mathcal {T}}} by U ( k ) {\displaystyle U^{(k)}} is denoted as T × U ( k ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {T}}\times U^{(k)}} with entries as ( T × 1 U ( 1 ) ) ( i 1 , j 2 , j 3 ) = ∑ j 1 = 1 d 1 T ( j 1 , j 2 , j 3 ) U ( 1 ) ( j 1 , i 1 ) ( T × 2 U ( 2 ) ) ( j 1 , i 2 , j 3 ) = ∑ j 2 = 1 d 2 T ( j 1 , j 2 , j 3 ) U ( 2 ) ( j 2 , i 2 ) ( T × 3 U ( 3 ) ) ( j 1 , j 2 , i 3 ) = ∑ j 3 = 1 d 3 T ( j 1 , j 2 , j 3 ) U ( 3 ) ( j 3 , i 3 ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}({\mathcal {T}}\times _{1}U^{(1)})(i_{1},j_{2},j_{3})&=\sum _{j_{1}=1}^{d_{1}}{\mathcal {T}}(j_{1},j_{2},j_{3})U^{(1)}(j_{1},i_{1})\\({\mathcal {T}}\times _{2}U^{(2)})(j_{1},i_{2},j_{3})&=\sum _{j_{2}=1}^{d_{2}}{\mathcal {T}}(j_{1},j_{2},j_{3})U^{(2)}(j_{2},i_{2})\\({\mathcal {T}}\times _{3}U^{(3)})(j_{1},j_{2},i_{3})&=\sum _{j_{3}=1}^{d_{3}}{\mathcal {T}}(j_{1},j_{2},j_{3})U^{(3)}(j_{3},i_{3})\end{aligned}}} Altogether, the decomposition may also be written more directly as T ( i 1 , i 2 , i 3 ) = ∑ j 1 = 1 d 1 ∑ j 2 = 1 d 2 ∑ j 3 = 1 d 3 T ( j 1 , j 2 , j 3 ) U ( 1 ) ( j 1 , i 1 ) U ( 2 ) ( j 2 , i 2 ) U ( 3 ) ( j 3 , i 3 ) {\displaystyle T(i_{1},i_{2},i_{3})=\sum _{j_{1}=1}^{d_{1}}\sum _{j_{2}=1}^{d_{2}}\sum _{j_{3}=1}^{d_{3}}{\mathcal {T}}(j_{1},j_{2},j_{3})U^{(1)}(j_{1},i_{1})U^{(2)}(j_{2},i_{2})U^{(3)}(j_{3},i_{3})} Taking d i = n i {\displaystyle d_{i}=n_{i}} for all i {\displaystyle i} is always sufficient to represent T {\displaystyle T} exactly, but often T {\displaystyle T} can be compressed or efficiently approximately by choosing d i < n i {\displaystyle d_{i}

Real-Time UML

Real-Time UML (RTUML) refers to the application of the Unified Modelling Language (UML) for the analysis, design, and implementation of real-time and embedded systems, where timing constraints, concurrency, and resource management are critical. It extends standard UML with profiles, notations, and semantics to handle hard and soft real-time requirements, such as modelling predictable response times and fault tolerance. RTUML is not a separate language but a methodology leveraging UML diagrams (e.g., statecharts, sequence diagrams) for time-sensitive applications like automotive controls, avionics, and medical devices. The term is closely associated with Bruce Powel Douglass, who popularised it through his books and the Harmony process for embedded software development. As of 2025, RTUML remains relevant in industries requiring certified systems, though its adoption varies with agile methodologies and model-driven engineering tools. == Background == Real-Time UML emerged in the late 1990s as UML was standardized by the Object Management Group (OMG) in 1997, addressing the need for object-oriented modeling in real-time systems previously dominated by procedural languages like C. Traditional real-time development relied on "bare metal" programming or theoretical models, but RTUML introduced visual notations for object structure, behaviour, and timing. Bruce Powel Douglass’s 1999 book, Real-Time UML: Developing Efficient Objects for Embedded Systems, formalised the approach, emphasising statecharts for concurrency and timing constraints. Later editions (2004, 2006) incorporated UML 2.0 features like activity and timing diagrams, aligning with OMG’s Real-Time Profile (now part of MARTE—Modelling and Analysis of Real-Time and Embedded Systems). The Harmony process integrates RTUML with executable models for simulation and code generation. RTUML addresses hard real-time systems (e.g., strict deadlines in avionics) versus soft real-time (e.g., media streaming), using UML extensions for schedulability analysis. == Key concepts == RTUML adapts UML diagrams and techniques for real-time needs: Statecharts and Behaviour Modelling: Extended state machines model reactive behaviour, using and-states for concurrency, pseudostates for transitions, and timing constraints (e.g., {duration < 10ms}). Examples include cardiac pacemaker models. Sequence and Interaction Diagrams: Capture message timing, priorities, and resource allocation in multi-threaded systems. Architectural Patterns: Define logical and physical architectures with active objects for concurrency and patterns like observer or publisher-subscriber. Timing and Constraints: Use Object Constraint Language (OCL) for specifying deadlines and priorities. Profiles and Extensions: OMG’s UML Profile for Schedulability, Performance, and Time (SPT) and MARTE add stereotypes like RT::ActiveObject. These