Looking for the best AI code-review tool? An AI code-review tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it can save you hours every week by automating repetitive work. Most options offer a generous free tier, with paid plans unlocking higher limits, faster processing, and team features. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI code-review tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.
Lessac Technologies
Lessac Technologies, Inc. (LTI) is an American firm which develops voice synthesis software, licenses technology and sells synthesized novels as MP3 files. The firm currently has seven patents granted and three more pending for its automated methods of converting digital text into human-sounding speech, more accurately recognizing human speech and outputting the text representing the words and phrases of said speech, along with recognizing the speaker's emotional state. The LTI technology is partly based on the work of the late Arthur Lessac, a Professor of Theater at the State University of New York and the creator of Lessac Kinesensic Training, and LTI has licensed exclusive rights to exploit Arthur Lessac's copyrighted works in the fields of speech synthesis and speech recognition. Based on the view that music is speech and speech is music, Lessac's work and books focused on body and speech energies and how they go together. Arthur Lessac's textual annotation system, which was originally developed to assist actors, singers, and orators in marking up scripts to prepare for performance, is adapted in LTI's speech synthesis system as the basic representation of the speech to be synthesized (Lessemes), in contrast to many other systems which use a phonetic representation. LTI's software has two major components: (1) a linguistic front-end that converts plain text to a sequence of prosodic and phonosensory graphic symbols (Lessemes) based on Arthur Lessac's annotation system, which specify the speech units to be synthesized; (2) a signal-processing back-end that takes the Lessemes as acoustic data and produces human-sounding synthesized speech as output, using unit selection and concatenation. LTI's text-to-speech system came in second in the world-wide Blizzard Challenge 2011 and 2012. The first-place team in 2011 also employed LTI's "front-end" technology, but with its own back-end. The Blizzard Challenge, conducted by the Language Technologies Institute of Carnegie Mellon University, was devised as a way to evaluate speech synthesis techniques by having different research groups build voices from the same voice-actor recordings, and comparing the results through listening tests. LTI was founded in 2000 by H. Donald Wilson (chairman), a lawyer, LexisNexis entrepreneur and business associate of Arthur Lessac; and Gary A. Marple (chief inventor), after Marple suggested that Arthur Lessac's kinesensic voice training might be applicable to computational linguistics. After Wilson's death in 2006, his nephew John Reichenbach became the firm's CEO.
AI Coding Assistants: Free vs Paid (2026)
In search of the best AI coding assistant? An AI coding assistant is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI coding assistant slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.
Trevor Hastie
Trevor John Hastie (born 27 June 1953) is an American statistician and computer scientist. He is currently serving as the John A. Overdeck Professor of Mathematical Sciences and Professor of Statistics at Stanford University. Hastie is known for his contributions to applied statistics, especially in the field of machine learning, data mining, and bioinformatics. He has authored several popular books in statistical learning, including The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction. Hastie has been listed as an ISI Highly Cited Author in Mathematics by the ISI Web of Knowledge. He also contributed to the development of S. == Education and career == Hastie was born on 27 June 1953 in South Africa. He received his B.S. in statistics from the Rhodes University in 1976 and master's degree from University of Cape Town in 1979. Hastie joined the doctoral program at Stanford University in 1980 and received his Ph.D. in 1984 under the supervision of Werner Stuetzle. His dissertation was "Principal Curves and Surfaces". Hastie began his professional career in 1977 with the South African Medical Research Council. After receiving his master's degree in 1979, he spent a year interning at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, the Johnson Space Center in Houston, and the Biomath department at Oxford University. After receiving his doctoral degree from Stanford, Hastie returned to South Africa to work with his former employer South African Medical Research Council. He returned to United States in 1986 and joined the AT&T Bell Laboratories in Murray Hill, New Jersey and remained there for nine years. Working with John Chambers, he co-directed the development of the S programming language. He joined Stanford University in 1994 as