The first edition of the textbook Data Science and Predictive Analytics: Biomedical and Health Applications using R, authored by Ivo D. Dinov, was published in August 2018 by Springer. The second edition of the book was printed in 2023. This textbook covers some of the core mathematical foundations, computational techniques, and artificial intelligence approaches used in data science research and applications. By using the statistical computing platform R and a broad range of biomedical case-studies, the 23 chapters of the book first edition provide explicit examples of importing, exporting, processing, modeling, visualizing, and interpreting large, multivariate, incomplete, heterogeneous, longitudinal, and incomplete datasets (big data). == Structure == === First edition table of contents === The first edition of the Data Science and Predictive Analytics (DSPA) textbook is divided into the following 23 chapters, each progressively building on the previous content. === Second edition table of contents === The significantly reorganized revised edition of the book (2023) expands and modernizes the presented mathematical principles, computational methods, data science techniques, model-based machine learning and model-free artificial intelligence algorithms. The 14 chapters of the new edition start with an introduction and progressively build foundational skills to naturally reach biomedical applications of deep learning. Introduction Basic Visualization and Exploratory Data Analytics Linear Algebra, Matrix Computing, and Regression Modeling Linear and Nonlinear Dimensionality Reduction Supervised Classification Black Box Machine Learning Methods Qualitative Learning Methods—Text Mining, Natural Language Processing, and Apriori Association Rules Learning Unsupervised Clustering Model Performance Assessment, Validation, and Improvement Specialized Machine Learning Topics Variable Importance and Feature Selection Big Longitudinal Data Analysis Function Optimization Deep Learning, Neural Networks == Reception == The materials in the Data Science and Predictive Analytics (DSPA) textbook have been peer-reviewed in the Journal of the American Statistical Association, International Statistical Institute’s ISI Review Journal, and the Journal of the American Library Association. Many scholarly publications reference the DSPA textbook. As of January 17, 2021, the electronic version of the book first edition (ISBN 978-3-319-72347-1) is freely available on SpringerLink and has been downloaded over 6 million times. The textbook is globally available in print (hardcover and softcover) and electronic formats (PDF and EPub) in many college and university libraries and has been used for data science, computational statistics, and analytics classes at various institutions.
Oculus Quill
Quill is a painting and animation software for virtual reality. It runs on Microsoft Windows with Oculus Rift headsets. It is used to create 3D paintings and animated cartoons. Quill was released on November 29, 2016, on the Oculus Store. Theater Elsewhere(formerly Quill Theater), an application for viewing creations made in Quill, was later made available following the release of the Oculus Quest. In September 2021, Facebook, now known as Meta Platforms, and the owner of Oculus, sold Quill to its original creator, who continues to develop and support the app. == Development == Quill was originally developed by Oculus Story Studio as an internal tool for the creative needs of the studio's project Dear Angelica directed by Saschka Unseld along with its art-director Wesley Allsbrook. == Controls == The software works on Oculus Rift utilizing its 6DoF motion controllers. Users can paint in 3D space using their hands naturally, and animate those paintings with keyframes. They can also capture videos and photos of their creations. == Reception == Dear Angelica, a VR story fully painted in Quill, was nominated for an Emmy Award in 2017.
