Scott Elliott Fahlman (born March 21, 1948) is an American computer scientist and Professor Emeritus at Carnegie Mellon University's Language Technologies Institute and Computer Science Department. He is notable for early work on automated planning and scheduling in a blocks world, on semantic networks, on neural networks (especially the cascade correlation algorithm), on the programming languages Dylan, and Common Lisp (especially CMU Common Lisp), and he was one of the founders of Lucid Inc. During the period when it was standardized, he was recognized as "the leader of Common Lisp." From 2006 to 2015, Fahlman was engaged in developing a knowledge base named Scone, based in part on his thesis work on the NETL Semantic Network. He also is credited with coining the use of the emoticon. == Life and career == Fahlman was born in Medina, Ohio, the son of Lorna May (Dean) and John Emil Fahlman. He attended the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he received a Bachelor of Science (B.S.) and Master of Science (M.S.) degree in electrical engineering and computer science in 1973, and a Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in artificial intelligence in 1977. He has noted that his doctoral diploma says the degree was awarded for "original research as demonstrated by a thesis in the field of Artificial Intelligence" and suggested that it may be the first doctorate to use that term. He is a fellow of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence. Fahlman acted as thesis advisor for Donald Cohen, David B. McDonald, David S. Touretzky, Skef Wholey, Justin Boyan, Michael Witbrock, and Alicia Tribble Sagae. From May 1996 to July 2001, Fahlman directed the Justsystem Pittsburgh Research Center. === Boltzmann Machine (1983) === In 1983, Fahlman, Geoffrey Hinton, and Terry Sejnowski published a paper in Proceedings of the AAAI-83 Conference, Washington DC, August 1983. The paper was titled as "Massively Parallel Architectures for AI: NETL, Thistle and Boltzmann Machines". === Emoticons === Fahlman was not the first to suggest the concept of the emoticon – a similar concept for a marker appeared in an article of Reader's Digest in May 1967, although that idea was never put into practice. In an interview printed in The New York Times in 1969, Vladimir Nabokov noted: "I often think there should exist a special typographical sign for a smile – some sort of concave mark, a supine round bracket." Fahlman is credited with originating the first smiley emoticon, which he thought would help people on a message board at Carnegie Mellon to distinguish serious posts from jokes. He proposed the use of :-) and :-( for this purpose, and the symbols caught on. The original message from which these symbols originated was posted on 19 September 1982. The message was recovered by Jeff Baird on 10 September 2002 and read: 19-Sep-82 11:44 Scott E Fahlman :-) From: Scott E Fahlman
Luxafor
Luxafor () is a brand of office productivity tools designed to improve efficiency and communication in workplaces. The brands main product is LED status indicators for use in office settings. Luxafor is a product line under the company SIA Greynut, based in Riga, Latvia. == History == Luxafor was developed by the technology company SIA Greynut. The brand first gained attention through a Kickstarter campaign in 2015, which aimed to fund its initial product, the Luxafor Flag. Although the campaign was unsuccessful in reaching its funding goal, the product was still brought to market. In 2017, Luxafor launched another Kickstarter campaign for the Luxafor Bluetooth, a wireless version of its LED status indicator. This campaign also did not meet its funding goal, but like its predecessor, the product was still developed and released. Despite initial setbacks, Luxafor Bluetooth has become one of the brand's leading products. == Products == Luxafors main product range is LED status indicators, including: === Luxafor Flag === A USB-powered LED indicator that shows different colors to signal the user's availability. === Luxafor Bluetooth === A wireless LED indicator controlled via Bluetooth, integrating with productivity tools like Slack and Microsoft Teams. === Luxafor Switch === An advanced status indicator designed to manage room and workspace availability. === Other === Other Luxafor products include CO2 Dongle, Smart Button, Mute Button, Pomodoro Timer and others. == Features == Luxafor products are known for their customizable indicators, integration capabilities with IFTTT, Zapier, and remote control features. They are compatible with various operating systems, including Windows and macOS, and can be integrated with numerous communication and productivity platforms, like Microsoft Teams and Cisco Jabber.
Production Rule Representation
The Production Rule Representation (PRR) is a proposed standard of the Object Management Group (OMG) that aims to define a vendor-neutral model for representing production rules within the Unified Modeling Language (UML), specifically for use in forward-chaining rule engines. == History == The OMG set up a Business Rules Working Group in 2002 as the first standards body to recognize the importance of the "Business Rules Approach". It issued 2 main RFPs in 2003 – a standard for modeling production rules (PRR), and a standard for modeling business rules as business documentation (BSBR, now SBVR). PRR was mostly defined by and for vendors of Business Rule Engines (BREs) (sometimes termed Business Rules Engine(s), like in Wikipedia). Contributors have included all the major BRE vendors, members of RuleML, and leading UML vendors. == Evolution == The PRR RFP originally suggested that PRR use a combination of UML OCL and Action Semantics for rule conditions and actions. However, expecting modellers to learn 2 relatively obscure UML languages in order to define a production rule proved unpalatable. Therefore, PRR OCL was defined that included OCL extensions for simple rule actions (as well as external functions). PRR OCL is currently considered "non-normative" i.e. is not part of the PRR standard per se. PRR beta applies just to a PRR Core that excludes an explicit expression language. The PRR RFP envisaged covering both forward and backward chaining rule engines. However, the lack of vendor support for / interest in backward chaining caused this to be revise to forward chaining and "sequential" semantics. The latter is simply the scripting mode provided by many BPM tools, where rules are listed and executed sequentially as if programmed. This provides PRR with better compatibility with typical BPM scripting engines (and acknowledges the fact that most BREs today support a "sequential" mode of operation, improving performance in some circumstances). == Status == PRR is currently at version 1.0.
