A blitter object (Bob) is a graphical element (GEL) used by the Amiga computer. Bobs are hardware sprite-like objects, movable on the screen with the help of the blitter coprocessor. == Overview == The AmigaOS GEL system consists of VSprites, Bobs, AnimComps (animation components) and AnimObs (animation objects), each extending the preceding with additional functionality. While VSprites are a virtualization of hardware sprites Bobs are drawn into a playfield by the blitter, saving and restoring the background of the GEL as required. The Bob with the highest video priority is the last one to be drawn, which makes it appear to be in front of all other Bobs. In contrast to hardware sprites Bobs are not limited in size and number. Bobs require more processing power than sprites, because they require at least one DMA memory copy operation to draw them on the screen. Sometimes three distinct memory copy operations are needed: one to save the screen area where the Bob would be drawn, one to actually draw the Bob, and one later to restore the screen background when the Bob moves away. An AnimComp adds animation to a Bob and an AnimOb groups AnimComps together and assigns them velocity and acceleration.
Multimedia database
A Multimedia database (MMDB) is a collection of related for multimedia data. The multimedia data include one or more primary media data types such as text, images, graphic objects (including drawings, sketches and illustrations) animation sequences, audio and video. A Multimedia Database Management System (MMDBMS) is a framework that manages different types of data potentially represented in a wide diversity of formats on a wide array of media sources. It provides support for multimedia data types, and facilitate for creation, storage, access, query and control of a multimedia database. == Contents of MMDB == A Multimedia Database (MMDB) hosts one or more multimedia data types (i.e. text, images, graphic objects, audio, video, animation sequences). These data types are broadly categorized into three classes: Static media (time-independent: image and graphic object). Dynamic media (time-dependent: audio, video and animation). Dimensional media(3D game and computer aided drafting programs). === Comparison of multimedia data types === Additionally, a Multimedia Database (MMDB) needs to manage additional information pertaining to the actual multimedia data. The information is about the following: Media data: the actual data representing an object. Media format data: information about the format of the media data after it goes through the acquisition, processing, and encoding phases. Media keyword data: the keyword descriptions, usually relating to the generation of the media data. Media feature data: content dependent data such as contain information about the distribution of colours, the kinds of textures and the different shapes present in an image. The last three types are called metadata as they describe several different aspects of the media data. The media keyword data and media feature data are used as indices for searching purpose. The media format data is used to present the retrieved information. == Requirements of Multimedia databases == Like the traditional databases, Multimedia databases should address the following requirements: Integration Data items do not need to be duplicated for different programs invocations Data independence Separate the database and the management from the application programs Concurrency control Allows concurrent transactions Persistence Data objects can be saved and re-used by different transactions and program invocations Privacy Access and authorization control Integrity control Ensures database consistency between transactions Recovery Failures of transactions should not affect the persistent data storage Query support Allows easy querying of multimedia data Multimedia databases should have the ability to uniformly query data (media data, textual data) represented in different formats and have the ability to simultaneously query different media sources and conduct classical database operations across them. (Query support) They should have the ability to retrieve media objects from a local storage device in a good manner. (Storage support) They should have the ability to take the response generated by a query and develop a presentation of that response in terms of audio-visual media and have the ability to deliver this presentation. (Presentation and delivery support) == Issues and challenges == Multimedia data consists of a variety of media formats or file representations including