Associate Professor in Statistics and Biostatistics. He was promoted to full Professor in 1999. During the period 2006–2009, he was the chair of the Department of Statistics at Stanford University. In 2013 he was named the John A. Overdeck Professor of Mathematical Sciences. == Awards and honors == Hastie is a Fellow of the Royal Statistical Society since 1979. He is also an elected Fellow of several professional and scholarly societies, including the Institute of Mathematical Statistics, the American Statistical Association, and the South African Statistical Society. He is a recipient of 'Myrto Lefkopolou Distinguished Lectureship' award of Biostatistics Department at the Harvard School of Public Health. In 2018, he was elected a member of the National Academy of Sciences. In 2019 Hastie became a foreign member of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. Hastie was named for the C.R. and Bhargavi Rao Prize in 2025. Hastie and Hui Zou received the 2025 Founders of Statistics prize for their elastic net paper. == Publications == Hastie is a prolific author of scientific works on numerous topics in applied statistics, including statistical learning, data mining, statistical computing, and bioinformatics. He along with his collaborators has authored about 125 scientific articles. Many of Hastie's scientific articles were coauthored by his longtime collaborator, Robert Tibshirani. Hastie has been listed as an ISI Highly Cited Author in Mathematics by the ISI Web of Knowledge. He has coauthored the following books: T. Hastie and R. Tibshirani, Generalized Additive Models, Chapman and Hall, 1990. J. Chambers and T. Hastie, Statistical Models in S, Wadsworth/Brooks Cole, 1991. T. Hastie, R. Tibshirani, and J. Friedman, The Elements of Statistical Learning: Prediction, Inference and Data Mining, Second Edition, Springer Verlag, 2009 (available for free from the author's website). G. James, D. Witten, T. Hastie, R. Tibshirani, An Introduction to Statistical Learning with Applications in R, Springer Verlag, 2013 (available for free from the co-author's website). T. Hastie, R. Tibshirani, M. Wainwright, Statistical Learning with Sparsity: the Lasso and Generalizations, CRC Press, 2015 (available for free from the author's website). Bradley Efron; Trevor Hastie (2016). Computer Age Statistical Inference. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781107149892.
Brainware
Brainware was an American software company that marketed Automatic identification and data capture and data extraction products. The company was acquired by Hyland Software in 2017. Brainware originally spun out of Dulles, Virginia-based SER Solutions Inc. in February 2006 when SER was acquired by The Gores Group LLC. From February 2006 to March 2012, Brainware's majority owner was San Francisco-based private equity firm Vista Equity Partners. == History == On March 5, 2012, Lexmark International announced it had acquired the company for a cash price of approximately $148 million. The company was added to Lexmark's Perceptive Software division. On July 10, 2017, Hyland Software finalized its acquisition of the Perceptive Business Unit of Lexmark International, Inc. All enterprise software business assets in the Perceptive business unit, including Perceptive Content (formerly ImageNow), Perceptive Intelligent Capture (formerly Brainware), Acuo VNA, PACSGEAR, Claron, Nolij, Saperion, Pallas Athena, ISYS and Twistage, now operate under Hyland's portfolio of products. Brainware was headquartered in Ashburn, Virginia, USA, with sales, support, professional services and R&D offices in London, UK; Kirchzarten, Germany; and Neuchâtel, Switzerland. The company had partnerships with most major enterprise software providers, including Oracle, SAP and Microsoft, and said its software integrated with most available enterprise content management platforms. Brainware also partnered with a number of hardware providers, including Hewlett-Packard, Fujitsu and OPEX. Brainware's core solution, Distiller, "disrupted the data capture industry by using contextual document data to deliver higher automated processing than earlier technology" said Henry Ijams, Managing Director and Founder, PayStream Advisors. Brainware was awarded a Technology Excellence Award by PayStream Advisors and their Advisory Board to honor those providers who are delivering industry leading solutions. Brainware said its software "could relieve a company of 60 percent to 80 percent of the work of manually keying in information from unstructured documents," and serviced companies such as NEC, Mayo Clinic, Bechtel, Royal Dutch Shell, and Rabobank. In a 2011 comparison report, Real Story Group classifies Brainware as a "Capture Solutions" vendor, competing directly with Kofax and ReadSoft. Brainware and its customers were profiled in publications including Profit Online, Business Finance, imageSource, Managing Automation, Industryweek, Treasury & Risk and others. The company's enterprise search technology has been profiled by InfoWorld.
