SeaTable is a no-code platform that allows users to develop and implement business processes. The cloud collaboration service SeaTable is marketed by the GmbH of the same name with headquarters in Mainz and additional offices in Berlin and Beijing, and developed by the same company as Seafile. == History == SeaTable is a collaborative database and low-code application platform developed as part of a joint venture between Seafile Ltd., a software company based in Guangzhou, China, and SeaTable GmbH, a German firm headquartered in Mainz. Founded in 2020, the project represents the international expansion of Seafile, a Chinese developer originally known for its file synchronization and sharing software. While SeaTable's cloud services and European client operations are managed by the German entity, the platform itself is developed in China by Seafile's engineering team. This cross-border structure, described by TechCrunch as an “unconventional path” for a Chinese startup expanding abroad, reflects Seafile's effort to maintain its product development in China while addressing growing scrutiny in Western markets over data governance and corporate control. In 2021, an innovation project led by the Cyber Innovation Hub at the IT School of the German Armed Forces started to evaluate the possibilities of a large-scale deployment at the German Armed Forces. The evaluation project is currently still ongoing. In 2022, SeaTable is optimizing its database backend to allow millions of records within one base in the future. The focus of development is increasingly on automation and visualization. In 2025, SeaTable introduced AI-powered automations with version 6. The update enabled the integration of large language models (LLMs) for text analysis and automated decision-making. SeaTable operates a self-hosted LLM on servers provided by Hetzner (Germany), while self-hosted deployments can connect to any compatible model. == Features == SeaTable combines the traditional capabilities of a spreadsheet such as Excel and supplements them with a wide range of functions for process automation and visualization as well as a fully comprehensive API. SeaTable is not a pure cloud solution, but can alternatively be installed on a private server and operated completely autonomously. In this way, the owner retains full control over their own data. The installation is done via Docker on a Linux server. == Security and privacy == While most no-code platforms exist only as SaaS solutions, SeaTable describes itself as a data-sparse European solution. While initially the SeaTable Cloud was hosted on Amazon AWS, the move to the German data centers of Swiss provider Exoscale then took place in May 2021. This was followed by the replacement of the Freshdesk cloud ticketing system with a self-hosted Zammad instance, and since April 2022 SeaTable has completely dispensed with all tracking cookies on its website.
Tea (app)
Tea, officially Tea Dating Advice, is a dating surveillance mobile phone application that allows women to post personal data about men they are interested in or are currently dating. Founded by Sean Cook, the app rose to prominence in July 2025 after it was the subject of three major data leaks in July and August 2025. It was removed from Apple's App Store in October 2025, but remains available on the Google Play Store. == History == The app enables its users to upload, view, and comment on photos of men, check men's public records, and perform image searches. It also provides the ability to rate and review men, as well as a group chat function. The app uses artificial intelligence to verify that the user is a woman through facial analysis and other personal information to preserve the app as a women-only space. Users are required to submit their photo and an ID to access the app. The company that created the app was founded by businessman and tech capitalist Sean Cook, who stated in July 2025 that he was inspired to create the app because of his mother's experiences from online dating. According to the company, users remain anonymous, and the requirement to upload an ID was removed in 2023. An August 2025 investigation by 404 Media suggested that much of the information given by Cook on the historical background of the company was inaccurate. In July 2025, private messages, other personally identifying information, and approximately 72,000 images were leaked via 4chan. A further 1.1 million private messages were subsequently leaked using a separate security vulnerability; these included intimate conversations about controversial topics such as adultery and other forms of infidelity to their partners, discussions of abortion, phone numbers, meeting locations, and other confidential communications. The app's publishers subsequently revoked the ability to private message users in the app. Shortly after, the app was hidden from search on Android and an interactive, unverified map was also created of those in the files. By 7 August 2025, ten class action lawsuits had been filed. A further leak was reported later that month. Proponents have praised the app as an aid for women's safety by helping them check men for adultery, catfishing, criminal convictions and other "red flag" behaviors. Critics have described the app as a doxing tool and a violation of privacy, an opportunity for defamation against innocent individuals, and a witch hunt. Cook has stated that the company's legal team receives about three legal threats per day. Another mobile app, called TeaOnHer, was created in response of the app’s popularity. It was described as the male version of the Tea app. The app also reported a data breach in August 2025. In October 2025, Apple removed the app from their app store, telling journalists that the removal was due to a failure to meet company terms regarding content moderation and user privacy. Apple also mentioned an excessive amount of complaints, including allegations that the personal information of minors was being shared. The app remains on the Google Play Store.
