KitKat (cat)

KitKat was a bodega cat from the Mission District of San Francisco who was killed by a Waymo car on October 27, 2025. Locals built altars and the death has raised comments about the safety of self-driving cars. == Life == Mike Zeidan, the owner of Randa's Market, adopted KitKat as a stray to help keep rodents out of his store. KitKat lived in Randa's Market for six years and was well-loved by the neighborhood, including an appearance on a shop cats map that went viral in 2022 as a "particularly friendly cat". After KitKat arrived at the bodega, customers were said to come more often, and regularly brought the cat food and gifts. == Death == At around 11:40 pm on October 27, 2025, witnesses saw KitKat sitting in front of a stopped Waymo car for seven seconds. He walked under the car as the car pulled out, and the right rear tire ran over the back half of his body. A bartender who was taking a cigarette break used a sandwich board sign as a stretcher and took KitKat to an emergency animal clinic. An hour later, KitKat was pronounced dead. Waymo confirmed that the cat was killed by one of its vehicles on October 30. Surveillance footage of the incident was released in December. From Waymo's report to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA): The Waymo AV was stopped next to the curb for a passenger pickup facing east on 16th Street. As the passengers were boarding the Waymo AV, a cat approached the Waymo AV from the southern sidewalk of 16th Street and sat in the roadway partially under the front right corner of the Waymo AV. A pedestrian approached the Waymo AV from the east on the southern sidewalk of 16th Street and began crouching near the front of the Waymo AV, stepping partially into the roadway, appearing to reach for the cat. As they did so, the cat moved farther from the sidewalk under the Waymo AV and the pedestrian stepped back onto the sidewalk. The Waymo AV then departed the pickup location and the rear right tire made contact with the cat. At the time of impact, the Waymo AV's Level 4 ADS was engaged in autonomous mode. Waymo later received notice that the cat did not survive. The passengers in the Waymo AV did not have seatbelts fastened at the time, having just boarded the Waymo AV. Prior to KitKat's death, the NHTSA had logged 14 collisions between Waymo cars and animals, of which 5 were confirmed fatalities. == Aftermath == After KitKat's death, an altar was created outside Randa's Market. People left flowers, candles, cat food, written notes, and Kit Kat candy bars in the cat's honor. A city worker took down the memorial for fire safety reasons, but neighbors built it again. Local supervisor Jackie Fielder held a rally called "Justice for KitKat" in support of a non-binding San Francisco resolution to shift decision-making about the operation of self-driving cars from the state to individual counties. Critics say that the resolution is performative because it is non-binding, that local control would make autonomous vehicle operation impractical, and that Waymo is still far less dangerous to animals than human drivers. Elon Musk commented that "many pets will be saved by autonomy". There are multiple meme coins inspired by KitKat.

