A super column is a tuple (a pair) with a binary super column name and a value that maps it to many columns. They consist of a key–value pairs, where the values are columns. Theoretically speaking, super columns are (sorted) associative array of columns. Similar to a regular column family where a row is a sorted map of column names and column values, a row in a super column family is a sorted map of super column names that maps to column names and column values. A super column is part of a keyspace together with other super columns and column families, and columns. == Code example == Written in the JSON-like syntax, a super column definition can be like this: Where: "databases" are keyspace; "Cassandra" and "HBase" are rowKeys; "name" and "address" are super column names; "firstName", "city", "age", etc. are column names.
Spherical basis
In pure and applied mathematics, particularly quantum mechanics and computer graphics and their applications, a spherical basis is the basis used to express spherical tensors. The spherical basis closely relates to the description of angular momentum in quantum mechanics and spherical harmonic functions. While spherical polar coordinates are one orthogonal coordinate system for expressing vectors and tensors using polar and azimuthal angles and radial distance, the spherical basis are constructed from the standard basis and use complex numbers. == In three dimensions == A vector A in 3D Euclidean space R3 can be expressed in the familiar Cartesian coordinate system in the standard basis ex, ey, ez, and coordinates Ax, Ay, Az: or any other coordinate system with associated basis set of vectors. From this extend the scalars to allow multiplication by complex numbers, so that we are now working in C 3 {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} ^{3}} rather than R 3 {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{3}} . === Basis definition === In the spherical bases denoted e+, e−, e0, and associated coordinates with respect to this basis, denoted A+, A−, A0, the vector A is: where the spherical basis vectors can be defined in terms of the Cartesian basis using complex-valued coefficients in the xy plane: in which i {\displaystyle i} denotes the imaginary unit, and one normal to the plane in the z direction: e 0 = e z {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{0}=\mathbf {e} _{z}} The inverse relations are: === Commutator definition === While giving a basis in a 3-dimensional space is a valid definition for a spherical tensor, it only covers the case for when the rank k {\displaystyle k} is 1. For higher ranks, one may use either the commutator, or rotation definition of a spherical tensor. The commutator definition is given below, any operator T q ( k ) {\displaystyle T_{q}^{(k)}} that satisfies the following relations is a spherical tensor: [ J ± , T q ( k ) ] = ℏ ( k ∓ q ) ( k ± q + 1 ) T q ± 1 ( k ) {\displaystyle [J_{\pm },T_{q}^{(k)}]=\hbar {\sqrt {(k\mp q)(k\pm q+1)}}T_{q\pm 1}^{(k)}} [ J z , T q ( k ) ] = ℏ q T q ( k ) {\displaystyle [J_{z},T_{q}^{(k)}]=\hbar qT_{q}^{(k)}} === Rotation definition === Analogously to how the spherical harmonics transform under a rotation, a general spherical tensor transforms as follows, when the states transform under the unitary Wigner D-matrix D ( R ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}(R)} , where R is a (3×3 rotation) group element in SO(3). That is, these matrices represent the rotation group elements. With the help of its Lie algebra, one can show these two definitions are equivalent. D ( R ) T q ( k ) D † ( R ) = ∑ q ′ = − k k T q ′ ( k ) D q ′ q ( k ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}(R)T_{q}^{(k)}{\mathcal {D}}^{\dagger }(R)=\sum _{q'=-k}^{k}T_{q'}^{(k)}{\mathcal {D}}_{q'q}^{(k)}} === Coordinate vectors === For the spherical basis, the coordinates are complex-valued numbers A+, A0, A−, and can be found by substitution of (3B) into (1), or directly calculated from the inner product ⟨, ⟩ (5): A 0 = ⟨ e 0 , A ⟩ = ⟨ e z , A ⟩ = A z {\displaystyle A_{0}=\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{0},\mathbf {A} \right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{z},\mathbf {A} \right\rangle =A_{z}} with inverse relations: In general, for two vectors with complex coefficients in the same real-valued