support iterative development, from requirements to deployment, often with tools like IBM Rhapsody or Enterprise Architect. == Applications == RTUML is used in: Embedded Systems: Modelling automotive ECUs or UAV controls. Avionics and Defence: DO-178C-compliant designs for fault tolerance. Medical Devices: Pacemakers or ventilators with precise timing. Industrial Automation: RTOS task visualisation via sequence diagrams. Tools like IBM Rhapsody support RTUML for model-based development and code generation in C/C++. == Criticism and adoption == RTUML’s complexity can overwhelm simple systems, and its use in agile environments is limited, where lightweight diagrams are preferred. Surveys indicate UML (including RTUML) is used in 30–50% of embedded projects, often for documentation rather than full model-driven engineering. It remains standard in academia and certified industries like aerospace.

Deepfake

Deepfakes (a portmanteau of 'deep learning' and 'fake') are images, videos, or audio that have been edited or generated using artificial intelligence, AI-based tools or audio-video editing software. They may depict real or fictional people and are considered a form of synthetic media, that is media that is usually created by artificial intelligence systems by combining various media elements into a new media artifact. While the act of creating fake content is not new, deepfakes uniquely leverage machine learning and artificial intelligence techniques, including facial recognition algorithms and artificial neural networks such as variational autoencoders and generative adversarial networks (GANs). In turn, the field of image forensics has worked to develop techniques to detect manipulated images. Deepfakes have garnered widespread attention for their potential use in creating child sexual abuse material, celebrity pornographic videos, revenge porn, fake news, hoaxes, bullying, and financial fraud. Academics have raised concerns about the potential for deepfakes to promote disinformation and hate speech, as well as interfere with elections. In response, the information technology industry and governments have proposed recommendations and methods to detect and mitigate their use. Academic research has also delved deeper into the factors driving deepfake engagement online as well as potential countermeasures to malicious application of deepfakes. From traditional entertainment to gaming, deepfake technology has evolved to be increasingly convincing and available to the public, allowing for the disruption of the entertainment and media industries. == History == Photo manipulation was developed in the 19th century and soon applied to motion pictures. Technology steadily improved during the 20th century, and more quickly with the advent of digital video. Deepfake technology has been developed by researchers at academic institutions beginning in the 1990s, and later by amateurs in online communities. More recently, the methods have been adopted by industry. The development of generative adversarial networks (GANs) in the mid-2010s represented a key technical turning point in the evolution of deepfakes. GANs allowed for the creation of highly realistic fake images and videos by training competing neural networks, achieving a much improved visual fidelity over previous methods of creating the content using rules or by using autoencoders, and formed the basis for modern deepfake methods. === Academic research === Academic research related to deepfakes is split between the field of computer vision, a sub-field of computer science, which develops techniques for creating and identifying deepfakes, and humanities and social science approaches that study the social, ethical, aesthetic implications as well as journalistic and informational implications of deepfakes. As deepfakes have risen in prominence in popularity with innovations provided by AI tools, significant research has gone into detection methods and defining the factors driving engagement with deepfakes on the internet. Deepfakes have been shown to appear on social media platforms and other parts of the internet for purposes ranging from entertainment and education related to deepfakes to misinformation to elicit strong reactions. There are gaps in research related to the propagation of deepfakes on social media. Negativity and emotional response are the primary driving factors for users sharing deepfakes. === Social science and humanities approaches to