The Public Services Network (PSN) is a UK government's high-performance network, which helps public sector organisations work together, reduce duplication and share resources. It unified the provision of network infrastructure across the United Kingdom public sector into an interconnected "network of networks" to increase efficiency and reduce overall public expenditure. It is now a legacy network and public sector organisations are being migrated to using services on the public internet. == Origins == The Public Services Network (PSN) was launched officially as part of the Transformational Government Strategy commencing in 2005, under the original name of the Public Sector Network. Prior to this, some parts of local government had already successfully implemented the concept. The Hampshire Public Services Network (HPSN) was the first PSN, launched in 1999, followed closely by Kent County Councils partnerships with the KPSN. The HPSN, encompassing all of the borough, district and unitary councils, with the County Council, as well as the Fire Services, the Isle of Wight Council and 540 schools. National PSN technical and architecture compliance criteria were established from 2007, by GDS working with local government leaders from Socitm (the Society of Information Technology Management) on the National CIO Council and the Local CIO Council. The PSN's aim was to bring public services organisations with a common interest onto a single, coherent and standards-based ‘network of networks’. This would create influence, economies of scale and a commonality of standards for secure and easy inter-connection between public service organisations. The original concept of a network of networks strategy was based upon the work already undertaken in local government and recognition of Communities of Interest (COI) within the Criminal Justice Sector during work by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform (OCJR) between 2005 and 2007 to enable data sharing across business units. In this context a COI was defined as groups of Government departments and external partners who in combination provided services within a specific area of operation and used the same data, with a similar risk profile, shared risk appetite and common governance framework. Historically each group member had implemented their own networks and standards of operation in isolation with little or no consideration as to how services and data may be shared and resulting in increased costs of operation. The Network of Networks strategy proposed within OCJR recommended the creation of specific networks based upon these Communities of Interest which were joined together through data interchange gateways supporting common standards. Under this approach networks would be arranged by data type and business functions such as Criminal Justice, Health and Social Care, Defence and Intelligence or Public Finance rather than solely on established departmental boundaries. Within a COI, trust relationships and data interchange are readily supported, enabling data sharing without a need to cross network boundaries and providing benefits of scale without the challenges and compromises intrinsic to homogeneous cross sector networks. Data is made available without a need to transport it between organisations and control is retained by the data originator. In early 2007 a group of UK Government department CTOs in conjunction with the Office for Government Commerce Buying Solutions (OGC BS) established the vision for a single commonly provided, procured and managed public sector voice and data network infrastructure to replace the multitude of separately procured and managed networks serving various segments of the UK public sector; Education, Health, Central Government, Local Government etc. In 2008 an Industry Working Group was established to document the objectives and requirements more clearly. Their report set out the architectural and commercial principles as well as anticipated security, service management, governance and transition arrangements. == Architecture == The PSN comprises a core network, the Government Conveyancing Network or GCN provided by GCN Service Providers or GCNSPs. The GCN interconnects multiple operator networks, termed Direct Network Service Providers or DNSPs. Subscriber organisations contract to a connection from a local participating DNSP, connect via that to GCN and hence onwards to other interconnected networks and services. The GCN network is entirely based on IPv4 and MPLS and the GCNSPs are not currently mandated to provide IPv6, though they should have a roadmap to implementing it if and when required. == Commercial framework == In 2010 Virgin Media Business, BT, Cable & Wireless and Global Crossing signed Deeds of Undertaking (DoU) and subsequently achieved accreditation for providing GCN and IP VPN services. In March 2012, BT, Cable & Wireless, Capita Business Services, Eircom, Fujitsu, Kcom, Level 3, Logicalis, MDNX, Thales, Updata and Virgin Media Business were successful bidders for the initial two-year PSN Connectivity framework. In June 2012, 29 companies were confirmed as suppliers of ICT services to the UK public sector under the Government's PSN Services framework contract. Apart from most of the previous suppliers, additional companies also included 2e2, Airwave Solutions, Azzurri Communications, Cassidian, CSC Computer Sciences, Computacenter, Daisy Communications, Easynet Global Services, EE, Freedom Communications, Icom Holdings, NextiraOne, PageOne Communications, Phoenix IT Group, Siemens Communications, Specialist Computer Centres, Telefónica, telent Technology Services, Uniworld Communications and Vodafone. == Governance == The PSN is managed within the Cabinet Office where it is part of the Government Digital Service. == Early implementations == There were already notable initiatives in progress in county council areas, demonstrating