Multicloud (also written as multi-cloud or multi cloud) is a term with varying interpretations, generally referring to a system using multiple cloud computing providers. According to ISO/IEC 22123-1: "multi-cloud is a cloud deployment model in which a customer uses public cloud services provided by two or more cloud service providers". Multi-cloud can involve various deployment models, including public, private, and hybrid clouds, and multiple service models, such as Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), and Software as a Service (SaaS). Multicloud incorporates workload, data, traffic, and workflow portability options, which can result in varying implementation complexity. When effectively implemented, multicloud solutions can enhance architectural resilience, reduce dependence on a single vendor, and improve flexibility by leveraging services from different providers. However, multicloud strategies also present challenges, including increased operational complexity, security risks, higher costs, and integration difficulties. According to the 2024 State of the Cloud Report by Flexera, multi-cloud adoption has continued to rise in 2024. Enterprises increasingly silo applications into specific clouds and select best-fit services. Key use cases include data analysis in separate clouds and cross-cloud disaster recovery. == Advantages and challenges == There are several advantages to using a multicloud approach, including the ability to negotiate better pricing with cloud providers, the ability to quickly switch to another provider if needed, and the ability to avoid vendor lock-in. Multicloud can also be a good way to hedge against the risks of obsolescence, as it allows you to rely on multiple vendors and open standards, which can prolong the life of your systems. Additional benefits of the multicloud architecture include adherence to local policies that require certain data to be physically present within the area/country, geographical distribution of processing requests from physically closer cloud unit which in turn reduces latency and protect against disasters. Various issues and challenges also present themselves in a multicloud environment. Security and governance is more complicated, and more "moving parts" may create resiliency issues. == Difference between multicloud and hybrid cloud == Multicloud differs from hybrid cloud in that it refers to multiple cloud services from different vendors rather than multiple deployment modes (on-premises hardware, and public and private, cloud hosting). However, when considering a broad definition of multi-cloud, hybrid cloud can still be regarded as a special form of multi-cloud.
Super-resolution optical fluctuation imaging
Super-resolution optical fluctuation imaging (SOFI) is a post-processing method for the calculation of super-resolved images from recorded image time series that is based on the temporal correlations of independently fluctuating fluorescent emitters. SOFI has been developed for super-resolution of biological specimen that are labelled with independently fluctuating fluorescent emitters (organic dyes, fluorescent proteins). In comparison to other super-resolution microscopy techniques such as STORM or PALM that rely on single-molecule localization and hence only allow one active molecule per diffraction-limited area (DLA) and timepoint, SOFI does not necessitate a controlled photoswitching and/ or photoactivation as well as long imaging times. Nevertheless, it still requires fluorophores that are cycling through two distinguishable states, either real on-/off-states or states with different fluorescence intensities. In mathematical terms SOFI-imaging relies on the calculation of cumulants, for what two distinguishable ways exist. For one thing an image can be calculated via auto-cumulants that by definition only rely on the information of each pixel itself, and for another thing an improved method utilizes the information of different pixels via the calculation of cross-cumulants. Both methods can increase the final image resolution significantly although the cumulant calculation has its limitations. Actually SOFI is able to increase the resolution in all three dimensions. == Principle == Likewise to other super-resolution methods SOFI is based on recording an image time series on a CCD- or CMOS camera. In contrary to other methods the recorded time series can be substantially