orthonormal basis ei, with the property ei·ej = δij, the inner product is: where · is the usual dot product and the complex conjugate must be used to keep the magnitude (or "norm") of the vector positive definite. == Properties (three dimensions) == === Orthonormality === The spherical basis is an orthonormal basis, since the inner product ⟨, ⟩ (5) of every pair vanishes meaning the basis vectors are all mutually orthogonal: ⟨ e + , e − ⟩ = ⟨ e − , e 0 ⟩ = ⟨ e 0 , e + ⟩ = 0 {\displaystyle \left\langle \mathbf {e} _{+},\mathbf {e} _{-}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{-},\mathbf {e} _{0}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{0},\mathbf {e} _{+}\right\rangle =0} and each basis vector is a unit vector: ⟨ e + , e + ⟩ = ⟨ e − , e − ⟩ = ⟨ e 0 , e 0 ⟩ = 1 {\displaystyle \left\langle \mathbf {e} _{+},\mathbf {e} _{+}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{-},\mathbf {e} _{-}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{0},\mathbf {e} _{0}\right\rangle =1} hence the need for the normalizing factors of 1 / 2 {\displaystyle 1/\!{\sqrt {2}}} . === Change of basis matrix === The defining relations (3A) can be summarized by a transformation matrix U: ( e + e − e 0 ) = U ( e x e y e z ) , U = ( − 1 2 − i 2 0 + 1 2 − i 2 0 0 0 1 ) , {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{+}\\\mathbf {e} _{-}\\\mathbf {e} _{0}\end{pmatrix}}=\mathbf {U} {\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{x}\\\mathbf {e} _{y}\\\mathbf {e} _{z}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad \mathbf {U} ={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,,} with inverse: ( e x e y e z ) = U − 1 ( e + e − e 0 ) , U − 1 = ( − 1 2 + 1 2 0 + i 2 + i 2 0 0 0 1 ) . {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{x}\\\mathbf {e} _{y}\\\mathbf {e} _{z}\end{pmatrix}}=\mathbf {U} ^{-1}{\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{+}\\\mathbf {e} _{-}\\\mathbf {e} _{0}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad \mathbf {U} ^{-1}={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,.} It can be seen that U is a unitary matrix, in other words its Hermitian conjugate U† (complex conjugate and matrix transpose) is also the inverse matrix U−1. For the coordinates: ( A + A − A 0 ) = U ∗ ( A x A y A z ) , U ∗ = ( − 1 2 + i 2 0 + 1 2 + i 2 0 0 0 1 ) , {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}A_{+}\\A_{-}\\A_{0}\end{pmatrix}}=\mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} }{\begin{pmatrix}A_{x}\\A_{y}\\A_{z}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad \mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} }={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,,} and inverse: ( A x A y A z ) = ( U ∗ ) − 1 ( A + A − A 0 ) , ( U ∗ ) − 1 = ( − 1 2 + 1 2 0 − i 2 − i 2 0 0 0 1 ) . {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}A_{x}\\A_{y}\\A_{z}\end{pmatrix}}=(\mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} })^{-1}{\begin{pmatrix}A_{+}\\A_{-}\\A_{0}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad (\mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} })^{-1}={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,.} === Cross products === Taking cross products of the spherical basis vectors, we find an obvious relation: e q × e q = 0 {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{q}\times \mathbf {e} _{q}={\boldsymbol {0}}} where q is a placeholder for +, −, 0, and two less obvious relations: e ± × e ∓ = ± i e 0 {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{\pm }\times \mathbf {e} _{\mp }=\pm i\mathbf {e} _{0}} e ± × e 0 = ± i e ± {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{\pm }\times \mathbf {e} _{0}=\pm i\mathbf {e} _{\pm }} === Inner product in the spherical basis === The inner product between two vectors A and B in the spherical basis follows from the above definition of the inner product: ⟨ A , B ⟩ = A + B + ⋆ + A − B − ⋆ + A 0 B 0 ⋆ {\displaystyle \left\langle \mathbf {A} ,\mathbf {B} \right\rangle =A_{+}B_{+}^{\star }+A_{-}B_{-}^{\star }+A_{0}B_{0}^{\star }}
AI Essay Writers Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026
Trying to pick the best AI essay writer? An AI essay writer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI essay writer slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.