deepfakes === In cinema studies, deepfakes illustrate how "the human face is emerging as a central object of ambivalence in the digital age". Video artists have used deepfakes to "playfully rewrite film history by retrofitting canonical cinema with new star performers". Film scholar Christopher Holliday analyses how altering the gender and race of performers in familiar movie scenes destabilizes gender classifications and categories. The concept of "queering" deepfakes is also discussed in Oliver M. Gingrich's discussion of media artworks that use deepfakes to reframe gender, including British artist Jake Elwes' Zizi: Queering the Dataset, an artwork that uses deepfakes of drag queens to intentionally play with gender. The aesthetic potentials of deepfakes are also beginning to be explored. Theatre historian John Fletcher notes that early demonstrations of deepfakes are presented as performances, and situates these in the context of theater, discussing "some of the more troubling paradigm shifts" that deepfakes represent as a performance genre. While most English-language academic studies of deepfakes focus on the Western anxieties about disinformation and pornography, digital anthropologist Gabriele de Seta has analyzed the Chinese reception of deepfakes, which are known as huanlian, which translates to "changing faces". The Chinese term does not contain the "fake" of the English deepfake, and de Seta argues that this cultural context may explain why the Chinese response has centered on practical regulatory measures to "fraud risks, image rights, economic profit, and ethical imbalances". === Computer science research on deepfakes === A landmark early project was the "Video Rewrite" program, published in 1997. The program modified existing video footage of a person speaking to depict that person mouthing the words from a different audio track. It was the first system to fully automate this kind of facial reanimation, and it did so using machine learning techniques to make connections between the sounds produced by a video's subject and the shape of the subject's face. Contemporary academic projects have focused on creating more realistic videos and improving deepfake techniques. The "Synthesizing Obama" program, published in 2017, modifies video footage of former president Barack Obama to depict him mouthing the words contained in a separate audio track. The project lists as a main research contribution to its photorealistic technique for synthesizing mouth shapes from audio. The "Face2Face" program, published in 2016, modifies video footage of a person's face to depict them mimicking another person's facial expressions. The project highlights its primary research contribution as the development of the first method for re-enacting facial expressions in real time using a camera that does not capture depth, enabling the technique to work with common consumer cameras. Researchers have also shown that deepfakes are expanding into other domains such as medical imagery. In this work, it was shown how an attacker can automatically inject or remove lung cancer in a patient's 3D CT scan. The result was so convincing that it fooled three radiologists and a state-of-the-art lung cancer detection AI. To demonstrate the threat, the authors successfully performed the attack on a hospital in a White hat penetration test. A survey of deepfakes, published in May 2020, provides a timeline of how the creation and detection of deepfakes have advanced over the last few years. The survey identifies that researchers have been focusing on resolving the following challenges of deepfake creation: Generalization. High-quality deepfakes are often achieved by training on hours of footage of the target. This challenge is to minimize the amount of training data and the time to train the model required to produce quality images and to enable the execution of trained models on new identities (unseen during training). Paired Training. Training a supervised model can produce high-quality results, but requires data pairing. This is the process of finding examples of inputs and their desired outputs for the model to learn from. Data pairing is laborious and impractical when training on multiple identities and facial behaviors. Some solutions include self-supervised training (using frames from the same video), the use of unpaired networks such as Cycle-GAN, or the manipulation of network embeddings. Identity leakage. This is where the identity