shorter, since a precise localization of emitters is not required and therefore a larger quantity of activated fluorophores per diffraction-limited area is allowed. The pixel values of a SOFI-image of the n-th order are calculated from the values of the pixel time series in the form of a n-th order cumulant, whereas the final value assigned to a pixel can be imagined as the integral over a correlation function. The finally assigned pixel value intensities are a measure of the brightness and correlation of the fluorescence signal. Mathematically, the n-th order cumulant is related to the n-th order correlation function, but exhibits some advantages concerning the resulting resolution of the image. Since in SOFI several emitters per DLA are allowed, the photon count at each pixel results from the superposition of the signals of all activated nearby emitters. The cumulant calculation now filters the signal and leaves only highly correlated fluctuations. This provides a contrast enhancement and therefore a background reduction for good measure. As it is implied in the figure on the left the fluorescence source distribution: ∑ k = 1 N δ ( r → − r → k ) ⋅ ε k ⋅ s k ( t ) {\displaystyle \sum _{k=1}^{N}\delta ({\vec {r}}-{\vec {r}}_{k})\cdot \varepsilon _{k}\cdot s_{k}(t)} is convolved with the system's point spread function (PSF) U(r). Hence the fluorescence signal at time t and position r → {\displaystyle {\vec {r}}} is given by F ( r → , t ) = ∑ k = 1 N U ( r → − r → k ) ⋅ ε k ⋅ s k ( t ) . {\displaystyle F({\vec {r}},t)=\sum _{k=1}^{N}U({\vec {r}}-{\vec {r}}_{k})\cdot \varepsilon _{k}\cdot s_{k}(t).} Within the above equations N is the amount of emitters, located at the positions r → k {\displaystyle {\vec {r}}_{k}} with a time-dependent molecular brightness ε k ⋅ s k {\displaystyle \varepsilon _{k}\cdot s_{k}} where ε k {\displaystyle \varepsilon _{k}} is a variable for the constant molecular brightness and s k ( t ) {\displaystyle s_{k}(t)} is a time-dependent fluctuation function. The molecular brightness is just the average fluorescence count-rate divided by the number of molecules within a specific region. For simplification it has to be assumed that the sample is in a stationary equilibrium and therefore the fluorescence signal can be expressed as a zero-mean fluctuation: δ F ( r → , t ) = F ( r → , t ) − ⟨ F ( r → , t ) ⟩ t {\displaystyle \delta F({\vec {r}},t)=F({\vec {r}},t)-\langle F({\vec {r}},t)\rangle _{t}} where ⟨ ⋯ ⟩ t {\displaystyle \langle \cdots \rangle _{t}} denotes time-averaging. The auto-correlation here e.g. the second-order can then be described deductively as follows for a certain time-lag τ {\displaystyle \tau } : δ F ( r → , t ) = ⟨ δ F ( r → , t + τ ) ⋅ δ F ( r → , t ) ⟩ t {\displaystyle \delta F({\vec {r}},t)=\langle \delta F({\vec {r}},t+\tau )\cdot \delta F({\vec {r}},t)\rangle _{t}} From these equations it follows that the PSF of the optical system has to be taken to the power of the order of the correlation. Thus in a second-order correlation the PSF would be reduced along all dimensions by a factor of 2 {\displaystyle {\sqrt {2}}} . As a result, the resolution of the SOFI-images increases according to this factor. === Cumulants versus correlations === Using only the simple correlation function for a reassignment of pixel values, would ascribe to the independency of fluctuations of the emitters in time in a way that no cross-correlation terms would contribute to the new pixel value. Calculations of higher-order correlation functions would suffer from lower-order correlations for what reason it is superior to calculate cumulants, since all lower-order correlation terms vanish. == Cumulant-calculation == === Auto-cumulants === For computational reasons it is convenient to set all time-lags in higher-order cumulants to zero so that a general expression for the n-th order auto-cumulant can be found: A C n ( r → , τ 1 … n − 1 = 0 ) = ∑ k = 1 N U n ( r → − r → k ) ε k n w k ( 0 ) {\displaystyle AC_{n}({\vec {r}},\tau _{1\ldots n-1}=0)=\sum _{k=1}^{N}U^{n}({\vec {r}}-{\vec {r}}_{k})\varepsilon _{k}^{n}w_{k}(0)} w k {\displaystyle w_{k}} is a specific correlation based weighting function influenced by the order of the cumulant and mainly depending on the fluctuation properties of the emitters. Albeit there is no fundamental limitation in calculating very high orders of cumulants and thereby shrinking the FWHM of the PSF there