TIFF, BMP, PPT, IVUE, FPX, JPEG, MPEG, AVI, MID, WAV, DOC, GIF, EPS, PNG, etc. Because of restrictions on the conversion from one format to the other, the use of the data in a specific format has been limited as well. Usually, the data size of multimedia is large such as video; therefore, multimedia data often require a large storage. Multimedia database consume a lot of processing time, as well as bandwidth. Some multimedia data types such as video, audio, and animation sequences have temporal requirements that have implications on their storage, manipulation and presentation, but images, video and graphics data have special constraints in terms of their content. == Application areas == Examples of multimedia database application areas: Digital Libraries News-on-Demand Video-on-Demand Music database Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Telemedicine
Computational heuristic intelligence
Computational heuristic intelligence (CHI) refers to specialized programming techniques in computational intelligence (also called artificial intelligence, or AI). These techniques have the express goal of avoiding complexity issues, also called NP-hard problems, by using human-like techniques. They are best summarized as the use of exemplar-based methods (heuristics), rather than rule-based methods (algorithms). Hence the term is distinct from the more conventional computational algorithmic intelligence, or symbolic AI. An example of a CHI technique is the encoding specificity principle of Tulving and Thompson. In general, CHI principles are problem solving techniques used by people, rather than programmed into machines. It is by drawing attention to this key distinction that the use of this term is justified in a field already replete with confusing neologisms. Note that the legal systems of all modern human societies employ both heuristics (generalisations of cases) from individual trial records as well as legislated statutes (rules) as regulatory guides. Another recent approach to the avoidance of complexity issues is to employ feedback control rather than feedforward modeling as a problem-solving paradigm. This approach has been called computational cybernetics, because (a) the term 'computational' is associated with conventional computer programming techniques which represent a strategic, compiled, or feedforward model of the problem, and (b) the term 'cybernetic' is associated with conventional system operation techniques which represent a tactical, interpreted, or feedback model of the problem. Of course, real programs and real problems both contain both feedforward and feedback components. A real example which illustrates this point is that of human cognition, which clearly involves both perceptual (bottom-up, feedback, sensor-oriented) and conceptual (top-down, feedforward, motor-oriented) information flows and hierarchies. The AI engineer must choose between mathematical and cybernetic problem solution and machine design paradigms. This is not a coding (program language) issue, but relates to understanding the relationship between the declarative and procedural programming paradigms. The vast majority of STEM professionals never get the opportunity to design or implement pure cybernetic solutions. When pushed, most responders will dismiss the importance of any difference by saying that all code can be reduced to a mathematical model anyway. Unfortunately, not only is this belief false, it fails most spectacularly in many AI scenarios. Mathematical models are not time agnostic, but by their very nature are pre-computed, i.e. feedforward. Dyer [2012] and Feldman [2004] have independently investigated the simplest of all somatic governance paradigms, namely control of a simple jointed limb by a single flexor muscle. They found that it is impossible to determine forces from limb positions- therefore, the problem cannot have a pre-computed (feedforward) mathematical solution. Instead, a top-down command bias signal changes the threshold feedback level in the sensorimotor loop, e.g. the loop formed by the afferent and efferent nerves, thus changing the so-called ‘equilibrium point’ of the flexor muscle/ elbow joint system. An overview of the arrangement reveals that global postures and limb position are commanded in feedforward terms, using global displacements (common coding), with the forces needed being computed locally by feedback loops. This method of sensorimotor unit governance, which is based upon what Anatol Feldman calls the ‘equilibrium Point’ theory, is formally equivalent to a servomechanism such as a car's ‘cruise control’.