Apache Pig

Apache Pig is a high-level platform for creating programs that run on Apache Hadoop. The language for this platform is called Pig Latin. Pig can execute its Hadoop jobs in MapReduce, Apache Tez, or Apache Spark. Pig Latin abstracts the programming from the Java MapReduce idiom into a notation which makes MapReduce programming high level, similar to that of SQL for relational database management systems. Pig Latin can be extended using user-defined functions (UDFs) which the user can write in Java, Python, JavaScript, Ruby or Groovy and then call directly from the language. == History == Apache Pig was originally developed at Yahoo Research around 2006 for researchers to have an ad hoc way of creating and executing MapReduce jobs on very large data sets. In 2007, it was moved into the Apache Software Foundation. === Naming === Regarding the naming of the Pig programming language, the name was chosen arbitrarily and stuck because it was memorable, easy to spell, and for novelty. The story goes that the researchers working on the project initially referred to it simply as 'the language'. Eventually they needed to call it something. Off the top of his head, one researcher suggested Pig, and the name stuck. It is quirky yet memorable and easy to spell. While some have hinted that the name sounds coy or silly, it has provided us with an entertaining nomenclature, such as Pig Latin for the language, Grunt for the shell, and PiggyBank for the CPAN-like shared repository. == Example == Below is an example of a "Word Count" program in Pig Latin: The above program will generate parallel executable tasks which can be distributed across multiple machines in a Hadoop cluster to count the number of words in a dataset such as all the webpages on the internet. == Pig vs SQL == In comparison to SQL, Pig has a nested relational model, uses lazy evaluation, uses extract, transform, load (ETL), is able to store data at any point during a pipeline, declares execution plans, supports pipeline splits, thus allowing workflows to proceed along DAGs instead of strictly sequential pipelines. On the other hand, it has been argued DBMSs are substantially faster than the MapReduce system once the data is loaded, but that loading the data takes considerably longer in the database systems. It has also been argued RDBMSs offer out of the box support for column-storage, working with compressed data, indexes for efficient random data access, and transaction-level fault tolerance. Pig Latin is procedural and fits very naturally in the pipeline paradigm while SQL is instead declarative. In SQL users can specify that data from two tables must be joined, but not what join implementation to use (You can specify the implementation of JOIN in SQL, thus "... for many SQL applications the query writer may not have enough knowledge of the data or enough expertise to specify an appropriate join algorithm."). Pig Latin allows users to specify an implementation or aspects of an implementation to be used in executing a script in several ways. In effect, Pig Latin programming is similar to specifying a query execution plan, making it easier for programmers to explicitly control the flow of their data processing task. SQL is oriented around queries that produce a single result. SQL handles trees naturally, but has no built in mechanism for splitting a data processing stream and applying different operators to each sub-stream. Pig Latin script describes a directed acyclic graph (DAG) rather than a pipeline. Pig Latin's ability to include user code at any point in the pipeline is useful for pipeline development. If SQL is used, data must first be imported into the database, and then the cleansing and transformation process can begin.

Imagen (text-to-image model)

Imagen is a series of text-to-image models developed by Google DeepMind. They were developed by Google Brain until the company's merger with DeepMind in April 2023. Imagen is primarily used to generate images from text prompts, similar to Stability AI's Stable Diffusion, OpenAI's DALL-E, or Midjourney. The original version of the model was first discussed in a paper from May 2022. The tool produces high-quality images and is available to all users with a Google account through services including Gemini, ImageFX, and Vertex AI. == History == Imagen's original version was first presented in a paper published in May 2022. It featured the ability to generate high-fidelity images from natural language. The second version, Imagen 2 was released in December 2023. The standout feature was text and logo generation. Imagen 3 was released in August 2024. Google claims that the newest version provides better detail and lighting on generated images. On 20 May 2025 at Google I/O 2025 the company released an improved model, Imagen 4. == Technology == Imagen uses two key technologies. The first is the use of transformer-based large language models, notably T5, to understand text and subsequently encode text for image synthesis. The second is the use of cascaded diffusion models providing high-fidelity image generation. Imagen generates image in three stages, starting from a base of 64x64, then upsampled to 256x256 and 1024x1024. Imagen 4 generates image up to 2k. == Capabilities == Imagen can generate photorealistic images from text prompts. It can also create various styles, such as cinematic, 35mm film, illustration, and surreal. Like most text-to-image generative AI models, Imagen has difficulty rendering human fingers, text, ambigrams and other forms of typography. The model can generate images in five aspect ratios, namely 9:16, 3:4, 1:1, 4:3, and 16:9. Imagen can also refine already generated images by editing existing text prompts.