are practical limitations according to the weighting of the values assigned to the final image. Emitters with a higher molecular brightness will show a strong increase in terms of the pixel cumulant value assigned at higher-orders as well as this performance can be expected from a diverse appearance of fluctuations of different emitters. A wide intensity range of the resulting image can therefore be expected and as a result dim emitters can get masked by bright emitters in higher-order images:. The calculation of auto-cumulants can be realized in a very attractive way in a mathematical sense. The n-th order cumulant can be calculated with a basic recursion from moments K n ( r → ) = μ n ( r → ) − ∑ i = 1 n − 1 ( n − 1 i ) K n − i ( r → ) μ i ( r → ) {\displaystyle K_{n}({\vec {r}})=\mu _{n}({\vec {r}})-\sum _{i=1}^{n-1}{\begin{pmatrix}n-1\\i\end{pmatrix}}K_{n-i}({\vec {r}})\mu _{i}({\vec {r}})} where K is a cumulant of the index's order, likewise μ {\displaystyle \mu } represents the moments. The term within the brackets indicates a binomial coefficient. This way of computation is straightforward in comparison with calculating cumulants with standard formulas. It allows for the calculation of cumulants with only little time of computing and is, as it is well implemented, even suitable for the calculation of high-order cumulants on large images. === Cross-cumulants === In a more advanced approach cross-cumulants are calculated by taking the information of several pixels into account. Cross-cumulants can be described as follows: C C n ( r → , τ 1 … n − 1 = 0 ) = ∏ j < l n U ( r → j − r → l n ) ⋅ ∑ i = 1 N U n ( r → i − ∑ k n r → k n ) ε i n w i ( 0 ) {\displaystyle CC_{n}({\vec {r}},\tau _{1\ldots n-1}=0)=\prod _{j Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) is a measure used to determine image quality. CNR is similar to the metric signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), but subtracts a term before taking the ratio. This is important when there is a significant bias in an image, such as from haze. As can be seen in the picture at right, the intensity is rather high even though the features of the image are washed out by the haze. Thus this image may have a high SNR metric, but will have a low CNR metric. One way to define contrast-to-noise ratio is: C = | S A − S B | σ o {\displaystyle C={\frac {|S_{A}-S_{B}|}{\sigma _{o}}}} where SA and SB are signal intensities for signal producing structures A and B in the region of interest and σo is the standard deviation of the pure image noise. Art Recognition is a Swiss technology company headquartered in Adliswil, within the Zurich metropolitan area, Switzerland. Art Recognition specializes in the application of artificial intelligence (AI) for art authentication and the detection of art forgeries. == Overview == Art Recognition was established in 2019 by Dr. Carina Popovici and Christiane Hoppe-Oehl. Art Recognition employs a combination of machine learning techniques, computer vision algorithms, and deep neural networks to assess the authenticity of artworks. The company's technology undergoes a process of data collection, dataset preparation, and training. === Academic partnerships and grants === Art Recognition has established a relationship with Innosuisse, a Swiss innovation agency, to expand its research and development initiatives. It has also formed a strategic collaboration with Nils Büttner, an art historian and professor at the State Academy of Fine Arts Stuttgart (ABK Stuttgart). === Notable developments === In May 2024, Art Recognition played a key role in identifying counterfeit artworks, including alleged Monets and Renoirs, being sold on eBay. Germann Auction in November 2024 became the first auction house to successfully conduct a sale of artwork authenticated entirely by artificial intelligence. As of January 2025, Art Recognition has appointed art crime expert and Pulitzer Prize finalist Noah Charney as an advisor. === Recognition and debates === The company was featured on the front page of The Wall Street Journal for its involvement in the authentication case of the Flaget Madonna, believed to have been partly painted by Raphael. A broadcast by the Swiss public television SRF covered how the algorithm can be used to detect art forgeries with high accuracy. The technology developed by Art Recognition has been recognized for its role in providing a technology-based