Purged cross-validation
Purged cross-validation is a variant of k-fold cross-validation designed to prevent look-ahead bias in time series and other structured data, developed in 2017 by Marcos López de Prado at Guggenheim Partners and Cornell University. It is primarily used in financial machine learning to ensure the independence of training and testing samples when labels depend on future events. It provides an alternative to conventional cross-validation and walk-forward backtesting methods, which often yield overly optimistic performance estimates due to information leakage and overfitting. == Motivation == Standard cross-validation assumes that observations are independently and identically distributed (IID), which often does not hold in time series or financial datasets. If the label of a test sample overlaps in time with the features or labels in the training set, the result may be data leakage and overfitting. Purged cross-validation addresses this issue by removing overlapping observations and, optionally, adding a temporal buffer ("embargo") around the test set to further reduce the risk of leakage. The figure below illustrates standard 5 Fold Cross-Validation == Purging == Purging removes from the training set any observation whose timestamp falls within the time range of formation of a label in the test set. This can be the case for train set observations before and after the test set. Their removal ensures that the algorithm cannot learn during train time information that will be used to assess the performance of the algorithm. See the figure below for an illustration of purging. == Embargoing == Embargoing addresses a more subtle form of leakage: even if an observation does not directly overlap the test set, it may still be affected by test events due to market reaction lag or downstream dependencies. To guard against this, a percentage-based embargo is imposed after each test fold. For example, with a 5% embargo and 1000 observations, the 50 observations following each test fold are excluded from training. Unlike purging, embargoing can only occur after the test set. The figure below illustrates the application of embargo: == Applications == Purged and embargoed cross-validation has been useful in: Backtesting of trading strategies Validation of classifiers on labeled event-driven returns Any machine learning task with overlapping label horizons == Example == To illustrate the effect of purging and embargoing, consider the figures below. Both diagrams show the structure of 5-fold cross-validation over a 20-day period. In each row, blue squares indicate training samples and red squares denote test samples. Each label is defined based on the value of the next two observations, hence creating an overlap. If this overlap is left untreated, test set information leaks into the train set. The second figure applies the Purged CV procedure. Notice how purging removes overlapping observations from the training set and the embargo widens the gap between test and training data. This approach ensures that the evaluation more closely resembles a true out-of-sample test and reduces the risk of backtest overfitting. == Combinatorial Purged Cross-Validation == Walk-forward backtesting analysis, another common cross-validation technique in finance, preserves temporal order but evaluates the model on a single sequence of test sets. This leads to high variance in performance estimation, as results are contingent on a specific historical path. Combinatorial Purged Cross-Validation (CPCV) addresses this limitation by systematically constructing multiple train-test splits, purging overlapping samples, and enforcing an embargo period to prevent information leakage. The result is a distribution of out-of-sample performance estimates, enabling robust statistical inference and more realistic assessment of a model's predictive power. === Methodology === CPCV divides a time-series dataset into N sequential, non-overlapping groups. These groups preserve the temporal order of observations. Then, all combinations of k groups (where k < N) are selected as test sets, with the remaining N − k groups used for training. For each combination, the model is trained and evaluated under strict controls to prevent leakage. To eliminate potential contamination between training and test sets, CPCV introduces two additional mechanisms: Purging: Any training observations whose label horizon overlaps with the test period are excluded. This ensures that future information does not influence model training. Embargoing: After the end of each test period, a fixed number of observations (typically a small percentage) are removed from the training set. This prevents leakage due to delayed market reactions or auto-correlated features. Each data point appears in multiple test sets across different combinations. Because test groups are drawn combinatorially, this process produces multiple backtest "paths," each of which simulates a plausible market scenario. From these paths, practitioners can compute a distribution of performance statistics such as the Sharpe ratio, drawdown, or classification accuracy. === Formal definition === Let N be the number of sequential groups into which the dataset is divided, and let k be the number of groups selected as the test set for each split. Then: The number of unique train-test combinations is given by the binomial coefficient: ( N k ) {\displaystyle {\binom {N}{k}}} Each observation is used in k {\displaystyle k} test sets and contributes to φ [ N , k ] {\displaystyle \varphi [N,k]} unique backtest paths: φ [ N , k ] = k N ( N k ) {\displaystyle \varphi [N,k]={\frac {k}{N}}{\binom {N}{k}}} This yields a distribution of performance metrics rather than a single point estimate, making it possible to apply Monte Carlo-based or probabilistic techniques to assess model robustness. === Illustrative example === Consider the case where N = 6 and k = 2. The number of possible test set combinations is ( 6 2 ) = 15 {\displaystyle {\binom {6}{2}}=15} . Each of the six groups appears in five test splits. Consequently, five distinct backtest paths can be constructed, each incorporating one appearance from every group. ==== Test group assignment matrix ==== This table shows the 15 test combinations. An "x" indicates that the corresponding group is included in the test set for that split. ==== Backtest path assignment ==== Each group contributes to five different backtest paths. The number in each cell indicates the path to which the group's result is assigned for that split. === Advantages === Combinatorial Purged Cross-Validation offers several key benefits over conventional methods: It produces a distribution of performance metrics, enabling more rigorous statistical inference. The method systematically eliminates lookahead bias through purging and embargoing. By simulating multiple historical scenarios, it reduces the dependence on any single market regime or realization. It supports high-confidence comparisons between competing models or strategies. CPCV is commonly used in quantitative strategy research, especially for evaluating predictive models such as classifiers, regressors, and portfolio optimizers. It has been applied to estimate realistic Sharpe ratios, assess the risk of overfitting, and support the use of statistical tools such as the Deflated Sharpe Ratio (DSR). === Limitations === The main limitation of CPCV stems from its high computational cost. However, this cost can be managed by sampling a finite number of splits from the space of all possible combinations.