Amaq News Agency
Amaq News Agency (Arabic: وكالة أعماق الإخبارية, romanized: Wakālat Aʻmāq al-Ikhbārīyah) is a news outlet linked to the Islamic State (IS). Amaq is often the "first point of publication for claims of responsibility" for terrorist attacks in Western countries by the Islamic State. In March 2019, Amaq News Agency was designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the United States Department of State. == History == Among the founders of Amaq was Syrian journalist Baraa Kadek, who joined IS in late 2013, Abu Muhammad al-Furqan, and seven others who originally worked for Halab News Network. According to The New York Times, it has a direct connection with IS, from which it "gets tips". Its name was taken from Amik Valley in Hatay Province, which is mentioned in a hadith as the site of an "apocalyptic victory over non-believers". Amaq News Agency was first noticed by SITE during the Siege of Kobanî (Syria) in 2014, when its updates were shared among IS fighters. It became more widely known after it began reporting claims of responsibility for terrorist attacks in Western countries, such as the 2015 San Bernardino attack, for which IS officially claimed responsibility the next day. An Amaq cameraman shot the first footage of the capture of Palmyra in 2015. Amaq launched an official mobile app in 2015 and has warned against unofficial versions that reportedly have been used to spy on its users. It also uses a Telegram account. It had a WordPress-based blog, but it was removed without explanation in April 2016. On 12 June 2016, IS claimed responsibility for the Pulse nightclub shooting through Amaq, without prior knowledge of the attack. The shooter, Omar Mateen had later pledged allegiance to IS via a phone call with emergency services. On 31 May 2017, a Facebook post announced Amaq's founder, Baraa Kadek AKA Rayan Meshaal, had been killed with his daughter by an American airstrike on Mayadin. The post was reportedly made by his younger brother. Reuters could not immediately verify this account. On 27 July 2017, the US confirmed that Kadek had been killed by a coalition airstrike near Mayadin between 25 and 27 May 2017. In June 2017, German police arrested a 23-year-old Syrian man identified only as Mohammed G., accusing him of communicating with the alleged perpetrator of the 2016 Malmö Muslim community centre arson in order to report to Amaq. On 21 March 2019, the U.S. Department of State officially deemed Amaq an alias of IS, and thus a Foreign Terrorist Organization. On 22 March 2024, the Islamic State claimed responsibility for the Crocus City Hall attack through Amaq, U.S. officials confirmed the claim shortly after. A day after the attack, Amaq published a video of the attack, filmed by one of the attackers. It showed the attackers shooting victims and slitting the throat of another, while the filming attacker praises Allah and speaks against infidels. == Character == Amaq publishes a stream of short news reports, both text and video, on the mobile app Telegram. The reports take on the trappings of mainstream journalism, with "Breaking News" headings, and embedded reporters at the scenes of IS battles. The reports try to appear neutral, toning down the jihadist language and sectarian slurs IS uses in its official releases. Charlie Winter of the Transcultural Conflict and Violence Initiative at Georgia State University, and Rita Katz of SITE Intelligence Group in Washington say Amaq functions much like the state-owned news agency of IS, though the group does not acknowledge it as such. Katz said it behaves "like a state media". Amaq appears to have been allowed to develop by IS as a way to have a news outlet that is controlled by the group but is somewhat removed from it, giving IS more of the appearance of legitimacy. == Reliability == According to Rukmini Callimachi in The New York Times: "Despite a widespread view that the Islamic State opportunistically claims attacks with which it has little genuine connection, its track record—minus a handful of exceptions—suggests a more rigorous protocol. At times, the Islamic State has got details wrong, or inflated casualty figures, but the gist of its claims is typically correct." According to Callimachi, the group considers itself responsible for acts carried out by people who were inspired by its propaganda, as well as acts carried out by its own personnel and in some instances, had claimed attacks before the identities of the killers were known. Graeme Wood writing in The Atlantic in October 2017, wrote "The idea that the Islamic State simply scans the news in search of mass killings, then sends out press releases in hope of stealing glory, is false. Amaq may learn details of the attacks from mainstream media ... but its claim of credit typically flows from an Amaq-specific source." An October 2017 article in The Hill, points to two false claims made in the summer of 2017, the Resorts World Manila attack and a false claim that bombs had been planted at Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris. Also, a claimed IS connection to the 2017 Las Vegas shooting proved to be false. According to Rita Katz on the SITE Intelligence Group website, calling a terrorist a "soldier of the caliphate (warrior from the caliphate)" in a statement issued by Amaq, was the usual way in which IS indicated that it inspired an attack. Centrally coordinated attacks were usually described as "executed by a detachment belonging to the Islamic State", and were often announced by both Amaq and by IS' central media command. == Online presence == In November 2019, Belgian police said they had carried out a successful cyberattack on Amaq, thus leaving IS without an operational communication channel. However, Amaq has since regained online presence, primarily on dark web platforms to make it harder for law enforcement to take them down without physical access to the server hosting the specific platform.