art authentication solution, compared to traditional methods. == Controversial cases == Art Recognition's AI algorithm has been applied to several high-profile and controversial artworks, sparking significant interest and debate in the art world. Samson and Delilah at the National Gallery in London: The National Gallery's "Samson and Delilah", traditionally attributed to the artist Rubens, has also been examined using Art Recognition's AI, which has assessed the painting as non-authentic. De Brecy Tondo Madonna. A research team from Bradford University and the University of Nottingham initially attributed the painting to Raphael, employing an AI face recognition software, while the AI developed at Art Recognition returned a negative result. The Bradford group's AI was trained on 49 images, whereas Art Recognition employed a larger dataset of over 100 images. Lucian Freud Painting Controversy: Featured in The New Yorker, a painting attributed to Lucian Freud became a subject of dispute. Art Recognition's AI analysis played a big role in examining the painting's authenticity. Titian at Kunsthaus Zürich: A painting attributed to Titian, housed at Kunsthaus Zürich, has been a topic of debate among art experts. The application of Art Recognition's technology offered a new perspective. Following this debate, Kunsthaus Zürich has announced plans to initiate a comprehensive project aimed at resolving the authenticity questions surrounding the painting. Art Recognition has contributed to the authentication debate surrounding The Polish Rider, a painting traditionally attributed to Rembrandt but subject to scholarly debate. The Web Hypertext Application Technology Working Group (WHATWG) was founded by representatives from Apple Inc., the Mozilla Foundation and Opera Software, leading web browser vendors in 2004. WHATWG is responsible for maintaining multiple web-related technical standards, including the specifications for the HyperText Markup Language (HTML) and the Document Object Model (DOM). The central organizational membership and control of WHATWG – its "Steering Group" – consists of Apple, Mozilla, Google, and Microsoft. WHATWG editors of the specifications ensure correct implementation, in consultation with participants, but ultimately in accordance with Steering Group member objectives. == History == The WHATWG was formed in response to the slow development of World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web standards and W3C's decision to abandon HTML in favor of XML-based technologies. The WHATWG mailing list was announced on 4 June 2004, two days after the initiatives of a joint Opera–Mozilla position paper had been voted down by the W3C members at the W3C Workshop on Web Applications and Compound Documents. On 10 April 2007, the Mozilla Foundation, Apple, and Opera Software proposed that the new HTML working group of the W3C adopt the WHATWG's HTML5 as the starting point of its work and name its future deliverable as "HTML5" (though the WHATWG specification was later renamed HTML Living Standard). On 9 May 2007, the new HTML working group of the W3C resolved to do that. An Internet Explorer platform architect from Microsoft was invited but did not join, citing the lack of a patent policy to ensure all specifications can be implemented on a royalty-free basis. Since then, the W3C and the WHATWG had been developing HTML independently, at times causing specifications to diverge. In 2017, the WHATWG established an intellectual property rights agreement that includes a patent policy. This spurred a renewed attempt to allow the W3C and the WHATWG to work together on specifications. In 2019, the W3C and WHATWG agreed to a memorandum of understanding where development of HTML and DOM specifications would be done principally in the WHATWG. The editor has significant control over the specification, but the community can influence the decisions of the editor. In one case, editor Ian Hickson proposed replacing the 80 Million Tiny Images is a dataset intended for training machine-learning systems constructed by Antonio Torralba, Rob Fergus, and William T. Freeman in a collaboration between MIT and New York University. It was published in 2008. The dataset has size 760 GB. It contains 79,302,017 32×32-pixel color images, scaled down from images scraped from the World Wide Web over 8 months. The images are classified into 75,062 classes. Each