Diffbot
Diffbot is a developer of machine learning and computer vision algorithms and public APIs for extracting data from web pages / web scraping to create a knowledge base. == Overview == The company has gained interest from its application of computer vision technology to web pages, wherein it visually parses a web page for important elements and returns them in a structured format. In 2015 Diffbot announced it was working on its version of an automated "knowledge graph" by crawling the web and using its automatic web page extraction to build a large database of structured web data. In 2019 Diffbot released their Knowledge Graph which has since grown to include over two billion entities (corporations, people, articles, products, discussions, and more), and ten trillion "facts." == Features == The company's products allow software developers to analyze web home pages and article pages, and extract the "important information" while ignoring elements deemed not core to the primary content. In August 2012 the company released its Page Classifier API, which automatically categorizes web pages into specific "page types". As part of this, Diffbot analyzed 750,000 web pages shared on the social media service Twitter and revealed that photos, followed by articles and videos, are the predominant web media shared on the social network. In September 2020 the company released a Natural Language Processing API for automatically building Knowledge Graphs from text. The company raised $2 million in funding in May 2012 from investors including Andy Bechtolsheim and Sky Dayton. Diffbot's customers include Adobe, AOL, Cisco, DuckDuckGo, eBay, Instapaper, Microsoft, Onswipe and Springpad.
Feigenbaum test
A Feigenbaum test is a variation of the Turing test where a computer system attempts to replicate an expert in a given field such as chemistry or marketing. It is also known, as a subject matter expert Turing test and was proposed by Edward Feigenbaum in a 2003 paper. The concept is also described by Ray Kurzweil in his 2005 book The Singularity is Near. Kurzweil argues that machines who pass this test are an inevitable consequence of Moore's Law.
Label noise
Label noise refers to errors or inaccuracies in the class labels of data instances. This is a widespread issue in machine learning datasets, arising from human annotator mistakes, unclear labeling instructions, automated labeling methods, or adversarial attacks in supervised learning. Label noise can be roughly divided into random noise, where labels are flipped independently of input features, and systematic noise, where mislabeling is dependent on certain patterns or biases in the data. Label noise can be damaging to model performance, especially for complex models that may overfit to noisy labels rather than generalizable patterns. Many approaches have been proposed to deal with the effects of label noise, including robust loss functions, noise-tolerant algorithms, data cleaning methods, and semi-supervised learning approaches. To reduce the impact of wrong labels during training, techniques like label smoothing, sample reweighting and using trusted validation sets are used. The role of noise-robust training paradigms and curriculum learning strategies to improve resilience against mislabeled data is also explored in recent research.
Reification (computer science)
In computer science, reification is the process by which an abstract idea about a program is turned into an explicit data model or other object created in a programming language. A computable/addressable object—a resource—is created in a system as a proxy for a non computable/addressable object. By means of reification, something that was previously implicit, unexpressed, and possibly inexpressible is explicitly formulated and made available to conceptual (logical or computational) manipulation. Informally, reification is often referred to as "making something a first-class citizen" within the scope of a particular system. Some aspect of a system can be reified at language design time, which is related to reflection in programming languages. It can be applied as a stepwise refinement at system design time. Reification is one of the most frequently used techniques of conceptual analysis and knowledge representation. == Reflective programming languages == In the context of programming languages, reification is the process by which a user program or any aspect of a programming language that was implicit in the translated program and the run-time system, are expressed in the language itself. This process makes it available to the program, which can inspect all these aspects as ordinary data. In reflective languages, reification data is causally connected to the related reified aspect such that a modification to one of them affects the other. Therefore, the reification data is always a faithful representation of the related reified aspect . Reification data is often said to be made a first class object. Reification, at least partially, has been experienced in many languages to date: in early Lisp dialects and in current Prolog dialects, programs have been treated as data, although the causal connection has often been left to the responsibility of the programmer. In Smalltalk-80, the compiler from the source text to bytecode has been part of the run-time system since the very first implementations of the language. The C programming language reifies the low-level detail of memory addresses.Many programming language designs encapsulate the details of memory allocation in the compiler and the run-time system. In the design of the C programming language, the memory address is reified and is available for direct manipulation by other language constructs. For example, the following code may be used when implementing a memory-mapped device driver. The buffer pointer is a proxy for the memory address 0xB8000000. Functional programming languages based on lambda-calculus reify the concept of a procedure abstraction and procedure application in the form of the Lambda expression. The Scheme programming language reifies continuations (approximately, the call stack). In C#, reification