Jürgen Schmidhuber

Jürgen Schmidhuber (born 17 January 1963) is a German computer scientist noted for his work in the field of artificial intelligence, specifically artificial neural networks. He has been described by media outlets as a leading pioneer of modern artificial intelligence. He is a scientific director of the Dalle Molle Institute for Artificial Intelligence Research in Switzerland. He is also director of the Artificial Intelligence Initiative and professor of the Computer Science program in the Computer, Electrical, and Mathematical Sciences and Engineering (CEMSE) division at the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) in Saudi Arabia. He is best known for his work on long short-term memory (LSTM), a type of neural network architecture which was the dominant technique for various natural language processing tasks in research and commercial applications in the 2010s. He also introduced principles of dynamic neural networks, meta-learning, generative adversarial networks and linear transformers, all of which are widespread in modern AI. == Career == Schmidhuber completed his undergraduate (1987) and PhD (1991) studies at the Technical University of Munich in Munich, Germany. His PhD advisors were Wilfried Brauer and Klaus Schulten. He taught there from 2004 until 2009. From 2009 to 2021, he was a professor of artificial intelligence at the Università della Svizzera Italiana in Lugano, Switzerland. He has served as the director of Dalle Molle Institute for Artificial Intelligence Research (IDSIA), a Swiss AI lab, since 1995. Since 2021, he has also been the director of the AI Initiative at the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST). In 2014, Schmidhuber formed a company, NNAISENSE, to work on commercial applications of artificial intelligence in fields such as finance, heavy industry and self-driving cars. Sepp Hochreiter, Jaan Tallinn, and Marcus Hutter are advisers to the company. Sales were under US$11 million in 2016; however, Schmidhuber states that the current emphasis is on research and not revenue. NNAISENSE raised its first round of capital funding in January 2017. Schmidhuber's overall goal is to create an all-purpose AI by training a single AI in sequence on a variety of narrow tasks, but as of 2026 he has said that the focus of NNAISENSE has shifted from artificial general intelligence to asset management. == Research == In the 1980s, backpropagation did not work well for deep learning with long credit assignment paths in artificial neural networks. To overcome this problem, Schmidhuber (1991) proposed a hierarchy of recurrent neural networks (RNNs) pre-trained one level at a time by self-supervised learning. It uses predictive coding to learn internal representations at multiple self-organizing time scales, facilitating downstream deep learning. The RNN hierarchy can be collapsed into a single RNN, by distilling a higher level chunker network into a lower level automatizer network. In 1993, a chunker solved a deep learning task whose depth exceeded 1000. In 1991, Schmidhuber published adversarial neural networks that contest with each other in the form of a zero-sum game, where one network's gain is the other network's loss. The first network is a generative model that models a probability distribution over output patterns. The second network learns by gradient descent to predict the reactions of the environment to these patterns. This was called "artificial curiosity". In 2014, this principle was used in the creation of the generative adversarial network, which Schmidhuber describes as a special case of artificial curiosity where the environmental reaction is 1 or 0 depending on whether the first network's output is in a given set. Schmidhuber supervised the 1991 diploma thesis of his student Sepp Hochreiter which he considered "one of the most important documents in the history of machine learning". It studied the neural history compressor and analyzed and overcame the vanishing gradient problem. This led to the creation of long short-term memory (LSTM), a type of recurrent neural network. The name LSTM was introduced in a tech report in 1995, leading to the most cited LSTM publication, published in 1997 and co-authored by Hochreiter and Schmidhuber. The standard LSTM architecture was introduced in 2000 by Felix Gers, Schmidhuber, and Fred Cummins. Today's "vanilla LSTM" using backpropagation through time was published with his student Alex Graves in 2005, and its connectionist temporal classification (CTC) training algorithm in 2006. CTC was applied to end-to-end speech recognition with LSTM. In 2014, the state of the art was training “very deep neural network” with 20 to 30 layers. Stacking too many layers led to a steep reduction in training accuracy, known as the "degradation" problem. In