The Citation Project
The Citation Project is a series of studies that measure and analyze first-year college writing students' source use and their ability to understand and implement sources within their own writing. The Citation Project reveals students' source-use habits and the issues that can be seen based on their lack of proper citation skills, such as the prevalence of plagiarism, institution policies, and the results of current writing pedagogy. The Citation Project's central findings were first presented at the Conference on College Composition and Communication in 2012. Although The Citation Project originally referred to this single 2012 study, the feedback received led to the conception of the Project as a broader initiative and as a place to gather and publish studies and data relating to student writing habits for the usage of other researches. == Method == The Citation Project's data comes from the work of 20 researchers analyzing 174 first-year composition students' research papers. The student papers studied originated from 16 institutions across the United States of America, including community colleges, public and private universities, denominational colleges, and Ivy Leagues. Researchers used bibliographic coding to aggregate data regarding the type, length, reading level, and usage of students' sources. == Findings == === Student source assessment and use === This study found that students were capable of identifying, locating, and accessing librarian-approved academic sources, most commonly accessing them with the internet. Despite students demonstrating their ability to find appropriate sources, they tend to exclusively cite the first few pages of their sources. Students' use and analysis of their citations are often limited, frequently resorting to patchwriting, directly restating their source's points, and omitting their own interpretations of their reference's ideas. The Citation Project also highlights students' struggle to accurately determine, address, and value their sources' bias, authority, and credibility. According to the Project's researchers' analysis, these habits demonstrate that first-year college writing students minimally engage with their sources and the academic conversations between them. One researcher from the Citation Project, Rebecca Moore Howard, believes these findings do not point towards students being lazy, but is rather a result of a writing pedagogy that prioritizes efficient, product-focused writing. Another interpretation offered by Sandra Jamieson, another researcher from the Citation Project explains their findings as a result of a lack of adherence to Information Learning (IL) Standards. === Pedagogy === A significant focus of The Citation Project is the development of pedagogical practices intended to equip students with writing and research techniques that will set them up for future success. Writers associated with The Citation Project, such as Tricia Serviss, believe that the practices of teachers surrounding academic integrity and writing practices are what form the foundation of how students think about writing and how to engage with assignments throughout their academic career. They also stress the importance of teaching students to effectively engage with sources rather than simply how to correctly cite them. The Citation Project asserts that endowing students with the ability to read, understand, and synthesize a variety of sources in their writing is a skill that will benefit them throughout their academic careers, and that the surface level typographical focus that many writing programs utilize is inadequate. == Plagiarism == One of the areas that The Citation Project also looks at is how students commit plagiarism throughout their writing. Plagiarism tends to be a checkpoint that gives instructors a sense where students' citation skills stand. Findings from The Citation Project reveal that the most common type of plagiarism is patchwriting which is the act of using the same sentence with only changing a couple of words. These types of issues can be seen as a learning curve due to lack of proper training. Student's that commit plagiarism are often unaware. === Policies === Another issue found is that academic plagiarism policies may not benefit a student's growth but may instead obstruct it. Policies against plagiarism tend to be harsh on the student that committed of offense. Even though student plagiarism is often unintentional academic institutions see this behavior as intentional. Student may then face harsh consequences as a result from their lack of citation knowledge. Additionally, higher level institutions assume that new students already have the skill set to avoid plagiarism which may be an unrealistic expectation. == Legacy == === Inspired studies === ==== Parrott and Napier ==== In one study, "Critical Reading and Student Self-Selected Texts: Results of a Collaborative, Explicit Curricular Approach," Jill Parrot and Trenia Napier quoted the Citation Project's findings as evidence that current collegiate writing curriculums are an ineffective means of teaching students how to properly write academic research papers. The researchers accredited current writing pedagogy's lack of emphasis on teaching critical reading skills. Parrott and Napier tested their thesis by seeing if students would produce more academic writing if they partook in a writing course that taught critical reading. Their results mostly went against this hypothesis, finding students who received additional critical reading training only significantly improved in how they integrated their sources. ==== Kocatepe ==== In May Mehtap Kocatep's study, "Reconceptualising the notion of finding information: How undergraduate students construct information as they read-to-write in an academic writing class," Kocatep expresses that she believes current conversations around writing pedagogy, including the Citation Project, operate with the underlying misconception that information is an easily discoverable static entity and its retrieval is an objective, unbiased decision. Kocatepe instead offers the analysis of what students view as valuable information and if it is worth using is influenced by the socially constructed meanings available to writers at the moment. To further examine students' source engagement, Kocatepe did a study on how female university students from the United Arab Emirates find, retrieve, use, and value sources. Kocatepe's results mainly noted students' almost exclusive reliance on using Google to find sources, as well as how students' navigated mainly English-speaking academic conversations as non-native English speakers. ==== Dahlen, Nordstrom-Sanchez, and Graff ==== Dahlen, Nordstrom-Sanchez, and Graff built their study off The Citation Project research in order to explore the attitudes and practices of students in an undergraduate writing course. As the researchers acknowledge, data collected by the Citation Project was the subject of the bulk of their analysis. This study sought to examine undergraduate writing practices tied to source-usage and elucidate any relevant trends. Dahlen, Nordstrom-Sanchez and Graff found that undergraduate writing students were not engaging with outside sources properly. Key issues discussed include lack of engagement with broad source ideas (in favor of picking out quotes), lack of paraphrasing, and inability to link information between multiple sources. ==== Davis ==== Phillip M. Davis based much of the analysis in his study on data gathered by the Citation Project. This study aimed to examine the particular effects web-based research and study had on undergraduate's papers and the replicability of their bibliographies. Davis sought to see how the shift from physical in-person library based research to online, often at-home research changed the function and usability of the bibliography as a form of documenting source usage in a given work. The primary method of analysis involved examining students' bibliographies to see where they were finding information online and how these sources were accessed. A main issue Davis found was "persistency" of URLs used for online citations. He found that only 18% of URL-based citations continued to function (the others either no longer pointing to the correct document or ceasing to exist altogether) within 3 years of their usage by students, and more than half of claimed online citations could not be found in any form. He suggests that this result brings up questions about how web-based citations should be dealt with in a university context.