Information space analysis
Within the field of information science, information space analysis is a deterministic method, enhanced by machine intelligence, for locating and assessing resources for team-centric efforts. Organizations need to be able to quickly assemble teams backed by the support services, information, and material to do the job. To do so, these teams need to find and assess sources of services that are potential participants in the team effort. To support this initial team and resource development, information needs to be developed via analysis tools that help make sense of sets of data sources in an Intranet or Internet. Part of the process is to characterize them, partition them, and sort and filter them. These tools focus on three key issues in forming a collaborative team: Help individuals responsible for forming the team understand what is available. Assist team members in identifying the structure and categorize the information available to them in a manner specifically suited to the task at hand. Aid team members to understand the mappings of their information between their organization and that used by others who might participate. Information space analysis tools combine multiple methods to assist in this task. This causes the tools to be particularly well-suited to integrating additional technologies in order to create specialized systems.
Level-set method
The Level-set method (LSM) is a conceptual framework for using level sets as a tool for numerical analysis of surfaces and shapes. LSM can perform numerical computations involving curves and surfaces on a fixed Cartesian grid without having to parameterize these objects. LSM makes it easier to perform computations on shapes with sharp corners and shapes that change topology (such as by splitting in two or developing holes). These characteristics make LSM effective for modeling objects that vary in time, such as an airbag inflating or a drop of oil floating in water. == Overview == The figure on the right illustrates several ideas about LSM. In the upper left corner is a bounded region with a well-behaved boundary. Below it, the red surface is the graph of a level set function φ {\displaystyle \varphi } determining this shape, and the flat blue region represents the X-Y plane. The boundary of the shape is then the zero-level set of φ {\displaystyle \varphi } , while the shape itself is the set of points in the plane for which φ {\displaystyle \varphi } is positive (interior of the shape) or zero (at the boundary). In the top row, the shape's topology changes as it is split in two. It is challenging to describe this transformation numerically by parameterizing the boundary of the shape and following its evolution. An algorithm can be used to detect the moment the shape splits in two and then construct parameterizations for the two newly obtained curves. On the bottom row, however, the plane at which the level set function is sampled is translated upwards, on which the shape's change in topology is described. It is less challenging to work with a shape through its level-set function rather than with itself directly, in which a method would need to consider all the possible deformations the shape might undergo. Thus, in two dimensions, the level-set method amounts to representing a closed curve Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } (such as the shape boundary in our example) using an auxiliary function φ {\displaystyle \varphi } , called the level-set function. The curve Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } is represented as the zero-level set of φ {\displaystyle \varphi } by Γ = { ( x , y ) ∣ φ ( x , y ) = 0 } , {\displaystyle \Gamma =\{(x,y)\mid \varphi (x,y)=0\},} and the level-set method manipulates Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } implicitly through the function φ {\displaystyle \varphi } . This function φ {\displaystyle \varphi } is assumed to take positive values inside the region delimited by the curve Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } and negative values outside. == The level-set equation == If the curve Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } moves in the normal direction with a speed v {\displaystyle v} , then by chain rule and implicit differentiation, it can be determined that the level-set function φ {\displaystyle \varphi } satisfies the level-set equation ∂ φ ∂ t = v | ∇ φ | . {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial \varphi }{\partial t}}=v|\nabla \varphi |.