class is a non-abstract noun in WordNet. Images may appear in more than one class. The dataset was motivated by non-parametric models of neural activations in the visual cortex upon seeing images. The CIFAR-10 dataset uses a subset of the images in this dataset, but with independently generated labels, as the original labels were not reliable. The CIFAR-10 set has 6000 examples of each of 10 classes, and the CIFAR-100 set has 600 examples of each of 100 non-overlapping classes. == Construction == It was first reported in a technical report in April 2007, during the middle of the construction process, when there were only 73 million images. The full dataset was published in 2008. They began with all 75,846 non-abstract nouns in WordNet, and then for each of these nouns, they scraped 7 image search engines: Altavista, Ask.com, Flickr, Cydral, Google, Picsearch, and Webshots. After 8 months of scraping, they obtained 97,245,098 images. Since they did not have enough storage, they downsized the images to 32×32 as they were scraped. After gathering, they removed images with zero variance and intra-word duplicate images, resulting in the final dataset. Out of the 75,846 nouns, only 75,062 classes had any results, so the other nouns did not appear in the final dataset. The number of images per noun follows a Zipf-like distribution, with 1056 images per noun on average. To prevent a few nouns taking up too many images, they put an upper bound of at most 3000 images per noun. == Retirement == The 80 Million Tiny Images dataset was retired from use by its creators in 2020, after a paper by researchers Abeba Birhane and Vinay Prabhu found that some of the labeling of several publicly available image datasets, including 80 Million Tiny Images, contained racist and misogynistic slurs which were causing models trained on them to exhibit racial and sexual bias. The dataset also contained offensive images. Following the release of the paper, the dataset's creators removed the dataset from distribution, and requested that other researchers not use it for further research and to delete their copies of the dataset. DocuWare is cloud-based Software as a Service (SaaS) provider. DocuWare software provides document management, repository, and workflow automation functions (also referred to as enterprise content management (ECM) or content services). The company is headquartered in Germany and the United States. DocuWare is also the name of the flagship product offered by the company. == Company history == On October 27, 1988, DOCUNET GmbH was founded in Germering, Germany (near Munich) by President Jürgen Biffar. Since 1990, Biffar has been managing the company with his colleague, Thomas Schneck. DOCUNET AG has since been renamed and is now known as DocuWare. Since 1999, DocuWare has outsourced parts of its development to Sofia, Bulgaria. As of 2016, Nemetschek OOD had 42 employees working on the DocuWare product. DocuWare GmbH holds a 20 percent stake in Nemetschek OOD. In April 2012, an investment agreement was signed between the company and Morgan Stanley Expansion Capital LP, a Morgan Stanley Investment Management private equity fund. Its aim was promoting and accelerating the global growth of DocuWare. The legal form, AG (Public Holding Company) changed to GmbH (limited liability corporation). The company acquired U.S.-based Westbrook Technologies Inc., developer of Fortis ECM software in August 2013. In 2014, Westbrook Technologies Inc. was merged into DocuWare Corporation. At the beginning of 2016, DocuWare appointed Dr. Michael Berger as its Chief Technology Officer (CTO). Dr. Berger joined the company in 2008 as Vice President Research & Development. On January 1, 2019, Jürgen Biffar and Thomas Schneck stepped back from their operational roles after 30 years, and Dr. Michael Berger and Max Ertl started their new roles as co-presidents. On August 6, 2019, DocuWare was acquired by Ricoh. DocuWare continues to operate as a standalone subsidiary of Ricoh. In 2020, the company received approval to move its U.S. headquarters from New Windsor to Beacon, New York. === Subsidiaries === DocuWare Corporation (Beacon, NY), founded January 1, 2001 DocuWare Ltd (Nottinghamshire), founded April 1, 2005 DocuWare SARL (Paris), founded September 1, 2008 DocuWare S.L. (Barcelona), founded July 1, 2009Contrast-to-noise ratio
Art Recognition
WHATWG
80 Million Tiny Images
DocuWare