Shopping for the best AI analytics tool? An AI analytics tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI analytics tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.
OpenFog Consortium
The OpenFog Consortium (sometimes stylized as Open Fog Consortium) was a consortium of high tech industry companies and academic institutions across the world aimed at the standardization and promotion of fog computing in various capacities and fields. The consortium was founded by Cisco Systems, Intel, Microsoft, Princeton University, Dell, and ARM Holdings in 2015 and now has 57 members across the North America, Asia, and Europe, including Forbes 500 companies and noteworthy academic institutions. The OpenFog consortium merged with the Industrial Internet Consortium, now the Industry IoT Consortium, on January 31, 2019. == History == OpenFog was created on November 19, 2015, by ARM Holdings, Cisco Systems, Dell, Intel, Microsoft, and Princeton University. The idea for a consortium centered on the advancement and dissemination of fog computing was thought up by Helder Antunes, a Cisco executive with a history in IoT, Mung Chiang, then a Princeton University professor and now President of Purdue University, and Dr. Tao Zhang, a Cisco Distinguished Engineer and CIO for the IEEE Communications Society then and now a manager at the National Institute of Standards and Technologies (NIST). The project was executed from concept to launch by Armando Pereira at PVentures Consulting, a Silicon Valley–based high-tech consulting firm. OpenFog released its reference architecture for fog computing on February 13, 2017. The Fog World Congress 2017, with Dr. Tao Zhang as its General Chair, was hosted in October 2017 by OpenFog, in conjunction with the IEEE Communications Society, as the first congress devoted to fog computing. == Administration == The OpenFog Consortium was governed by its board of directors, which is chaired by Cisco Senior Director Helder Antunes. The board of directors is made up of 11 seats, each representing one of the following companies and institutions: ARM, AT&T, Cisco, Dell, Intel, Microsoft, Princeton University, IEEE, GE, ZTE and Shanghai Tech University. The consortium's general membership comprised 13 academic members: Aalto University, Arizona State University, California Institute of Technology, Georgia State University, National Chiao Tung University, National Taiwan University, Shanghai Research Centre for Wireless Communication, Chinese University of Hong Kong, University of Colorado Boulder, University of Southern California, University of Pisa, Vanderbilt University, Wayne State University, and 20 additional members: Hitachi, Internet Initiative Japan, Itochu, Kii, Nebbiolo, PrismTech, NEC, NGD Systems, NTT Communications, OSIsoft, Real-time Innovations, relayr, Sakura Internet, Stichting imec Nederland, Toshiba, TTT Tech, Fujitsu, FogHorn Systems, TTTech and MARSEC. == Published work == The OpenFog Consortium published the white paper, "OpenFog Reference Architecture". This document outlines the eight pillars of an OpenFog architecture:Security; Scalability; Open; Autonomy; Programmability; RAS (reliability, availability and serviceability); Agility; and Hierarchy. It also incorporates a glossary for fog computing terms. In July 2018, the IEEE Standards Association announced it had adopted the OpenFog Reference Architecture as the first standard for fog computing.