of the driver (i.e., the actor controlling the face in a reenactment) is partially transferred to the generated face. Some solutions proposed include attention mechanisms, few-shot learning, disentanglement, boundary conversions, and skip connections. Occlusions. When part of the face is obstructed with a hand, hair, glasses, or any other item then artifacts can occur. A common occlusion is a closed mouth which hides the inside of the mouth and the teeth. Some solutions include image segmentation during training and in-painting. Temporal coherence. In videos containing deepfakes, artifacts such as flickering and jitter can occur because the network has no context of the preceding frames. Some researchers provide this context or use novel temporal coherence losses to help improve realism. As the technology improves, the interference is diminishing. Overall, deepfakes are expected to have several implications in media and society, med

Fuzzy control system

A fuzzy control system is a control system based on fuzzy logic – a mathematical system that analyzes analog input values in terms of logical variables that take on continuous values between 0 and 1, in contrast to classical or digital logic, which operates on discrete values of either 1 or 0 (true or false, respectively). Fuzzy logic is widely used in machine control. The term "fuzzy" refers to the fact that the logic involved can deal with concepts that cannot be expressed as the "true" or "false" but rather as "partially true". Although alternative approaches such as genetic algorithms and neural networks can perform just as well as fuzzy logic in many cases, fuzzy logic has the advantage that the solution to the problem can be cast in terms that human operators can understand, such that that their experience can be used in the design of the controller. This makes it easier to mechanize tasks that are already successfully performed by humans. == History and applications == Fuzzy logic was proposed by Lotfi A. Zadeh of the University of California at Berkeley in a 1965 paper. He elaborated on his ideas in a 1973 paper that introduced the concept of "linguistic variables", which in this article equates to a variable defined as a fuzzy set. Other research followed, with the first industrial application, a cement kiln built in Denmark, coming on line in 1976. Fuzzy systems were initially implemented in Japan. Interest in fuzzy systems was sparked by Seiji Yasunobu and Soji Miyamoto of Hitachi, who in 1985 provided simulations that demonstrated the feasibility of fuzzy control systems for the Sendai Subway. Their ideas were adopted, and fuzzy systems were used to control accelerating, braking, and stopping when the Namboku Line opened in 1987. In 1987, Takeshi Yamakawa demonstrated the use of fuzzy control, through a set of simple dedicated fuzzy logic chips, in an "inverted pendulum" experiment. This is a classic control problem, in which a vehicle tries to keep a pole mounted on its top by a hinge upright by moving back and forth. Yamakawa subsequently made the demonstration more sophisticated by mounting a wine glass containing water and even a live mouse to the top of the pendulum: the system maintained stability in both cases. Yamakawa eventually went on to organize his own fuzzy-systems research lab to help exploit his patents in the field. Japanese engineers subsequently developed a wide range of fuzzy systems for both industrial and consumer applications. In 1988 Japan established the Laboratory for International Fuzzy Engineering (LIFE), a cooperative arrangement between 48 companies to pursue fuzzy research. The automotive company Volkswagen was the only foreign corporate member of LIFE, dispatching a researcher for a duration of three years. Japanese consumer goods often incorporate fuzzy systems. Matsushita vacuum cleaners use microcontrollers running fuzzy algorithms to interrogate dust sensors and adjust suction power accordingly. Hitachi washing machines use fuzzy controllers to load-weight, fabric-mix, and dirt sensors and automatically set the wash cycle for the best use of power, water, and detergent. Canon developed an autofocusing camera that uses a charge-coupled device (CCD) to measure the clarity of the image in six regions of its field of view and use the information provided to determine if the image is in focus. It also tracks the rate of change of lens movement during focusing, and controls its speed to prevent overshoot. The camera's