Friendly artificial intelligence
Friendly artificial intelligence (friendly AI or FAI) is hypothetical artificial general intelligence (AGI) that would have a positive (benign) effect on humanity or at least align with human interests such as fostering the improvement of the human species. It is a part of the ethics of artificial intelligence and is closely related to machine ethics. While machine ethics is concerned with how an artificially intelligent agent should behave, friendly artificial intelligence research is focused on how to practically bring about this behavior and ensuring it is adequately constrained. == Etymology and usage == The term was coined by Eliezer Yudkowsky, who is best known for popularizing the idea, to discuss superintelligent artificial agents that reliably implement human values. Stuart J. Russell and Peter Norvig's leading artificial intelligence textbook, Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, describes the idea: Yudkowsky (2008) goes into more detail about how to design a Friendly AI. He asserts that friendliness (a desire not to harm humans) should be designed in from the start, but that the designers should recognize both that their own designs may be flawed, and that the robot will learn and evolve over time. Thus the challenge is one of mechanism design—to define a mechanism for evolving AI systems under a system of checks and balances, and to give the systems utility functions that will remain friendly in the face of such changes. "Friendly" is used in this context as technical terminology, and picks out agents that are safe and useful, not necessarily ones that are "friendly" in the colloquial sense. The concept is primarily invoked in the context of discussions of recursively self-improving artificial agents that rapidly explode in intelligence, on the grounds that this hypothetical technology would have a large, rapid, and difficult-to-control impact on human society. == Risks of unfriendly AI == The roots of concern about artificial intelligence are very old. Kevin LaGrandeur showed that the dangers specific to AI can be seen in ancient literature concerning artificial humanoid servants such as the golem, or the proto-robots of Gerbert of Aurillac and Roger Bacon. In those stories, the extreme intelligence and power of these humanoid creations clash with their status as slaves (which by nature are seen as sub-human), and cause disastrous conflict. By 1942 these themes prompted Isaac Asimov to create the "Three Laws of Robotics"—principles hard-wired into all the robots in his fiction, intended to prevent them from turning on their creators, or allowing them to come to harm. In modern times as the prospect of superintelligent AI looms nearer, philosopher Nick Bostrom has said that superintelligent AI systems with goals that are not aligned with human ethics are intrinsically dangerous unless extreme measures are taken to ensure the safety of humanity. He put it this way: Basically we should assume that a 'superintelligence' would be able to achieve whatever goals it has. Therefore, it is extremely important that the goals we endow it with, and its entire motivation system, is 'human friendly.' In 2008, Eliezer Yudkowsky called for the creation of "friendly AI" to mitigate existential risk from advanced artificial intelligence. He explains: "The AI does not hate you, nor does it love you, but you are made out of atoms which it can use for something else." Steve Omohundro says that a sufficiently advanced AI system will, unless explicitly counteracted, exhibit a number of basic "drives", such as resource acquisition, self-preservation, and continuous self-improvement, because of the intrinsic nature of any goal-driven systems and that these drives will, "without special precautions", cause the AI to exhibit undesired behavior. Alexander Wissner-Gross says that AIs driven to maximize their future freedom of action (or causal path entropy) might be considered friendly if their planning horizon is longer than a certain threshold, and unfriendly if their planning horizon is shorter than that threshold. Luke Muehlhauser, writing for the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, recommends that machine ethics researchers adopt what Bruce Schneier has called the "security mindset": Rather than thinking about how a system will work, imagine how it could fail. For instance, he suggests even an AI that only makes accurate predictions and communicates via a text interface might cause unintended harm. In 2014, Luke Muehlhauser and Nick Bostrom underlined the need for 'friendly AI'; nonetheless, the difficulties in designing a 'friendly' superintelligence, for instance via programming counterfactual moral thinking, are considerable. == Coherent extrapolated volition == Yudkowsky advances the Coherent Extrapolated Volition (CEV) model. According to him, our coherent extrapolated volition is "our wish if we knew more, thought faster, were more the people we wished we were, had grown up farther together; where the extrapolation converges rather than diverges, where our wishes cohere rather than interfere; extrapolated as we wish that extrapolated, interpreted as we wish that interpreted". Rather than a Friendly AI being designed directly by human programmers, it is to be designed by a "seed AI" programmed to first study human nature and then produce the AI that humanity would want, given sufficient time and insight, to arrive at a satisfactory answer. The appeal to an objective through contingent human nature (perhaps expressed, for mathematical purposes, in the form of a utility function or other decision-theoretic formalism), as