AirSim (Aerial Informatics and Robotics Simulation) is an open-source, cross-platform simulator for drones, ground vehicles such as cars and various other objects, built on Epic Games’ proprietary Unreal Engine 4 as a platform for AI research. It is developed by Microsoft and can be used to experiment with deep learning, computer vision and reinforcement learning algorithms for autonomous vehicles. This allows testing of autonomous solutions without worrying about real-world damage. AirSim provides some 12 kilometers of roads with 20 city blocks and APIs to retrieve data and control vehicles in a platform independent way. The APIs are accessible via a variety of programming languages, including C++, C#, Python and Java. AirSim supports hardware-in-the-loop with driving wheels and flight controllers such as PX4 for physically and visually realistic simulations. The platform also supports common robotic platforms, such as Robot Operating System (ROS). It is developed as an Unreal plug-in that can be dropped into any Unreal environment. An experimental release for a Unity plug-in is also available. On December 15, 2023 Microsoft has shutdown the development of the project.
AIXI
AIXI is a theoretical mathematical formalism for artificial general intelligence. It combines Solomonoff induction with sequential decision theory. AIXI was first proposed by Marcus Hutter in 2000 and several results regarding AIXI are proved in Hutter's 2005 book Universal Artificial Intelligence. AIXI is a reinforcement learning (RL) agent. It maximizes the expected total rewards received from the environment. Intuitively, it simultaneously considers every computable hypothesis (or environment). In each time step, it looks at every possible program and evaluates how many rewards that program generates depending on the next action taken. The promised rewards are then weighted by the subjective belief that this program constitutes the true environment. This belief is computed from the length of the program: longer programs are considered less likely, in line with Occam's razor. AIXI then selects the action that has the highest expected total reward in the weighted sum of all these programs. == Etymology == According to Hutter, the word "AIXI" can have several interpretations. AIXI can stand for AI based on Solomonoff's distribution, denoted by ξ {\displaystyle \xi } (which is the Greek letter xi), or e.g. it can stand for AI "crossed" (X) with induction (I). There are other interpretations. == Definition == AIXI is a reinforcement learning agent that interacts with some stochastic and unknown but computable environment μ {\displaystyle \mu } . The interaction proceeds in time steps, from t = 1 {\displaystyle t=1} to t = m {\displaystyle t=m} , where m ∈ N {\displaystyle m\in \mathbb {N} } is the lifespan of the AIXI agent. At time step t, the agent chooses an action a t ∈ A {\displaystyle a_{t}\in {\mathcal {A}}} (e.g. a limb movement) and executes it in the environment, and the environment responds with a "percept" e t ∈ E = O × R {\displaystyle e_{t}\in {\mathcal {E}}={\mathcal {O}}\times \mathbb {R} } , which consists of an "observation" o t ∈ O {\displaystyle o_{t}\in {\mathcal {O}}} (e.g., a camera image) and a reward r t ∈ R {\displaystyle r_{t}\in \mathbb {R} } , distributed according to the conditional probability μ ( o t r t | a 1 o 1 r 1 . . . a t − 1 o t − 1 r t − 1 a t ) {\displaystyle \mu (o_{t}r_{t}|a_{1}o_{1}r_{1}...a_{t-1}o_{t-1}r_{t-1}a_{t})} , where a 1 o 1 r 1 . . . a t − 1 o t − 1 r t − 1 a t {\displaystyle a_{1}o_{1}r_{1}...a_{t-1}o_{t-1}r_{t-1}a_{t}} is the "history" of actions, observations and rewards. The environment μ {\displaystyle \mu } is thus mathematically represented as a probability distribution over "percepts" (observations and rewards) which depend on the full history, so there is no Markov assumption (as opposed to other RL algorithms). Note again that this probability distribution is unknown to the AIXI agent. Furthermore, note again that μ {\displaystyle \mu } is computable, that is, the observations and rewards received by the agent from the environment μ {\displaystyle \mu } can be computed by some program (which runs on a Turing machine), given the past actions of the AIXI agent. The only goal of the AIXI agent is to maximize ∑ t = 1 m r t {\displaystyle \sum _{t=1}^{m}r_{t}} , that is, the sum of rewards from time step 1 to m. The AIXI agent is associated with a stochastic policy π : ( A × E ) ∗ → A {\displaystyle \pi :({\mathcal {A}}\times {\mathcal {E}})^{}\rightarrow {\mathcal {A}}} , which is the function it uses to choose actions at every time step, where A {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}} is the space of all possible actions that AIXI can take and E {\displaystyle {\mathcal {E}}} is the space of all possible "percepts" that can be produced by the environment. The environment (or probability distribution) μ {\displaystyle \mu } can also be thought of as a stochastic policy (which is a function): μ : ( A × E ) ∗ × A → E {\displaystyle \mu :({\mathcal {A}}\times {\mathcal {E}})^{}\times {\mathcal {A}}\rightarrow {\mathcal {E}}} , where the ∗ {\displaystyle } is the Kleene star operation. In general, at time step t {\displaystyle t} (which ranges from 1 to m), AIXI, having previously executed actions a 1 … a t − 1 {\displaystyle a_{1}\dots a_{t-1}} (which is often abbreviated in the literature as a < t {\displaystyle a_{ Looking for the best AI content generator? An AI content generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it can save you hours every week by automating repetitive work. Most options offer a generous free tier, with paid plans unlocking higher limits, faster processing, and team features. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI content generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for. In automata theory, a self-verifying finite automaton (SVFA) is a special kind of a nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA) with a symmetric kind of nondeterminism introduced by Hromkovič and Schnitger. Generally, in self-verifying nondeterminism, each computation path is concluded with any of the three possible answers: yes, no, and I do not know. For each input string, no two paths may give contradictory answers, namely both answers yes and no on the same input are not possible. At least one path must give answer yes or no, and if it is yes then the string is considered accepted. SVFA accept the same class of languages as deterministic finite automata (DFA) and NFA but have different state complexity. == Formal definition == An SVFA is represented formally by a 6-tuple, A=(Q, Σ, Δ, q0, Fa, Fr) such that (Q, Σ, Δ, q0, Fa) is an NFA, and Fa, Fr are disjoint subsets of Q. For each word w = a1a2 … an, a computation is a sequence of states r0,r1, …, rn, in Q with the following conditions: r0 = q0 ri+1 ∈ Δ(ri, ai+1), for i = 0, …, n−1. If rn ∈ Fa then the computation is accepting, and if rn ∈ Fr then the computation is rejecting. There is a requirement that for each w there is at least one accepting computation or at least one rejecting computation but not both. == Results == Each DFA is a SVFA, but not vice versa. Jirásková and Pighizzini proved that for every SVFA of n states, there exists an equivalent DFA of g ( n ) = Θ ( 3 n / 3 ) {\displaystyle g(n)=\Theta (3^{n/3})} states. Furthermore, for each positive integer n, there exists an n-state SVFA such that the minimal equivalent DFA has exactly g ( n ) {\displaystyle g(n)} states. Other results on the state complexity of SVFA were obtained by Jirásková and her colleagues. Comparing the best AI art generator? An AI art generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI art generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence. Medical data, including patients' identity information, health status, disease diagnosis and treatment, and biogenetic information, not only involve patients' privacy but also have a special sensitivity and important value, which may bring physical and mental distress and property loss to patients and even negatively affect social stability and national security once leaked. However, the development and application of medical AI must rely on a large amount of medical data for algorithm training, and the larger and more diverse the amount of data, the more accurate the results of its analysis and prediction will be. However, the application of big data technologies such as data collection, analysis and processing, cloud storage, and information sharing has increased the risk of data leakage. In the United States, the rate of such breaches has increased over time, with 176 million records breached by the end of 2017. By 2024, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services reported 725 large healthcare data breaches affecting approximately 275 million individual records in a single year, marking a significant escalation in both the frequency and scale of incidents. == Black market for health data == In February 2015 an NPR report claimed that organized crime networks had ways of selling health data in the black market. In 2015 a Beazley employee estimated that medical records could sell on the black market for US$40-50. == How data is lost == Theft, data loss, hacking, and unauthorized account access are ways in which medical data breaches happen. Among reported breaches of medical information in the United States networked information systems accounted for the largest number of records breached. There are many data breaches happening in the US health care system, among business associates of the health care providers that continuously gain access to patients' data. == List of data breaches == In February 2024, a ransomware attack on Change Healthcare, a subsidiary of UnitedHealth Group, compromised the protected health information of approximately 100 million individuals, making it the largest healthcare data breach in United States history. The attack disrupted claims processing for healthcare providers nationwide for several weeks. In May 2024, MediSecure suffered a cyberattack involving ransomware in Australia. In May 2021, the Health Service Executive in the Republic of Ireland was the victim of a cyberattack involving ransomware, in the Health Service Executive cyberattack, with admission records and test results present in a sample of the data reviewed by the Financial Times. In October 2018, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in the US reported that around 75,000 individual records had been affected by a data breach that took place through the ACA Agent and Broker Portal. In 2018, Social Indicators Research published the scientific evidence of 173,398,820 (over 173 million) individuals affected in USA from October 2008 (when the data were collected) to September 2017 (when the statistical analysis took place). In 2015, Anthem Inc. lost data for 37 million people in the Anthem medical data breach In 2014 4.5 million people using Complete Health Systems had their data stolen In 2013-14 1 million people using Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services had their data stolen In 2013 4 million people using Advocate Health and Hospitals Corporation had their data stolen In 2011 4.9 million users of Tricare services had their data stolen due to an employee error by Science Applications International Corporation In 2011 1.9 million people using Health Net had their data stolen In 2011 1 million people using Nemours Foundation had their data stolen In 2010 6800 people using New York-Presbyterian Hospital and Columbia University Medical Center had their data breached. In response, those organizations agreed to pay the United States Department of Health and Human Services a US$4.8 million dollar fine. In 2009 1 million people using BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee had their data stolen == Regulation == In the United States, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act require companies to report data breaches to affected individuals and the federal government. Under the HIPAA Breach Notification Rule, covered entities must notify affected individuals without unreasonable delay and no later than 60 days after discovering a breach of unsecured protected health information. Breaches affecting 500 or more individuals must also be reported to the HHS Secretary and to prominent media outlets serving the affected state or jurisdiction within the same timeframe; HHS publicly lists these larger breaches on its breach portal, commonly known as the "wall of shame." Breaches affecting fewer than 500 individuals are reported to HHS annually, no later than 60 days after the end of the calendar year in which they were discovered. Health Information Privacy Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). - 45 CFR Parts 160 and 164, Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information and Security Standards for the Protection of Electronic Protected Health Information. HIPAA includes provisions designed to save health care businesses money by encouraging electronic transactions, as well as regulations to protect the security and confidentiality of patient information. The Privacy Rule became effective April 14, 2001, and most covered entities (health plans, health care clearinghouses, and health care providers that conduct certain financial and administrative transactions electronically) had until April 2003 to comply. This security provision became effective April 21, 2003. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) is the baseline set of federal regulations governing medical information. It does three things: i. i. i.Establish a structure for how personal health information is disclosed and establish the rights of individuals with respect to health information; ii.Specify security standards for the retention and transmission of electronic patient information; iii.Need a common format and data structure for the electronic exchange of health information. California-Specific Laws California’s medical privacy laws, primarily the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (CMIA), the data breach sections of the Civil Code, and sections of the Health and Safety Code, provide HIPAA-like protections, although the terminology is different. HIPAA establishes a federal "minimum standard" that applies where there are gaps in California law, and HIPAA also specifies that stricter state laws will override or supersede HIPAA. California's health care privacy laws apply to providers who provide personal health records (PHR), while HIPAA only applies when the provider providing the PHR is a business associate of a covered entity. Federal law does not grant individuals the right to file a lawsuit in the event of a data breach (only the Attorney General can file a lawsuit), but California law does. This means that California law sets a higher standard for medical privacy, and that individuals in California enjoy stronger legal protections and more ways to hold entities that violate their medical privacy accountable. In the UK, the legal framework for how patient data is cared for and processed is the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA), which incorporates the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) into law, and the common law duty of confidentiality (CLDC). The data protection legislation requires that the collection and processing of personal data be fair, lawful and transparent. This means that the collection and processing of data as defined by data protection legislation must always have a valid lawful basis and must also meet the requirements of the CLDC. In the China, Article 18 of the "National Health Care Big Data Standards, Security and Services Management Measures (for Trial Implementation)" (National Health Planning and Development (2018) No. 23) promulgated by the National Health Care Commission in 2018 states, "The responsible unit shall adopt measures such as data classification, important data backup, and encryption authentication to guarantee the security of health care big data." However, the scope and definition of important data are not covered. Although the "Information Security Technology-Healthcare Data Security Guide" (the "Guide") issued by the National Standardization Committee also proposes that important data should be evaluated and approved in accordance with the regulations, there is likewise no definition of the connotation and definition of important data. Apache cTAKES: clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction System is an open-source Natural Language Processing (NLP) system that extracts clinical information from electronic health record unstructured text. It processes clinical notes, identifying types of clinical named entities — drugs, diseases/disorders, signs/symptoms, anatomical sites and procedures. Each named entity has attributes for the text span, the ontology mapping code, context (family history of, current, unrelated to patient), and negated/not negated. cTAKES was built using the UIMA Unstructured Information Management Architecture framework and OpenNLP natural language processing toolkit. == Components == Components of cTAKES are specifically trained for the clinical domain, and create rich linguistic and semantic annotations that can be utilized by clinical decision support systems and clinical research. These components include: Named Section identifier Sentence boundary detector Rule-based tokenizer Formatted list identifier Normalizer Context dependent tokenizer Part-of-speech tagger Phrasal chunker Dictionary lookup annotator Context annotator Negation detector Uncertainty detector Subject detector Dependency parser patient smoking status identifier Drug mention annotator == History == Development of cTAKES began at the Mayo Clinic in 2006. The development team, led by Dr. Guergana Savova and Dr. Christopher Chute, included physicians, computer scientists and software engineers. After its deployment, cTAKES became an integral part of Mayo's clinical data management infrastructure, processing more than 80 million clinical notes. When Dr. Savova's moved to Boston Children's Hospital in early 2010, the core development team grew to include members there. Further external collaborations include: University of Colorado Brandeis University University of Pittsburgh University of California at San Diego Such collaborations have extended cTAKES' capabilities into other areas such as Temporal Reasoning, Clinical Question Answering, and coreference resolution for the clinical domain. In 2010, cTAKES was adopted by the i2b2 program and is a central component of the SHARP Area 4. In 2013, cTAKES released their first release as an Apache Software Foundation incubator project: cTAKES 3.0. In March 2013, cTAKES became an Apache Software Foundation Top Level Project (TLP).The Best Free AI Content Generator for Beginners
Self-verifying finite automaton
AI Art Generators Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026
Medical data breach
Apache cTAKES