Netflix Prize

The Netflix Prize was an open competition for the best collaborative filtering algorithm to predict user ratings for films, based on previous ratings without any other information about the users or films, i.e. without the users being identified except by numbers assigned for the contest. The competition was held by Netflix, a video streaming service, and was open to anyone who was neither connected with Netflix (current and former employees, agents, close relatives of Netflix employees, etc.) nor a resident of certain blocked countries (such as Cuba or North Korea). On September 21, 2009, the grand prize of US$1,000,000 was given to the BellKor's Pragmatic Chaos team which bested Netflix's own algorithm for predicting ratings by 10.06%. == Problem and data sets == Netflix provided a training data set of 100,480,507 ratings that 480,189 users gave to 17,770 movies. Each training rating is a quadruplet of the form . The user and movie fields are integer IDs, while grades are from 1 to 5 (integer) stars. The qualifying data set contains over 2,817,131 triplets of the form , with grades known only to the jury. A participating team's algorithm must predict grades on the entire qualifying set, but they are informed of the score for only half of the data: a quiz set of 1,408,342 ratings. The other half is the test set of 1,408,789, and performance on this is used by the jury to determine potential prize winners. Only the judges know which ratings are in the quiz set, and which are in the test set—this arrangement is intended to make it difficult to hill climb on the test set. Submitted predictions are scored against the true grades in the form of root mean squared error (RMSE), and the goal is to reduce this error as much as possible. Note that, while the actual grades are integers in the range 1 to 5, submitted predictions need not be. Netflix also identified a probe subset of 1,408,395 ratings within the training data set. The probe, quiz, and test data sets were chosen to have similar statistical properties. In summary, the data used in the Netflix Prize looks as follows: Training set (99,072,112 ratings not including the probe set; 100,480,507 including the probe set) Probe set (1,408,395 ratings) Qualifying set (2,817,131 ratings) consisting of: Test set (1,408,789 ratings), used to determine winners Quiz set (1,408,342 ratings), used to calculate leaderboard scores For each movie, the title and year of release are provided in a separate dataset. No information at all is provided about users. In order to protect the privacy of the customers, "some of the rating data for some customers in the training and qualifying sets have been deliberately perturbed in one or more of the following ways: deleting ratings; inserting alternative ratings and dates; and modifying rating dates." The training set is constructed such that the average user rated over 200 movies, and the average movie was rated by over 5000 users. But there is wide variance in the data—some movies in the training set have as few as 3 ratings, while one user rated over 17,000 movies. There was some controversy as to the choice of RMSE as the defining metric. It has been claimed that even as small an improvement as 1% RMSE results in a significant difference in the ranking of the "top-10" most recommended movies for a user. == Prizes == Prizes were based on improvement over Netflix's own algorithm, called Cinematch, or the previous year's score if a team has made improvement beyond a certain threshold. A trivial algorithm that predicts for each movie in the quiz set its average grade from the training data produces an RMSE of 1.0540. Cinematch uses "straightforward statistical linear models with a lot of data conditioning." The performance of Cinematch had plateaued by 2006. Using only the training data, Cinematch scores an RMSE of 0.9514 on the quiz data, roughly a 10% improvement over the trivial algorithm. Cinematch has a similar performance on the test set, 0.9525. In order to win the grand prize of $1,000,000, a participating team had to improve this by another 10%, to achieve 0.8572 on the test set. Such an improvement on the quiz set corresponds to an RMSE of 0.8563. As long as no team won the grand prize, a progress prize of $50,000 was awarded every year for the best result thus far. However, in order to win this prize, an algorithm had to improve the RMSE on the quiz set by at least 1% over the previous progress