Averbis
Averbis has a focus on healthcare, pharma, automotive and intellectual property analytics. Averbis is involved in various research projects of the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Energy and the European Union such as DebugIT, EUCases, Mantra and SEMCARE. In addition to these projects, Averbis was also involved in the following projects: Greenpilot is a virtual library, which provides technical information in the fields of nutrition, environment and agriculture. Medpilot is a virtual library, which provides information about medicine and related sciences. In 2013, Averbis has been nominated for the German Founder Prize 2013. Averbis GmbH provides text analytics and text mining software to transform unstructured text into actionable information. It was founded in 2007 by IT experts after years of relevant scientific experience in the field of text mining and multilingual information retrieval. Averbis works in the field of terminology management, natural language processing, machine learning and semantic search. Its text mining software is embedded into the text mining framework UIMA.
Lexical choice
Lexical choice is the subtask of Natural language generation that involves choosing the content words (nouns, non-auxiliary verbs, adjectives, and adverbs) in a generated text. Function words (determiners, for example) are usually chosen during realisation. == Examples == The simplest type of lexical choice involves mapping a domain concept (perhaps represented in an ontology) to a word. For example, the concept Finger might be mapped to the word finger. A more complex situation is when a domain concept is expressed using different words in different situations. For example, the domain concept Value-Change can be expressed in many ways: The temperature rose: the verb rose is used for a Value-Change in temperature which increases the value. The temperature fell: the verb fell is used for a Value-Change in temperature which decreases the value. The rain got heavier: the phrase got heavier is used for a Value-Change in precipitation amount when the precipitation is rain. Sometimes words can communicate additional contextual information, for example: The temperature plummeted: the verb plummeted is used for a Value-Change in temperature which decreases the value, when the change is rapid and large. Contextual information is especially significant for vague terms such as tall. For example, a 2m tall man is tall, but a 2m tall horse is small. == Linguistic perspective == Lexical choice modules must be informed by linguistic knowledge of how the system's input data maps onto words. This is a question of semantics, but it is also influenced by syntactic factors (such as collocation effects) and pragmatic factors (such as context). Hence NLG systems need linguistic models of how meaning is mapped to words in the target domain (genre) of the NLG system. Genre tends to be very important; for example the verb veer has a very specific meaning in weather forecasts (wind direction is changing in a clockwise direction) which it does not have in general English, and a weather-forecast generator must be aware of this genre-specific meaning. In some cases there are major differences in how different people use the same word; for example, some people use by evening to mean 6PM and others use it to mean midnight. Psycholinguists have shown that when people speak to each other, they agree on a common interpretation via lexical alignment; this is not something which NLG systems can yet do. Ultimately, lexical choice must deal with the fundamental issue of how language relates to the non-linguistic world. For example, a system which chose colour terms such as red to describe objects in a digital image would need to know which RGB pixel values could generally be described as red; how this was influenced by visual (lighting, other objects in the scene) and linguistic (other objects being discussed) context; what pragmatic connotations were associated with red (for example, when an apple is called red, it is assumed to be ripe as well as have the colour red); and so forth. == Algorithms and models == A number of algorithms and models have been developed for lexical choice in the research community, for example Edmonds developed a model for choosing between near-synonyms (words with similar core meanings but different connotations). However such algorithms and models have not been widely used in applied NLG systems; such systems have instead often used quite simple computational models, and invested development effort in linguistic analysis instead of algorithm development.
Latent semantic mapping
Latent semantic mapping (LSM) is a data-driven framework to model globally meaningful relationships implicit in large volumes of (often textual) data. It is a generalization of latent semantic analysis. In information retrieval, LSA enables retrieval on the basis of conceptual content, instead of merely matching words between queries and documents. LSM was derived from earlier work on latent semantic analysis. There are 3 main characteristics of latent semantic analysis: Discrete entities, usually in the form of words and documents, are mapped onto continuous vectors, the mapping involves a form of global correlation pattern, and dimensionality reduction is an important aspect of the analysis process. These constitute generic properties, and have been identified as potentially useful in a variety of different contexts. This usefulness has encouraged great interest in LSM. The intended product of latent semantic mapping, is a data-driven framework for modeling relationships in large volumes of data. Mac OS X v10.5 and later includes a framework implementing latent semantic mapping.
