Predictive text is an input technology used where one key or button represents many letters, such as on the physical numeric keypads of mobile phones and in accessibility technologies. Each key press results in a prediction rather than repeatedly sequencing through the same group of "letters" it represents, in the same, invariable order. Predictive text could allow for an entire word to be input by a single keypress. Predictive text makes efficient use of fewer device keys to input writing into a text message, an e-mail, an address book, a calendar, and the like. The most widely used, general, predictive text systems are T9, iTap, eZiText, and LetterWise/WordWise. There are many ways to build a device that predicts text, but all predictive text systems have initial linguistic settings that offer predictions that are re-prioritized to adapt to each user. This learning adapts, by way of the device memory, to a user's disambiguating feedback that results in corrective key presses, such as pressing a "next" key to get to the intention. Most predictive text systems have a user database to facilitate this process. Theoretically the number of keystrokes required per desired character in the finished writing is, on average, comparable to using a keyboard. This is approximately true provided that all words used are in its database, punctuation is ignored, and no input mistakes are made when typing or spelling. The theoretical keystrokes per character, KSPC, of a keyboard is KSPC=1.00, and of multi-tap is KSPC=2.03. Eatoni's LetterWise is a predictive multi-tap hybrid, which when operating on a standard telephone keypad achieves KSPC=1.15 for English. The choice of which predictive text system is the best to use involves matching the user's preferred interface style, the user's level of learned ability to operate predictive text software, and the user's efficiency goal. There are various levels of risk in predictive text systems, versus multi-tap systems, because the predicted text that is automatically written provides the speed and mechanical efficiency benefit, which, if the user is not careful to review, results in transmitting misinformation. Predictive text systems take time to learn to use well, and so generally, a device's system has user options to set up the choice of multi-tap or any one of several schools of predictive text methods. == Background == Short message service (SMS) permits a mobile phone user to send text messages (also called messages, SMSes, texts, and txts) as a short message. The most common system of SMS text input is referred to as "multi-tap". Using multi-tap, a key is pressed multiple times to access the list of letters on that key. For instance, pressing the "2" key once displays an "a", twice displays a "b" and three times displays a "c". To enter two successive letters that are on the same key, the user must either pause or hit a "next" button. A user can type by pressing an alphanumeric keypad without looking at the electronic equipment display. Thus, multi-tap is easy to understand and can be used without any visual feedback. However, multi-tap is not very efficient, requiring potentially many keystrokes to enter a single letter. In ideal predictive text entry, all words used are in the dictionary, punctuation is ignored, no spelling mistakes are made, and no typing mistakes are made. The ideal dictionary would include all slang, proper nouns, abbreviations, URLs, foreign-language words and other user-unique words. This ideal circumstance gives predictive text software a reduction in the number of key strokes a user is required to enter a word. The user presses the number corresponding to each letter. As long as the word exists in the predictive text dictionary or is correctly disambiguated by non-dictionary systems, it will appear. For instance, pressing "4663" will typically be interpreted as the word good, provided that a linguistic database in English is currently in use, though alternatives such as home, hood and hoof are also valid interpretations of the sequence of key strokes. The most widely used systems of predictive text are Tegic's T9, Motorola's iTap, and the Eatoni Ergonomics' LetterWise and WordWise. T9 and iTap use dictionaries, but Eatoni Ergonomics' products use a disambiguation process, a set of statistical rules to recreate words from keystroke sequences. All predictive text systems require a linguistic database for every supported input language. == Dictionary vs. non-dictionary systems == Traditional disambiguation works by referencing a dictionary of commonly used words, though Eatoni offers a dictionaryless disambiguation system. In dictionary-based systems, as the user presses the number buttons, an algorithm searches the dictionary for a list of possible words that match the keypress combination and offers up the most probable choice. The user can then confirm the selection and move on, or use a key to cycle through the possible combinations. A non-dictionary system constructs words and other sequences of letters from the statistics of word parts. To attempt predictions of the intended result of keystrokes not yet entered, disambiguation may be combined with a word completion facility. Either system (disambiguation or predictive) may include a user database, which can be further classified as a "learning" system when words or phrases are entered into the user database without direct user intervention. The user database is for storing words or phrases that are not well disambiguated by the pre-supplied database. Some disambiguation systems further attempt to correct spelling, format text or perform