Tamara Broderick
Tamara Ann Broderick is an American computer scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. She works on machine learning and Bayesian inference. == Education and early career == Broderick is from Parma Heights, Ohio. She attended Laurel School and graduated in 2003. Whilst at high school she took part in the inaugural Massachusetts Institute of Technology Women's Technology Program. She studied mathematics at Princeton University, earning a bachelor's degree in 2007. She was a Marshall scholar, allowing her to pursue graduate research at the University of Cambridge. She was a runner-up in the Association for Women in Mathematics Alice T. Shafer Prize for Excellence in Mathematics. She was co-president of the Princeton Math Club and organised a competition for high school maths teams. She won the Phi Beta Kappa Prize for the highest academic average at Princeton University. During her undergraduate degree, Broderick worked on dark matter haloes with Rachel Mandelbaum. Broderick moved to the United Kingdom for her graduate studies, earning a Master of Advanced Studies for completing Part III of the Mathematical Tripos at the University of Cambridge in 2009. Her Master's thesis looked at the Nomon selection method, improving the efficiency of communications. She returned to America in 2009, joining University of California, Berkeley for her Master's and PhD. Her graduate research was supported by the Berkeley Fellowship and a National Science Foundation Fellowship. Her PhD thesis Clusters and features from combinatorial stochastic processes looked at clustering and speeding up the analysis of large, streaming data sets. In 2013 she was selected for the Berkeley EECS Rising Stars conference. == Research and career == Broderick joined Massachusetts Institute of Technology as an assistant professor in 2015. She is interested in Bayesian statistics and graphical models. She was the recipient of a Google Faculty Research Grant and International Society for Bayesian Analysis Lifetime Members Junior Researcher Award. She was awarded an Army Research Office young investigator program award to investigate machine-learning to quantify uncertainty in data analysis. Broderick is also Alfred P. Sloan Foundation scholar. === Academic service === In 2018, Broderick spoke at the Harvard University Institute for Applied Computational Science Women in Data Science conference. She spoke about Bayesian inference at the 2018 International Conference on Machine Learning. She led a three-day Masterclass on machine learning at University College London in June 2018. Broderick is a scientific advisor for AI.Reverie and WiML (Women in Machine Learning). She has developed a high-school level introduction to machine learning with the Women's Technology Program (WTP). Software she has developed is available on her website. === Awards and honors === Broderick was awarded the Evelyn Fix Memorial Medal and Citation and the International Society for Bayesian Analysis Savage Award for her doctoral thesis. She was awarded a National Science Foundation CAREER Award to scale her machine learning techniques. She was a 2021 Leadership Academy winner of the Committee of Presidents of Statistical Societies.
Nando de Freitas
Nando de Freitas is a researcher in the field of machine learning, and in particular in the subfields of neural networks, Bayesian inference and Bayesian optimization, and deep learning. == Biography == De Freitas was born in Zimbabwe. He did his undergraduate studies (1991–94) and MSc (1994–96) at the University of the Witwatersrand, and his PhD at Trinity College, Cambridge (1996-2000). From 2001, he was a professor at the University of British Columbia, before joining the Department of Computer Science at the University of Oxford from 2013 to 2017. In 2014, he joined Google's DeepMind when the company acquired Oxford spinoff Dark Blue Labs. He was in charge of the team that worked on creating tools for generating audio and images at DeepMind. In September 2024, de Freitas joined Microsoft AI as VP of AI. == Awards and recognition == De Freitas has been recognised for his contributions to machine learning through the following awards: Best Paper Award at the International Conference on Machine Learning (2016) Best Paper Award at the International Conference on Learning Representations (2016) Google Faculty Research Award (2014) Distinguished Paper Award at the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2013) Charles A. McDowell Award for Excellence in Research (2012) Mathematics of Information Technology and Complex Systems Young Researcher Award (2010)
Automatic acquisition of sense-tagged corpora