May 2015, Rupesh Kumar Srivastava, Klaus Greff, and Schmidhuber used LSTM principles to create the highway network, a feedforward neural network with hundreds of layers, much deeper than previous networks. In Dec 2015, the residual neural network (ResNet) was published, which is a variant of the highway network. In 1992, Schmidhuber published fast weights programmer, an alternative to recurrent neural networks. It has a slow feedforward neural network that learns by gradient descent to control the fast weights of another neural network through outer products of self-generated activation patterns, and the fast weights network itself operates over inputs. This was later shown to be equivalent to the unnormalized linear transformer. In 2011, Schmidhuber's team at IDSIA with his postdoc Dan Ciresan also achieved dramatic speedups of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) using graphics processing units (GPUs), based on CNN designs introduced much earlier by Kunihiko Fukushima. An earlier CNN on GPU by Chellapilla et al. (2006) was 4 times faster than an equivalent implementation on CPU. The deep CNN of Dan Ciresan et al. (2011) at IDSIA was 60 times faster and achieved the first superhuman performance in a computer vision contest in August 2011. Between 15 May 2011 and 10 September 2012, these CNNs won four more image competitions and improved the state of the art on multiple image benchmarks. The approach has become central to the field of computer vision. == Credit disputes == Schmidhuber has controversially argued that he and other researchers have been denied adequate recognition for their contribution to the field of deep learning, in favour of Geoffrey Hinton, Yoshua Bengio and Yann LeCun, who shared the 2018 Turing Award for their work in deep learning. He wrote a "scathing" 2015 article arguing that Hinton, Bengio and LeCun "heavily cite each other" but "fail to credit the pioneers of the field". In a statement to the New York Times, Yann LeCun wrote that "Jürgen is manically obsessed with recognition and keeps claiming credit he doesn't deserve for many, many things... It causes him to systematically stand up at the end of every talk and claim credit for what was just presented, generally not in a justified manner." Schmidhuber replied that LeCun did this "without any justification, without providing a single example", and published details of numerous priority disputes with Hinton, Bengio and LeCun. The term "schmidhubered" has been jokingly used in the AI community to describe Schmidhuber's habit of publicly challenging the originality of other researchers' work, a practice seen by some in the AI community as a "rite of passage" for young researchers. Some suggest that Schmidhuber's significant accomplishments have been underappreciated due to his confrontational personality. == Recognition == Schmidhuber received the Helmholtz Award of the International Neural Network Society in 2013, and the Neural Networks Pioneer Award of the IEEE Computational Intelligence Society in 2016 for "pioneering contributions to deep learning and neural networks." He is a member of the European Academy of Sciences and Arts. He has been referred to as the "father of modern AI", the "father of generative AI", and the "father of deep learning". Schmidhuber himself, however, has called Alexey Grigorevich Ivakhnenko the "father of deep learning", and gives credit to many even earlier AI pioneers. The New York Times ran a profile under the headline "When A.I. Matures, It May Call Jürgen Schmidhuber 'Dad'", highlighting his early work on deep learning and his long‑term vision for self‑improving AI. == Views == Schmidhuber is a proponent of open source AI, and believes that they will become competitive against commercial closed-source AI. Since the 1970s, Schmidhuber wanted to create "intelligent machines that could learn and improve on their own and become smarter than him within his lifetime." He differentiates between two types of AIs: tool AI, such as those for improving healthcare, and autonomous AIs that set their own goals, perform their own research, and explore the universe. He has worked on both types for de

Ontology learning

