Neuromorphic computing is a computing approach inspired by the human brain's structure and function. It uses artificial neurons to perform computations, mimicking neural systems for tasks such as perception, motor control, and multisensory integration. These systems, implemented in analog, digital, or mixed-mode VLSI, prioritize robustness, adaptability, and learning by emulating the brain’s distributed processing across small computing elements. This interdisciplinary field integrates biology, physics, mathematics, computer science, and electronic engineering to develop systems that emulate the brain’s morphology and computational strategies. Neuromorphic systems aim to enhance energy efficiency and computational power for applications including artificial intelligence, pattern recognition, and sensory processing. == History == Carver Mead proposed one of the first applications for neuromorphic engineering in the late 1980s. In 2006, researchers at Georgia Tech developed a field programmable neural array, a silicon-based chip modeling neuron channel-ion characteristics. In 2011, MIT researchers created a chip mimicking synaptic communication using 400 transistors and standard CMOS techniques. In 2012 HP Labs researchers reported that Mott memristors exhibit volatile behavior at low temperatures, enabling the creation of neuristors that mimic neuron behavior and support Turing machine components. Also in 2012, Purdue University researchers presented a neuromorphic chip design using lateral spin valves and memristors, noted for energy efficiency. The 2013 Blue Brain Project creates detailed digital models of rodent brains. Neurogrid, developed by Brains in Silicon at Stanford University, used 16 NeuroCore chips to emulate 65,536 neurons with high energy efficiency in 2014. The 2014 BRAIN Initiative and IBM’s TrueNorth chip contributed to neuromorphic advancements. The 2016 BrainScaleS project, a hybrid neuromorphic supercomputer at University of Heidelberg, operated 864 times faster than biological neurons. In 2017, Intel unveiled its Loihi chip, using an asynchronous artificial neural network for efficient learning and inference. Also in 2017 IMEC’s self-learning chip, based on OxRAM, demonstrated music composition by learning from minuets. In 2022, MIT researchers developed artificial synapses using protons for analog deep learning. In 2019, the European Union funded neuromorphic quantum computing to explore quantum operations using neuromorphic systems. Also in 2022, researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Polymer Research developed an organic artificial spiking neuron for in-situ neuromorphic sensing and biointerfacing. Researchers reported in 2024 that chemical systems in liquid solutions can detect sound at various wavelengths, offering potential for neuromorphic applications. == Neurological inspiration == Neuromorphic engineering emulates the brain’s structure and operations, focusing on the analog nature of biological computation and the role of neurons in cognition. The brain processes information via neurons using chemical signals, abstracted into mathematical functions. Neuromorphic systems distribute computation across small elements, similar to neurons, using methods guided by anatomical and functional neural maps from electron microscopy and neural connection studies. == Implementation == Neuromorphic systems employ hardware such as oxide-based memristors, spintronic memories, threshold switches, and transistors. Software implementations train spiking neural networks using error backpropagation. === Neuromemristive systems === Neuromemristive systems use memristors to implement neuroplasticity, focusing on abstract neural network models rather than detailed biological mimicry. These systems enable applications in speech recognition, face recognition, and object recognition, and can replace conventional digital logic gates. The Caravelli-Traversa-Di Ventra equation describes memristive memory evolution, revealing tunneling phenomena and Lyapunov functions. === Neuromorphic sensors === Neuromorphic principles extend to sensors, such as the retinomorphic sensor or event camera, which mimic human vision by registering brightness changes individually, optimizing power consumption. An example of this applied to detecting light is the retinomorphic sensor or, when employed in an array, an event camera. == Ethical considerations == Neuromorphic systems raise the same ethical questions as those for other approaches to artificial intelligence. Daniel Lim argued that advanced neuromorphic systems could lead to machine consciousness, raising concerns about whether civil rights and other protocols should be extended to them. Legal debates, such as in Acohs Pty Ltd v. Ucorp Pty Ltd, question ownership of work produced by neuromorphic systems, as non-human-generated outputs may not be copyrightable.