other automatic rewrites, with the risky effect of either enhancing or frustrating user efforts to enter text. == History == The predictive text and autocomplete technology was invented out of necessities by Chinese scientists and linguists in the 1950s to solve the input inefficiency of the Chinese typewriter, as the typing process involved finding and selecting thousands of logographic characters on a tray, drastically slowing down the word processing speed. The actuating keys of the Chinese typewriter created by Lin Yutang in the 1940s included suggestions for the characters following the one selected. In 1951, the Chinese typesetter Zhang Jiying arranged Chinese characters in associative clusters, a precursor of modern predictive text entry, and broke speed records by doing so. Predictive entry of text from a telephone keypad has been known at least since the 1970s (Smith and Goodwin, 1971). Predictive text was mainly used to look up names in directories over the phone until mobile phone text messaging came into widespread use. == Example == On a typical phone keypad, if users wished to type the in a "multi-tap" keypad entry system, they would need to: Press 8 (tuv) once to select t. Press 4 (ghi) twice to select h. Press 3 (def) twice to select e. Meanwhile, in a phone with predictive text, they need only: Press 8 once to select the (tuv) group for the first character. Press 4 once to select the (ghi) group for the second character. Press 3 once to select the (def) group for the third character. The system updates the display as each keypress is entered, to show the most probable entry. In this example, prediction reduced the number of button presses from five to three. The effect is even greater with longer words and those composed of letters later in each key's sequence. A dictionary-based predictive system is based on the hope that the desired word is in the dictionary. That hope may be misplaced if the word differs in any way from common usage—in particular, if the word is not spelled or typed correctly, is slang, or is a proper noun. In these cases, some other mechanism must be used to enter the word. Furthermore, the simple dictionary approach fails with agglutinative languages, where a single word does not necessarily represent a single semantic entity. == Companies and products == Predictive text is developed and marketed in a variety of competing products, such as Nuance Communications's T9. Other products include Motorola's iTap; Eatoni Ergonomic's LetterWise (character, rather than word-based prediction); WordWise (word-based prediction without a dictionary); EQ3 (a QWERTY-like layout compatible with regular telephone keypads); Prevalent Devices's Phraze-It; Xrgomics' TenGO (a six-key reduced QWERTY keyboard system); Adaptxt (considers language, context, grammar and semantics); Lightkey (a predictive typing software for Windows); Clevertexting (statistical nature of the language, dictionaryless, dynamic key allocation); and Oizea Type (temporal ambiguity); Intelab's Tauto; WordLogic's Intelligent Input Platform™ (patented, layer-based advanced text prediction, includes multi-language dictionary, spell-check, built-in Web search); Google's Gboard. == Textonyms == Words produced by the same combination of keypresses have been called "textonyms"; also "txtonyms"; or "T9o
VOCEDplus
VOCEDplus is a free international research database about tertiary education, maintained and developed by staff at the c (NCVER) in Adelaide, South Australia. The focus of the database content is the relation of post-compulsory education and training to workforce needs, skills development, and social inclusion. == Structure == The content of the VOCEDplus database encompasses vocational education and training (VET), higher education, lifelong learning, informal learning, VET in schools, adult and community education, apprenticeships/traineeships, international education, providers of education and training, and workforce development. It is international in scope and contains over 84,000 English language records, many with links to full text documents. VOCEDplus contains extensive Australian materials and includes a wide range of international information, covering outcomes of tertiary education in the shape of published research, practice, policy, and statistics. Entries are included for the following types of publications: reports; annual reports; papers; discussion papers; occasional papers; working papers; books; book chapters; conference papers; conference proceedings; journals; journal articles; policy documents; published statistics; theses; podcasts; and teaching and training materials. Each database entry contains standard bibliographic information and an abstract. Many entries include full text access via the publisher's website or a digitised copy. == History == === 1989-1997 === In the early years VOCEDplus was known as VOCED. The original database was produced by a network of clearinghouses across Australia with the aim of sharing activities in the technical and further education (TAFE) sector. VOCED was produced in hardcopy and an electronic version was distributed on diskette. === 1997-2001 === 1997 - the first web version of VOCED was made available from the National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) organisational website 1998 - a major project to upgrade the database and expand its international coverage commenced 2001 - creation of VOCED's own website 2001 - VOCED endorsed as the UNESCO international database for technical and vocational education and training (TVET) research information === 2001-2009 === Many changes to the database and website occurred during this period with a focus on continuous improvement to meet the needs of users and utilise emerging technologies. 