Latent and observable variables
In statistics, latent variables (from Latin: present participle of lateo 'lie hidden') are variables that can only be inferred indirectly through a mathematical model from other observable variables that can be directly observed or measured. Such latent variable models are used in many disciplines, including engineering, medicine, ecology, physics, machine learning/artificial intelligence, natural language processing, bioinformatics, chemometrics, demography, economics, management, political science, psychology and the social sciences. Latent variables may correspond to aspects of physical reality. These could in principle be measured, but may not be for practical reasons. Among the earliest expressions of this idea is Francis Bacon's polemic the Novum Organum, itself a challenge to the more traditional logic expressed in Aristotle's Organon: But the latent process of which we speak, is far from being obvious to men’s minds, beset as they now are. For we mean not the measures, symptoms, or degrees of any process which can be exhibited in the bodies themselves, but simply a continued process, which, for the most part, escapes the observation of the senses. In this situation, the term hidden variables is commonly used, reflecting the fact that the variables are meaningful, but not observable. Other latent variables correspond to abstract concepts, like categories, behavioral or mental states, or data structures. The terms hypothetical variables or hypothetical constructs may be used in these situations. The use of latent variables can serve to reduce the dimensionality of data. Many observable variables can be aggregated in a model to represent an underlying concept, making it easier to understand the data. In this sense, they serve a function similar to that of scientific theories. At the same time, latent variables link observable "sub-symbolic" data in the real world to symbolic data in the modeled world. == Examples == === Psychology === Latent variables, as created by factor analytic methods, generally represent "shared" variance, or the degree to which variables "move" together. Variables that have no correlation cannot result in a latent construct based on the common factor model. The "Big Five personality traits" have been inferred using factor analysis. extraversion spatial ability wisdom: “Two of the more predominant means of assessing wisdom include wisdom-related performance and latent variable measures.” Spearman's g, or the general intelligence factor in psychometrics === Economics === Examples of latent variables from the field of economics include quality of life, business confidence, morale, happiness and conservatism: these are all variables which cannot be measured directly. However, by linking these latent variables to other, observable variables, the values of the latent variables can be inferred from measurements of the observable variables. Quality of life is a latent variable which cannot be measured directly, so observable variables are used to infer quality of life. Observable variables to measure quality of life include wealth, employment, environment, physical and mental health, education, recreation and leisure time, and social belonging. === Medicine === Latent-variable methodology is used in many branches of medicine. A class of problems that naturally lend themselves to latent variables approaches are longitudinal studies where the time scale (e.g. age of participant or time since study baseline) is not synchronized with the trait being studied. For such studies, an unobserved time scale that is synchronized with the trait being studied can be modeled as a transformation of the observed time scale using latent variables. Examples of this include disease progression modeling and modeling of growth (see box). == Inferring latent variables == There exists a range of different model classes and methodology that make use of latent variables and allow inference in the presence of latent variables. Models include: linear mixed-effects models and nonlinear mixed-effects models Hidden Markov models Factor analysis Item response theory Analysis and inference methods include: Principal component analysis Instrumented principal component analysis Partial least squares regression Latent semantic analysis and probabilistic latent semantic analysis EM algorithms Metropolis–Hastings algorithm === Bayesian algorithms and methods === Bayesian statistics is often used for inferring latent variables. Latent Dirichlet allocation The Chinese restaurant process is often used to provide a prior distribution over assignments of objects to latent categories. The Indian buffet process is often used to provide a prior distribution over assignments of latent binary features to objects.
GraphLab
Turi is a graph-based, high performance, distributed computation framework written in C++. The GraphLab project was started by Prof. Carlos Guestrin of Carnegie Mellon University in 2009. It is an open source project that uses the Apache License. While GraphLab was originally developed for machine learning tasks, it has also been developed for other data-mining tasks. == Motivation == As the amounts of collected data and computing power grow (multicore, GPUs, clusters, clouds), modern datasets no longer fit into one computing node. Efficient distributed parallel algorithms for handling large-scale data are required. The GraphLab framework is a parallel programming abstraction targeted for sparse iterative graph algorithms. GraphLab provides a programming interface, allowing deployment of distributed machine learning algorithms. The main design considerations behind the design of GraphLab are: Sparse data with local dependencies Iterative algorithms Potentially asynchronous execution == GraphLab toolkits == On top of GraphLab, several implemented libraries of algorithms: Topic modeling - contains applications like LDA, which can be used to cluster documents and extract topical representations. Graph analytics - contains applications like pagerank and triangle counting, which can be applied to general graphs to estimate community structure. Clustering - contains standard data clustering tools such as Kmeans Collaborative filtering - contains a collection of applications used to make predictions about users interests and factorize large matrices. Graphical models - contains tools for making joint predictions about collections of related random variables. Computer vision - contains a collection of tools for reasoning about images. == Turi == Turi (formerly called Dato and before that GraphLab Inc.) is a company that was founded by Prof. Carlos Guestrin from University of Washington in May 2013 to continue development support of the GraphLab open source project. Dato Inc. raised a $6.75M Series A from Madrona Venture Group and New Enterprise Associates (NEA). They raised a $18.5M Series B from Vulcan Capital and Opus Capital, with participation from Madrona and NEA. On August 5, 2016, Turi was acquired by Apple Inc. for $200,000,000.