Physics-informed neural networks
In machine learning, physics-informed neural networks (PINNs), also referred to as theory-trained neural networks (TTNs), are a type of universal function approximator that can embed the knowledge of any physical laws that govern a given data-set in the learning process, and can be described by partial differential equations (PDEs). Low data availability for some biological and engineering problems limit the robustness of conventional machine learning models used for these applications. The prior knowledge of general physical laws acts in the training of neural networks (NNs) as a regularization agent that limits the space of admissible solutions, increasing the generalizability of the function approximation. This way, embedding this prior information into a neural network results in enhancing the information content of the available data, facilitating the learning algorithm to capture the right solution and to generalize well even with a low amount of training examples. Because they process continuous spatial and time coordinates and output continuous PDE solutions, they can be categorized as neural fields. == Function approximation == Most of the physical laws that govern the dynamics of a system can be described by partial differential equations. For example, the Navier–Stokes equations are a set of partial differential equations derived from the conservation laws (i.e., conservation of mass, momentum, and energy) that govern fluid mechanics. The solution of the Navier–Stokes equations with appropriate initial and boundary conditions allows the quantification of flow dynamics in a precisely defined geometry. However, these equations cannot be solved exactly and therefore numerical methods must be used (such as finite differences, finite elements and finite volumes). In this setting, these governing equations must be solved while accounting for prior assumptions, linearization, and adequate time and space discretization. Recently, solving the governing partial differential equations of physical phenomena using deep learning has emerged as a new field of scientific machine learning (SciML), leveraging the universal approximation theorem and high expressivity of neural networks. In general, deep neural networks could approximate any high-dimensional function given that sufficient training data are supplied. However, such networks do not consider the physical characteristics underlying the problem, and the level of approximation accuracy provided by them is still heavily dependent on careful specifications of the problem geometry as well as the initial and boundary conditions. Without this preliminary information, the solution is not unique and may lose physical correctness. To remedy this, Physics-Informed Neural Networks (PINNs) leverage governing physical equations in neural network training. Namely, PINNs are designed to be trained to satisfy the given training data as well as the imposed governing equations. In this fashion, a neural network can be guided with training datasets that do not necessarily need to be large or complete. An accurate solution of partial differential equations can potentially be found without knowing the boundary conditions. Therefore, with some knowledge about the physical characteristics of the problem and some form of training data (even sparse and incomplete), PINNs may be used for finding an optimal solution with high fidelity. PINNs can be applied to a wide range of problems in computational science, and are a pioneering technology leading to the development of new classes of numerical solvers for PDEs. PINNs can be thought of as a mesh-free alternative to traditional approaches (e.g., CFD for fluid dynamics), and new data-driven approaches for model inversion and system identification. Notably, a trained PINN network can be used to predict values on simulation grids of different resolutions without needing to be retrained. Additionally, the derivatives used in the partial differential equations can be computed using automatic differentiation (AD), which is assessed to be superior to numerical or symbolic differentiation. == Modeling and computation == A general nonlinear partial differential equation can be written as: u t + N [ u ; λ ] = 0 , x ∈ Ω , t ∈ [ 0 , T ] {\displaystyle u_{t}+{\mathcal {N}}[u;\lambda ]=0,\quad x\in \Omega ,\quad t\in [0,T]} where u ( t , x ) {\displaystyle u(t,x)} denotes the solution, N [ ⋅ ; λ ] {\displaystyle {\mathcal {N}}[\cdot ;\lambda ]} is a nonlinear operator parameterized by λ {\displaystyle \lambda } , and Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } is a subset of R D {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{D}} . This general form of governing equations summarizes a wide range of problems in mathematical physics, such as conservative laws, diffusion process, advection-diffusion systems, and kinetic equations. Given noisy measurements of a generic dynamic system described by the equation above, PINNs can be designed to solve two classes of problems: data-driven solutions of partial differential equations data-driven discovery of partial differential equations === Data-driven solution of partial differential equations === The data-driven solution