is used to make parametric polymorphism implemented in the form of generics as a first-class feature of the language. In the Java programming language, there exist "reifiable types" that are "completely available at run time" (i.e. their information is not erased during compilation). REBOL reifies code as data and vice versa. Many languages, such as Lisp, JavaScript, and Curl, provide an eval or evaluate procedure that effectively reifies the language interpreter. Smalltalk and Actor languages permit the reification of blocks and messages, which are equivalent of lambda expressions in Lisp, and thisContext in Smalltalk, which is a reification of the current executing block. Homoiconic languages reify the syntax of the language as data that is understood by the language itself. This allows the user to write programs whose inputs and outputs are code (see macros, eval). Common representations of code include S-expressions (e.g. Clojure, Lisp), and abstract syntax trees (e.g. Rust). == Data reification vs. data refinement == Data reification (stepwise refinement) involves finding a more concrete representation of the abstract data types used in a formal specification. Data reification is the terminology of the Vienna Development Method (VDM) that most other people would call data refinement. An example is taking a step towards an implementation by replacing a data representation without a counterpart in the intended implementation language, such as sets, by one that does have a counterpart (such as maps with fixed domains that can be implemented by arrays), or at least one that is closer to having a counterpart, such as sequences. The VDM community prefers the word "reification" over "refinement", as the process has more to do with concretising an idea than with refining it. For similar usages, see Reification (linguistics). == In conceptual modeling == Reification is widely used in conceptual modeling. Reifying a relationship means viewing it as an entity. The purpose of reifying a relationship is to make it explicit, when additional information needs to be added to it. Consider the relationship type IsMemberOf(member:Person, Committee). An instance of IsMemberOf is a relationship that represents the fact that a person is a member of a committee. The figure below shows an example population of IsMemberOf relationship in tabular form. Person P1 is a member of committees C1 and C2. Person P2 is a member of committee C1 only. The same fact, however, could also be viewed as an entity. Viewing a relationship as an entity, one can say that the entity reifies the relationship. This is called reification of a relationship. Like any other entity, it must be an instance of an entity type. In the present example, the entity type has been named Membership. For each instance of IsMemberOf, there is one and only one instance of Membership, and vice versa. Now, it becomes possible to add more information to the original relationship. As an example, we can express the fact that "person p1 was nominated to be the member of committee c1 by person p2". Reified relationship Membership can be used as the source of a new relationship IsNominatedBy(Membership, Person). For related usages see Reification (knowledge representation). == In Unified Modeling Language (UML) == UML provides an association class construct for defining reified relationship types. The association class is a single model element that is both a kind of association and a kind of class. The association and the entity type that reifies are both the same model element. Note that attributes cannot be reified. == On Semantic Web == === RDF and OWL === In Semantic Web languages, such as Resource Description Framework (RDF) and Web Ontology Language (OWL), a statement is a binary relation. It is used to link two individuals or an individual and a value. Applications sometimes need to describe other RDF statements, for instance, to record information like when statements were made, or who made them, which is sometimes called "provenance" information. As an example, we may want to represent properties of a relation, such as our certainty about it, severity or strength of a relation, relevance of a relation, and so on. The example from the conceptual modeling section describes a particular person with URIref person:p1, who is a member of the committee:c1. The RDF triple from that description is Consider to store two further facts: (i) to record who nominated this particular person to this committee (a statement about the membership itself), and (ii) to record who added the fact to the database (a statement about the statement). The first case is a case of classical reification like above in UML: reify the membership and store its attributes and roles etc.: Additionally, RDF provides a built-in vocabulary intended for describing RDF statements. A description of a statement using this vocabulary is called a reification of the statement. The RDF reification vocabulary consists of the type rdf:Statement, and the properties rdf:subject, rdf:predicate, and rdf:object. Using the reification vocabulary, a reification of the statement about the person's membership would be given by assigning the statement a URIref such as committee:membership12345 so that describing statements can be written as follows: These statements say that the resource identified by the URIref committee:membership12345Stat is an RDF statement, that the subject of the statement refers to the resource identified by person:p1, the predicate of the statement refers to the resource identified by committee:isMemberOf, and the object of the statement refers to the resource committee:c1. Assuming that the original statement is actually identified by committee:membership12345, it should be clear by comparing the original statement with the reification that the reification actually does describe it. The conventional use of the RDF reification vocabulary always involves describing a statement using four statements in this pattern. Therefore, they are sometimes referred to as the "reification quad". Using reification according to this convention, we could record the fact that pe