Tree transducer
In theoretical computer science and formal language theory, a tree transducer (TT) is an abstract machine taking as input a tree, and generating output – generally other trees, but models producing words or other structures exist. Roughly speaking, tree transducers extend tree automata in the same way that word transducers extend word automata. Manipulating tree structures instead of words enable TT to model syntax-directed transformations of formal or natural languages. However, TT are not as well-behaved as their word counterparts in terms of algorithmic complexity, closure properties, etcetera. In particular, most of the main classes are not closed under composition. The main classes of tree transducers are: == Top-Down Tree Transducers (TOP) == A TOP T is a tuple (Q, Σ, Γ, I, δ) such that: Q is a finite set, the set of states; Σ is a finite ranked alphabet, called the input alphabet; Γ is a finite ranked alphabet, called the output alphabet; I is a subset of Q, the set of initial states; and δ is a set of rules of the form q ( f ( x 1 , … , x n ) ) → u {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}))\to u} , where f is a symbol of Σ, n is the arity of f, q is a state, and u is a tree on Γ and Q × 1.. n {\displaystyle Q\times 1..n} , such pairs being nullary. === Examples of rules and intuitions on semantics === For instance, q ( f ( x 1 , … , x 3 ) ) → g ( a , q ′ ( x 1 ) , h ( q ″ ( x 3 ) ) ) {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},\dots ,x_{3}))\to g(a,q'(x_{1}),h(q''(x_{3})))} is a rule – one customarily writes q ( x i ) {\displaystyle q(x_{i})} instead of the pair ( q , x i ) {\displaystyle (q,x_{i})} – and its intuitive semantics is that, under the action of q, a tree with f at the root and three children is transformed into g ( a , q ′ ( x 1 ) , h ( q ″ ( x 3 ) ) ) {\displaystyle g(a,q'(x_{1}),h(q''(x_{3})))} where, recursively, q ′ ( x 1 ) {\displaystyle q'(x_{1})} and q ″ ( x 3 ) {\displaystyle q''(x_{3})} are replaced, respectively, with the application of q ′ {\displaystyle q'} on the first child and with the application of q ″ {\displaystyle q''} on the third. === Semantics as term rewriting === The semantics of each state of the transducer T, and of T itself, is a binary relation between input trees (on Σ) and output trees (on Γ). A way of defining the semantics formally is to see δ {\displaystyle \delta } as a term rewriting system, provided that in the right-hand sides the calls are written in the form q ( x i ) {\displaystyle q(x_{i})} , where states q are unary symbols. Then the semantics [ [ q ] ] {\displaystyle [\![q]\!]} of a state q is given by [ [ q ] ] = { u ↦ v ∣ u is a tree on Σ , v is a tree on Γ , and q ( u ) → δ ∗ v } . {\displaystyle [\![q]\!]=\{u\mapsto v\mid u{\text{ is a tree on }}\Sigma ,\ v{\text{ is a tree on }}\Gamma {\text{, and }}q(u)\to _{\delta }^{}v\}.} The semantics of T is then defined as the union of the semantics of its initial states: [ [ T ] ] = ⋃ q ∈ I [ [ q ] ] . {\displaystyle [\![T]\!]=\bigcup _{q\in I}[\![q]\!].} === Determinism and domain === As with tree automata, a TOP is said to be deterministic (abbreviated DTOP) if no two rules of δ share the same left-hand side, and there is at most one initial state. In that case, the semantics of the DTOP is a partial function from input trees (on Σ) to output trees (on Γ), as are the semantics of each of the DTOP's states. The domain of a transducer is the domain of its semantics. Likewise, the image of a transducer is the image of its semantics. === Properties of DTOP === DTOP are not closed under union: this is already the case for deterministic word transducers. The domain of a DTOP is a regular tree language. Furthermore, the domain is recognisable by a deterministic top-down tree automaton (DTTA) of size at most exponential in that of the initial DTOP. That the domain is DTTA-recognizable is not surprising, considering that the left-hand sides of DTOP rules are the same as for DTTA. As for the reason for the exponential explosion in the worst case (that does not exist in the word case), consider the rule q ( f ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) → g ( p 1 ( x 1 ) , p 2 ( x 1 ) , p 3 ( x 2 ) ) {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},x_{2}))\to