of PDE computes the hidden state u ( t , x ) {\displaystyle u(t,x)} of the system given boundary data and/or measurements z {\displaystyle z} , and fixed model parameters λ {\displaystyle \lambda } . We solve: u t + N [ u ] = 0 , x ∈ Ω , t ∈ [ 0 , T ] {\displaystyle u_{t}+{\mathcal {N}}[u]=0,\quad x\in \Omega ,\quad t\in [0,T]} . by defining the residual f ( t , x ) {\displaystyle f(t,x)} as: f := u t + N [ u ] {\displaystyle f:=u_{t}+{\mathcal {N}}[u]} , and approximating u ( t , x ) {\displaystyle u(t,x)} by a deep neural network. This network can be differentiated using automatic differentiation. The parameters of u ( t , x ) {\displaystyle u(t,x)} and f ( t , x ) {\displaystyle f(t,x)} can be then learned by minimizing the following loss function L tot {\displaystyle L_{\text{tot}}} : L tot = L u + L f {\displaystyle L_{\text{tot}}=L_{u}+L_{f}} where: L u = ‖ u − z ‖ Γ {\displaystyle L_{u}=\Vert u-z\Vert _{\Gamma }} is the error between the PINN u ( t , x ) {\displaystyle u(t,x)} and the set of boundary conditions and measured data on the set of points Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } where the boundary conditions and data are defined. L f = ‖ f ‖ Γ {\displaystyle L_{f}=\Vert f\Vert _{\Gamma }} is the mean-squared error of the residual function. This second term encourages the PINN to learn the structural information expressed by the PDE during the training process. This approach has been used to yield computationally efficient physics-informed surrogate models with applications in the forecasting of physical processes, model predictive control, multi-physics and multi-scale modeling, and simulation. It has been shown to converge to the solution of the PDE. === Data-driven discovery of partial differential equations === Given noisy and incomplete measurements z {\displaystyle z} of the state of the system, the data-driven discovery of PDEs results in computing the unknown state u ( t , x ) {\displaystyle u(t,x)} and learning model parameters λ {\displaystyle \lambda } that best describe the observed data: u t + N [ u ; λ ] = 0 , x ∈ Ω , t ∈ [ 0 , T ] {\displaystyle u_{t}+{\mathcal {N}}[u;\lambda ]=0,\quad x\in \Omega ,\quad t\in [0,T]} By defining f ( t , x ) {\displaystyle f(t,x)} as: f := u t + N [ u ; λ ] = 0 {\displaystyle f:=u_{t}+{\mathcal {N}}[u;\lambda ]=0} , and approximating u ( t , x ) {\displaystyle u(t,x)} by a deep neural network, f ( t , x ) {\displaystyle f(t,x)} results in a PINN. This network can be derived using automatic differentiation. The parameters of u ( t , x ) {\displaystyle u(t,x)} and f ( t , x ) {\displaystyle f(t,x)} , together with the parameter λ {\displaystyle \lambda } of the differential operator can be then learned by minimizing the following loss function L tot {\displaystyle L_{\text{tot}}} : L tot = L u + L f {\displaystyle L_{\text{tot}}=L_{u}+L_{f}} where: L u = ‖ u − z ‖ Γ {\displaystyle L_{u}=\Vert u-z\Vert _{\Gamma }} , with u {\displaystyle u} and z {\displaystyle z} state solutions and measurements at sparse location Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } , respectively. L f = ‖ f ‖ Γ {\displaystyle L_{f}=\Vert f\Vert _{\Gamma }} is the residual function. This second term requires the structured information represented by the partial differential equations to be satisfied in the training process. This strategy allows for discovering dynamic models described by nonlinear PDEs assembling computationally efficient and fully differentiable surrogate models that may find application in predictive forecasting, control, and data assimilation. == Extensions and applications == === For piece-wise function approximation === PINNs are unable to approximate PDEs that have strong non-linearity or sharp gradients (such as those that commonly occur in practical fluid flow problems). Piecewise approximation has been an old practic
Global Artificial Intelligence Summit & Awards
The Global Artificial Intelligence Summit & Awards (GAISA) is an international conference on Artificial Intelligence organized annually by AICRA. Since its inception in 2019, GAISA has been held at various locations each year. The 5th Edition of GAISA will be Scheduled on April 11-12, 2024, at Bharat Mandapam. GAISA 2025 features a distinguished lineup of speakers, including leading experts, researchers, and executives from top global tech companies. These thought leaders are at the forefront of AI innovation, with deep expertise in areas such as machine learning, robotics, and ethical AI. Their diverse backgrounds span academia, industry, and entrepreneurship, offering unique insights into how AI is reshaping sectors like healthcare, finance, transportation, and more. Attendees can expect thought-provoking discussions on the future of AI, its societal impact, and the transformative potential of emerging technologies in solving complex global challenges Few Speakers are listed below:- Shri Nitin Gadkari, Rao Inderjit Singh, Piyush Goyal, Admiral R Hari Kumar PVSM, AVSM, ADC, Samir V Kamat, Narayan Tatu Rane, Prof. K. Vijay Raghavan and many others. == History == The conference was launched first in 2019 as Vigyan Bhawan New Delhi by AICRA with an objective of discussion and exploring artificial intelligence in engrossed sectors.