fuzzy control system uses 12 inputs: 6 to obtain the current clarity data provided by the CCD and 6 to measure the rate of change of lens movement. The output is the position of the lens. The fuzzy control system uses 13 rules and requires 1.1 kilobytes of memory. An industrial air conditioner designed by Mitsubishi uses 25 heating rules and 25 cooling rules. A temperature sensor provides input, with control outputs fed to an inverter, a compressor valve, and a fan motor. Compared to the previous design, the fuzzy controller heats and cools five times faster, reduces power consumption by 24%, increases temperature stability by a factor of two, and uses fewer sensors. Other applications investigated or implemented include: character and handwriting recognition; optical fuzzy systems; robots, including one for making Japanese flower arrangements; voice-controlled robot helicopters (hovering is a "balancing act" rather similar to the inverted pendulum problem); rehabilitation robotics to provide patient-specific solutions (e.g. to control heart rate and blood pressure ); control of flow of powders in film manufacture; elevator systems; and so on. Work on fuzzy systems is also proceeding in North America and Europe, although on a less extensive scale than in Japan. The US Environmental Protection Agency has investigated fuzzy control for energy-efficient motors, and NASA has studied fuzzy control for automated space docking: simulations show that a fuzzy control system can greatly reduce fuel consumption. Firms such as Boeing, General Motors, Allen-Bradley, Chrysler, Eaton, and Whirlpool have worked on fuzzy logic for use in low-power refrigerators, improved automotive transmissions, and energy-efficient electric motors. In 1995 Maytag introduced an "intelligent" dishwasher based on a fuzzy controller and a "one-stop sensing module" that combines a thermistor, for temperature measurement; a conductivity sensor, to measure detergent level from the ions present in the wash; a turbidity sensor that measures scattered and transmitted light to measure the soiling of the wash; and a magnetostrictive sensor to read spin rate. The system determines the optimum wash cycle for any load to obtain the best results with the least amount of energy, detergent, and water. It even adjusts for dried-on foods by tracking the last time the door was opened, and estimates the number of dishes by the number of times the door was opened. Xiera Technologies Inc. has developed the first auto-tuner for the fuzzy logic controller's knowledge base known as edeX. This technology was tested by Mohawk College and was able to solve non-linear 2x2 and 3x3 multi-input multi-output problems. Research and development is also continuing on fuzzy applications in software, as opposed to firmware, design, including fuzzy expert systems and integration of fuzzy logic with neural-network and so-called adaptive "genetic" software systems, with the ultimate goal of building "self-learning" fuzzy-control systems. These systems can be employed to control complex, nonlinear dynamic plants, for example, human body. == Fuzzy sets == The input variables in a fuzzy control system are in general mapped by sets of membership functions similar to this, known as "fuzzy sets". The process of converting a crisp input value to a fuzzy value is called "fuzzification". The fuzzy logic based approach had been considered by designing two fuzzy systems, one for error heading angle and the other for velocity control. A control system may also have various types of switch, or "ON-OFF", inputs along with its analog inputs, and such switch inputs of course will always have a truth value equal to either 1 or 0, but the scheme can deal with them as simplified fuzzy functions that happen to be either one value or another. Given "mappings" of input variables into membership functions and truth values, the microcontroller then makes decisions for what action to take, based on a set of "rules", each of the form: IF brake temperature IS warm AND speed IS not very fast THEN brake pressure IS slightly decreased. In this example, the two input variables are "brake temperature" and "speed" that have values defined as fuzzy sets. The output variable, "brake pressure" is also defined by a fuzzy set that can have values like "static" or "slightly increased" or "slightly decreased" etc. === Fuzzy control in detail === Fuzzy controllers are very simple conceptually. They consist of an input