Ontology learning (ontology extraction, ontology augmentation generation, ontology generation, or ontology acquisition) is the automatic or semi-automatic creation of ontologies, including extracting the corresponding domain's terms and the relationships between the concepts that these terms represent from a corpus of natural language text, and encoding them with an ontology language for easy retrieval. As building ontologies manually is extremely labor-intensive and time-consuming, there is great motivation to automate the process. Typically, the process starts by extracting terms and concepts or noun phrases from plain text using linguistic processors such as part-of-speech tagging and phrase chunking. Then statistical or symbolic techniques are used to extract relation signatures, often based on pattern-based or definition-based hypernym extraction techniques. == Procedure == Ontology learning (OL) is used to (semi-)automatically extract whole ontologies from natural language text. The process is usually split into the following eight tasks, which are not all necessarily applied in every ontology learning system. === Domain terminology extraction === During the domain terminology extraction step, domain-specific terms are extracted, which are used in the following step (concept discovery) to derive concepts. Relevant terms can be determined, e.g., by calculation of the TF/IDF values or by application of the C-value / NC-value method. The resulting list of terms has to be filtered by a domain expert. In the subsequent step, similarly to coreference resolution in information extraction, the OL system determines synonyms, because they share the same meaning and therefore correspond to the same concept. The most common methods therefore are clustering and the application of statistical similarity measures. === Concept discovery === In the concept discovery step, terms are grouped to meaning bearing units, which correspond to an abstraction of the world and therefore to concepts. The grouped terms are these domain-specific terms and their synonyms, which were identified in the domain terminology extraction step. === Concept hierarchy derivation === In the concept hierarchy derivation step, the OL system tries to arrange the extracted concepts in a taxonomic structure. This is mostly achieved with unsupervised hierarchical clustering methods. Because the result of such methods is often noisy, a supervision step, e.g., user evaluation, is added. A further method for the derivation of a concept hierarchy exists in the usage of several patterns that should indicate a sub- or supersumption relationship. Patterns like “X, that is a Y” or “X is a Y” indicate that X is a subclass of Y. Such pattern can be analyzed efficiently, but they often occur too infrequently to extract enough sub- or supersumption relationships. Instead, bootstrapping methods are developed, which learn these patterns automatically and therefore ensure broader coverage. === Learning of non-taxonomic relations === In the learning of non-taxonomic relations step, relationships are extracted that do not express any sub- or supersumption. Such relationships are, e.g., works-for or located-in. There are two common approaches to solve this subtask. The first is based upon the extraction of anonymous associations, which are named appropriately in a second step. The second approach extracts verbs, which indicate a relationship between entities, represented by the surrounding words. The result of both approaches need to be evaluated by an ontologist to ensure accuracy. === Rule discovery === During rule discovery, axioms (formal description of concepts) are generated for the extracted concepts. This can be achieved, e.g., by analyzing the syntactic structure of a natural language definition and the application of transformation rules on the resulting dependency tree. The result of this process is a list of axioms, which, afterwards, is comprehended to a concept description. This output is then evaluated by an ontologist. === Ontology population === At this step, the ontology is augmented with instances of concepts and properties. For the augmentation with instances of concepts, methods based on the matching of lexico-syntactic patterns are used. Instances of properties are added through the application of bootstrapping methods, which collect relation tuples. === Concept hierarchy extension === In this step, the OL system tries to extend the taxonomic structure of an existing ontology with further concepts. This can be performed in a supervised manner with a trained classifier or in an unsupervised manner via the application of similarity measures. === Frame and Event detection === During frame/event detection, the OL system tries to extract complex relationships from text, e.g., who departed from where to what place and when. Approaches range from applying SVM with kernel methods to semantic role labeling (SRL) to deep semantic parsing techniques. == Tools == Dog4Dag (Dresden Ontology Generator for Directed Acyclic Graphs) is an ontology generation plugin for Protégé 4.1 and OBOEdit 2.1. It allows for term generation, sibling generation, definition generation, and relationship induction. Integrated into Protégé 4.1 and OBO-Edit 2.1, DOG4DAG allows ontology extension for all common ontology formats (e.g., OWL and OBO). Limited largely to EBI and Bio Portal lookup service extensions.