prize winner (or over Cinematch, the first year). If no submission succeeded, the progress prize was not to be awarded for that year. To win a progress or grand prize a participant had to provide source code and a description of the algorithm to the jury within one week after being contacted by them. Following verification the winner also had to provide a non-exclusive license to Netflix. Netflix would publish only the description, not the source code, of the system. (To keep their algorithm and source code secret, a team could choose not to claim a prize.) The jury also kept their predictions secret from other participants. A team could send as many attempts to predict grades as they wish. Originally submissions were limited to once a week, but the interval was quickly modified to once a day. A team's best submission so far counted as their current submission. Once one of the teams succeeded in improving the RMSE by 10% or more, the jury would issue a last call, giving all teams 30 days to send their submissions. Only then, the team with the best submission was asked for the algorithm description, source code, and non-exclusive license, and, after successful verification; declared a grand prize winner. The contest would last until the grand prize winner was declared. Had no one received the grand prize, it would have lasted for at least five years (until October 2, 2011). After that date, the contest could have been terminated at any time at Netflix's sole discretion. == Progress over the years == The competition began on October 2, 2006. By October 8, a team called WXYZConsulting had already beaten Cinematch's results. By October 15, there were three teams who had beaten Cinematch, one of them by 1.06%, enough to qualify for the annual progress prize. By June 2007 over 20,000 teams had registered for the competition from over 150 countries. 2,000 teams had submitted over 13,000 prediction sets. Over the first year of the competition, a handful of front-runners traded first place. The more prominent ones were: WXYZConsulting, a team of Wei Xu and Yi Zhang. (A front runner during November–December 2006.) ML@UToronto A, a team from the University of Toronto led by Prof. Geoffrey Hinton. (A front runner during parts of October–December 2006.) Gravity, a team of four scientists from the Budapest University of Technology (A front runner during January–May 2007.) BellKor, a group of scientists from AT&T Labs. (A front runner since May 2007.) Dinosaur Planet, a team of three undergraduates from Princeton University. (A front runner on September 3, 2007 for one hour before BellKor snatched back the lead.) The algorithms used by the leading teams were usually an ensemble of singular value decomposition, k-nearest neighbor, neural networks, and so on. On August 12, 2007, many contestants gathered at the KDD Cup and Workshop 2007, held at San Jose, California. During the workshop all four of the top teams on the leaderboard at that time presented their techniques. The team from IBM Research—Yan Liu, Saharon Rosset, Claudia Perlich, and Zhenzhen Kou—won the third place in Task 1 and first place in Task 2. Over the second year of the competition, only three teams reached the leading position: BellKor, a group of scientists from AT&T Labs (front runner during May 2007 – September 2008) BigChaos, a team of Austrian scientists from Commendo Research & Consulting (single team front runner since October 2008) BellKor in BigChaos, a joint team of the two leading single teams (a front runner since September 2008) === 2007 Progress Prize === On September 2, 2007, the competition entered the "last call" period for the 2007 Progress Prize. Over 40,000 teams from 186 countries had entered the contest. They had thirty days to tender submissions for consideration. At the beginning of this period the leading team was BellKor, with an RMSE of 0.8728 (8.26% improvement), followed by Dinosaur Planet (RMSE = 0.8769; 7.83% improvement), and Gravity (RMSE = 0.8785; 7.66% improvement). In the last hour of the last call period, an entry by "KorBell" took first place. This turned out to be an alternate name for Team BellKor. On November 13, 2007, team KorBell (formerly BellKor) was declared the winner of the $50,000 Progress Prize with an RMSE of 0.8712 (8.43% improvement). The team consisted of three researchers from AT&T Labs, Yehuda Koren, Robert Bell, and Chris Volinsky. As required, they published a description of their a