Randomized weighted majority algorithm
The randomized weighted majority algorithm is an algorithm in machine learning theory for aggregating expert predictions to a series of decision problems. It is a simple and effective method based on weighted voting which improves on the mistake bound of the deterministic weighted majority algorithm. In fact, in the limit, its prediction rate can be arbitrarily close to that of the best-predicting expert. == Example == Imagine that every morning before the stock market opens, we get a prediction from each of our "experts" about whether the stock market will go up or down. Our goal is to somehow combine this set of predictions into a single prediction that we then use to make a buy or sell decision for the day. The principal challenge is that we do not know which experts will give better or worse predictions. The RWMA gives us a way to do this combination such that our prediction record will be nearly as good as that of the single expert which, in hindsight, gave the most accurate predictions. == Motivation == In machine learning, the weighted majority algorithm (WMA) is a deterministic meta-learning algorithm for aggregating expert predictions. In pseudocode, the WMA is as follows: initialize all experts to weight 1 for each round: add each expert's weight to the option they predicted predict the option with the largest weighted sum multiply the weights of all experts who predicted wrongly by 1 2 {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{2}}} Suppose there are n {\displaystyle n} experts and the best expert makes m {\displaystyle m} mistakes. Then, the weighted majority algorithm (WMA) makes at most 2.4 ( log 2 n + m ) {\displaystyle 2.4(\log _{2}n+m)} mistakes. This bound is highly problematic in the case of highly error-prone experts. Suppose, for example, the best expert makes a mistake 20% of the time; that is, in N = 100 {\displaystyle N=100} rounds using n = 10 {\displaystyle n=10} experts, the best expert makes m = 20 {\displaystyle m=20} mistakes. Then, the weighted majority algorithm only guarantees an upper bound of 2.4 ( log 2 10 + 20 ) ≈ 56 {\displaystyle 2.4(\log _{2}10+20)\approx 56} mistakes. As this is a known limitation of the weighted majority algorithm, various strategies have been explored in order to improve the dependence on m {\displaystyle m} . In particular, we can do better by introducing randomization. Drawing inspiration from the Multiplicative Weights Update Method algorithm, we will probabilistically make predictions based on how the experts have performed in the past. Similarly to the WMA, every time an expert makes a wrong prediction, we will decrement their weight. Mirroring the MWUM, we will then use the weights to make a probability distribution over the actions and draw our action from this distribution (instead of deterministically picking the majority vote as the WMA does). == Randomized weighted majority algorithm (RWMA) == The randomized weighted majority algorithm is an attempt to improve the dependence of the mistake bound of the WMA on m {\displaystyle m} . Instead of predicting based on majority vote, the weights, are used as probabilities for choosing the experts in each round and are updated over time (hence the name randomized weighted majority). Precisely, if w i {\displaystyle w_{i}} is the weight of expert i {\displaystyle i} , let W = ∑ i w i {\displaystyle W=\sum _{i}w_{i}} . We will follow expert i {\displaystyle i} with probability w i W {\displaystyle {\frac {w_{i}}{W}}} . This results in the following algorithm: initialize all experts to weight 1. for each round: add all experts' weights together to obtain the total weight W {\displaystyle W} choose expert i {\displaystyle i} randomly with probability w i W {\displaystyle {\frac {w_{i}}{W}}} predict as the chosen expert predicts multiply the weights of all experts who predicted wrongly by β {\displaystyle \beta } The goal is to bound the worst-case expected number of mistakes, assuming that the adversary has to select one of the answers as correct before we make our coin toss. This is a reasonable assumption in, for instance, the stock market example provided