The knowledge acquisition bottleneck is perhaps the major impediment to solving the word-sense disambiguation (WSD) problem. Unsupervised learning methods rely on knowledge about word senses, which is barely formulated in dictionaries and lexical databases. Supervised learning methods depend heavily on the existence of manually annotated examples for every word sense, a requisite that can so far be met only for a handful of words for testing purposes, as it is done in the Senseval exercises. == Existing methods == Therefore, one of the most promising trends in WSD research is using the largest corpus ever accessible, the World Wide Web, to acquire lexical information automatically. WSD has been traditionally understood as an intermediate language engineering technology which could improve applications such as information retrieval (IR). In this case, however, the reverse is also true: Web search engines implement simple and robust IR techniques that can be successfully used when mining the Web for information to be employed in WSD. The most direct way of using the Web (and other corpora) to enhance WSD performance is the automatic acquisition of sense-tagged corpora, the fundamental resource to feed supervised WSD algorithms. Although this is far from being commonplace in the WSD literature, a number of different and effective strategies to achieve this goal have already been proposed. Some of these strategies are: acquisition by direct Web searching (searches for monosemous synonyms, hypernyms, hyponyms, parsed gloss' words, etc.), Yarowsky algorithm (bootstrapping), acquisition via Web directories, and acquisition via cross-language meaning evidences. == Summary == === Optimistic results === The automatic extraction of examples to train supervised learning algorithms reviewed has been, by far, the best explored approach to mine the web for word-sense disambiguation. Some results are certainly encouraging: In some experiments, the quality of the Web data for WSD equals that of human-tagged examples. This is the case of the monosemous relatives plus bootstrapping with Semcor seeds technique and the examples taken from the ODP Web directories. In the first case, however, Semcor-size example seeds are necessary (and only available for English), and it has only been tested with a very limited set of nouns; in the second case, the coverage is quite limited, and it is not yet clear whether it can be grown without compromising the quality of the examples retrieved. It has been shown that a mainstream supervised learning technique trained exclusively with web data can obtain better results than all unsupervised WSD systems which participated at Senseval-2. Web examples made a significant contribution to the best Senseval-2 English all-words system. === Difficulties === There are, however, several open research issues related to the use of Web examples in WSD: High precision in the retrieved examples (i.e., correct sense assignments for the examples) does not necessarily lead to good supervised WSD results (i.e., the examples are possibly not useful for training). The most complete evaluation of Web examples for supervised WSD indicates that learning with Web data improves over unsupervised techniques, but the results are nevertheless far from those obtained with hand-tagged data, and do not even beat the most-frequent-sense baseline. Results are not always reproducible; the same or similar techniques may lead to different results in different experiments. Compare, for instance, Mihalcea (2002) with Agirre and Martínez (2004), or Agirre and Martínez (2000) with Mihalcea and Moldovan (1999). Results with Web data seem to be very sensitive to small differences in the learning algorithm, to when the corpus was extracted (search engines change continuously), and on small heuristic issues (e.g., differences in filters to discard part of the retrieved examples). Results are strongly dependent on bias (i.e., on the relative frequencies of examples per word sense). It is unclear whether this is simply a problem of Web data, or an intrinsic problem of supervised learning techniques, or just a problem of how WSD systems are evaluated (indeed, testing with rather small Senseval data may overemphasize sense distributions compared to sense distributions obtained from the full Web as corpus). In any case, Web data has an intrinsic bias, because queries to search engines directly constrain the context of the examples retrieved. There are approaches that alleviate this problem, such as using several different seeds/queries per sense or assigning senses to Web directories and then scanning directories for examples; but this problem is nevertheless far from being solved. Once a Web corpus of examples is built, it is not entirely clear whether its distribution is safe from a legal perspective. === Future === Besides automatic acquisition of examples from the Web, there are some other WSD experiments that have profited from the Web: The Web as a social network has been successfully used for cooperative annotation of a corpus (OMWE, Open Mind Word Expert project), which has already been used in three Senseval-3 tasks (English, Romanian and Multilingual). The Web has been used to enrich WordNet senses with domain information: topic signatures and Web directories, which have in turn been successfully used for WSD. Also, some research benefited from the semantic information that the Wikipedia maintains on its disambiguation pages. It is clear, however, that most research opportunities remain largely unexplored. For instance, little is known about how to use lexical information extracted from the Web in knowledge-based WSD systems; and it is also hard to find systems that use Web-mined parallel corpora for WSD, even though there are already efficient algorithms that use parallel corpora in WSD.