Type-2 fuzzy sets and systems

Type-2 fuzzy sets and systems generalize standard type-1 fuzzy sets and systems so that more uncertainty can be handled. From the beginning of fuzzy sets, criticism was made about the fact that the membership function of a type-1 fuzzy set has no uncertainty associated with it, something that seems to contradict the word fuzzy, since that word has the connotation of much uncertainty. So, what does one do when there is uncertainty about the value of the membership function? The answer to this question was provided in 1975 by the inventor of fuzzy sets, Lotfi A. Zadeh, when he proposed more sophisticated kinds of fuzzy sets, the first of which he called a "type-2 fuzzy set". A type-2 fuzzy set lets us incorporate uncertainty about the membership function into fuzzy set theory, and is a way to address the above criticism of type-1 fuzzy sets head-on. And, if there is no uncertainty, then a type-2 fuzzy set reduces to a type-1 fuzzy set, which is analogous to probability reducing to determinism when unpredictability vanishes. Type1 fuzzy systems are working with a fixed membership function, while in type-2 fuzzy systems the membership function is fluctuating. A fuzzy set determines how input values are converted into fuzzy variables. == Overview == In order to symbolically distinguish between a type-1 fuzzy set and a type-2 fuzzy set, a tilde symbol is put over the symbol for the fuzzy set; so, A denotes a type-1 fuzzy set, whereas à denotes the comparable type-2 fuzzy set. When the latter is done, the resulting type-2 fuzzy set is called a "general type-2 fuzzy set" (to distinguish it from the special interval type-2 fuzzy set). Zadeh didn't stop with type-2 fuzzy sets, because in that 1976 paper he also generalized all of this to type-n fuzzy sets. The present article focuses only on type-2 fuzzy sets because they are the next step in the logical progression from type-1 to type-n fuzzy sets, where n = 1, 2, ... . Although some researchers are beginning to explore higher than type-2 fuzzy sets, as of early 2009, this work is in its infancy. The membership function of a general type-2 fuzzy set, Ã, is three-dimensional (Fig. 1), where the third dimension is the value of the membership function at each point on its two-dimensional domain that is called its "footprint of uncertainty"(FOU). For an interval type-2 fuzzy set that third-dimension value is the same (e.g., 1) everywhere, which means that no new information is contained in the third dimension of an interval type-2 fuzzy set. So, for such a set, the third dimension is ignored, and only the FOU is used to describe it. It is for this reason that an interval type-2 fuzzy set is sometimes called a first-order uncertainty fuzzy set model, whereas a general type-2 fuzzy set (with its useful third-dimension) is sometimes referred to as a second-order uncertainty fuzzy set model. The FOU represents the blurring of a type-1 membership function, and is completely described by its two bounding functions (Fig. 2), a lower membership function (LMF) and an upper membership function (UMF), both of which are type-1 fuzzy sets! Consequently, it is possible to use type-1 fuzzy set mathematics to characterize and work with interval type-2 fuzzy sets. This means that engineers and scientists who already know type-1 fuzzy sets will not have to invest a lot of time learning about general type-2 fuzzy set mathematics in order to understand and use interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Work on type-2 fuzzy sets languished during the 1980s and early-to-mid 1990s, although a small number of articles were published about them. People were still trying to figure out what to do with type-1 fuzzy sets, so even though Zadeh proposed type-2 fuzzy sets in 1976, the time was not right for researchers to drop what they were doing with type-1 fuzzy sets to focus on type-2 fuzzy sets. This changed in the latter part of the 1990s as a result of Jerry Mendel and his student's works on type-2 fuzzy sets and systems. Since then, more researchers around the world are writing articles about type-2 fuzzy sets and systems. == Interval type-2 fuzzy sets == Interval type-2 fuzzy sets have received the most attention because the mathematics that is needed for such sets—primarily Interval arithmetic—is much simpler than the mathematics that is needed for general type-2 fuzzy sets. The literature about interval type-2 fuzzy sets is large, whereas the literature about general type-2 fuzzy sets