E-Science librarianship

E-Science librarianship refers to a role for librarians in e-Science. == Early scholars == Early references to e-Science and librarianship involve information studies scholars researching cyberinfrastructure and emerging networked information and knowledge communities. Notably Christine Borgman, Professor and Presidential Chair in Information Studies at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) was a key player in bringing e-Science, and the idea of networked knowledge communities, to the attention of the library profession. In 2004, as a visiting fellow at the Oxford Internet Institute, she conducted research and lectured publicly on e-Science, Digital Libraries, and Knowledge Communities. In 2007 Anna K. Gold, formerly of MIT and Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo, authored a series of articles in D-Lib Magazine that opened the door for academic libraries to begin exploring roles, skills, and strategies for engaging in e-Science: Cyberinfrastructure, Data, and Libraries, Part 1: A Cyberinfrastructure Primer for Librarians and Cyberinfrastructure, Data, and Libraries, Part 2: Libraries and the Data Challenge: Roles and Actions for Libraries. == Academic research and health sciences libraries == In 2007, the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) e-Science task force issued its report on e-Science and librarianship. The ARL's report encouraged its member libraries to position themselves to engage with researchers involved in e-Science (eScience) by cultivating new research support strategies and developing their digital scholarship infrastructure. E-Science has multiple attributes; Tony and Jessie Hey framed e-Science for the library community by characterizing it as a research methodology: "e-Science is not a new scientific discipline in its own right: e-Science is shorthand for the set of tools and technologies required to support collaborative, networked science". In addition to academic libraries' interests in providing support for their researchers engaging in e-Science, the health sciences library community also emerged as a major proponent for creating librarian positions for supporting the information needs of large-scale, networked, research collaborations on their campuses. Neil Rambo, current director of NYU's Health Sciences Library and former director of University of Washington Health Sciences Library, was the first to use the term in the Journal of the Medical Library Association, in his 2009 editorial e-Science and the Biomedical Library. Rambo's definition of e-Science highlighted the potential e-Science held for creating data as a research product: "E-science is a new research methodology, fueled by networked capabilities and the practical possibility of gathering and storing vast amounts of data." In response to this article the University of Massachusetts Medical School Lamar Soutter Library and National Network of Libraries of Medicine, New England Region encouraged health sciences libraries to cooperate to identify skills and develop a program for training e-Science Librarians. Then, in 2013, Shannon Bohle, an archivist who was employed in the library at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, an NCI-designated basic cancer research facility, used experience gained there and previous papers and presentations about preserving scientific archival materials to expand the traditional definition of e-Science by including the terms, principles, and practices used in archival science. These included in the definition the "long-term storage and accessibility of all materials generated through the scientific process," as well as examples of material types traditionally preserved in archives, like "electronic/digitized laboratory notebooks, raw and fitted data sets, manuscript production and draft versions, pre-prints," as well as library materials ("print and/or electronic publications"). == Roles == Many areas of science are about to be transformed by the availability of vast amounts of new scientific data that can potentially provide insights at a level of detail never before envisaged. However, this new data dominant era brings new challenges for the scientists and they will need the skills and technologies both of computer scientists and of the library community to manage, search and curate these new data resources. Libraries will not be immune from change in this new world of research. Karen Williams identifies roles in the following areas for librarians in the developing world of e-Science. Campus Engagement Content/Collection Development and Management Teaching and Learning Scholarly Communication E-Scholarship and Digital Tools Reference/Help Services Outreach Fund Raising Exhibit and Event Planning Leadership == Challenges for research libraries == E-science tends toward inter- and multidisciplinary approaches that depend on computation and computer science. Research libraries have traditionally been discipline focused and, although increasingly technologically sophisticated, do not have systems of the scale or complexity of the e-science environment. E-science is data intensive, but research libraries have not typically been responsible for scientific data. E-science is frequently conducted in a team context, often distributed across multiple institutions and on a global scale. The primary constituency of libraries generally comprises those affiliated with the local institution. Licenses for electronic content are typically restricted to a particular institutional community, and the infrastructure to move institutional licenses into a multi-institutional environment is not well developed. E-science challenges all these traditional paradigms of research library organization and services. == Skills == Garritano & Carlson were among the first to outline a skill set for librarians seeking to support the data needs of e-Science; they identified five skill categories librarians new to this area should expect to adapt or develop when participating on such projects: Library and information science expertise Subject expertise Partnerships and outreach (both internal and external) Participating in sponsored research Balancing workload An example of librarians reconfiguring traditional librarian skills to meet the needs of researchers engaging in e-Science is Witt & Carlson's adaptation of the traditional reference interview into a "data interview" in order to provide effective data management and e-Science services. This interview consists of ten practical queries necessary for understanding the provenance and expectations for the preservation of datasets typical of e-Science that also help illustrate some of the educational tools and skills needed by a librarian new to e-Science. "What is the story of the data? What form and format are the data in? What is the expected lifespan of the dataset? How could the data be used, reused, and repurposed? How large is the dataset, and what is its rate of growth? Who are the potential audiences for the data? Who owns the data? Does the dataset include any sensitive information? What publications or discoveries have resulted from the data? How should the data be made accessible?" == Resources == In 2009 the Lamar Soutter Library at the University of Massachusetts Medical School (UMMS) and the National Network of Libraries of Medicine, New England Region (NN/LM NER) funded an e-Science program for building the skills highlighted above for librarians. Elaine Russo Martin, Director of Library Services at the Lamar Soutter Library and Director of the NN/LM NER developed this comprehensive e-Science program to build librarians' subject expertise in the sciences, developing their data management skills, and their familiarity with cyberinfrastructure and e-Science. Three major products of this program are the e-Science web portal for librarians, the E-Science Symposium, and the New England Collaborative Data Management Curriculum (NECDMC). This portal includes educational resources for specific tools and subject/discipline tutorials and modules to assist librarians new to e-Science. UMMS and NN/LM NER also publish an open access journal called the Journal of eScience Librarianship.