Niceaunties
Niceaunties is the pseudonym of a Singapore-based artist and designer whose work incorporates generative artificial intelligence, video, and digital installation. Her practice centers around the figure of the "auntie", a common term for older women in Southeast Asian contexts, and explores themes such as aging, care, domesticity, and gender roles. Her work has been featured in exhibitions and media platforms including TED, Christie's Art + Tech, Expanded.Art, and publications such as The Guardian, The Straits Times. == Early life and career == Niceaunties was born in 1981 in Singapore. She attributes her inspiration for "auntie culture" to the matriarchal environment and older women of her household, including her grandmother, while growing up. She is also an architectural designer with Spark Architect. The Niceaunties project began in 2023 after she encountered AI-generated images in her work as an architect. It draws inspiration from women in the artist's family and broader Southeast Asian cultural dynamics. Her work often features AI-generated visuals created with tools such as DALL-E, Krea, RunwayML, and SORA. Her imagery and narratives center on the fictional "Auntieverse", which features older women in imagined settings involving community, ecology, and labor. Her notable works include 'Auntlantis', a five-part video series imagining older women engaged in ocean clean-up and collective ritual, and 'Goddess,' a video created with Sora, featuring a character who gradually forgets her divine identity through years of domestic labor. == Exhibitions == 2024 – Expanded.Art, Berlin – Auntiedote solo exhibition 2024 – TED (conference), Vancouver – Speaker and screening 2024 – Victoria and Albert Museum, London – Digital Art Weekend 2024 – Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, Denmark – Ocean exhibition 2025 – Christie's Augmented Intelligence Auction, New York == Reception == In 2024, Niceaunties gave a TED Talk titled The Weird and Wonderful Art of Niceaunties. Journalist Rebecca Ratcliffe, writing for The Guardian, described her work as combining AI with "the surreal and the political," noting her focus on older women as central characters. Her work has also received criticism for being reliant on generative AI, which many feel exploits and steals from traditional artists.
Fuzzy electronics
Fuzzy electronics is an electronic technology that uses fuzzy logic, instead of the two-state Boolean logic more commonly used in digital electronics. Fuzzy electronics is fuzzy logic implemented on dedicated hardware. This is to be compared with fuzzy logic implemented in software running on a conventional processor. Fuzzy electronics has a wide range of applications, including control systems and artificial intelligence. == History == The first fuzzy electronic circuit was built by Takeshi Yamakawa et al. in 1980 using discrete bipolar transistors. The first industrial fuzzy application was in a cement kiln in Denmark in 1982. The first VLSI fuzzy electronics was by Masaki Togai and Hiroyuki Watanabe in 1984. In 1987, Yamakawa built the first analog fuzzy controller. The first digital fuzzy processors came in 1988 by Togai (Russo, pp. 2–6). In the early 1990s, the first fuzzy logic chips were presented to the public. Two companies which are Omron and NEC have announced the development of dedicated fuzzy electronic hardware in the year 1991. Two years later, the Japanese Omron Cooperation has shown a working fuzzy chip during a technical fair.
Agentive logic
Agentive logic (also called the logic of action or logic of agency) is the field of philosophical logic and logic in computer science that studies formal representations of agents, their actions, and their abilities. An agentive logic in the narrower sense is a formal system whose primitive operators express that an agent does something, can do something, or sees to it that something is the case. Agentive logics generalise modal logic by adding modalities indexed to agents and to actions. Typical examples include: STIT logics (from sees to it that) with operators of the form [ i s t i t : φ ] {\displaystyle [i\ {\mathsf {stit}}:\varphi ]} meaning that agent i {\displaystyle i} sees to it that φ {\displaystyle \varphi } holds; dynamic logics of action with program-like modalities [ α ] φ {\displaystyle [\alpha ]\varphi } and ⟨ α ⟩ φ {\displaystyle \langle \alpha \rangle \varphi } meaning, roughly, that after every (respectively, some) execution(s) of action α {\displaystyle \alpha } , φ {\displaystyle \varphi } holds; logics with explicit agentive operators such as "can do", "brings about", or "is able to ensure". Agentive logics are used in action theory in philosophy, in the semantics of natural language, in the theory of program verification, and in artificial intelligence, where they underpin formalisms for reasoning about actions, planning, and intelligent agents. == Terminology and scope == The adjective agentive derives from the Latin agens ("one who acts") and originally referred to the grammatical agent of a verb. In logical contexts it designates operators or predicates whose primary argument position is an agent rather than a proposition alone, for example A i φ {\displaystyle A_{i}\varphi } ("agent i {\displaystyle i} does φ {\displaystyle \varphi } ") or C i φ {\displaystyle C_{i}\varphi } ("agent i {\displaystyle i} can bring about φ {\displaystyle \varphi } "). In contemporary literature, agentive