providing the ultimate criterion of "Friendliness", is an answer to the meta-ethical problem of defining an objective morality; extrapolated volition is intended to be what humanity objectively would want, all things considered, but it can only be defined relative to the psychological and cognitive qualities of present-day, unextrapolated humanity. == Other approaches == Steve Omohundro has proposed a "scaffolding" approach to AI safety, in which one provably safe AI generation helps build the next provably safe generation. Seth Baum argues that the development of safe, socially beneficial artificial intelligence or artificial general intelligence is a function of the social psychology of AI research communities and so can be constrained by extrinsic measures and motivated by intrinsic measures. Intrinsic motivations can be strengthened when messages resonate with AI developers; Baum argues that, in contrast, "existing messages about beneficial AI are not always framed well". Baum advocates for "cooperative relationships, and positive framing of AI researchers" and cautions against characterizing AI researchers as "not want(ing) to pursue beneficial designs". In his book Human Compatible, AI researcher Stuart J. Russell lists three principles to guide the development of beneficial machines. He emphasizes that these principles are not meant to be explicitly coded into the machines; rather, they are intended for the human developers. The principles are as follows: The machine's only objective is to maximize the realization of human preferences. The machine is initially uncertain about what those preferences are. The ultimate source of information about human preferences is human behavior. The "preferences" Russell refers to "are all-encompassing; they cover everything you might care about, arbitrarily far into the future." Similarly, "behavior" includes any choice between options, and the uncertainty is such that some probability, which may be quite small, must be assigned to every logically possible human preference. == Public policy == James Barrat, author of Our Final Invention, suggested that "a public-private partnership has to be created to bring A.I.-makers together to share ideas about security—something like the International Atomic Energy Agency, but in partnership with corporations." He urges AI researchers to convene a meeting similar to the Asilomar Conference on Recombinant DNA, which discussed risks of biotechnology. John McGinnis encourages governments to accelerate friendly AI research. Because the goalposts of friendly AI are not necessarily eminent, he suggests a model similar to the National Institutes of Health, where "Peer review panels of computer and cognitive scientists would sift through projects and choose those that are designed both to advance AI and assure that such advances would be accompanied by appropriate safeguards." McGinnis feels that peer review is better "than regulation to address technical issues that are not possible to capture through bureaucratic mandates". McGinnis notes that his proposal stands in contrast to that of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, which generally aims to avoid government involvement in friendly AI. == Criticism == Some critics believe that both human-level AI and superintelligence are unlikely and that, therefore, friendly AI is unlik
BRS/Search
BRS/Search is a full-text database and information retrieval system. BRS/Search uses a fully inverted indexing system to store, locate, and retrieve unstructured data. It was the search engine that in 1977 powered Bibliographic Retrieval Services (BRS) commercial operations with 20 databases (including the first national commercial availability of MEDLINE); it has changed ownership several times during its development and is currently sold as Livelink ECM Discovery Server by Open Text Corporation. == Early development == Development on what was to become BRS began as Biomedical Communications Network (BCN) at the State University of New York at Albany (SUNY). BCN, which went online in 1968, provided on-line access to nine databases, including MEDLINE and BIOSIS Previews, to large universities and medical schools primarily in the Northeast of the USA. State funding for the project was withdrawn in 1975, and Bibliographic Retrieval Services (BRS) was formed as a non-profit concern the following year. It was incorporated in May 1976 as a for-profit corporation with Ron Quake as president, Jan Egeland as vice president in charge of marketing and training, and Lloyd Palmer as vice president of systems. == BRS commercial operations == In December 1976, the First BRS User Meeting was held in Syracuse, New York, and by January 1977 BRS started commercial operations with 20 databases (including the first national commercial availability of MEDLINE) and 9 million records, using modified IBM STAIRS (STorage And Information Retrieval System) software, Telenet for telecommunications, and timesharing mainframe computers of Carrier Corporation. In October 1980 BRS was sold by Egeland and Quake to Indian Head, Inc., a subsidiary of the Dutch company Thyssen-Bornemisza Group. == 1989–1993 == In 1989 Robert Maxwell acquired BRS and the BRS/Search software; he announced the planned incorporation of the ORBIT Search Service and BRS Information Technologies and renamed the whole group Maxwell Online, Inc. At that time BRS Information Technologies was serving the medical and academic library marketplace with over 150 databases. Maxwell later bought the publishing company Macmillan and put Maxwell Online under Macmillan. In the same year BRS/LINK (hypertext connection of databases; first