User-subjective approach

The user-subjective approach is the first interaction design approach dedicated specifically to personal information management (PIM). The approach offers design principles with which PIM systems (e.g. operating systems, email applications and web browsers) can make systematic use of subjective (i.e. user-dependent) attributes. The approach evolved in three stages: (a) theoretical foundations first published in a Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology during 2003. The paper introduces the approach and its design principles (b) evidence and implementation was published in another JASIST paper in 2008. The paper gives empirical evidence in support of the approach as well as seven novel design schemes that derives from it. It has won the Best JASIST paper award in 2009.(c) specific design evaluation this stage has already begun with evaluation of the first user-subjective design prototype called GrayArea in a Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems paper published in 2009. == Theoretical foundations == The user-subjective approach takes advantage of the fact that in PIM the person who retrieves the information is the same person who had previously stored it. PIM can be seen as a communication between the person and him\her self at two different times: the time of storage and the time of retrieval. The PIM system design should help facilitate that unique communication by allowing the user use subjective (user-dependent) attributes in addition to the standard objective ones. PIM systems should capture these subjective attributes when the user interacts with the information item (either automatically or by using direct manipulation interface) in order to help the user retrieve the item later on. The user-subjective approach identifies three subjective attributes – the project which the item was classified to, its degree of importance to the user, and the context in which the item was used during the interaction with it. The approach also assigns a design principle for each. The principles (discussed below) are deliberately abstract to allow for a variety of different implementations. === The subjective project classification principle === The subjective project classification principle suggests that PIM systems design should allow all information items related to a project be classified under the same category regardless of whether they are files, emails, Web Favorites or of any other format. This stands in sharp contrast with the present PIM system design where there are distinct folder hierarchies for each of these formats. The current design forces the user to store information related to a single project in separate locations depending on their format causing the project fragmentation problem. === The subjective importance principle === The subjective importance principle suggests that the subjective importance of information should affect its degree of visual salience and accessibility: important information items should be highly visible and accessible as they are more likely to be retrieved (the promotion principle) and those of lower importance should be demoted (i.e. making them less visible) so as not to distract the user (the demotion principle). While the promotion principle is not new and has been widely applied in PIM system design, the demotion principle is novel and has been applied only sporadically in these systems. Currently these systems allow only two options: keeping information (where unneeded information items could clutter folders and obscure the target item) and deleting it (where there is a risk that the item will not be there when needed). Demotion suggests a third option where the item is less visible so it doesn’t distract the user but is kept within its original context in case the user would need it after all. === The subjective context principle === The subjective context principle suggests that PIM systems should allow users retrieve their information items in the same context that they had previously used in order to bridge the time gap between these two events. By "context" the approach refers to other information items that were used at the time of interaction with the item, thoughts that the users may have regarding the item, the phase the user got to in the interaction with the item and other people the user collaborates with regarding the information item. == Evidence and implementations == === Evidence === The user-subjective approach was evaluated in a multioperational designed study which used questionnaires, screen shots and in-depth interviews (N = 84). The research tested the use of subjective attributes in current PIM systems and its dependency on design. Results show that participants used subjective attributes whenever design allowed them to. When it didn't, they either used their own alternative ways to use these attributes or avoided using subjective attributes at all. Regarding the subjective project classification principle – many of the participants' recent files, emails and web pages related to the same projects (indicating that they were working on the same project using different formats), and they had saved files of different format in the same project folders. However, as design does not suggest