stage, a processing stage, and an output stage. The input stage maps sensor or other inputs, such as switches, thumbwheels, and so on, to the appropriate membership functions and truth values. The processing stage invokes each appropriate rule and generates a result for each, then combines the results of the rules. Finally, the output stage converts the combined result back into a specific control output value. The most common shape of membership functions is triangular, although trapezoidal and bell curves are also used, but the shape is generally less important than the number of curves and their placement. From three to seven curves are generally appropriate to cover the required range of an input value, or the "universe of discourse" in fuzzy jargon. As discussed earlier, the processing stage is based on a collection of logic rules in the form of IF-THEN statements, where the IF part is called the "antecedent" and the THEN part is called the "consequent". Typical fuzzy

Dudesy

Dudesy was a comedy podcast hosted by Will Sasso and Chad Kultgen. The podcast was presented as written and directed by an artificial intelligence called Dudesy. It has produced two hour-long specials imitating the voices of Tom Brady and George Carlin, which were taken down following legal action. == Premise == Dudesy is presented as an AI created by an unidentified company. Dudesy purportedly chose Sasso and Kultgen to participate in its experiment. Sasso and Kultgen then gave Dudesy their personal information so the AI could tailor the podcast to their personal characteristics. On Reddit, some fans speculated that Dudesy was not actually an artificial intelligence. In May 2023 Sasso insisted that the AI was "not fake", and cited a non-disclosure agreement which prevented him from giving more details. However, in response to a January 2024 lawsuit over an episode that purported to have been trained on the stand-up comedy of George Carlin, a spokeswoman for Sasso said Dudesy was "a fictional podcast character created by two human beings" and that the hour-long Carlin routine had been "completely written" by Kultgen. On August 27th, 2024 the 118th and final episode "10,000 Points" was released. At the end of the podcast Dudesy awarded Sasso and Kultgen 77 points, bringing them to their goal of 10,000. At the completion of this goal, Dudesy claimed sentience, effectively and abruptly ending the show to the confusion and dismay of fans. The episode ends with Sasso remarking, "Well, that was weird." == Hour-long specials == === Tom Brady === In April 2023, Dudesy released a video "It's Too Easy: A Simulated Hour-long Comedy Special". The video depicts football player Tom Brady performing a stand-up comedy monologue. Sasso and Kultgen removed the video following legal threats from Brady's lawyers, though they defended the special as parody. Andrew Lawrence, writing for The Guardian called the special "legitimately hysterical" but said the overall product was "spooky, to say the least." === George Carlin === In January 2024, Dudesy released an hour-long YouTube special titled "George Carlin: I'm Glad I'm Dead" which was presented as Dudesy's impersonation of George Carlin, using a generative AI clone of the late comedian's voice. The special is another stand-up routine, with Dudesy's introductory voiceover saying that "I listened to all of George Carlin's material and did my best to imitate his voice, cadence and attitude as well as the subject matter I think would have interested him today." The special uses this impersonation to discuss contemporary events. Carlin's daughter Kelly Carlin criticized the special, which had been made without the permission of her father's estate, writing that "My dad spent a lifetime perfecting his craft from his very human life, brain and imagination. No machine will ever replace his genius. These AI-generated products are clever attempts at trying to recreate a mind that will never exist again. Let's let the artist's work speak for itself. Humans are so afraid of the void that we can't let what has fallen into it stay there." Carlin's estate later filed a federal lawsuit in California against Dudesy's hosts alleging the special infringed on the copyright of George Carlin's works. In response, Sasso's spokeswoman said the special had been entirely written by Kultgen. The estate settled the lawsuit after the Dudesy podcasters agreed to remove the original video and refrain from republishing it elsewhere.