2006 - materials produced for two adult literacy and learning programs funded by the Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) - the Workplace English Language and Learning (WELL) Programme and the Adult Literacy National Project (ALNP) included in VOCED 2007 - the Australian clearinghouse network transferred most of the hardcopy collections to NCVER, to form a centralised repository of resources 2009 - materials produced by Reframing the Future (RTF) a vocational education and training workforce development initiative of the Australian, State and Territory Governments included in VOCED === 2009-2014 === A major rebuild of the database and website was undertaken during this period to take advantage of the potential of new technologies to provide improved services and incorporate Web 2.0 technologies (RSS feeds, and share and bookmark tools). 2009 - scope expanded to more fully encompass the higher education sector 2011 - launch of VOCEDplus with the name change representing the enhanced features and extended focus 2012 - a major retrospective digitisation project commenced and by the end of the 2012-2013 financial year a total of 9,328 publications (593,534 pages/microfiche frames) had been digitised, ensuring these publications are available electronically for free === 2014-2019 === A number of significant curated content products were released during this period. 2015 - release of a refreshed look to adopt the new NCVER branding plus a number of search enhancements (Guided search, Expert search, and Glossary search) were added 2015 - first in the series of 'Focus on...' pages released 2016 - launch of the 'Pod Network', a convenient and efficient platform that allows instant access to research and a multitude of resources on a range of subjects 2017 - completion of the 'Pod Network', consisting of 20 Pods (on broad subjects including Apprenticeships and traineeships, Foundation skills, Teaching and learning, Career development, and Students) and 74 Podlets (on narrow topics including Online learning, Social media, VET in schools, STEM skills, and Adult literacy) 2018 - launch of the 'Timeline of Australian VET Policy Initiatives' and the 'VET Knowledge Bank' which contains a suite of products capturing Australia's diverse, complex and ever-changing VET system 2019 - after an internal review, a refreshed, streamlined version of the 'Pod Network' was released, consisting of 13 Pods and 20 Podlets 2019 - launch of the 'VET Practitioner Resource' which contains a range of information to support VET practitioners in their work and is organised into three sections: (1) Teaching, training and assessment: standards, guidance, research and good practice resources to inform daily work; (2) Practitioners as researchers: information for undertaking practitioner-led research; and (3) The VET workforce: information about VET teachers and trainers, and the professional development needs of the VET workforce 2019 - VOCEDplus celebrated 30 years of providing information to the tertiary education sector and the homepage was refreshed to make it more modern and easier to use === 2020- === VOCEDplus continued to be accessible throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. 2020-2021 - the VET Knowledge Bank added a dedicated page, 'COVID-19 announcements', that showcases the measures introduced by the Australian, state and territory governments to mitigate the impact of the pandemic and promote economic recovery 2020-2024 - published research about the effects of the pandemic on education and training, providers, students, labour markets, employment and employees was collected and made permanently available in the database 2024 - VOCEDplus celebrated 35 years of providing information to the tertiary education sector. The homepage was refreshed and a number of enhancements and new features were implemented including a new My Profile feature, improvements to My Selection, accessible search history and saved searches, enhanced search functionality, and improved navigation.
Law and Corpus Linguistics
Law and corpus linguistics (LCL) is an academic sub-discipline that uses large databases of examples of language usage equipped with tools designed by linguists called corpora to better get at the meaning of words and phrases in legal texts (statutes, constitutions, contracts, etc.). Thus, LCL is the application of corpus linguistic tools, theories, and methodologies to issues of legal interpretation in much the same way law and economics is the application of economic tools, theories, and methodologies to various legal issues. == History == A 2005 law review article by Lawrence Solan noted in passing that corpus linguistics had potential for its application to interpreting legal texts. But the first systematic exploration and advocacy of applying the tools and methodologies of corpus linguistics to legal interpretive questions of law and corpus linguistics came in the fall of 2010, when the BYU Law Review published a note by Stephen Mouritsen, entitled The Dictionary is Not a Fortress: Definitional Fallacies and a Corpus-Based Approach to Plain Meaning. The note argued that dictionaries are the primary linguistic tool used by judges to determine the plain or ordinary meaning of words and phrases, and highlighted the deficiencies of such an approach. In its stead, the note proposed using corpus linguistics. And the note would be later cited by Adam Liptak in a New York Times article on statutory construction. Law