storing emails and web favorites with files, users avoid doing so. Regarding the subjective importance principle – users tended to retrieve their important information from highly visible and accessible locations offered by current design (e.g. by using the desktop), however since current systems offers no way to demote files of low subjective importance participants tended to use their own walk around ways for doing so (e.g. by moving them to a folder called "old" inside their original folder). Regarding the subjective context principle – participants tended to talk spontaneously about the context of their information items during the interview. These evidence imply that current PIM systems could possibly be improved if it would allow users to make more use of subjective attributes of their personal information. === Implementations === Each of the user-subjective design principles can be implemented in various ways. Moreover, as the approach is generative it offers PIM designers to use these principles in order to create their own user subjective designs. Below are design schemes that demonstrate an implementation of each of the principles. A more complete set of implementation examples can be found in the user-subjective website Archived 2011-02-01 at the Wayback Machine. The single hierarchy solution – addresses the project fragmentation problem (the current situation where the users stores and retrieve their project-related files, emails and web favorites at different hierarchies) and implements the subjective classification principle by offering the user a single folder hierarchy for all information items. At the operation system level the users would navigate to a folder and find there all project related files, emails, web favorites, tasks, contacts and notes. This would allow them to retrieve all their project-related information items from a single location regardless of their formats. When looking at these folders at their mail box the users would see only their emails and only web favorites through their browser. The single hierarchy design scheme has not been evaluated yet. GrayArea – implements the demotion principle by allowing users to move subjectively unimportant files to a gray area at the bottom end of their folders. This clears the upper part of the folder from file that are unlikely to be retrieved while allowing the users to retrieve these unimportant file in their original context in case they are needed after all. GrayArea design scheme was positively evaluated (see next section). ItemHistory – is an implementation of the subjective context principle. It allows users to reach all information items that were previously retrieved while that information item was open. This design scheme has not been evaluated to date. == Specific design evaluation == The evaluation of specific designs is the third and final step of the approach development. It had begun with the assessment of GrayArea. === GrayArea evaluation === GrayArea was evaluated by using a prototype that simulated the participants' folders but included a gray area where they could drag & drop their subjectively unimportant files. In the study 96 participants were asked to clean up their folders from unimportant files once with GrayArea and once without it. Results show that the use of GrayArea reduced the clutter in folders, that it was easier for participants to demote files than to delete them and that they would use it if provided in their next operating system. These results encourage commercial implementation of GrayArea and the development and testing of other user-subjective designs. == Chronological development == The user-subjective approach was developed by

Best arm identification

Best arm identification (BAI) is a sequential one-player game where the player has to find the best action (arm) among a list of actions (arms) by collecting information in the most efficient way. It is a multi-armed bandit game as a player only gets information about an arm by playing it. The most common objective in multi-armed bandit games is to minimize the regret (i.e., play the best action as much as possible), but in BAI, the goal is to find the best arm as efficiently as possible. This problem naturally arises in scenarios such as adaptive clinical trials where the number of patients is limited and the quantification of the confidence in a treatment is important. It also arises in hyperparameter optimization where the goal is to find the optimal choice of hyperparameters for an algorithm with the smallest possible number of experiments, as it can be costly in terms of time, energy, or money. == Stochastic multi-armed bandit == The stochastic multi-armed bandit (MAB) is a sequential game with one player and K {\displaystyle K} actions (arms). Each arm has an unknown probability distribution associated with it. At each turn, the player has to choose one action and receive an observation from the probability distribution associated with the arm. The more you play an arm, the more you get information on its probability distribution. === Best arm identification === In BAI the goal is to find the arm that has the probability distribution with the highest mean. BAI may be either fixed confidence or fixed horizon. In a fixed-confidence game, a confidence