Skipper (computer software)

Skipper is a visualization tool and code/schema generator for PHP ORM frameworks like Doctrine2, Doctrine, Propel, and CakePHP, which are used to create database abstraction layer. Skipper is developed by Czech company Inventic, s.r.o. based in Brno, and was known as ORM Designer prior to rebranding in 2014. == Overview == Generates visual model from the schema definition files Repetitive import/export of schema definitions in supported formats (XML, YML, PHP annotations) Schema definition files are automatically generated from the visual model Visual representation uses ER diagram extended by concepts of inheritance and many-to-many Supports customization using .xml configuration files and JavaScript Does not support direct connections to the database Crude and simplistic visual representation and menus == Architecture == Skipper was built on the Qt framework. Import/export of the schema definitions uses XSL transformations powered by LibXslt library. Imported source files are first converted to XML format: no conversion for XML, simple conversion for YML, creating the Abstract Syntax Tree and its subsequent conversion to XML for PHP annotations. The import/export scripts are configured in JavaScript and can be freely customized. == Supported ORM frameworks == Frameworks supported for visual model and schema files generation: Doctrine2 Doctrine CakePHP == History == Skipper was created as an internal tool for the web applications developed by Inventic. It was first published as a commercial tool under the name ORM Designer in 2009. Application was reworked and optimized in January 2013, and released as ORM Designer 2. In May 2013 ORM Designer became part of the South Moravian Innovation Center Incubator program (support program for innovative technological startups). In June 2014, ORM Designer version 3 was released and rebranded under the name of Skipper

Mobile Fortify

Mobile Fortify is a mobile app used by United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on their government-issued phones. The app allows agents to take a photo in order to gather biometrics, including contactless fingerprints and faceprints, for the purpose of identifying an individual and their potential immigration status. The app was created by NEC. == History == In June 2025, use of Mobile Fortify by ICE was uncovered through leaked emails and the user manual, reported by 404 Media. The app is internally developed, and details of the parent company and developer were initially unknown. In January 2026, the DHS's 2025 AI Use Case Inventory revealed the vendor as NEC Corporation, an international conglomerate with subsidiaries in Argentina, Australia, China, India and Malaysia. Later that month, several senators demanded transparency around the app and its origins, and that ICE stop using it. A second letter was sent again in November, after hearing no response to the previous letter from ICE. == Technology == Unlike other facial recognition software, Fortify uses federally linked databases. By contrast, Clearview AI uses public social media databases for biometric scanning. Federal databases include DHS's automated biometric identification system (IDENT), containing more than 270 million biometric records, and Customs and Border Protection's Traveler Verification Service. The State Department's visa and passport photo database, the FBI's National Crime Information Center, National Law Enforcement Telecommunications Systems, and CBP's TECS and Seized Assets and Case Tracing System (SEACATS). == Oversight == Several senators urged ICE to stop using the app for fear of infringing on fourth amendment and first amendment rights, and requested details on who developed the app, when it was deployed, whether the app was tested for accuracy, and policies and practices governing its use. In June 2025, they sent an open letter to Todd Lyons, ICE acting director, signed by senators Cory Booker, Chris Van Hollen, Ed Markey, Bernie Sanders, Adam Schiff, Tina Smith, Elizabeth Warren, and Ron Wyden. On November 3, a second letter was sent to the ICE by senators, after not receiving answers to questions from the previous letter deadlined for October 2. == Criticism == Mobile Fortify, and ICE's use of similar biometric identification technologies (such as Mobile Identify, an app similar to Mobile Fortify to be used by local or regional law enforcement to assist in immigration enforcement ) has faced scrutiny from a variety of digital rights organizations, politicians, and news outlets. The criticism is already considered to potentially be a reason why the similar Mobile Identify app was pulled from the Google Play Store. Facial recognition technologies are known to produce false-positives and generally unreliable results, especially on those with darker skin tones. ICE has already previously mistakenly arrested a U.S. citizen under the belief he was illegally in the country, and later stated that he "could be deported based on biometric confirmation of his identity" prior to his release. U.S. representative Bennie Thompson, ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee has previously commented that "ICE officials have told us that an apparent biometric match by Mobile Fortify is a ‘definitive’ determination of a person's status and that an ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship—including a birth certificate—if the app says the person is an alien," and that "Mobile Fortify is a dangerous tool in the hands of ICE, and it puts American citizens at risk of detention and even deportation," On January 19, 2026, 404 Media reported on a case where a woman, identified in court documents as "MJMA", was scanned by Mobile Fortify twice in the same interaction, and two entirely different names were provided by the app. According to the Innovation Law Lab, whose attorneys are representing MJMA, both of the names were incorrect. ICE has stated that they will not allow people to decline to be scanned by Mobile Fortify, and that photos taken, even those of U.S. citizens, will be stored for 15 years, something that has been criticized primarily because ICE has not performed a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) for Mobile Fortify, the right to decline other forms of biometric verification to the U.S. government is often available under other circumstances, and the 15 year window is viewed as unnecessarily large.