public sector network integration in both the Hampshire HPSN2 network and in Kent's community network. Project Pathway was established as a pilot linking these two county-wide networks, with Virgin Media Business and Global Crossing the subscriber and GCN network elements. Staffordshire County Council was the first council in England to establish a PSN that included the county's NHS Health partners. Other county councils have since followed the leads of these councils. == Transition == Centrally procured public sector networks are expected to migrate across to the PSN framework as they reach the end of their contract terms, either through an interim framework or directly. The Government Secure Intranet (GSi) contracts expired in September 2011, running on to 12 February 2012 and were replaced by the transitional Government Secure Intranet Convergence Framework (GCF). The Managed Telephony Service (MTS) contract expired on 31 December 2011 and was replaced by the Managed Telephony Convergence Framework (MTCF). == Future plan == In a blog post published on 20 January 2017, Government Digital Service announced that the Technology Leaders Network (TLN) had agreed that government was starting a journey away from the PSN. This was because using the Internet was considered suitable for the vast majority of the work that the public sector does. The blog post confirmed that the 'move was not going to happen immediately' and stated that 'there's quite a bit of work to do across the public sector to prepare for the changes'. It also stated that it was too early for a full timeline to be provided, although all PSN-connected organisations would be updated as the process evolved. The blog post confirmed that organisations that need to access services that are only available on the PSN would still need to connect to it for the time being and continue to meet its assurance requirements. In a blog post published on 16 March 2017, Government Digital Service (GDS) set out its plans for PSN assurance. The blog post confirmed that the PSN compliance process wasn't 'going anywhere, certainly for a while yet'. It explained that the TLN agreed that – as one of the only recognised, externally accredited, cross-government common assurance standards – it 'needs to live on far beyond the end of the physical PSN network'. Government Digital Service, along with the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) and the Cyber and Government Security Directorate, are now looking at ways to expand and reframe PSN compliance in a new context that, while retaining the assurance principles that are the basis of the existing process, will aim to improve the process. A GDS blog post titled 'The road to closing down the PSN' published on 8 September 2020 describes how the public sector will migrate away from the PSN. The Cabinet Office has set up a programme called Future Networks for Government (FN4G) to help organisations move away from the PSN.
Object Data Management Group
The Object Data Management Group (ODMG) was conceived in the summer of 1991 at a breakfast with object database vendors that was organized by Rick Cattell of Sun Microsystems. In 1998, the ODMG changed its name from the Object Database Management Group to reflect the expansion of its efforts to include specifications for both object database and object–relational mapping products. The primary goal of the ODMG was to put forward a set of specifications that allowed a developer to write portable applications for object database and object–relational mapping products. In order to do that, the data schema, programming language bindings, and data manipulation and query languages needed to be portable. Between 1993 and 2001, the ODMG published five revisions to its specification. The last revision was ODMG version 3.0, after which the group disbanded. == Major components of the ODMG 3.0 specification == Object Model. This was based on the Object Management Group's Object Model. The OMG core model was designed to be a common denominator for object request brokers, object database systems, object programming languages, etc. The ODMG designed a profile by adding components to the OMG core object model. Object Specification Languages. The ODMG Object Definition Language (ODL) was used to define the object types that conform to the ODMG Object Model. The ODMG Object Interchange Format (OIF) was used to dump and load the current state to or from a file or set of files. Object Query Language (OQL). The ODMG OQL was a declarative (nonprocedural) language for query and updating. It used SQL as a basis, where possible, though OQL supports more powerful object-oriented capabilities. C++ Language Binding. This defined a C++ binding of the ODMG ODL and a C++ Object Manipulation Language (OML). The C++ ODL was expressed as a library that provides classes and functions to implement the concepts defined in the ODMG Object Model. The C++ OML syntax and semantics are those of standard C++ in the context of the standard class library. The C++ binding also provided a mechanism to invoke OQL. Smalltalk Language Binding. This defined the mapping between the ODMG ODL and Smalltalk, which was based on the OMG Smalltalk binding for the OMG Interface Definition Language (IDL). The Smalltalk binding also provided a mechanism to invoke OQL. Java Language Binding. This defined the binding between the ODMG ODL and the Java programming language as defined by the Java 2 Platform. The Java binding also provided a mechanism to invoke OQL. == Status == ODMG 3.0 was published in book form in 2000.[1] By 2001, most of the major object database and object-relational mapping vendors claimed conformance to the ODMG Java Language Binding. Compliance to the other components of the specification was mixed.[2] In 2001, the ODMG Java Language Binding was submitted to the Java Community Process as a basis for the Java Data Objects specification. The ODMG member companies then decided to concentrate their efforts on the Java Data Objects specification. As a result, the ODMG disbanded in 2001. In 2004, the Object Management Group (OMG) was granted the right to revise the ODMG 3.0 specification as an OMG specification by the copyright holder, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. In February 2006, the OMG announced the formation of the Object Database Technology Working Group (ODBT WG) and plans to work on the 4th generation of an object database standard. == ODMG Compliant DBMS == Orient ODBMS: http://www.OrienTechnologies.com Objectivity/DB C++, Java and Smalltalk interfaces.