application delivering full text) was announced. The initial BRS/LINK application "relates the citation in a bibliographic database to its full-text article in a second database," and "eliminates the need to re-execute a search strategy in the second database in order to find the corresponding full-text article." Initially BRS/LINK supported linking only selected bibliographic databases: MEDLINE, Health Planning and Administration, and MEDLINE References on AIDS to the full-text Comprehensive Core Medical Library. At the time of Robert Maxwell’s death in 1991, Macmillan brought in Andrew Gregory to represent the company during the 2 years that Maxwell’s affairs were being settled and to prepare Maxwell Online to be able to sell the components. Maxwell Online shortly thereafter underwent yet another name change, this time to InfoPro Technologies. == Dataware Technologies ownership of BRS/SEARCH == Early in 1994, InfoPro Technologies, a subsidiary of MHC Inc. (holding company for Macmillan Inc.), the former Maxwell Online service, sold off all its subsidiaries. ORBIT Search Services went to the French-owned Questel, the dial-up BRS Search Services to CD Plus Technologies (later to become OVID), and BRS Software Products (including BRS/SEARCH) to Dataware Technologies. Almost up to the end of InfoPro Technologies, BRS Software had been the fastest growing segment of the company. At the 14th BRS North American Users Group Conference in 1999, Dave Schubmehl of Dataware Technologies presented a paper in which he stated "The purpose of this presentation is to update BRS users on upcoming releases of BRS/Search, NetAnswer, and other Dataware products. BRS/Search 7.0 will include features specifically requested by customers, as well as other enhancements. Earlier this year, Dataware acquired Sovereign Hill Software, makers of InQuery. In light of that acquisition, and Dataware's other development projects, we'll look at Dataware's plans for all products, including BRS/Search and NetAnswer." == Open Text acquisition of BRS/Search == In 2001 BRS/Search was acquired by Open Text and became LiveLink ECM Discovery Server. It is now referred to as Open Text Discovery Server. Open Text still supports both BRS/Search and NetAnswer. The core BRS/Search technology in the Open Text portfolio was augmented with other capabilities through various acquisitions. For example, Dataware's acquisition of Sovereign-Hill brought InQuery, “a probabilistic information retrieval system using an inference network”, which was developed by the University of Massachusetts Amherst Center for Intelligent Information Retrieval] out of the UMass CIIR and into the marketplace. A product re-branding table shows the range of products, their old names and their new names. InQuery is a concept search engine that uses noun phrases, parts of speech and other co-occurrence relationships in overlapping passages of text rather than single term inverted indexes of single words in documents. Open Text's portfolio has grown to include Hummingbird Content Management, and has always included BASIS. == 2003 == BRS/Search North America User's Group (BRSNAUG) website with a June 8, 2003 date listed the following features for BRS/Search. The BRSNAUG also disincorporated in 2003. Cross-references to BRS/Search on the World Wide Web point to Open Text Livelink. Engine features include: Rapid query response time. Numerical data handling and elementary statistical processing (sum, avg, min, max) Search results weighting and relevancy ranking Left- and right-truncation and expansion of search terms Superior data compression – loaded databases typically use only about 1.5 times the input stream size in disk space Large capacity databases – up to 100 million documents, each with up to 65,000 paragraphs Fine control of indexing and searching – right down to the word, sentence, and paragraph level Fine control over data security. Document access can be controlled at the database, document, and paragraph level International language support for all 7/8 bit characters sets and customizable language tables Flexible and customizable stop word lists ANSI-compatible thesauri Hypertext links within and between documents and databases (R6.x) Support for natural language parsing of queries Automatic document summarization tools Client/Server development Programming interfaces for World-Wide Web (HTTP, HTML) access to databases
WriterDuet
WriterDuet is a screenwriting software for writing and editing screenplays and other forms of mass media. == History == WriterDuet was founded in 2013 by Guy Goldstein. In April 2015, WriterDuet acquired the domain for Scripped.com after they closed, citing a serious technical failure. In August 2016, WriterDuet released a localized version of its software in China. In May 2018, WriterDuet included Bechdel test analysis functions to address issues of gender diversity in the screenwriting industry. In 2018, WriterDuet published WriterSolo, an offline version of their app that runs on the browser and opens/saves files on the computer, Dropbox, Google Drive, and iCloud. In July 2019, WriterDuet made the WriterSolo browser app and desktop app available as pay-what-you-want under the web address FreeScreenwriting.com. == Features == WriterDuet is primarily used to outline, write, and format screenplays to the standards recommended by the AMPAS. It also supports formats for theater, novels, and video games. The software is powered by Firebase allowing users to write together in real-time from multiple devices. WriterDuet's main competitors in the screenwriting industry are Final Draft, Celtx, and Movie Magic Screenwriter.