is much smaller. Both kinds of fuzzy sets are being actively researched by an ever-growing number of researchers around the world and have resulted in successful employment in a variety of domains such as robot control. Formally, the following have already been worked out for interval type-2 fuzzy sets: Fuzzy set operations: union, intersection and complement Centroid (a very widely used operation by practitioners of such sets, and also an important uncertainty measure for them) Other uncertainty measures [fuzziness, cardinality, variance and skewness and uncertainty bounds Similarity Subsethood Embedded fuzzy sets Fuzzy set ranking Fuzzy rule ranking and selection Type-reduction methods Firing intervals for an interval type-2 fuzzy logic system Fuzzy weighted average Linguistic weighted average Synthesizing an FOU from data that are collected from a group of subject == Interval type-2 fuzzy logic systems == Type-2 fuzzy sets are finding very wide applicability in rule-based fuzzy logic systems (FLSs) because they let uncertainties be modeled by them whereas such uncertainties cannot be modeled by type-1 fuzzy sets. A block diagram of a type-2 FLS is depicted in Fig. 3. This kind of FLS is used in fuzzy logic control, fuzzy logic signal processing, rule-based classification, etc., and is sometimes referred to as a function approximation application of fuzzy sets, because the FLS is designed to minimize an error function. The following discussions, about the four components in Fig. 3 rule-based FLS, are given for an interval type-2 FLS, because to-date they are the most popular kind of type-2 FLS; however, most of the discussions are also applicable for a general type-2 FLS. Rules, that are either provided by subject experts or are extracted from numerical data, are expressed as a collection of IF-THEN statements, e.g., IF temperature is moderate and pressure is high, then rotate the valve a bit to the right. Fuzzy sets are associated with the terms that appear in the antecedents (IF-part) or consequents (THEN-part) of rules, and with the inputs to and the outputs of the FLS. Membership functions are used to describe these fuzzy sets, and in a type-1 FLS they are all type-1 fuzzy sets, whereas in an interval type-2 FLS at least one membership function is an interval type-2 fuzzy set. An interval type-2 FLS lets any one or all of the following kinds of uncertainties be quantified: Words that are used in antecedents and consequents of rules—because words can mean different things to different people. Uncertain consequents—because when rules are obtained from a group of experts, consequents will often be different for the same rule, i.e. the experts will not necessarily be in agreement. Membership function parameters—because when those parameters are optimized using uncertain (noisy) training data, the parameters become uncertain. Noisy measurements—because very often it is such measurements that activate the FLS. In Fig. 3, measured (crisp) inputs are first transformed into fuzzy sets in the Fuzzifier block because it is fuzzy sets and not numbers that activate the rules which are described in terms of fuzzy sets and not numbers. Three kinds of fuzzifiers are possible in an interval type-2 FLS. When measurements are: Perfect, they are modeled as a crisp set; Noisy, but the noise is stationary, they are modeled as a type-1 fuzzy set; and, Noisy, but the noise is non-stationary, they are modeled as an interval type-2 fuzzy set (this latter kind of fuzzification cannot be done in a type-1 FLS). In Fig. 3, after measurements are fuzzified, the resulting input fuzzy sets are mapped into fuzzy output sets by the Inference block. This is accomplished by first quantifying each rule using fuzzy set theory, and by then using the mathematics of fuzzy sets to establish the output of each rule, with the help of an inference mechanism. If there are M rules then the fuzzy input sets to the Inference block will activate only a subset of those rules, where the subset contains at least one rule and usually way fewer than M rules. The inference is done one rule at a time. So, at the output of the Inference block, there will be one or more fired-rule fuzzy output sets. In most engineering applications of an FLS, a number (and not a fuzzy set) is needed as its final output, e.g., the consequent of the rule given above is "Rotate the valve a bit to the right." No automatic valve will know what this means because "a bit to the right" is a linguistic expression, and a valv