Document capture software
Document capture software refers to applications that provide the ability and feature set to automate the process of scanning paper documents or importing electronic documents, often for the purposes of feeding advanced document classification and data collection processes. Most scanning hardware, both scanners and copiers, provides the basic ability to scan to any number of image file formats, including: PDF, TIFF, JPG, BMP, etc. This basic functionality is augmented by document capture software, which can add efficiency and standardization to the process. == Typical features == Typical features of Document Capture Software include: Barcode recognition Patch Code recognition Separation Optical Character Recognition (OCR) Optical Mark Recognition (OMR) Quality Assurance Indexing Migration === Goal for implementation of a document capture solution === The goal for implementing a document capture solution is to reduce the amount of time spent scanning, separating, enhancing, organizing, classifying, normalizing, and collecting information from document collections, and to produce metadata along with an image/PDF file, and/or OCR text. This information is then migrated to a file share, FTP site, database, Document Management or Enterprise Content Management system. These systems often provide a search function, allowing search of the assets based on the produced metadata, and then viewed using document imaging software. == General document capture system solutions == === Integration with document management system === ECM (Enterprise Content management) and their DMS component (Document Management System) are being adopted by many organizations as a corporate document management system for all types of electronic files, e.g. MS word, PDF ... However, much of the information held by organisations is on paper and this needs to be integrated within the same document repository. By converting paper documents into digital format through scanning, organizations convert paper into image formats such as TIF, JPG, and PDF, and also extract valuable index information or business data from the document using OCR technology. Digital documents and associated metadata can easily be stored in the ECM in a variety of formats. The most popular of these formats is PDF which not only provides an accurate representation of the document but also allows all the OCR text in the document to be stored behind the PDF image. This format is known as PDF with hidden text or text-searchable PDF. This allows users to search for documents by using keywords in the metadata fields or by searching the content of PDF files across the repository. ==== Advantages of scanning documents into a ECM/DMS ==== Information held on paper is usually just as valuable to organisations as the electronic documents that are generated internally. Often this information represents a large proportion of the day to day correspondence with suppliers and customers. Having the ability to manage and share this information internally through a document management system such as SharePoint or a CMIS-compatible repository improves collaboration between departments or employees and also eliminates the risk of losing this information through disasters such as floods or fire. Organisations adopting an ECM/DMS often implement electronic workflow which allows the information held on paper to be included as part of an electronic business process and incorporated into a customer record file along with other associated office documents and emails. For business critical documents, such as purchase orders and supplier invoices, digitising documents helps speed up business transactions as well as reduce manual effort involved in keying data into business systems, such as CRM, ERP and Accounting. Scanned invoices can also be routed to managers for payment approval via email or an electronic workflow. == Electronic document capture == In the earlier implementations of Document Capture Software, the technology focused solely on the digitization and capture of information from paper documents. Document images were acquired from document scanners via TWAIN/ISIS drivers. Only image-based file formats like TIF, JPG, and BMP were typically compatible with these solutions. But in recent years, as the volume of electronically-created documents and the number of proprietary file formats continues to increase at exponential rates, the need for handling documents existing in electronic formats has grown. The relevant document capture products have adapted to function with non-image file formats with the end-goal of creating a unified processing workflow capable of handling all incoming documents The ability to import files from a variety of sources is one example of such adaptation. Importing documents from ECM/DMS software solutions, email servers, FTP, and EDI is now as much of a requirement of document capture software as is paper capture. The normalization of output files to text-based PDF format is now another critical factor in long-term archival of proprietary electronic file formats. Normalization expands access and usage of files to users throughout the enterprise, rather than only those that created the original electronic file.