logic is sometimes used narrowly for formal reconstructions of St. Anselm's modal account of facere ("to do"). More broadly, the term is used interchangeably with logic of action or logic of agency to cover a family of modal and dynamic logics designed to capture the structure of action and choice. == Historical background == === Medieval and early modern roots === Medieval logicians already explored analogies between modalities of action and alethic modalities such as possibility and necessity, for instance, in discussions of obligation and power. An influential early agentive analysis is due to St. Anselm (11th century), who treated "doing φ {\displaystyle \varphi } " as a kind of modal operator on propositions, anticipating later modal logics of agency. Modern reconstructions of Anselm's theory show that the resulting "agentive logic" can be modelled with neighbourhood semantics and satisfies a recognisable square of opposition. === Modern logic of action === Modern study of the logic of action began in the mid-20th century, parallel to developments in deontic logic and tense logic. Early systems were proposed by Georg Henrik von Wright, Stig Kanger, and others, often motivated by questions about norms and responsibility. From the 1960s onward, two largely independent but eventually converging traditions emerged: a branching-time tradition, culminating in STIT logics, emphasising agents' choices among possible futures; and dynamic logics of programs and actions, developed within computer science to reason about program execution. In the 1990s and 2000s, action logics were further developed in connection with knowledge representation, planning, and multi-agent systems in AI, and with dynamic and update semantics in linguistics. == Core ideas == Despite their diversity, most agentive logics share some general themes: Agents are treated as explicit indices of modal operators, as in [ i d o e s ] φ {\displaystyle [i\ {\mathsf {does}}]\varphi } or C i φ {\displaystyle C_{i}\varphi } . Actions are represented either implicitly, via changes between possible worlds along an accessibility relation, or explicitly, as terms denoting primitive and composite actions. Choice and ability are captured by modalities describing what an agent can ensure, usually relative to assumptions about the environment and other agents. Formal properties such as closure under composition, interaction between different agents, and connections to obligation (what an agent ought to do) and knowledge (what an agent knows how to do) are investigated. == STIT logics == STIT ("sees to it that") logics, originating in work by Nuel Belnap and collaborators, treat agency in a branching-time framework. A STIT model consists of a partially ordered set of moments with a tree-like structure, sets of histories (maximal branches through the tree), and for each agent at each moment, a partition of the histories through that moment representing the choices available to the agent. Intuitively, an agent's action at a moment determines which equivalence class (choice cell) of histories becomes actual; a formula [ i s t i t : φ ] {\displaystyle [i\ {\mathsf {stit}}:\varphi ]} is true at a history–moment pair if φ {\displaystyle \varphi } holds on all histories in the choice cell corresponding to the agent's current action. Different STIT operators have been distinguished, notably: the Chellas STIT operator, often written [ i c s t i t : φ ] {\displaystyle [i\ {\mathsf {cstit}}:\varphi ]} , which requires only that the agent's choice guarantees φ {\displaystyle \varphi } ; and the deliberative STIT operator, [ i d s t i t : φ ] {\displaystyle [i\ {\mathsf {dstit}}:\varphi ]} , which additionally requires that φ {\displaystyle \varphi } is not already historically necessary. STIT frameworks have been extended with group agency operators, temporal modalities, epistemic operators, and deontic operators to study responsibility, collective action, and obligations under indeterminism. == Dynamic logics of action == Dynamic logic was originally developed to reason about the behaviour of computer programs, treating program execution as a kind of action. In propositional dynamic logic (PDL), action terms α , β , … {\displaystyle \alpha ,\beta ,\dots } denote abstract programs or actions, and formulas of the form [ α ] φ {\displaystyle [\alpha ]\varphi } and ⟨ α ⟩ φ {\displaystyle \langle \alpha \rangle \varphi } express that all, respectively some, terminating executions of α {\displaystyle \alpha } lead to states where φ {\displaystyle \varphi } holds. From the standpoint of agentive logic, dynamic logic provides: a language for building complex actions from primitives via sequencing, choice, and iteration (e.g., α ; β {\displaystyle \alpha ;\beta } , α ∪ β {\displaystyle \alpha \cup \beta } , α ∗ {\displaystyle \alpha ^{}} ); a Kripke semantics in which actions correspond to labelled accessibility relations; and proof systems (such as Hoare logic and weakest precondition calculi) for reasoning about the correctness of action sequences. Extensions such as concurrent dynamic logic add operators for parallel composition, allowing reasoning about interacting processes and concurrent actions. John-Jules Ch. Meyer and others have argued that dynamic logic is a natural base for logics of agents, by adding modalities for knowledge, belief, and ability on top of the action modalities. Dynamic logics have also been applied to normative reasoning, yielding