and corpus linguistics (LCL) gained greater legitimacy in July 2011 with the first judicial opinion in American history utilizing corpus linguistics to determine the meaning of a legal text: In re the Adoption of Baby E.Z. In a concurrence in part and in the judgment, Justice Thomas Lee wrote to put forth an alternative ground for the majority's holding—interpreting the phrase "custody determination" by using corpus linguistics. Justice Lee looked at 500 randomized sample sentences from the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) and found that the most common sense of "custody" was in the context of divorce rather than adoption. Further, he found that "custody" is ten times more likely to co-occur (or collocate) with "divorce" than with "adoption". From that evidence Justice Lee concluded that he "would find that the custody proceedings covered by the Act are limited to proceedings resulting in the modifiable custody orders of a divorce", rather than the broader range of custody proceedings. Other jurisprudence and scholarship would follow. In a 2015 concurrence in State v. Rasabout, Justice Lee used a COCA search to determine that "discharge" when used with a firearm (or one of its synonyms) overwhelmingly referred to a single shot rather than emptying the entire magazine of the weapon. And in 2016, four of the five justices joined a footnote in a majority opinion by Justice Lee commending a party for using corpus linguistics in its briefing even though the Court found it unnecessary to resolve the related question. Finally, in 2016 the Michigan Supreme Court became the first court to use a linguist-designed corpus in a majority opinion (COCA), with both the majority and the dissent turning to COCA to determine the meaning of the word "information". In 2020, courts desiring to bolster the legal theory of original intent have sought the opportunity to undertake analyses of statutes utilizing corpus linguistics. In a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals case, Jones v. Becerra (No. 20-56174), a case involving the Second Amendment and the constitutionality of a California statute which bans the sale of firearms to individuals under the age of 21, a Ninth Circuit panel requested that the parties address three questions: 1) “What is the original public meaning of the Second Amendment phrases: ‘A well regulated Militia’; ‘the right of the people’; and ‘shall not be infringed’? 2) How does the tool of corpus linguistics help inform the determination of the original public meaning of those Second Amendment phrases?” 3) How do the data yielded from corpus linguistics assist in the interpretation of the constitutionality of age-based restrictions under the Second Amendment? As to scholarship, in 2012, Mouritsen followed up his original work with an article in the Columbia Science and Technology Law Review, where he further refined and promoted the use of corpus-based methods for determining questions of legal ambiguity. Additionally, in 2016 two essays and an article on law and corpus linguistics were published. The Yale Law Journal Forum published Corpus Linguistics & Original Public Meaning: A New Tool to Make Originalism More Empirical. Written by Justice Lee and two co-authors, the essay urged originalists to turn to corpus linguistics to improve the rigor and accuracy of originalist scholarship. And in response, the Forum published an essay by Lawrence Solan (a Brooklyn Law professor with a PhD in linguistics), Can Corpus Linguistics Help Make Originalism Scientific? The Boston University Public Interest Law Journal published The Merciful Corpus: The Rule of Lenity, Ambiguity and Corpus Linguistics by Daniel Ortner. In the article Ortner applied corpus linguistics to determining whether sufficient ambiguity exists to trigger the rule of lenity in five Supreme Court cases. Looking forward, in 2017 two more articles are slated for publication. Lee Strang focuses on corpus linguistics and originalism in the U.C. Davis Law Review, and Lawrence Solan and Tammy Gales explore corpus linguistics in the context of finding ordinary meaning in statutory interpretation in the International Journal of Legal Discourse. Lawyers and journalists have also taken notice of corpus linguistics at it relates to the law. In 2010, Neal Goldfarb filed the first known brief in the Supreme Court using corpus linguistics (COCA) to determine whether the ordinary meaning of "personal" referred to corporations in the case FCC v. AT&T. The amicus brief looked at the top collocates (words that co-occur) of "personal" in COHA as well as BYU's Time Magazine Corpus. And writing for The Atlantic, Ben Zimmer took note of this new trend, referring to corpus linguistics in the courts as "Like Lexis on Steroids". On the academic front, in 2013 BYU Law School started the first class on law and corpus linguistics, co-taught by Mouritsen, Lee, and (now Dean) Gordon Smith. The class is currently in its fourth year. And in February 2016, BYU Law School hosted the inaugural conference on LCL, with over two dozen legal and linguistic scholars from around the country discussing and debating the next steps forward for the growing academic movement. The conference has been held regularly in subsequent years. At the 2016 conference BYU Law School announced its plans and progress on the Corpus of Founding Era American English (COFEA), a corpus that covers 1760–1799 and contains more than 120 million words have been collected from founding era letters, diaries, newspapers, non-fiction books, fiction, sermons, speeches, debates, legal cases, and other legal materials.