Nike+iPod
The Nike+iPod Sport Kit is an activity tracker device, developed by Nike, Inc., which measures and records the distance and pace of a walk or run. The Nike+iPod consists of a small transmitter device attached to or embedded in a shoe, which communicates with either the Nike+ Sportband, or a receiver plugged into an iPod Nano. It can also work directly with a 2nd Generation iPod Touch (or higher), iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPhone 5, The Nike+iPod was announced on May 23, 2006. On September 7, 2010, Nike released the Nike+ Running App (originally called Nike+ GPS) on the App Store, which used a tracking engine powered by MotionX that does not require the separate shoe sensor or pedometer. This application works using the accelerometer and GPS of the iPhone and the accelerometer of the iPod Touch, which does not have a GPS chip. Nike+Running is compatible with the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus down to iPhone 3GS and iPod touch. On June 21, 2012, Nike released Nike+ Running App for Android. The current app is compatible with all Android phones running 4.0.3 and up. == Overview == The sensor and iPod kit were revealed on May 20, 2006. The kit stores information such as the elapsed time of the workout, the distance traveled, pace, and calories burned by the individual. Nike+ was a collaboration between Nike and Apple; the platform consisted of an iPod, a wireless chip, Nike shoes that accepted the wireless chip, an iTunes membership, and a Nike+ online community. iPods using Nike iPod require a sensor and remote. The next upgraded product was the Sportband kit, which was announced in April 2008. The kit allows users to store run information without the iPod Nano. The Sportband consists of two parts: a rubber holding strap which is worn around the wrist, and a receiver which resembles a USB key-disk. The receiver displays information comparable to that of the iPod kit on the built-in display. After a run, the receiver can be plugged straight into a USB port and the software will upload the run information automatically to the Nike+ website. As of August 2008 "Nike+iPod for the Gym" launched, allowing users to record their cardio workouts directly to their iPods. No Sport kit or shoe sensor is required; all that is needed is a compatible iPod (1st–6th generation iPod Nano or 2nd/3rd gen iPod Touch) and an enabled piece of cardio equipment. As of March 2009, the seven largest commercial equipment providers were shipping enabled equipment (Life Fitness, Technogym, Precor USA, Star Trac, Cybex International, Matrix Fitness and Free Motion). The models of compatible cardio equipment include treadmills, stationary bicycles, stair climbers, ellipticals, and others such as Precor's Adaptive Motion Trainer. Once the user syncs an iPod with iTunes, the cardio workouts are automatically stored at Nikeplus.com, where each workout is visualized and tracked based on the number of calories burned. The calories are converted to "CardioMiles", at a ratio of 100:1, allowing cardio users to take full advantage of all the tools and features of Nikeplus.com, and allow them to engage in challenges with other runners, walkers and cardio users, using a common currency. With the release of the second-generation iPod Touch in 2008, Apple Inc. included a built-in ability to receive Nike+ signals, which allowed the iPod to connect directly to the wireless sensor thus eliminating the need for an external receiver to be connected. Apple also added this capability to the iPhone 3GS (released 2009), iPhone 4 (2010), and third-generation iPod Touch (2009). Those devices use their Broadcom Bluetooth chipset to receive the signals. On June 7, 2010, Polar and Nike introduced the Polar WearLink+ that works with Nike+. This new product works with the Nike+ SportBand and the fifth generation iPod nano in conjunction with the Nike+ iPod Sport Kit. Polar WearLink+ that works with Nike+ communicates directly with the fifth generation iPod nano and Nike+ SportBand using a proprietary digital protocol but it is dual-mode so it is also compatible with most Polar training computers (all those using 5 kHz analog transmission technology). Nike+ had 18 million global users as of April 2013. One year later, Nike updated the number of global users to 28 million. In iOS 6.1.2 (and possibly higher), a hole in the compatibility for the app has allowed jailbroken iPad users to use the native Nike + iPod iPhone and iPod app by moving the app bundle