} Here, | ⋅ | {\displaystyle |\cdot |} is the Euclidean norm (denoted customarily by single bars in partial differential equations), and t {\displaystyle t} is time. This is a partial differential equation, in particular a Hamilton–Jacobi equation, and can be solved numerically, for example, by using finite differences on a Cartesian grid. However, the numerical solution of the level set equation may require advanced techniques. Simple finite difference methods fail quickly. Upwinding methods such as the Godunov method are considered better; however, the level set method does not guarantee preservation of the volume and shape of the set level in an advection field that maintains shape and size, for example, a uniform or rotational velocity field. Instead, the shape of the level set may become distorted, and the level set may disappear over a few time steps. Therefore, high-order finite difference schemes, such as high-order essentially non-oscillatory (ENO) schemes, are often required, and even then, the feasibility of long-term simulations is questionable. More advanced methods have been developed to overcome this; for example, combinations of the leveling method with tracking marker particles suggested by the velocity field. == Example == Consider a unit circle in R 2 {\textstyle \mathbb {R} ^{2}} , shrinking in on itself at a constant rate, i.e. each point on the boundary of the circle moves along its inwards pointing normally at some fixed speed. The circle will shrink and eventually collapse down to a point. If an initial distance field is constructed (i.e. a function whose value is the signed Euclidean distance to the boundary, positive interior, negative exterior) on the initial circle, the normalized gradient of this field will be the circle normal. If the field has a constant value subtracted from it in time, the zero level (which was the initial boundary) of the new fields will also be circular and will similarly collapse to a point. This is due to this being effectively the temporal integration of the Eikonal equation with a fixed front velocity. == Applications == In mathematical modeling of combustion, LSM is used to describe the instantaneous flame surface, known as the G equation. Level-set data structures have been developed to facilitate the use of the level-set method in computer applications. Computational fluid dynamics Trajectory planning Optimization Image processing Computational biophysics Discrete complex dynamics (visualization of the parameter plane and the dynamic plane) == History == The level-set method was developed in 1979 by Alain Dervieux, and subsequently popularized by Stanley Osher and James Sethian. It has since become popular in many disciplines, such as image processing, computer graphics, computational geometry, optimization, computational fluid dynamics, and computational biology.
Cognitive philology
Cognitive philology is the science that studies written and oral texts as the product of human mental processes. Studies in cognitive philology compare documentary evidence emerging from textual investigations with results of experimental research, especially in the fields of cognitive and ecological psychology, neurosciences and artificial intelligence. "The point is not the text, but the mind that made it". Cognitive Philology aims to foster communication between literary, textual, philological disciplines on the one hand and researches across the whole range of the cognitive, evolutionary, ecological and human sciences on the other. Cognitive philology: investigates transmission of oral and written text, and categorization processes which lead to classification of knowledge, mostly relying on the information theory; studies how narratives emerge in so called natural conversation and selective process which lead to the rise of literary standards for storytelling, mostly relying on embodied semantics; explores the evolutive and evolutionary role played by rhythm and metre in human ontogenetic and phylogenetic development and the pertinence of the semantic association during processing of cognitive maps; Provides the scientific ground for multimedia critical editions of literary texts. Among the founding thinkers and noteworthy scholars devoted to such investigations are: Alan Richardson: Studies Theory of Mind in early-modern and contemporary literature. Anatole Pierre Fuksas Benoît de Cornulier David Herman: Professor of English at North Carolina State University and an adjunct professor of linguistics at Duke University. He is the author of "Universal Grammar and Narrative Form" and the editor of "Narratologies: New Perspectives on Narrative Analysis". Domenico Fiormonte François Recanati Gilles Fauconnier, a professor in Cognitive science at the University of California, San Diego. He was one of the founders of cognitive linguistics in the 1970s through his work on pragmatic scales and mental spaces. His research explores the areas of conceptual integration and compressions of conceptual mappings in terms of the emergent structure in language. Julián Santano Moreno Luca Nobile Manfred Jahn in Germany Mark Turner Paolo Canettieri