The forking lemma is any of a number of related lemmas in cryptography research. The lemma states that if an adversary (typically a probabilistic Turing machine), on inputs drawn from some distribution, produces an output that has some property with non-negligible probability, then with non-negligible probability, if the adversary is re-run on new inputs but with the same random tape, its second output will also have the property. This concept was first used by David Pointcheval and Jacques Stern in "Security proofs for signature schemes," published in the proceedings of Eurocrypt 1996. In their paper, the forking lemma is specified in terms of an adversary that attacks a digital signature scheme instantiated in the random oracle model. They show that if an adversary can forge a signature with non-negligible probability, then there is a non-negligible probability that the same adversary with the same random tape can create a second forgery in an attack with a different random oracle. The forking lemma was later generalized by Mihir Bellare and Gregory Neven. The forking lemma has been used and further generalized to prove the security of a variety of digital signature schemes and other random-oracle based cryptographic constructions. == Statement of the lemma == The generalized version of the lemma is stated as follows. Let A be a probabilistic algorithm, with inputs (x, h1, ..., hq; r) that outputs a pair (J, y), where r refers to the random tape of A (that is, the random choices A will make). Suppose further that IG is a probability distribution from which x is drawn, and that H is a set of size h from which each of the hi values are drawn according to the uniform distribution. Let acc be the probability that on inputs distributed as described, the J output by A is greater than or equal to 1. We can then define a "forking algorithm" FA that proceeds as follows, on input x: Pick a random tape r for A. Pick h1, ..., hq uniformly from H. Run A on input (x, h1, ..., hq; r) to produce (J, y). If J = 0, then return (0, 0, 0). Pick h'J, ..., h'q uniformly from H. Run A on input (x, h1, ..., hJ−1, h'J, ..., h'q; r) to produce (J', y'). If J' = J and hJ ≠ h'J then return (1, y, y'), otherwise, return (0, 0, 0). Let frk be the probability that FA outputs a triple starting with 1, given an input x chosen randomly from IG. Then frk ≥ acc ⋅ ( acc q − 1 h ) . {\displaystyle {\text{frk}}\geq {\text{acc}}\cdot \left({\frac {\text{acc}}{q}}-{\frac {1}{h}}\right).} === Intuition === The idea here is to think of A as running two times in related executions, where the process "forks" at a certain point, when some but not all of the input has been examined. In the alternate version, the remaining inputs are re-generated but are generated in the normal way. The point at which the process forks may be something we only want to decide later, possibly based on the behavior of A the first time around: this is why the lemma statement chooses the branching point (J) based on the output of A. The requirement that hJ ≠ h'J is a technical one required by many uses of the lemma. (Note that since both hJ and h'J are chosen randomly from H, then if h is large, as is usually the case, the probability of the two values not being distinct is extremely small.) === Example === For example, let A be an algorithm for breaking a digital signature scheme in the random oracle model. Then x would be the public parameters (including the public key) A is attacking, and hi would be the output of the random oracle on its ith distinct input. The forking lemma is of use when it would be possible, given two different random signatures of the same message, to solve some underlying hard problem. An adversary that forges once, however, gives rise to one that forges twice on the same message with non-negligible probability through the forking lemma. When A attempts to forge on a message m, we consider the output of A to be (J, y) where y is the forgery, and J is such that m was the Jth unique query to the random oracle (it may be assumed that A will query m at some point, if A is to be successful with non-negligible probability). (If A outputs an incorrect forgery, we consider the output to be (0, y).) By the forking lemma, the probability (frk) of obtaining two good forgeries y and y' on the same message but with different random oracle outputs (that is, with hJ ≠ h'J) is non-negligible when acc is also non-negligible. This allows us to prove that if the underlying hard problem is indeed hard, then no adversary can forge signatures. This is the essence of the proof given by Pointcheval and Stern for a modified ElGamal signature scheme against an adaptive adversary. == Known issues with application of forking lemma == The reduction provided by the forking lemma is not tight. Pointcheval and Stern proposed security arguments for Digital Signatures and Blind Signature using Forking Lemma. Claus P. Schnorr provided an attack on blind Schnorr signatures schemes, with more than p o l y l o g ( n ) {\displaystyle polylog(n)} concurrent executions (the case studied and proven secure by Pointcheval and Stern). A polynomial-time attack, for Ω ( n ) {\displaystyle \Omega (n)} concurrent executions, was shown in 2020 by Benhamouda, Lepoint, Raykova, and Orrù. Schnorr also suggested enhancements for securing blind signatures schemes based on discrete logarithm problem.