Eurotra
Eurotra was a machine translation project established and funded by the European Commission from 1978 until 1992. == History == In 1976, the European Commission started using the commercially developed machine translation system SYSTRAN with a plan to make it work for further languages than originally developed for (Russian-English and English-French), which however turned out to be difficult. This and the potential in existing systems within European research center, led to the decision in 1978 to start the project Eurotra, first through a preparatory Eurotra Coordination Group. Four years later, the European Commission and coordination group gained the approval of the European Parliament. The goal of the project as to create machine translation system for the official languages of the European Community, which at the time were Danish, Dutch, German, English, French, Italian, later including Greek, Spanish and Portuguese. However, as time passed, expectations became tempered; "Fully Automatic High Quality Translation" was not a reasonably attainable goal. The true character of Eurotra was eventually acknowledged to be in fact pre-competitive research rather than prototype development. The project was motivated by one of the founding principles of the EU: that all citizens had the right to read any and all proceedings of the Commission in their own language. As more countries joined, this produced a combinatorial explosion in the number of language pairs involved, and the need to translate every paper, speech and even set of meeting minutes produced by the EU into the other eight languages meant that translation rapidly became the overwhelming component in the administrative budget. To solve this problem Eurotra was devised. The project was unusual in that rather than consisting of a single research team, it had member groups distributed around the member countries, organised along language rather than national lines (for example, groups in Leuven and Utrecht worked closely together), and the secretariat was based at the European Commission in Luxembourg. The actual design of the project was unusual as MT projects go. Older systems, such as SYSTRAN, were heavily dictionary-based, with minor support for rearranging word order. More recent systems have often worked on a probabilistic approach, based on parallel corpora. Eurotra addressed the constituent structure of the text to be translated, going through first a syntactic parse followed by a second parse to produce a dependency structure followed by a final parse with a third grammar to produce what was referred to internally as Intermediate Representation (IR). Since all three modules were implemented as Prolog programs, it would then in principle be possible to put this structure backwards through the corresponding modules for another language to produce a translated text in any of the other languages. However, in practice this was not in fact how language pairs were implemented. The first "live" translation occupied a 4Mb Microvax running Ultrix and C-Prolog for a complete weekend some time in early 1987. The sentence, translated from English into Danish, was "Japan makes computers". The main problem faced by the system was the generation of so-called "Parse Forests" - often a large number of different grammar rules could be applied to any particular phrase, producing hundreds, even thousands of (often identical) parse trees. This used up huge quantities of computer store, slowing the whole process down unnecessarily. While Eurotra never delivered a "working" MT system, the project made a far-reaching long-term impact on the nascent language industries in European member states, in particular among the southern countries of Greece, Italy, Spain, and Portugal. There is at least one commercial MT system (developed by an academic/commercial consortium in Denmark) derived from Eurotra technology.
Pedro Domingos
Pedro Domingos (born 1965) is a Professor Emeritus of computer science and engineering at the University of Washington. He is a researcher in machine learning known for Markov logic network enabling uncertain inference. == Education == Domingos received an undergraduate degree and Master of Science degree from Instituto Superior Técnico (IST). He moved to the University of California, Irvine, where he received a Master of Science degree followed by his PhD. == Research and career == After spending two years as an assistant professor at IST, he joined the University of Washington as an assistant professor of Computer Science and Engineering in 1999 and became a full professor in 2012. He started a machine learning research group at the hedge fund D. E. Shaw & Co. in 2018, but left in 2019. He co-founded the International Machine Learning Society. As of 2018, he was on the editorial board of Machine Learning journal. === Publications === Pedro Domingos, The Master Algorithm: How the Quest for the Ultimate Learning Machine Will Remake Our World, New York, Basic Books, 2015, ISBN 978-0-465-06570-7. Pedro Domingos, "Our Digital Doubles: AI will serve our species, not control it", Scientific American, vol. 319, no. 3 (September 2018), pp. 88–93. "AIs are like autistic savants and will remain so for the foreseeable future.... AIs lack common sense and can easily make errors that a human never would... They are also liable to take our instructions too literally, giving us precisely what we asked for instead of what we actually wanted." (p. 93.) Pedro Domingos, 2040: A Silicon Valley Satire, BookBaby, 2024, ISBN 979-8-350-96334-2. === Awards and honors === 2014: ACM SIGKDD Innovation Award. for his foundational research in data stream analysis, cost-sensitive classification, adversarial learning, and Markov logic networks, as well as applications in viral marketing and information integration. 2010: Elected an Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) Fellow. For significant contributions to the field of machine learning and to the unification of first-order logic and probability. 2003: Sloan Fellowship 1992–1997: Fulbright Scholarship