above: the variance of a stock price should not depend on the opinions of experts that influence private buy or sell decisions, so we can treat the price change as if it was decided before the experts gave their recommendations for the day. The randomized algorithm is better in the worst case than the deterministic algorithm (weighted majority algorithm): in the latter, the worst case was when the weights were split 50/50. But in the randomized version, since the weights are used as probabilities, there would still be a 50/50 chance of getting it right. In addition, generalizing to multiplying the weights of the incorrect experts by β < 1 {\displaystyle \beta <1} instead of strictly 1 2 {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{2}}} allows us to trade off between dependence on m {\displaystyle m} and log 2 n {\displaystyle \log _{2}n} . This trade-off will be quantified in the analysis section. == Analysis == Let W t {\displaystyle W_{t}} denote the total weight of all experts at round t {\displaystyle t} . Also let F t {\displaystyle F_{t}} denote the fraction of weight placed on experts which predict the wrong answer at round t {\displaystyle t} . Finally, let N {\displaystyle N} be the total number of rounds in the process. By definition, F t {\displaystyle F_{t}} is the probability that the algorithm makes a mistake on round t {\displaystyle t} . It follows from the linearity of expectation that if M {\displaystyle M} denotes the total number of mistakes made during the entire process, E [ M ] = ∑ t = 1 N F t {\displaystyle E[M]=\sum _{t=1}^{N}F_{t}} . After round t {\displaystyle t} , the total weight is decreased by ( 1 − β ) F t W t {\displaystyle \ (1-\beta )F_{t}W_{t}} , since all weights corresponding to a wrong answer are multiplied by β < 1 {\displaystyle \ \beta <1} . It then follows that W t + 1 = W t ( 1 − ( 1 − β ) F t ) {\displaystyle W_{t+1}=W_{t}(1-(1-\beta )F_{t})} . By telescoping, since W 1 = n {\displaystyle W_{1}=n} , it follows that the total weight after the process concludes is On the other hand, suppose that m {\displaystyle \ m} is the number of mistakes made by the best-performing expert. At the end, this expert has weight β m {\displaystyle \ \beta ^{m}} . It follows, then, that the total weight is at least this much; in other words, W ≥ β m {\displaystyle \ W\geq \beta ^{m}} . This inequality and the above result imply Taking the natural logarithm of both sides yields Now, the Taylor series of the natural logarithm is In particular, it follows that ln ( 1 − ( 1 − β ) F t ) < − ( 1 − β ) F t {\displaystyle \ \ln(1-(1-\beta )F_{t})<-(1-\beta )F_{t}} . Thus, Recalling that E [ M ] = ∑ t = 1 N F t {\displaystyle E[M]=\sum _{t=1}^{N}F_{t}} and rearranging, it follows that Now, as β → 1 {\displaystyle \beta \to 1} from below, the first constant tends to 1 {\displaystyle 1} ; however, the second constant tends to + ∞ {\displaystyle +\infty } . To quantify this tradeoff, define ε = 1 − β {\displaystyle \varepsilon =1-\beta } to be the penalty associated with getting a prediction wrong. Then, again applying the Taylor series of the natural logarithm, It then follows that the mistake bound, for small ε {\displaystyle \varepsilon } , can be written in the form ( 1 + ϵ 2 + O ( ε 2 ) ) m + ϵ − 1 ln ( n ) {\displaystyle \ \left(1+{\frac {\epsilon }{2}}+O(\varepsilon ^{2})\right)m+\epsilon ^{-1}\ln(n)} . In English, the less that we penalize experts for their mistakes, the more that additional experts will lead to initial mistakes but the closer we get to capturing the predictive accuracy of the best expert as time goes on. In particular, given a sufficiently low value of ε {\displaystyle \varepsilon } and enough rounds, the randomized weighted majority algorithm can get arbitrarily close to the correct prediction rate of the best expert. In particular, as long as m {\displaystyle m} is sufficiently large compared to ln ( n ) {\displaystyle \ln(n)} (so that their ratio is sufficiently small), we can assign we can obtain an upper bound on the number of mistakes equal to This implies that the "regret bound" on the algorithm (that is, how much worse it performs than the best expert) is