Smart data capture
Smart data capture (SDC), also known as 'intelligent data capture' or 'automated data capture', describes the branch of technology concerned with using computer vision techniques like optical character recognition (OCR), barcode scanning, object recognition and other similar technologies to extract and process information from semi-structured and unstructured data sources. IDC characterize smart data capture as an integrated hardware, software, and connectivity strategy to help organizations enable the capture of data in an efficient, repeatable, scalable, and future-proof way. Data is captured visually from barcodes, text, IDs and other objects - often from many sources simultaneously - before being converted and prepared for digital use, typically by artificial intelligence-powered software. An important feature of SDC is that it focuses not just on capturing data more efficiently but serving up easy-to-access, actionable insights at the instant of data collection to both frontline and desk-based workers, aiding decision-making and making it a two-way process. Smart data capture automates and accelerates capture, applying insights in real time and automating processes based on extracted input. Smart data capture is designed to be repeatable and scalable to reduce low-level manual tasks and eliminate human error. To achieve this goal, smart data capture solutions are often made available using specialist software installed on commodity hardware such as smartphones. However, some solutions may rely on specialized hardware such as dedicated scanning devices, wearables or shop floor robots. == Differences from OCR == Optical character recognition applications are typically concerned with the actual data capture process; they are intended to faithfully reproduce text, words, letters and symbols from a printed document. Smart data capture is multimodal, capable of extracting data from a wider range of semi-structured and unstructured sources, going beyond basic text recognition to offer a wider scope of applications. By extending functionality to provide actionable insights at the point of capture, SDC is also a two-way process (capture-display), while OCR is more commonly one-way (capture only), primarily used for data input. Smart data capture solutions typically have two parts: Data capture (which includes OCR, barcode scanning, object recognition) Functionality that then uses this data to provide actionable insights at the point of capture. == Applications == Smart data capture can be applied to almost any industry and application that requires visual information capture and interpretation. This may include: Retail Warehouse inventory control Logistics, handling and shipping Manufacturing Field service Healthcare Transport and travel Fraud detection
Sasha Stiles
Sasha Stiles (born 1980) is an American artist and poet. After discovering natural language processing, she created the 2021 poetry collection Technelegy through an eponymous AI model, before presenting the 2025–2026 installation A Living Poem at the Museum of Modern Art. In addition to artificial intelligence, binary code and non-fungible tokens have been important aspects of her work. == Biography == Stiles was born in 1980 in Pasadena, California, to documentary filmmaker parents whose work includes Cosmos: A Personal Voyage. She was interested in science fiction during her youth, particularly how they addressed human-machine collaboration and posthumanism. She graduated magna cum laude from Harvard University with a Bachelor of Arts in 2002 and she graduated with high honors from the University of Oxford with a Master of Studies in 2004. Originally, Stiles's poetry focused on technology. In 2017, she discovered natural language processing, piquing her interest in its ability to process thoughts and words comparably to its human counterparts. Despite lacking a technological background, she managed to channel people like Gwern Branwen, Ross Goodwin, and Allison Parrish as inspirations for her AI work, and in 2019, she started training an AI model named Technelegy. In 2021, Black Spring Press published her poetry collection Technelegy, where she combines AI-generated content produced by the titular AI model with her own traditionally-created work; the AI-generated content was produced by processing Stiles's own poetry onto GPT-2 and GPT-3. She and Technelegy later co-created A Living Poem, which ran at the Museum of Modern Art's Hyundai Card Digital Wall from September 2025 to March 2026. Stiles also has used non-fungible tokens as a platform for her poetry, having been inspired to go into blockchain by her experiences working with a metaverse exhibition curated by Jess Conatser. She has used Christie's and SuperRare to sell several of her poems as tokenized real-world assets, including Daughter of E.V.E. (Ex-Vivo Uterine Environment), a 2021 single-channel video using freeze-frame shots to hide poetry. In 2021, she co-founded TheVerseVerse (stylized as theVERSEverse), a non-fungible token gallery specializing in poetry. She later created Four Core Texts: Humanifesto and Other Poems, involving four NFT videos of poetry written in looping handwriting and powered by Technelegy. Stiles uses binary code as an inspiration for her work, citing in part its "quite antagonistic system of a binary 'EITHER / OR'", which she connected to several dichotomies pitting humanity and the present against technology and the future. In 2018, she started Analog Binary Code, where she creates sculptures by arranging objects in binary code ciphers. She also created Cursive Binary, where she combines binary with cursive handwriting, after writing zeros and ones on a steamed wall while showering. Stiles and the robot BINA48 co-created the 2020 ArtYard exhibition A Valentine for the Future. She was part of the 2021 group exhibition Computational Poetics at the Beall Center for Art and Technology. From February 24 to March 18, 2023, she held her solo show Binary Odes (stylized as B1NARY 0DES) at Annka Kultys Gallery. By 2024, her work had appeared in places such as Gucci storefronts and Times Square billboards. She designed Words Beyond Words, the official poster for Art Basel in Basel 2025. Stiles is based in Milford, New Jersey, where she lives with her husband, musician Kris Bones. She has also lived in Jersey City and Bucks County, Pennsylvania. She is Kalmyk-American on her mother's side, and she has also announced plans to create a version of Technelegy in her ancestral language Kalmyk.