Traité de Documentation
Traité de documentation: le livre sur le livre, théorie et pratique is a landmark book by Belgian author Paul Otlet, first published in 1934. == Legacy == The book is considered a landmark in the history of information science, with concepts predicting the rise of the World Wide Web and search engines. In [Otlet's] most famous publication of 1934, Traité de Documentation, he wrote of a desk in the form of a wheel from which different projects (workspaces) could be switched as they rotated — foreshadowing the multiple desktops and tabs of contemporary computer interfaces. Inspired by the arrival of radio, phonograph, cinema, and television, Otlet also posited that there were as yet many “inventions to be discovered,” including the reading and annotation of remote documents and computer speech.
Chinese speech synthesis
Chinese speech synthesis is the application of speech synthesis to the Chinese language (usually Standard Chinese). It poses additional difficulties due to Chinese characters frequently having different pronunciations in different contexts and the complex prosody, which is essential to convey the meaning of words, and sometimes the difficulty in obtaining agreement among native speakers concerning what the correct pronunciation is of certain phonemes. == Concatenation (Ekho and KeyTip) == Recordings can be concatenated in any desired combination, but the joins sound forced (as is usual for simple concatenation-based speech synthesis) and this can severely affect prosody; these synthesizers are also inflexible in terms of speed and expression. However, because these synthesizers do not rely on a corpus, there is no noticeable degradation in performance when they are given more unusual or awkward phrases. Ekho is an open source TTS which simply concatenates sampled syllables. It currently supports Cantonese, Mandarin, and experimentally Korean. Some of the Mandarin syllables have been pitched-normalised in Praat. A modified version of these is used in Gradint's "synthesis from partials". cjkware.com used to ship a product called KeyTip Putonghua Reader which worked similarly; it contained 120 Megabytes of sound recordings (GSM-compressed to 40 Megabytes in the evaluation version), comprising 10,000 multi-syllable dictionary words plus single-syllable recordings in 6 different prosodies (4 tones, neutral tone, and an extra third-tone recording for use at the end of a phrase). == Lightweight synthesizers (eSpeak and Yuet) == The lightweight open-source speech project eSpeak, which has its own approach to synthesis, has experimented with Mandarin and Cantonese. eSpeak was used by Google Translate from May 2010 until December 2010. The commercial product "Yuet" is also lightweight (it is intended to be suitable for resource-constrained environments like embedded systems); it was written from scratch in ANSI C starting from 2013. Yuet claims a built-in NLP model that does not require a separate dictionary; the speech synthesised by the engine claims clear word boundaries and emphasis on appropriate words. Communication with its author is required to obtain a copy. Both eSpeak and Yuet can synthesis speech for Cantonese and Mandarin from the same input text, and can output the corresponding romanisation (for Cantonese, Yuet uses Yale and eSpeak uses Jyutping; both use Pinyin for Mandarin). eSpeak does not concern itself with word boundaries when these don't change the question of which syllable should be spoken. == Corpus-based == A "corpus-based" approach can sound very natural in most cases but can err in dealing with unusual phrases if they can't be matched with the corpus. The synthesiser engine is typically very large (hundreds or even thousands of megabytes) due to the size of the corpus. === iFlyTek === Anhui USTC iFlyTek Co., Ltd (iFlyTek) published a W3C paper in which they adapted Speech Synthesis Markup Language to produce a mark-up language called Chinese Speech Synthesis Markup Language (CSSML) which can include additional markup to clarify the pronunciation of characters and to add some prosody information. The amount of data involved is not disclosed by iFlyTek but can be seen from the commercial products that iFlyTek have licensed their technology to; for example, Bider's SpeechPlus is a 1.3 Gigabyte download, 1.2 Gigabytes of which is used for the highly compressed data for a single Chinese voice. iFlyTek's synthesiser can also synthesise mixed Chinese and English text with the same voice (e.g. Chinese sentences containing some English words); they claim their English synthesis to be "average". The iFlyTek corpus appears to be heavily dependent on Chinese characters, and it is not possible to synthesize from pinyin alone. It is sometimes possible by means of CSSML to add pinyin to the characters to disambiguate between multiple possible pronunciations, but this does not always work. === NeoSpeech === There is an online interactive demonstration for NeoSpeech speech synthesis, which accepts Chinese characters and also pinyin if it's enclosed in their proprietary "VTML" markup. === Mac OS === Mac OS had Chinese speech synthesizers available up to version 9. This was removed in 10.0 and reinstated in 10.7 (Lion). === Historical corpus-based synthesizers (no longer available) === A corpus-based approach was taken by Tsinghua University in SinoSonic, with the Harbin dialect voice data taking 800 Megabytes. This was planned to be offered as a download but the link was never activated. Nowadays, only references to it can be found on Internet Archive. Bell Labs' approach, which was demonstrated online in 1997 but subsequently removed, was described in a monograph "Multilingual Text-to-Speech Synthesis: The Bell Labs Approach" (Springer, October 31, 1997, ISBN 978-0-7923-8027-6), and the former employee who was responsible for the project, Chilin Shih (who subsequently worked at the University of Illinois) put some notes about her methods on her website.
Cryptographic module
A cryptographic module is a component of a computer system that securely implements cryptographic algorithms, typically with some element of tamper resistance. NIST defines a cryptographic module as "The set of hardware, software, and/or firmware that implements security functions (including cryptographic algorithms), holds plaintext keys and uses them for performing cryptographic operations, and is contained within a cryptographic module boundary." Hardware security modules, including secure cryptoprocessors, are one way of implementing cryptographic modules. Standards for cryptographic modules include FIPS 140-3 and ISO/IEC 19790.
Vinelink.com
Vinelink.com (VINE) is a national website in the United States that allows victims of crime, and the general public, to track the movements of prisoners held by the various states and territories. The first four letters in the websites name, "vine", are an acronym for "Victim Information and Notification Everyday". Vinelink.com displays information, based on the information provided by the various states' departments of correction and other law enforcement agencies, on whether an inmate is in custody, has been released, has been granted parole or probation, or has escaped from custody. In some cases, the website will reveal whether a defendant has been granted parole or probation, but then subsequently violated conditions of their release and become a fugitive. Information provided on Vinelink.com represents metadata, in that the website lists a defendant's custody status; but does not list what the individual is charged with, their criminal history, or the amount of their bail, if applicable. Internet users accessing the Vinelink.com website choose from a map of states and provinces within the United States where they wish to perform a search for an inmate. The user may then search for an individual using the inmate's or parolee's name, or by entering the inmate's specific department of corrections inmate number, if known. When the inmate's custody status changes, users who have registered to be notified of such changes will be notified via email, phone or both. This information is currently released upon request, without the website requesting reasons for the users search or requiring payment, as public records available to the general public. Inmate information is available for most states, and for Puerto Rico, on the website. The states of Arizona, Georgia, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire and West Virginia provide very limited information on the site. In March of 2025, The Maine Sheriff's Association entered into a contract to pilot the use of the VINE system in three counties in the state as well as a regional jail, therefore making South Dakota the only state that does not participate in the VINE system to any degree. The website does not provide data on prisoners detained by the Federal Bureau of Prisons which has its own inmate locator web site nor for inmates of the U.S. military prisons.