Deep Learning Anti-Aliasing

Deep Learning Anti-Aliasing (DLAA) is a form of spatial anti-aliasing developed by Nvidia. DLAA depends on and requires Tensor Cores available in Nvidia RTX cards. DLAA is similar to Deep Learning Super Sampling (DLSS) in its anti-aliasing method, with one important differentiation being that the goal of DLSS is to increase performance at the cost of image quality, whereas the main priority of DLAA is improving image quality at the cost of performance (irrelevant of resolution upscaling or downscaling). DLAA is similar to temporal anti-aliasing (TAA) in that they are both spatial anti-aliasing solutions relying on past frame data. Compared to TAA, DLAA is substantially better when it comes to shimmering, flickering, and handling small meshes like wires. == Technical overview == DLAA collects game rendering data including raw low-resolution input, motion vectors, depth buffers, and exposure information. This information feeds into a convolutional neural network that processes the image to reduce aliasing while preserving fine detail. The neural network architecture employs an auto-encoder design trained on high-quality reference images. The training dataset includes diverse scenarios focusing on challenging cases like sub-pixel details, high-contrast edges, and transparent surfaces. The network then processes frames in real-time. Unlike traditional anti-aliasing solutions that rely on manually written heuristics, such as TAA, DLAA uses its neural network to preserve fine details while eliminating unwanted visual artifacts. == History == DLAA was initially called and marketed by Nvidia as DLSS 2x. The first game that added support for DLAA was The Elder Scrolls Online, which implemented the feature in 2021. By June 2022, DLAA was only available in six games. This number rose to 17 by February 2023. In June 2023, TechPowerUp reported that "DLAA is seeing sluggish adoption among game developers", and that Nvidia was working on adding DLAA to the quality presets of DLSS to boost adoption. By December 2023, DLAA was supported in 41 games. In early 2025, an update for the Nvidia App added a driver-based DLSS override feature that enables users to activate DLAA even in games that do not support it natively. == Differences between TAA and DLAA == TAA is used in many modern video games and game engines; however, all previous implementations have used some form of manually written heuristics to prevent temporal artifacts such as ghosting and flickering. One example of this is neighborhood clamping which forcefully prevents samples collected in previous frames from deviating too much compared to nearby pixels in newer frames. This helps to identify and fix many temporal artifacts, but deliberately removing fine details in this way is analogous to applying a blur filter, and thus the final image can appear blurry when using this method. DLAA uses an auto-encoder convolutional neural network trained to identify and fix temporal artifacts, instead of manually programmed heuristics as mentioned above. Because of this, DLAA can generally resolve detail better than other TAA and TAAU implementations, while also removing most temporal artifacts. == Differences between DLSS and DLAA == While DLSS handles upscaling with a focus on performance, DLAA handles anti-aliasing with a focus on visual quality. DLAA runs at the given screen resolution with no upscaling or downscaling functionality provided by DLAA. DLSS and DLAA share the same AI-driven anti-aliasing method. As such, DLAA functions like DLSS without the upscaling part. Both are made by Nvidia and require Tensor Cores. However, DLSS and DLAA cannot be enabled at the same time, only one can be selected depending on whether performance or image quality is prioritized. == Reception == TechPowerUp found that "[c]ompared to TAA and DLSS, DLAA is clearly producing the best image quality, especially at lower resolutions", arguing that, while "DLSS was already doing a better job than TAA at reconstructing small objects", "DLAA does an even better job". In a Cyberpunk 2077 performance test, IGN stated that "DLAA provided somewhat similar results [FPS wise] to the normal raster mode in most cases but got significant performance boost with the help of frame generation", a feature not available when using native resolution. Rock Paper Shotgun noted that, while DLAA is "not a completely perfect form of anti-aliasing, as the occasional jaggies are present", it "looks a lot sharper overall [than TAA], and especially in motion." According to PC World, "DLAA offers very good anti-aliasing without losing visual information — alternatives like TAA tend to struggle during motion-filled scenes, where DLAA doesn’t. Furthermore, DLAA’s loss of performance is lower than with conventional anti-aliasing methods."

Fuzzy Control Language

Fuzzy Control Language, or FCL, is a language for implementing fuzzy logic, especially fuzzy control. It was standardized by IEC 61131-7. It is a domain-specific programming language: it has no features unrelated to fuzzy logic, so it is impossible to even print "Hello, world!". Therefore, one does not write a program in FCL, but one may write part of it in FCL. == Example == RULE 0: IF (temperature IS cold) THEN (output IS low) RULE 1: IF (temperature IS very cold) THEN (output IS high) == Limitations == FCL is not an entirely complete fuzzy language, for instance, it does not support "hedges", which are adverbs that modify the set. For instance, the programmer cannot write: RULE 0: If (Temperature is VERY COLD) then (Output is VERY HIGH) However, the programmer can simply define new sets for "very cold" and "very high". FCL also lacks support for higher-order fuzzy sets, subsets, and so on. None of these features are essential to fuzzy control, although they may be nice to have.