g(p_{1}(x_{1}),p_{2}(x_{1}),p_{3}(x_{2}))} . In order for the computation to succeed, it must succeed for both children. That means that the right child must be in the domain of p 3 {\displaystyle p_{3}} . As for the left child, it must be in the domain of both p 1 {\displaystyle p_{1}} and p 2 {\displaystyle p_{2}} . Generally, since subtrees can be copied, a single subtree can be evaluated by multiple states during a run, despite the determinism, and unlike DTTA. Thus the construction of the DTTA recognising the domain of a DTOP must account for sets of states and compute the intersections of their domains, hence the exponential. In the special case of linear DTOP, that is to say DTOP where each x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} appears at most once in the right-hand side of each rule, the construction is linear in time and space. The image of a DTOP is not a regular tree language. Consider the transducer coding the transformation f ( x ) → g ( x , x ) {\displaystyle f(x)\to g(x,x)} ; that is, duplicate the child of the input. This is easily done by a rule q ( f ( x 1 ) ) → g ( p ( x 1 ) , p ( x 1 ) ) {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1}))\to g(p(x_{1}),p(x_{1}))} , where p encodes the identity. Then, absent any restrictions on the first child of the input, the image is a classical non-regular tree language. However, the domain of a DTOP cannot be restricted to a regular tree language. That is to say, given a DTOP T and a language L, one cannot in general build a DTOP T ′ {\displaystyle T'} such that the semantics of T ′ {\displaystyle T'} is that of T, restricted to L. This property is linked to the reason deterministic top-down tree automata are less expressive than bottom-up automata: once you go down a given path, information from other paths is inaccessible. Consider the transducer coding the transformation f ( x , y ) → y {\displaystyle f(x,y)\to y} ; that is, output the right child of the input. This is easily done by a rule q ( f ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) → p ( x 2 ) {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},x_{2}))\to p(x_{2})} , where p encodes the identity. Now let's say we want to restrict this transducer to the finite (and thus, in particular, regular) domain { f ( c , a ) , f ( c , b ) } {\displaystyle \{f(c,a),\ f(c,b)\}} . We must use the rules q ( f ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) → p ( x 2 ) , p ( a ) → a , p ( b ) → b {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},x_{2}))\to p(x_{2}),\ p(a)\to a,\ p(b)\to b} . But in the first rule, x 1 {\displaystyle x_{1}} does not appear at all, since nothing is produced from the left child. Thus, it is not possible to test that the left child is c. In contrast, since we produce from the right child, we can test that it is a or b. In general, the criterion is that DTOP cannot test properties of subtrees from which they do not produce output. DTOP are not closed under composition. However this problem can be solved by the addition of a lookahead: a tree automaton, coupled to the transducer, that can perform tests on the domain which the transducer is incapable of. This follows from the point about domain restriction: composing the DTOP encoding identity on { f ( c , a ) , f ( c , b ) } {\displaystyle \{f(c,a),\ f(c,b)\}} with the one encoding f ( x , y ) → y {\displaystyle f(x,y)\to y} must yield a transducer with the semantics { f ( c , a ) ↦ a , f ( c , b ) ↦ b } {\displaystyle \{f(c,a)\mapsto a,\ f(c,b)\mapsto b\}} , which we know is not expressible by a DTOP. The typechecking problem—testing whether the image of a regular tree language is included in another regular tree language—is decidable. The equivalence problem—testing whether two DTOP define the same functions—is decidable. == Bottom-Up Tree Transducers (BOT) == As in the simpler case of tree automata, bottom-up tree transducers are defined similarly to their top-down counterparts, but proceed from the leaves of the tree to the root, instead of from the root to the leaves. Thus the main difference is in the form of the rules, which are of the form f ( q 1 ( x 1 ) , … , q n ( x n ) ) → q ( u ) {\displaystyle f(q_{1}(x_{1}),\dots ,q_{n}(x_{n}))\to q(u)} .