and setting permissions for the app. On April 30, 2018, Nike retired services for legacy Nike wearable devices, such as the Nike+ FuelBand and the Nike+ SportWatch GPS, and previous versions of apps, including Nike Run Club and Nike Training Club version 4.X and lower. Likewise, Nike no longer supported the Nike+ Connect software that transferred data to a NikePlus Profile or the Nike+ Fuel/FuelBand and Nike+ Move apps. == Sports kit equipment == The kit consists of two pieces: a piezoelectric sensor with a Nordic Semiconductor nRF2402 transmitter that is mounted under the inner sole of the shoe and a receiver that connects to the iPod. They communicate using a 2.4 GHz wireless radio and use Nordic Semiconductor's "ShockBurst" network protocol. The wireless data is encrypted in transit, but some uniquely identifying data is sent in the plain. The wireless protocol was reverse engineered and documented by Dmitry Grinberg in 2011. Nike recommends that the shoe be a Nike+ model with a special pocket in which to place the device. Nike has released the sensor for individual sale meaning that consumers no longer have to purchase the whole set (the iPod receiver and sensor). As the sensor battery cannot be replaced, a new one must be purchased every time the battery runs out. Aftermarket solutions are available to users who do not want to use shoes with built-in or hand-made pockets for the foot sensor, such as shoe pouches and containment devices designed to affix the sensor against the shoe laces. No matter how the sensor is integrated with the user's shoes, care must be taken that it is firmly fixed in place and will not jerk around while in use, which would degrade the accuracy. == Sports kit usage == The Sports Kit can be used to track running, which it refers to as "workouts". New workouts are started by plugging the receiving unit into the iPod, then navigating through the iPod menu system. The user chooses a goal for the workout, which might be to cover a specific distance, or burn a number of calories, or work out for a specified time. A workout can also be started without a goal, which is called a "Basic Workout". When the workout goal has been set, the receiver seeks the sensor, possibly asking the user to "walk around to activate [the] sensor". The user then must press the center button on the iPod to begin the workout. Audio feedback is provided in the user's choice of generic male or female voice by the iPod over the course of the workout, depending on the type of workout chosen. For goal-oriented workouts, the feedback will correspond to significant milestones toward the goal. In a distance workout, for example, the audio feedback will inform the user as each mile or kilometer has been completed, as well as the half-way point of the workout, and a countdown of four 100-meter increments at the end of the workout. The iPod's control wheel functions change slightly during a workout. The Pause button now not only pauses the music but also the workout. Similarly, the Menu button is used to access the controls to end the workout. The Forward and Back buttons are unchanged, performing audio track skip and reverse functions. The Center button has two functions: audio feedback about the current distance, time, and pace are provided when the button is tapped once, while if the button is held down the iPod skips to the "PowerSong" - an audio track chosen by the user, generally intended for motivation. In addition to the in-workout audio feedback, there are pre-recorded congratulations provided by Lance Armstrong, Tiger Woods, Joan Benoit Samuelson, and Paula Radcliffe whenever a user achieves a personal best (such as fastest mile, fastest 5K, fastest 10K, longest run yet) or reaches certain long-term milestones (such as 250 miles, 500 kilometers). This "celebrity feedback" is heard after the usual end-of-run statistics. While the Sports Kit can be used immediately after purchase, it will report more accurate results if it is calibrated before the first usage and then regularly afterwards. For calibration, the user finds a fixed known distance of at least 0.25 mile or 400 meters and then sets the Nike+ to calibration mode for the walk or run over that distance. When the walk or run is complete, the device calibrates itself and future workout reporting will reflect statistics closer to that individual user's workout style. Consumer Reports magazine tested the device and found it accurate as long as you keep an even pace. In workouts with varied pa