sublinear, at O ( m ln ( n ) ) {\displaystyle O({\sqrt {m\ln(n)}})} . == Revisiting the motivation == Recall that the motivation for the randomized weighted majority algorithm was given by an example where the best expert makes a mistake 20% of the time. Precisely, in N = 100 {\displaystyle N=100} rounds, with n = 10 {\displaystyle n=10} experts, where the best expert makes m = 20 {\displaystyle m=20} mistakes, the deterministic weighted majority algorithm only guarantees an upper bound of 2.4 ( log 2 10 + 20 ) ≈ 56 {\displaystyle 2.4(\log _{2}10+20)\approx 56} . By the analysis above, it follows that minimizing the number of worst-case expected mistakes is equivalent to minimizing the fun
ActivTrak
ActivTrak is an American company that produces workforce analytics and productivity software. The company was founded in 2009 by Birch Grove Software and is headquartered in Austin, Texas. The company has raised US$77.5 million in funding and is backed by Sapphire Ventures and Elsewhere Partners. == History == ActivTrak was founded in 2009 by Herb Axilrod and Anton Seidler in Dallas, Texas. ActivTrak's first on-demand software product launched in 2012, and the workforce analytics platform launched in 2015. It uses data sourced from more than 9,500 customers and 900,000 users. In 2019, ActivTrak raised $20 million in a Series A round of funding with Elsewhere Partners, a growth-stage venture capital firm that principally invests in B2B startups. Rita Selvaggi assumed the role of CEO. In 2020, ActivTrak raised $50M in a Series B round of funding with Sapphire Ventures and Elsewhere Partners. The company also introduced the ActivTrak Productivity Lab, an online resource about workforce productivity research, industry benchmark data, and best practices. == Product == ActivTrak is a workforce analytics and productivity platform that uses reports, dashboards, and data analysis. The platform uses machine learning (AI) to collect and analyze user activity data and produce reports about workforce productivity. The software runs on Microsoft Windows, Mac, Chrome, Terminal Services, and VDI. It includes the ActivTrak Agent, which runs in the background and collects data. It responds to user activity, sensing mouse and keyboard movement in the active window(s) of the user's device. This data is collected and stored in a database that aggregates the data based on the user's request. ActivTrak does not utilize keystroke logging, content scraping, camera access, video recording or mobile device monitoring. The database leverages data analytics to generate account and team benchmarks, and identify productivity patterns and outliers. == Awards == Built In, 100 Best Midsize Places to Work in Austin, 2025 G2, Winter: Best Estimated ROI, High Performer, Best Relationship, Best Support, Users Most Likely to Recommend, Easiest Setup, Easiest Admin, Best Meets Requirements, Users Love Us, 2025 TrustRadius, Buyer’s Choice, 2025 Deloitte Technology Fast 500, No. 468 Fastest-Growing Company, 2024 Product Marketing Alliance, AI Marketing Innovation, 2024 Fortune Best Workplaces in Technology™, 2024 Inc. 5000, No. 2335 of America’s Fastest-Growing Private Companies, 2024 Fortune Best Workplaces in Texas™, 2024 Reworked IMPACT Gold Award: Most Innovative Workplace Productivity Solution, 2024 TrustRadius, Most Loved, 2024 Great Place To Work-Certified™, 2024 Inc. 5000 Regionals: Southwest, 2024 Brandon Hall Group, Best Advance in HR Predictive Analytics Technology, 2024
Diffusion map
Diffusion maps is a dimensionality reduction or feature extraction algorithm introduced by Coifman and Lafon which computes a family of embeddings of a data set into Euclidean space (often low-dimensional) whose coordinates can be computed from the eigenvectors and eigenvalues of a diffusion operator on the data. The Euclidean distance between points in the embedded space is equal to the "diffusion distance" between probability distributions centered at those points. Different from linear dimensionality reduction methods such as principal component analysis (PCA), diffusion maps are part of the family of nonlinear dimensionality reduction methods which focus on