Unspent transaction output
In cryptocurrencies, an unspent transaction output (UTXO, often capitalized as UTxO) is a distinctive element in a subset of digital currency models. A UTXO represents a certain amount of cryptocurrency that has been authorized by a sender and is available to be spent by a recipient. The utilization of UTXOs in transaction processes is a key feature of many cryptocurrencies, but it primarily characterizes those implementing the UTXO model. UTXOs employ public key cryptography to ascertain and transfer ownership. More specifically, the recipient's public key is formatted into the UTXO, thereby limiting the capability to spend the UTXO to the account that can demonstrate ownership of the corresponding private key. A valid digital signature associated with the public key must be included for the UTXO to be spent. In the UTXO model, each unit of currency is treated as a discrete object. The history of a UTXO is documented only within the blocks where it is transferred. To ascertain the total balance of an account, one must scan each block to find the latest UTXOs linked to that account. While all nodes within a blockchain network must consent to the block history, the blocks relevant to an account's balance are unique to that account. UTXOs constitute a chain of ownership depicted as a series of digital signatures dating back to the coin's inception, regardless of whether the coin was minted via mining, staking, or another procedure determined by the cryptocurrency protocol. The UTXO model was invented for Bitcoin. Cardano uses an extended version of the UTXO model known as EUTXO. == Origins == The conceptual framework of the UTXO model can be traced back to Hal Finney's Reusable Proofs of Work proposal, which itself was based on Adam Back's 1997 Hashcash proposal. Bitcoin, released in 2009, was the first widespread implementation of the UTXO model in practice. == UTXO model vs. account Model == Cryptocurrencies that utilize the UTXO model function differently compared to those using the account model. In the UTXO model, individual units of cryptocurrency, termed as unspent transaction outputs (UTXOs), are transferred between users, analogous to the exchange of physical cash. This model impacts how transactions and ownership are recorded and verified within the blockchain network. The account model preserves a record of each account and its corresponding balance for every block added to the network. This setup enables quicker balance verification without the need to scan historical blocks, but it increases the raw size of each block (though data compression techniques can be utilized to alleviate this). However, both models necessitate the inspection of past blocks to fully authenticate the origin of coins. In the UTXO model, each object is immutable - units of coins cannot be 'edited' in the same way an account balance is modified when a transaction occurs. Rather, the balance is computed from the transaction history dating back to when the coins were first minted. This simplicity enhances security, as a UTXO either exists in its anticipated form or it does not. In contrast, the account model requires meticulous verification of the account's status during transactions, which can lead to oversights if not conducted correctly. In valid blockchain transactions, only unspent outputs (UTXOs) are permissible for funding subsequent transactions. This requirement is critical to prevent double-spending and fraud. Accordingly, inputs in a transaction are removed from the UTXO set, while outputs create new UTXOs that are added to the set. The holders of private keys, such as those with cryptocurrency wallets, can utilize these UTXOs for future transactions.
Lexical substitution
Lexical substitution is the task of identifying a substitute for a word in the context of a clause. For instance, given the following text: "After the match, replace any remaining fluid deficit to prevent chronic dehydration throughout the tournament", a substitute of game might be given. Lexical substitution is strictly related to word sense disambiguation (WSD), in that both aim to determine the meaning of a word. However, while WSD consists of automatically assigning the appropriate sense from a fixed sense inventory, lexical substitution does not impose any constraint on which substitute to choose as the best representative for the word in context. By not prescribing the inventory, lexical substitution overcomes the issue of the granularity of sense distinctions and provides a level playing field for automatic systems that automatically acquire word senses (a task referred to as Word Sense Induction). == Evaluation == In order to evaluate automatic systems on lexical substitution, a task was organized at the Semeval-2007 evaluation competition held in Prague in 2007. A Semeval-2010 task on cross-lingual lexical substitution has also taken place. == Skip-gram model == The skip-gram model takes words with similar meanings into a vector space (collection of objects that can be added together and multiplied by numbers) that are found close to each other in N-dimensions (list of items). A variety of neural networks (computer system modeled after a human brain) are formed together as a result of the vectors and networks that are related together. This all occurs in the dimensions of the vocabulary that has been generated in a network. The model has been used in lexical substitution automation and prediction algorithms. One such algorithm developed by Oren Melamud, Omer Levy, and Ido Dagan uses the skip-gram model to find a vector for each word and its synonyms. Then, it calculates the cosine distance between vectors to determine which words will be the best substitutes. === Example === In a sentence like "The dog walked at a quick pace" each word has a specific vector in relation to the other. The vector for "The" would be [1,0,0,0,0,0,0] because the 1 is the word vocabulary and the 0s are the words surrounding that vocabulary, which create a vector.