level δ {\displaystyle \delta } is fixed at the beginning of the game and the goal is to find the best arm with this confidence level in as few turns as possible. In a fixed horizon game, the number of turns T {\displaystyle T} is fixed, and the goal is to find the best arm with the highest possible confidence in T {\displaystyle T} turns. === Math formalisation === We have one player and K {\displaystyle K} actions (arms). Behind each arm k ∈ { 1 , … , K } {\displaystyle k\in \{1,\ldots ,K\}} lies an unknown distribution ν k {\displaystyle \nu _{k}} with mean μ k {\displaystyle \mu _{k}} . Each distribution ν k {\displaystyle \nu _{k}} belongs to a known family D {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}} (such as the set of Gaussian distributions or Bernoulli distributions). At each time step t {\displaystyle t} , the player selects an arm a t {\displaystyle a_{t}} and observes an independent sample X t ∼ ν a t {\displaystyle X_{t}\sim \nu _{a_{t}}} from the corresponding distribution. We will note μ ∗ := max μ a {\displaystyle \mu ^{}:=\max \mu _{a}} the highest mean. An arm a {\displaystyle a} that satisfies μ a = μ ∗ {\displaystyle \mu _{a}=\mu ^{}} is called an optimal arm; otherwise it is called suboptimal arm. In best arm identification (BAI) the objective is to identify an optimal arm. Two main settings for BAI appear in the literature: Fixed confidence: In this setting, one typically assumes that there exists a unique optimal arm. A confidence level δ ∈ ( 0 , 1 ) {\displaystyle \delta \in (0,1)} is specified at the beginning. The algorithm must stop at some finite stopping time τ δ < + ∞ {\displaystyle \tau _{\delta }<+\infty } and return an arm a ^ τ δ {\displaystyle {\hat {a}}_{\tau _{\delta }}} such that the probability of error is bounded: P ( a ^ τ δ ≠ a ∗ ) ≤ δ {\displaystyle \mathbb {P} ({\hat {a}}_{\tau _{\delta }}\neq a^{})\leq \delta } . The objective is to minimize the expected sample complexity E [ τ δ ] {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} [\tau _{\delta }]} . Such a setting appears, for example, when a constraint on the confidence is required (for example, if we require a confidence level of 95%, so δ = 1 − 0.95 = 0.05 {\displaystyle \delta =1-0.95=0.05} ). Fixed horizon: In this setting, the number of samples T {\displaystyle T} is fixed in advance. The goal is to design an algorithm that minimizes the probability of misidentifying the optimal arm: P ( a ^ T ≠ a ∗ ) {\displaystyle \mathbb {P} ({\hat {a}}_{T}\neq a^{})} . This setting appears when the number of experiments is limited (for drug tests, the number of patients can be fixed in advance). === Example of simple modelling === In the case where we have K {\displaystyle K} treatments and we want to be sure with a confidence level of 95% which treatment is the best to heal a specific disease. Each treatment heals or does not heal the disease with a probability μ k {\displaystyle \mu _{k}} , which means that each distribution is a Bernoulli distribution, so D {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}} is the set of Bernoulli distributions. We can use a BAI algorithm to minimize E [ τ 0.05 ] {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} [\tau _{0.05}]} , the number of patients required to find the best treatment with probability 95%. == Applications == Best arm identification naturally arises in several practical domains: Adaptive clinical trials: The objective is to identify the most effective treatment based on sequentially collected patient data. Each treatment can be modeled as having an underlying distribution of outcomes. The goal is to identify the treatment with the highest expected outcome with high confidence (fixed confidence setting δ {\displaystyle \delta } ) while minimizing the number of drug test patients (minimise E [ τ δ ] {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} [\tau _{\delta }]} ), as it costs to pay patients for this and we would like to use as little as possible less effective drugs. Hyperparameter tuning: Selecting the best configuration for machine learning models efficiently by treating each hyperparameter setting as an arm. The goal is to find the best hyperparameter with as few experiments possible as experiments are costly in time and in energy == Fixed confidence level == In the fixed-confidence setting, the goal is to design an algorithm that identifies the best arm with a prescribed confidence level δ {\displaystyle \delta } while minimizing the expected number of samples. Any such algorithm requires two key components: Stopping rule: A decision criterion that determines when to stop sampling. Formally, this defines a stopping time τ δ {\displaystyle \tau _{\delta }} and returns an arm a ^ τ δ {\displaystyle {\hat {a}}_{\tau _{\delta }}} such that P ( a ^ τ δ ≠ a ⋆ ) ≤ δ {\displaystyle \mathbb {P} ({\hat {a}}_{\tau _{\delta }}\neq a^{\star })\leq \delta } and P ( τ δ < + ∞ ) = 1 {\displaystyle \mathbb {P} (\tau _{\delta }<+\infty )=1} . Sampling rule: A policy π {\displaystyle \pi } that, at each round t {\displaystyle t} , selects the next arm to sample a t {\displaystyle a_{t}} based on all previous observations ( a s , X s ) s < t {\displaystyle (a_{s},X_{s})_{s

TipTop Technologies