discovering the underlying manifold that the data has been sampled from. By integrating local similarities at different scales, diffusion maps give a global description of the data-set. Compared with other methods, the diffusion map algorithm is robust to noise perturbation and computationally inexpensive. == Definition of diffusion maps == Following and , diffusion maps can be defined in four steps. === Connectivity === Diffusion maps exploit the relationship between heat diffusion and random walk Markov chain. The basic observation is that if we take a random walk on the data, walking to a nearby data-point is more likely than walking to another that is far away. Let ( X , A , μ ) {\displaystyle (X,{\mathcal {A}},\mu )} be a measure space, where X {\displaystyle X} is the data set and μ {\displaystyle \mu } represents the distribution of the points on X {\displaystyle X} . Based on this, the connectivity k {\displaystyle k} between two data points, x {\displaystyle x} and y {\displaystyle y} , can be defined as the probability of walking from x {\displaystyle x} to y {\displaystyle y} in one step of the random walk. Usually, this probability is specified in terms of a kernel function of the two points: k : X × X → R {\displaystyle k:X\times X\rightarrow \mathbb {R} } . For example, the popular Gaussian kernel: k ( x , y ) = exp ( − | | x − y | | 2 ϵ ) {\displaystyle k(x,y)=\exp \left(-{\frac {||x-y||^{2}}{\epsilon }}\right)} More generally, the kernel function has the following properties k ( x , y ) = k ( y , x ) {\displaystyle k(x,y)=k(y,x)} ( k {\displaystyle k} is symmetric) k ( x , y ) ≥ 0 ∀ x , y {\displaystyle k(x,y)\geq 0\,\,\forall x,y} ( k {\displaystyle k} is positivity preserving). The kernel constitutes the prior definition of the local geometry of the data-set. Since a given kernel will capture a specific feature of the data set, its choice should be guided by the application that one has in mind. This is a major difference with methods such as principal component analysis, where correlations between all data points are taken into account at once. Given ( X , k ) {\displaystyle (X,k)} , we can then construct a reversible discrete-time Markov chain on X {\displaystyle X} (a process known as the normalized graph Laplacian construction): d ( x ) = ∫ X k ( x , y ) d μ ( y ) {\displaystyle d(x)=\int _{X}k(x,y)d\mu (y)} and define: p ( x , y ) = k ( x , y ) d ( x ) {\displaystyle p(x,y)={\frac {k(x,y)}{d(x)}}} Although the new normalized kernel does not inherit the symmetric property, it does inherit the positivity-preserving property and gains a conservation property: ∫ X p ( x , y ) d μ ( y ) = 1 {\displaystyle \int _{X}p(x,y)d\mu (y)=1} === Diffusion process === From p ( x , y ) {\displaystyle p(x,y)} we can construct a transition matrix of a Markov chain ( M {\displaystyle M} ) on X {\displaystyle X} . In other words, p ( x , y ) {\displaystyle p(x,y)} represents the one-step transition probability from x {\displaystyle x} to y {\displaystyle y} , and M t {\displaystyle M^{t}} gives the t-step transition matrix. We define the diffusion matrix L {\displaystyle L} (it is also a version of graph Laplacian matrix) L i , j = k ( x i , x j ) {\displaystyle L_{i,j}=k(x_{i},x_{j})\,} We then define the new kernel L i , j ( α ) = k ( α ) ( x i , x j ) = L i , j ( d ( x i ) d ( x j ) ) α {\displaystyle L_{i,j}^{(\alpha )}=k^{(\alpha )}(x_{i},x_{j})={\frac {L_{i,j}}{(d(x_{i})d(x_{j}))^{\alpha }}}\,} or equivalently, L ( α ) = D − α L D − α {\displaystyle L^{(\alpha )}=D^{-\alpha }LD^{-\alpha }\,} where D is a diagonal matrix and D i , i = ∑ j L i , j . {\displaystyle D_{i,i}=\sum _{j}L_{i,j}.} We apply the graph Laplacian normalization to this new kernel: M = ( D ( α ) ) − 1 L ( α ) , {\displaystyle M=({D}^{(\alpha )})^{-1}L^{(\alpha )},\,} where D ( α ) {\displaystyle D^{(\alpha )}} is a diagonal matrix and D i , i ( α ) = ∑ j L i , j ( α ) . {\displaystyle {D}_{i,i}^{(\alpha )}=\sum _{j}L_{i,j}^{(\alpha )}.