dynamic deontic logics where actions are related to obligations and permissions, and to dynamic epistemic logics in which information-changing actions such as announcements are modelled as programs. == Situation calculus and other action formalisms == In artificial intelligence, reasoning about action and change is often based on first-order languages that explicitly represent situations, events, and fluents (time-varying properties). The best known is situation calculus, introduced by John McCarthy and developed extensively by Raymond Reiter. In such formalisms: action terms name primitive actions; a function symbol (often d o {\displaystyle {\mathsf {do}}} ) maps an action and a situation to a successor situation; and axioms describe which fluents hold in which situations and how actions change them. Reiter's successor state axioms give compact specifications of how each fluent changes under all actions, and precondition axioms specify when actions are possible. Related formalisms include the event calculus and fluent calculus, which provide alternative ways of representing events and their effects. While these systems are often first-order rather than modal, they are closely related to agentive logics: their action terms and transition structures can be seen as providing models for dynamic or STIT-style modalities, and conversely, dynamic logics can be used as abstract specification languages for such AI formalisms. == Ability, agency, and related modalities == Many agentive logics introduce explicit operators for ability or "can-do"
Context-sensitive user interface
A context-sensitive user interface offers the user options based on the state of the active program. Context sensitivity is ubiquitous in current graphical user interfaces, often in context menus. A user-interface may also provide context sensitive feedback, such as changing the appearance of the mouse pointer or cursor, changing the menu color, or with auditory or tactile feedback. == Reasoning and advantages of context sensitivity == The primary reason for introducing context sensitivity is to simplify the user interface. Advantages include: Reduced number of commands required to be known to the user for a given level of productivity. Reduced number of clicks or keystrokes required to carry out a given operation. Allows consistent behaviour to be pre-programmed or altered by the user. Reduces the number of options needed on screen at one time. === Disadvantages === Context sensitive actions may be perceived as dumbing down of the user interface, leaving the operator at a loss as to what to do when the computer decides to perform an unwanted action. Additionally non-automatic procedures may be hidden or obscured by the context sensitive interface causing an increase in user workload for operations the designers did not foresee. A poor implementation can be more annoying than helpful – a classic example of this is Office Assistant. == Implementation == At the simplest level each possible action is reduced to a single most likely action – the action performed is based on a single variable (such as file extension). In more complicated implementations multiple factors can be assessed such as the user's previous actions, the size of the file, the programs in current use, metadata etc. The method is not only limited to the response to imperative button presses and mouse clicks – pop-up menus can be pruned and/or altered, or a web search can focus results based on previous searches. At higher levels of implementation context sensitive actions require either larger amounts of meta-data, extensive case analysis based programming, or other artificial intelligence algorithms. === In computer and video games === Context sensitivity is important in video games, especially those controlled by a gamepad, joystick or computer mouse in which the number of buttons available is limited. It is primarily applied when the player is in a certain place and is used to interact with a person or object. For example, if the player is standing next to a non-player character, an option may come up allowing the player to talk with them. Implementations range from the embryonic 'Quick Time Event' to context sensitive sword combat in which the attack used depends on the position and orientation of both the player and opponent, as well as the virtual surroundings. A similar range of use is found in the 'action button' which, depending upon the in-game position of the player's character, may cause it to pick something up, open a door, grab a rope, punch a monster or opponent, or smash an object. The response does not have to be player activated – an on-screen device may only be shown in certain circumstances, e.g. 'targeting' cross hairs in a flight combat game may indicate the player should fire. An alternative implementation is to monitor the input from the player (e.g. level of button pressing activity) and use that to control the pace of the game in an attempt to maximize enjoyment or to control the excitement or ambience. The method has become increasingly important as more complex games are designed for machines with few buttons (keyboard-less consoles). Bennet Ring commented (in 2006) that "Context-sensitive is the new lens flare". === Context-sensitive help === Context sensitive help is a common implementation of context sensitivity, a single help button is actioned and the help page or menu will open a specific page or related topic.