LIFER/LADDER
LIFER/LADDER was one of the first database natural language processing systems. It was designed as a natural language interface to a database of information about US Navy ships. This system, as described in a paper by Hendrix (1978), used a semantic grammar to parse questions and query a distributed database. It was implemented in Interlisp. The LIFER/LADDER system could only support simple one-table queries or multiple table queries with easy join conditions. Some examples of queries it could accept: What are the length, width, and draft of the Kitty Hawk? When will Reeves achieve readiness rating C2? What is the nearest ship to Naples with a doctor on board? What ships are carrying cargo for the United States? Where are they going? Print the American cruisers’ current positions and states of readiness?
AgMES
The AgMES (Agricultural Metadata Element set) initiative was developed by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations and aims to encompass issues of semantic standards in the domain of agriculture with respect to description, resource discovery, interoperability, and data exchange for different types of information resources. There are numerous other metadata schemas for different types of information resources. The following list contains a list of a few examples: Document-like Information Objects (DLIOs): Dublin Core, Agricultural Metadata Element Set (AgMES) Events: VCalendar Geographic and Regional Information: Geographic information—Metadata ISO/IEC 11179 Standards Persons: Friend-of-a-friend (FOAF), vCard Plant Production and Protection: Darwin Core (1.0 and 2.0) (DwC) AgMES as a namespace is designed to include agriculture specific extensions for terms and refinements from established standard metadata namespaces like Dublin Core, AGLS etc. Thus, to be used for Document-like Information Objects, for example like publications, articles, books, web sites, papers, etc., it will have to be used in conjunction with the standard namespaces mentioned before. The AgMES initiative strives to achieve improved interoperability between information resources in agricultural domain by enabling means for exchange of information. Describing a DLIO with AgMES means exposing its major characteristics and contents in a standard way that can be reused easily in any information system. The more institutions and organizations in the agricultural domain that use AgMES to describe their DLIOs, the easier it will be to interchange data in between information systems like digital libraries and other repositories of agricultural information. == Use of AgMES == Metadata on agricultural Document-like Information Objects (DLIOs) can be created and stored in various formats: embedded in a web site (in the manner as with the HTML meta tag) in a separate metadata database in an XML file in an RDF file AgMES defines elements that can be used to describe a DLIO that can be used together with other metadata standards such as the Dublin Core, the Australian Government Locator Service. A complete list of all elements, refinements and schemes endorsed by AgMES is available from the AgMES website. === Creating application profiles === Application profiles are defined as schemas which consist of data elements drawn from one or more namespaces, combined by implementers, and optimized for a particular local application. Application profiles share the following four characteristics: They draw upon existing pool of metadata definition standards to extract suitable application- or requirement oriented elements. An application profile cannot create new elements. Application profiles specify the application specific details such as the schemes or controlled vocabularies. An application profile also contains information such as the format for the element value, cardinality or data type. Lastly, an application profile can refine standardized definitions as long as it is "semantically narrower or more specific". This capability of application profiles caters to situations where a domain specific terminology is needed to replace a more general one. === Sample application profiles using AgMES === The AGRIS Application Profile is a standard created specifically to enhance the description, exchange and subsequent retrieval of agricultural Document-like Information Objects (DLIOs). It is a format that allows sharing of information across dispersed bibliographic systems and is based on well-known and accepted metadata standards. The Event Application Profile is a standard created to allow members of the Agricultural community to 'know' about an upcoming event and guide them to the event Web site where they can find further information. The information communicated is thus minimum yet interoperable across domains and organizations. == AgMES and the semantic web == One of the advantages of the AgMES metadata schema is the ability to link between the metadata element and controlled vocabularies. The use of controlled vocabulary provides a "known" set of options to the indexer (and the search programmer) as to how the field can be filled out. Often the values may come from a specific thesaurus (e.g. AGROVOC) or classification schemes (e.g. the AGRIS/CARIS classification scheme) etc. Thanks to the possibility to use controlled vocabularies for metadata elements, the user is provided with the most precise information. In this context, work is also being carried out on exploiting the power of controlled vocabularies expressed as using URIs and machine-understandable semantics. In this context, FAO is promoting the Agricultural Ontology Service (AOS) initiative with the objective of expressing more semantics within the traditional thesaurus AGROVOC and build a Concept Server as a repository from which it will be always possible to extract traditional KOS.