Artificial consciousness
Artificial consciousness, also known as machine consciousness, synthetic consciousness, or digital consciousness, is consciousness hypothesized to be possible for artificial intelligence. It is also the corresponding field of study, which draws insights from philosophy of mind, philosophy of artificial intelligence, cognitive science and neuroscience. The term "sentience" can be used when specifically designating ethical considerations stemming from a form of phenomenal consciousness (P-consciousness, or the ability to feel qualia). Since sentience involves the ability to experience ethically positive or negative (i.e., valenced) mental states, it may justify welfare concerns and legal protection, as with non-human animals. Some scholars believe that consciousness is generated by the interoperation of various parts of the brain; these mechanisms are labeled the neural correlates of consciousness (NCC). Some further believe that constructing a system (e.g., a computer system) that can emulate this NCC interoperation would result in a system that is conscious. Some scholars reject the possibility of non-biological conscious beings. == Philosophical views == As there are many hypothesized types of consciousness, there are many potential implementations of artificial consciousness. In the philosophical literature, perhaps the most common taxonomy of consciousness is into "access" and "phenomenal" variants. Access consciousness concerns those aspects of experience that can be apprehended, while phenomenal consciousness concerns those aspects of experience that seemingly cannot be apprehended, instead being characterized qualitatively in terms of "raw feels", "what it is like" or qualia. === Plausibility debate === Type-identity theorists and other skeptics hold the view that consciousness can be realized only in particular physical systems because consciousness has properties that necessarily depend on physical constitution. In his 2001 article "Artificial Consciousness: Utopia or Real Possibility," Giorgio Buttazzo says that a common objection to artificial consciousness is that, "Working in a fully automated mode, they [the computers] cannot exhibit creativity, unreprogrammation (which means can 'no longer be reprogrammed', from rethinking), emotions, or free will. A computer, like a washing machine, is a slave operated by its components." For other theorists (e.g., functionalists), who define mental states in terms of causal roles, any system that can instantiate the same pattern of causal roles, regardless of physical constitution, will instantiate the same mental states, including consciousness. ==== Thought experiments ==== David Chalmers proposed two thought experiments intending to demonstrate that "functionally isomorphic" systems (those with the same "fine-grained functional organization", i.e., the same information processing) will have qualitatively identical conscious experiences, regardless of whether they are based on biological neurons or digital hardware. The "fading qualia" is a reductio ad absurdum thought experiment. It involves replacing, one by one, the neurons of a brain with a functionally identical component, for example based on a silicon chip. Chalmers makes the hypothesis, knowing it in advance to be absurd, that "the qualia fade or disappear" when neurons are replaced one-by-one with identical silicon equivalents. Since the original neurons and their silicon counterparts are functionally identical, the brain's information processing should remain unchanged, and the subject's behaviour and introspective reports would stay exactly the same. Chalmers argues that this leads to an absurd conclusion: the subject would continue to report normal conscious experiences even as their actual qualia fade away. He concludes that the subject's qualia actually don't fade, and that the resulting robotic brain, once every neuron is replaced, would remain just as sentient as the original biological brain. Similarly, the "dancing qualia" thought experiment is another reductio ad absurdum argument. It supposes that two functionally isomorphic systems could have different perceptions (for instance, seeing the same object in different colors, like red and blue). It involves a switch that alternates between a chunk of brain that causes the perception of red, and a functionally isomorphic silicon chip, that causes the perception of blue. Since both perform the same function within the brain, the subject would not notice any change during the switch. Chalmers argues that this would be highly implausible if the qualia were truly switching between red and blue, hence the contradiction. Therefore, he concludes that the equivalent digital system would not only experience qualia, but it would perceive the same qualia as the biological system (e.g., seeing the same color). Greg Egan's short story Learning To Be Me (mentioned in §In fiction), illustrates how undetectable duplication of the brain and its functionality could be from a first-person perspective. Critics object that Chalmers' proposal begs the question in assuming that all mental properties and external connections are already sufficiently captured by abstract causal organization. Van Heuveln et al. argue that the dancing qualia argument contains an equivocation fallacy, conflating a "change in experience" between two systems with an "experience of change" within a single system. Mogensen argues that the fading qualia argument can be resisted by appealing to vagueness at the boundaries of consciousness and the holistic structure of conscious neural activity, which suggests consciousness may require specific biological substrates rather than being substrate-independent. Anil Seth argues that the complexity of brain neurons intrinsically matters in addition to their function and that it is not possible to replace any part of the brain with a perfect silicon equivalent. He