OCR Systems
OCR Systems, Inc., was an American computer hardware manufacturer and software publisher dedicated to optical character recognition technologies. The company's first product, the System 1000 in 1970, was used by numerous large corporations for bill processing and mail sorting. Following a series of pitfalls in the 1970s and early 1980s, founder Theodor Herzl Levine put the company in the hands of Gregory Boleslavsky and Vadim Brikman, the company's vice presidents and recent immigrants from the Soviet Ukraine, who were able to turn OCR System's fortunes around and expand its employee base. The company released the software-based OCR application ReadRight for DOS, later ported to Windows, in the late 1980s. Adobe Inc. bought the company in 1992. == History == OCR Systems was co-founded by Theodor Herzl Levine (c. 1923 – May 30, 2005). Levine served in the U.S. Army Signal Corps during World War II in the Solomon Islands, where he helped develop a sonar to find ejected pilots in the ocean. After the war, Levine spent 22 years at the University of Pennsylvania, earning his bachelor's degree in 1951, his master's degree in electrical engineering in 1957, and his doctorate in 1968. Alongside his studies, Levine taught statistics and calculus at Temple University, Rutgers University, La Salle University and Penn State Abington. Sometime in the 1960s, Levine was hired at Philco. He and two of his co-workers decided to form their own company dedicated to optical character recognition, founding OCR Systems in 1969 in Bensalem, Pennsylvania. OCR Systems's first product, the System 1000, was announced in 1970. OCR Systems entered a partnership with 3M to resell the System 1000 throughout the United States in March 1973. This was 3M's entry into the data entry field, managed by the company's Microfilm Products Division and accompanying 3M's suite of data retrieval systems. It soon found use among Texas Instruments, AT&T, Ricoh, Panasonic and Canon for bill processing and mail sorting. Later in the mid-1970s an unspecified Fortune 500 company reneged on a contract to distribute the System 1000; later still a Canadian company distributing the System 1000 in Canada went defunct. Both incidents led OCR Systems to go nearly bankrupt, although it eventually recovered. By the early 1980s, however, the company was almost insolvent. In 1983 Levine had only $8,000 in his savings and became bedridden with an illness. He left the company in the hands of Gregory Boleslavsky and Vadim Brikman, two Soviet Ukraine expats whom Levine had hired earlier in the 1980s. Boleslavsky was hired as a wire wrapper for the System 1000 and as a programmer and beta tester for ReadRight—a software package developed by Levine implementing patents from Nonlinear Technology, another OCR-centric company from Greenbelt, Maryland. Boleslavsky in turn recommended Brikman to Levine. The two soon became vice presidents of the company while Levine was bedridden; in Boleslavsky's case, he worked 14-hour work days for over half a year in pursuit of the title. The two presented OCR Systems' products to the National Computer Conference in Chicago, where they were massively popular. The company soon gained such clients as Allegheny Energy in Pennsylvania and the postal service of Belgium and received an influx of employees—mostly expats from Russia but also Poland and South Korea, as well as American-born workers. To accommodate the company's employee base, which had grown to over 30 in 1988, Levine moved OCR System's headquarters from Bensalem to the Masons Mill Business Park in Bryn Athyn. Chinon Industries of Japan signed an agreement with OCR Systems in 1987 to distribute OCR's ReadRight 1.0 software with Chinon's scanners, starting with their N-205 overhead scanner. In 1988, OCR opened their agreement to distribute ReadRight to other scanner manufacturers, including Canon, Hewlett-Packard, Skyworld, Taxan, Diamond Flower and Abaton. That year, the company posted a revenue of $3 million. OCR Systems extended their agreement with Chinon in 1989 and introduced version 2.0 of ReadRight. OCR Systems faced stiff competition in the software OCR market in the turn of the 1990s. The Toronto-based software firm Delrina signed a letter of intent to purchase the company in November 1991, expecting the deal to close in December and have OCR software available by Christmas. OCR was to receive $3 million worth of Delrina shares in a stock swap, but the deal collapsed in January 