} p ( x j , t | x i ) = M i , j t {\displaystyle p(x_{j},t|x_{i})=M_{i,j}^{t}\,} One of the main ideas of the diffusion framework is that running the chain forward in time (taking larger and larger powers of M {\displaystyle M} ) reveals the geometric structure of X {\displaystyle X} at larger and larger scales (the diffusion process). Specifically, the notion of a cluster in the data set is quantified as a region in which the probability of escaping this region is low (within a certain time t). Therefore, t not only serves as a time parameter, but it also has the dual role of scale parameter. The eigendecomposition of the matrix M t {\displaystyle M^{t}} yields M i , j t = ∑ l λ l t ψ l ( x i ) ϕ l ( x j ) {\displaystyle M_{i,j}^{t}=\sum _{l}\lambda _{l}^{t}\psi _{l}(x_{i})\phi _{l}(x_{j})\,} where { λ l } {\displaystyle \{\lambda _{l}\}} is the sequence of eigenvalues of M {\displaystyle M} and { ψ l } {\displaystyle \{\psi _{l}\}} and { ϕ l } {\displaystyle \{\phi _{l}\}} are the biorthogonal left and right eigenvectors respectively. Due to the spectrum decay of the eigenvalues, only a few terms are necessary to achieve a given relative accuracy in this sum. ==== Parameter α and the diffusion operator ==== The reason to introduce the normalization step involving α {\displaystyle \alpha } is to tune the influence of the data point density on the infinitesimal transition of the diffusion. In some applications, the sampling of the data is generally not related to the geometry of the manifold we are interested in describing. In this case, we can set α = 1 {\displaystyle \alpha =1} and the diffusion operator approximates the Laplace–Beltrami operator. We then recover the Riemannian geometry of the data set regardless of the distribution of the points. To describe the long-term behavior of the point distribution of a system of stochastic differential equations, we can use α = 0.5 {\displaystyle \alpha =0.5} and the resulting Markov chain approximates the Fokker–Planck diffusion. With α = 0 {\displaystyle \alpha =0} , it reduces to the classical graph Laplacian normalization. === Diffusion distance === The diffusion distance at time t {\displaystyle t} between two points can be measured as the similarity of two points in the observation space with the connectivity between them. It is given by D t ( x i , x j ) 2 = ∑ y ( p ( y , t | x i ) − p ( y , t | x j ) ) 2 ϕ 0 ( y ) {\displaystyle D_{t}(x_{i},x_{j})^{2}=\sum _{y}{\frac {(p(y,t|x_{i})-p(y,t|x_{j}))^{2}}{\phi _{0}(y)}}} where ϕ 0 ( y ) {\displaystyle \phi _{0}(y)} is the stationary distribution of the Markov chain, given by the first left eigenvector of M {\displaystyle M} . Explicitly: ϕ 0 ( y ) = d ( y ) ∑ z ∈ X d ( z ) {\displaystyle \phi _{0}(y)={\frac {d(y)}{\sum _{z\in X}d(z)}}} Intuitively, D t ( x i , x j ) {\displaystyle D_{t}(x_{i},x_{j})} is small if there is a large number of short paths connecting x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} and x j {\displaystyle x_{j}} . There are several interesting features associated with the diffusion distance, based on our previous discussion that t {\displaystyle t} also serves as a scale parameter: Points are closer at a given scale (as specified by D t ( x i , x j ) {\displaystyle D_{t}(x_{i},x_{j})} ) if they are highly connected in the graph, therefore emphasizing the concept of a cluster. This distance is robust to noise, since the distance between two points depends on all possible paths of length t {\displaystyle t} between the points. From a machine learning point of view, the distance takes into account all evidences linking x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} to x j {\displaystyle x_{j}} , allowing us to conclude that this distance is appropriate for the design of inference algorithms based on the majority of preponderance. === Diffusion process and low-dimensional embedding === The diffusion distance can be calculated using the eigenvectors by D t ( x i , x j ) 2 = ∑ l λ l 2 t ( ψ l ( x i ) − ψ l ( x j ) ) 2 {\displaystyle D_{t}(x_{i},x_{j})^{2}=\sum _{l}\lambda _{l}^{2t}(\psi _{l}(x_{i})-\psi _{l}(x_{j}))^{2}\,} So the eigenvectors can be used as a new set of coordinates for the data. The diffusion map is defined as: Ψ t ( x ) = ( λ 1 t ψ 1 ( x ) , λ 2 t ψ 2 ( x ) , … , λ k t ψ k ( x ) ) {\displaystyle \Psi _{t}(x)=(\lambda _{1}^{t}\psi _{1}(x),\lambda _{2}^{t}\psi _{2}(x),\ld