points out that some of biological neurons exhibit activity aimed at cleaning up metabolic waste products, and writes that a perfect silicon replacement would require a silicon-based metabolism, but silicon is not suitable for creating such artificial metabolism. ==== In large language models ==== In 2022, Google engineer Blake Lemoine made a viral claim that Google's LaMDA chatbot was sentient. Lemoine supplied as evidence the chatbot's humanlike answers to many of his questions; however, the chatbot's behavior was judged by the scientific community as likely a consequence of mimicry, rather than machine sentience. Lemoine's claim was widely derided for being ridiculous. Moreover, attributing consciousness based solely on the basis of LLM outputs or the immersive experience created by an algorithm is considered a fallacy. However, while philosopher Nick Bostrom states that LaMDA is unlikely to be conscious, he additionally poses the question of "what grounds would a person have for being sure about it?" One would have to have access to unpublished information about LaMDA's architecture, and also would have to understand how consciousness works, and then figure out how to map the philosophy onto the machine: "(In the absence of these steps), it seems like one should be maybe a little bit uncertain. [...] there could well be other systems now, or in the relatively near future, that would start to satisfy the criteria." David Chalmers argued in 2023 that LLMs today display impressive conversational and general intelligence abilities, but are likely not conscious yet, as they lack some features that may be necessary, such as recurrent processing, a global workspace, and unified agency. Nonetheless, he considers that non-biological systems can be conscious, and suggested that future, extended models (LLM+s) incorporating these elements might eventually meet the criteria for consciousness, raising both profound scientific questions and significant ethical challenges. However, the view that consciousness can exist without biological phenomena is controversial and some reject it. Kristina Šekrst cautions that anthropomorphic terms such as "hallucination" can obscure important ontological differences between artificial and human cognition. While LLMs may produce human-like outputs, she argues that it does not justify ascribing mental states or consciousness to them. Instead, she advocates for an epistemological framework (such as reliabilism) that recognizes the distinct nature of AI knowledge production. She suggests that apparent understanding in LLMs may be a sophisticated form of AI hallucination. She also questions what would happen if an LLM were trained without any mention of consciousness. === Testing === Sentience is an inherently first-person phenomenon. Because of that, and due to the lack of an empirical definition of sentience, directly measuring it may be impossible. Although systems may display numerous behaviors correlated with sentience, determining whether a system is sentient is known as the hard pr
CarPlay
CarPlay is an Apple standard that enables a car radio or automotive head unit to be a display and controller for an iOS device. It is available on iPhone 5 and later models running iOS 7.1 or later. More than 800 car and motorcycle models support CarPlay, according to Apple. Vehicle owners can add support by installing certain aftermarket vehicle audio products. Most CarPlay systems connect to iOS through USB, some are wireless, and wireless support can be added through aftermarket dongles. CarPlay Ultra, a more integrated version of CarPlay, was first announced on Aston Martin DBX707 in May 2025. == Software == Apple's CarPlay-enabled apps include: Phone Apple Music Apple Maps Calendar Messages Audiobooks (part of Apple Books) Podcasts Settings News Developers must obtain permission from Apple to develop CarPlay-enabled apps. Such apps fall into five categories: Audio: primarily provide audio content, such as music or podcasts. Examples: Amazon Music, Audible, Google Play Music, iHeartRadio, QQ Music, Spotify, and Overcast. Navigation: turn-by-turn guidance, including searching for points of interests and navigating to a destination. Examples: AutoNavi, Baidu Maps, Google Maps, ChargeFinder and Waze. Automaker-made apps allow a user to control vehicle-specific features such as climate controls, gas levels, or radio via CarPlay. Messaging/Voice over IP (VoIP): listen to new messages and reply using dictation in an audio-only interface. Messaging apps on CarPlay integrate with third-party Siri support (known as SiriKit), while VoIP apps integrate with the iOS calling interface using CallKit. Examples: Telegram, WhatsApp, and Zoom. Food-ordering and parking-services apps. To discourage distracted driving, Siri is used extensively, providing voice turn-by-turn navigation guidance and voice-input for text messages. Newscast-style weather and stock results are announced instead of displayed. Requests that bring up visual information may be blocked when the car is in gear, and most native CarPlay apps deliver audio content with minimal interaction. CarPlay-enabled apps installed on the device appear on the CarPlay home screen unless disabled by the user. The inclusion or exclusion and order of app appearance can be changed on a per-vehicle basis. == Hardware == Most of the CarPlay software runs on the connected iPhone. The CarPlay interface provides audio output and a visual display to the vehicle's infotainment system, while adapting to the vehicle's available control methods, including touch screens, rotary dials, physical buttons, steering-wheel controls, and hands-free microphones. Aftermarket head units may support CarPlay or Android Auto, and many support both platforms. === Wired CarPlay === In a wired CarPlay configuration, the iPhone connects to the vehicle or head unit via a USB cable. The USB connection supplies power to the iPhone and provides a stable data link for audio, video, and control input. Wired