1992. Delrine later marketed its own Extended Character Recognition, or XCR, software package to compete with ReadRight. In July 1992, OCR Systems was purchased by Adobe Inc. for an undisclosed sum. == Products == === System 1000 === The System 1000 was based on the 16-bit Varian Data 620/i minicomputer with 4 KB of core memory. The system used the 620/i for controlling the paper feed, interpreting the format of the documents, the optical character recognition process itself, error detection, sequencing and output. The System was initially programmed to recognize 1428 OCR (used by Selectrics); IBM 407 print; and the full character sets of OCR-A, OCR-B and Farrington 7B; as well as optical marks and handwritten numbers. OCR Systems promised added compatibility with more fonts available down the line—per request—in 1970. The number of fonts supported was limited by the amount of core memory, which was expandable in 4 KB increments up to 32 KB. The System 1000 later supported generalized typewriter and photocopier fonts. The rest of the System 1000 comprised the document transport, one or more scanner elements, a CRT display and a Teletype Model 33 or 35. Pages are fed via friction with a rubber belt. Up to three lines could be scanned per document, while the rest of the scanned document could be laid out in any manner granted there was enough space around the fields to be read. The reader initially supported pages as small as 3.25 in by 3.5 in dimension (later supporting 2.6 in by 3.5 in utility cash stubs) all the way to the standard ANSI letter size (8.5 in by 11 in; later 8.5 in by 12 in as used in stock certificates). The initial System 1000 had a maximum throughput of 420 documents per minute per transport (later 500 documents per minute), contingent on document size and content. A feature unique to the System 1000 over other optical character recognition systems of the time was its ability to alert the operator when a field was unreadable or otherwise invalid. This feature, called Document Referral, placed the document in front of the operator and displayed a blank field on the screen of the included CRT monitor for manual re-entry via keyboard. Once input, data could be output to 7- or 9-track tape, paper tape, punched cards and other mass storage media or to System/360 mainframes for further processing. The complete System 1000 could be purchased for US$69,000. Options for renting were $1,800 per month on a three-year lease or $1,600 per month for five years. Computerworld wrote that it was less than half the cost of its competitors while more capable and user-friendly. Competing systems included the Recognition Equipment Retina, the Scan-Optics IC/20 and the Scan-Data 250/350. === ReadRight === ReadRight processes individual letters topographically: it breaks down the scanned letter into parts—strokes, curves, angles, ascenders and descenders—and follows a tree structure of letters broken down into these parts to determine the corresponding character code. ReadRight was entirely software-based, requiring no expansion card to work. Version 2.01, the last version released for DOS, runs in real mode in under 640 KB of RAM. OCR Systems released the Windows-only version 3.0 in 1991 while offering version 2.01 alongside it. The company unveiled a sister product, ReadRight Personal, dedicated to handheld scanners and for Windows only in October 1991. This version adds real-time scanning—each word is updated to the screen while lines are being scanned. ReadRight proper was later made a Windows-only product with version 3.1 in 1992. The inclusion of ReadRight 2.0 with Canon's IX-12F flatbed scanner led PC Magazine to award it an Editor's Choice rating in 1989. Despite this, reviewer Robert Kendall found qualification with ReadRight's ability to parse proportional typefaces such as Helvetica and Times New Roman. Mitt Jones of the same publication found version 2.01 to have improved its ability to read such typefaces and praised its ease of use and low resource intensiveness. Jones disliked the inability to handle uneven page paragraph column widths and graphics, noting that the manual recommended the user block out graphics with a Post-it Note. Version 3.1 for Windows received mixed reviews. Mike Heck of InfoWorld wrote that its "low cost and rich collection of features are hard to ignore" but rated its speed and accuracy average. Barry Simon of PC Magazine called it economical but inaccurate, unable to correct errors it did