Systems development life cycle
The systems development life cycle (SDLC) describes the typical phases and progression between phases during the development of a computer-based system. These phases progress from inception to retirement. At base, there is just one life cycle, but the taxonomy used to describe it may vary; the cycle may be classified into different numbers of phases and various names may be used for those phases. The SDLC is analogous to the life cycle of a living organism from its birth to its death. In particular, the SDLC varies by system in much the same way that each living organism has a unique path through its life. The SDLC does not prescribe how engineers should go about their work to move the system through its life cycle. Prescriptive techniques are referred to using various terms such as methodology, model, framework, and formal process. Other terms are used for the same concept as SDLC, including software development life cycle (also SDLC), application development life cycle (ADLC), and system design life cycle (also SDLC). These other terms focus on a different scope of development and are associated with different prescriptive techniques, but are about the same essential life cycle. The term "life cycle" is often written without a space, as "lifecycle", with the former more popular in the past and in non-engineering contexts. The acronym SDLC was coined when the longer form was more popular and has remained associated with the expansion, even though the shorter form is popular in engineering. Also, SDLC is relatively unique as opposed to the TLA SDL, which is highly overloaded. == Phases == Depending on the source, the SDLC is described as having different phases and using different terms. Even so, there are common aspects. The following attempts to describe notable phases using notable terminology. The phases are somewhat ordered by the natural sequence of development, although they can be overlapping and iterative. === Conceptualization === During conceptualization (a.k.a. conceptual design, system investigation, feasibility), options and priorities are considered. A feasibility study can determine whether the development effort is worthwhile via activities such as understanding user needs, cost estimation, benefit analysis, and resource analysis. A study should address operational, financial, technical, human factors, and legal/political concerns. === Requirements analysis === Requirements analysis (a.k.a. preliminary design) involves understanding the problem and determining what is needed. Often this involves engaging users to define the requirements and recording them in a document known as a requirements specification. === Design === During the design phase (a.k.a. detail design), a solution is planned. The plan can include relatively high-level information such as describing the major components of the system. The plan can include relatively low-level information such as describing functions, screen layout, business rules, and process flow. The design phase is informed by the requirements of the system. The design must satisfy each requirement. The design may be recorded in textual documents as well as functional hierarchy diagrams, example screen images, business rules, process diagrams, pseudo-code, and data models. === Construction === During construction (a.k.a. implementation, production), the system is realized. Based on the design, hardware and software components are created and integrated. This phase includes testing sub-components, components and the integration of some components, but typically does not include testing at the complete system level. This phase may include the development of training materials, including user manuals and help files. === Acceptance === The acceptance phase (a.k.a. system testing) is about testing the complete system to ensure that it meets customer expectations (requirements). === Deployment === The deployment phase (a.k.a. implementation) involves the logistics of delivery to the customer. Some systems are deployed as a single instance (i.e. in the cloud), and deployment may be ad hoc and manual. Some systems are built in quantity and are associated with manufacturing process and commissioning. This phase may include training users to use the system. It may include transitioning future development to support staff. === Maintenance === During the maintenance phase (a.k.a. operation, utilization, support) development is largely inactive, although this phase does include customer support for resolving user issues and recording suggestions for improvement. Fixes and enhancements are handled by returning to the first phase, conceptualization. For minor changes, the cycle may be significantly abbreviated compared to initial development. === Decommission === Decommission (a.k.a. disposition, retirement, phase-out) is when the system is removed from use, i.e., when it reaches end-of-life. == Practices == === Management and control === SDLC phase objectives are described in this section with key deliverables, a description of recommended tasks, and a summary of related control objectives for effective management. It is critical for the project manager to establish and monitor control objectives