CarPlay is supported by a wide range of factory-installed infotainment systems and aftermarket head units. Some third-party devices marketed as wireless CarPlay adapters operate by emulating a wired CarPlay connection to the vehicle. These devices plug into the vehicle's USB port and present themselves as a wired CarPlay interface, while separately establishing a wireless connection to the iPhone. Such devices still require the vehicle or head unit to support standard (wired) CarPlay. === Wireless CarPlay === Wireless CarPlay allows the iPhone to connect to a compatible vehicle or head unit without a physical cable. During the initial pairing process, the iPhone exchanges network credentials with the CarPlay receiver over Bluetooth. Once paired, CarPlay data is transmitted over a two-way Wi-Fi connection between the phone and the vehicle. Wireless CarPlay support depends on both the vehicle or head unit hardware and the iPhone model, and is generally limited to newer factory systems and select aftermarket receivers. == History == === Predecessor === In 2008, one year after the release of the iPhone, Mercedes vehicles were first to sell an audio system incorporating both the iPod and iPhone, equipped with 30-pin iOS input jacks. The new 2008 Harman Kardon NTG 2.5 featured full audio streaming, syncing, charging and control integrated into the steering wheel controls, instrument panel, and head unit. Apple was working with Mercedes to develop iOS compatible audio systems into their cars first only a year after iPhone launch. With an Apple Lightning-to-30-pin adapter, iPhones/iPods remain backwards-compatible with the Harman Kardon 2.5 and later models. This is the earliest audio system specifically engineered for iPod/iPhone integration, which predated CarPlay and every other manufacturer incorporating iOS into vehicles. The concept of CarPlay was based on the iOS 4 feature called "iPod Out" which was produced through several years of joint development by Apple and the BMW Group's Technology Office USA. iPod Out enabled vehicles with the necessary infrastructure to "host" the analog video and audio from a supporting iOS device while receiving inputs, such as button presses and knob rotations, from a car's infotainment system, to drive the "hosted" user interface in the vehicle's built-in display. It was announced at WWDC 2010 and first shipped in BMW Group vehicles in early 2011. The BMW and Mini option was called "PlugIn" and paved the way for the first cross-OEM platforms, introducing the concept of requiring a car-specific interface for apps (as opposed to MirrorLink's simple and insufficient mirroring of what was shown on the smartphone's screen). === Development === CarPlay's codename was Stark. Apple's Eddy Cue announced it as iOS in the Car at WWDC 2013. In January 2014, it was reported that Apple's hardware-oriented corporate culture had led to release delays. iOS in the Car was then rebranded and launched as CarPlay with significant design changes at the Geneva Motor Show in March 2014 with Ferrari, Kia, Mercedes-Benz, and Volvo among the first car manufacturers. At WWDC 2022, Apple announced plans to release an all-new version of CarPlay, informally dubbed CarPlay 2. The new version was said to be able to control vehicle functions, access vehicle stats, and take over multiple vehicle screens. Officials said they planned to release it in late 2024 and that manufacturers that are planning to adopt the new CarPlay include: Audi, Acura, Ford, Honda, Infiniti, Jaguar, Land Rover, Lincoln, Mercedes-Benz, Nissan, Polestar, Porsche, Renault, and Volvo. In January 2025, amidst delays, Apple removed the planned released date from its website. On May 15, 2025, Apple announced that next-generation CarPlay, now called CarPlay Ultra, would be included with all new vehicles from Aston Martin. Existing vehicles will also be receiving CarPlay Ultra through a future software update. It is only available in the US and Canada. == Timeline == June 2013: Apple introduced iOS in the Car; an early version of CarPlay that was never publicly released, at WWDC 2013. June 2013: BMW officials announced their cars would not support iOS in the Car; they later changed their minds. November 2013: Siri Eyes Free mode was offered as a dealer-installed accessory in the US to some Honda Accord and Acura RDX & ILX models. In December, Honda offered additional integration, featuring new HondaLink services, on some US and Canada models of the Civic and the Fit. March 2014: Apple introduced CarPlay, which was renamed from iOS in the Car with significant design changes, at the 2014 Geneva Motor Show with automakers Ferrari, Mercedes-Benz and Volvo. September 2014: A Ferrari FF was the first car with a full version of CarPlay. November 2014: Hyundai announced the Sonata sedan would be their first model with available CarPlay by the end of the first quarter of 2015. January 2015: Volkswagen announced CarPlay support would be coming later in 2015 and would be either standard or available on the majority of their 2016 model year lineup. May 2015: General Motors announced CarPlay would be available starting with 14 different 2016 model year Chevrolet vehicles. July 2015: Honda announced CarPlay would be available in their vehicles starting with the 2016 Honda Accord. December 2015: Volvo implemented CarPlay in the 2016 Volvo XC90 as their first vehicle with CarPlay support. December 2015: Mercedes-Benz confirmed that CarPlay would be available starting with select 2016 model year vehicles. January 2016: Apple released a list detailing the car models which support CarPlay. January 2016: Ford announced CarPlay would be available on all 2017 Ford/Lincoln model year vehicles equipped with the Sync 3 infotainment system. January 2016: FCA (now a part of Stellantis) announced CarPlay would be available on their UConnect infotainment system starting with select 2016 model year vehicles. March 2016: Subaru announced the beginning of CarPlay and Android Auto support, st