while executing projects. Control objectives are clear statements of the desired result or purpose and should be defined and monitored throughout a project. Control objectives can be grouped into major categories (domains), and relate to the SDLC phases as shown in the figure. To manage and control a substantial SDLC initiative, a work breakdown structure (WBS) captures and schedules the work. The WBS and all programmatic material should be kept in the "project description" section of the project notebook. The project manager chooses a WBS format that best describes the project. The diagram shows that coverage spans numerous phases of the SDLC, but the associated MCD (Management Control Domains) shows mappings to SDLC phases. For example, Analysis and Design is primarily performed as part of the Acquisition and Implementation Domain, and System Build and Prototype is primarily performed as part of delivery and support. === Work breakdown structured organization === The upper section of the WBS provides an overview of the project scope and timeline. It should also summarize the major phases and milestones. The middle section is based on the SDLC phases. WBS elements consist of milestones and tasks to be completed rather than activities to be undertaken, and have a deadline. Each task has a measurable output (e.g., an analysis document). A WBS task may rely on one or more activities (e.g., coding). Parts of the project needing support from contractors should have a statement of work (SOW). The development of an SOW does not occur during a specific phase of SDLC but is developed to include the work from the SDLC process that may be conducted by contractors. === Baselines === Baselines are established after four of the five phases of the SDLC, and are critical to the iterative nature of the model. Baselines become milestones. functional baseline: established after the conceptual design phase. allocated baseline: established after the preliminary design phase. product baseline: established after the detailed design and development phase. updated product baseline: established after the production construction phase. In the following diagram, these stages are divided into ten steps, from definition to creation and modification of IT work products:
Shane Legg
Shane Legg (born 1973 or 1974) is a machine learning researcher and entrepreneur. With Demis Hassabis and Mustafa Suleyman, he cofounded DeepMind Technologies (later bought by Google and now called Google DeepMind), and works there as the chief AGI scientist. He is also known for his academic work on artificial general intelligence, including his thesis supervised by Marcus Hutter. == Early life and education == Legg attended Rotorua Lakes High School in Rotorua, on New Zealand's North Island. He completed his undergraduate studies at Waikato University in 1996. Also in 1996, he obtained his MSc degree with a thesis entitled "Solomonoff Induction", with Cristian S. Calude at the University of Auckland. == Research interests == In the early 2000s, Legg re-introduced and popularized with Ben Goertzel the term "artificial general intelligence" (AGI), to describe an AI that can do practically any cognitive task a human can do. At that time, talking about AGI "would put you on the lunatic fringe". Legg is known for his concern of existential risk from AI, highlighted in 2011 in an interview on LessWrong and in 2023 he signed the statement on AI risk of extinction. == Career == Before his PhD and before cofounding DeepMind, Shane Legg worked at "a number of software development positions at private companies", including the "big data firm Adaptive Intelligence" and the startup WebMind founded by Ben Goertzel. === Research === Legg later obtained a PhD at the Dalle Molle Institute for Artificial Intelligence Research (IDSIA), a joint research institute of USI Università della Svizzera italiana and SUPSI. He worked on theoretical models of super intelligent machines (AIXI) with Marcus Hutter, and completed in 2008 his doctoral thesis entitled "Machine Super Intelligence". He then went on to complete a postdoctoral fellowship in finance at USI, and began a further fellowship at University College London's Gatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit. === DeepMind === Demis Hassabis and Shane Legg first met in 2009 at University College London, where Legg was a postdoctoral researcher. In 2010, Legg cofounded the start-up DeepMind Technologies along with Demis Hassabis and Mustafa Suleyman. DeepMind Technologies was bought in 2014 by Google. After the merge with Google Brain in 2023, the company is now known as Google DeepMind. According to a 2017 article, a significant part of his job as the chief scientist was to supervise recruitment, to decide where DeepMind should focus its efforts, and to lead DeepMind's AI safety work. As of July 2023, Legg works at Google DeepMind as the Chief AGI Scientist. == Awards and honors == Legg was awarded the $10,000 prize of the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence for his PhD done in 2008. Legg was appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) in the 2019 Birthday Honours for services to the science and technology sector and to investment.