TipTop Technologies is a real-time web and social search engine with a platform for semantic analysis of natural language. Tip-Top Search provides results capturing individual and group sentiment, opinions, and experiences there from the content of various sorts such as real-time messages from Twitter or consumer product reviews on Amazon.com. TipTop Technologies and ITC Infotech collaborated to create a search interface suitable for both enterprise and consumer applications. Tip-Top's products are part of the "emerging Web 3.0 applications which use semantic technologies to augment the underlying Web system's functionalities." Their main product is 360, an AI tool that incorporates multiple AI applications under one wing. Jonathan AlBright professor at Elon University, found videos generated by TipTop Technologies software on YouTube in his research into artificial intelligence, described it as AI-generated "fake news". Through semantic analysis of large data sets, TipTop gleaned behavioral insights from Tweets around events like Halloween, Thanksgiving, Holiday Gifting, the Super Bowl, and the Oscar Nominees for the Academy Awards coverage. Sentiment analysis, concept trend tracking, and real-time market research are other applications included in the TipTop Search product. TipTop's insight engine solves the problem of real-time data noise, and its ability to "sort the 'good tweets' from the 'bad tweets' when it comes to a product, service, or a region..." In addition, products like TipTop Shopping with customizable search widgets bring together consumer reviews, social search, and sentiment analysis enabling product comparisons across attributes like the overall value and aiding purchasing decisions through user-driven product tips and pits. TipTop Finance adds another complexity to real-time search results by incorporating corporate sentiment, company stock tickers, and social media into TipTop's existing social search platform. Additional success applying semantic technologies has been with polling, "if you compare these Gallup results with TipTop, a sentiment engine based on Twitter, the results are not way off. It does surprise you but it tells me that sentiment analysis in case of public opinion about a burning social issue or a famous personality is relatively easier." With the increasing amount of unstructured, opinion-oriented, and user-generated content available on the Web, TipTop's technology aims to make sense of all this data, and deliver it in a useful way for consumer and enterprise users alike. TipTop Technologies is a privately held company with its headquarters in the San Francisco Bay Area, and team members are located globally.

Technical data management system

A technical data management system (TDMS) is a document management system (DMS) pertaining to the management of technical and engineering drawings and documents. Often the data are contained in 'records' of various forms, such as on paper, microfilms or digital media. Hence technical data management is also concerned with record management involving technical data. Technical document management systems are used within large organisations with large scale projects involving engineering. For example, a TDMS can be used for integrated steel plants (ISP), automobile factories, aero-space facilities, infrastructure companies, city corporations, research organisations, etc. In such organisations, technical archives or technical documentation centres are created as central facilities for effective management of technical data and records. TDMS functions are similar to that of conventional archive functions in concepts, except that the archived materials in this case are essentially engineering drawings, survey maps, technical specifications, plant and equipment data sheets, feasibility reports, project reports, operation and maintenance manuals, standards, etc. Document registration, indexing, repository management, reprography, etc. are parts of TDMS. Various kinds of sophisticated technologies such as document scanners, microfilming and digitization camera units, wide format printers, digital plotters, software, etc. are available, making TDMS functions an easier process than previous times. == Constituents of a technical data management system == Technical data refers to both scientific and technical information recorded and presented in any form or manner (excluding financial and management information). A Technical Data Management System is created within an organisation for archiving and sharing information such as technical specifications, datasheets and drawings. Similar to other types of data management system, a Technical Data Management System consists of the 4 crucial constituents mentioned below. === Data planning === Data plans (long-term or short-term) are constructed as the first essential step of a proper and complete TDMS. It is created to ultimately help with the 3 other constituents, data acquisition, data management and data sharing. A proper data plan should not exceed 2 pages and should address the following basics: Types of data (samples, experiment results, reports, drawings, etc.) and metadata (data that summarizes and describes other data. In this case, it refers to details such as sample sizes, experiment conditions and procedures, dates of reports, explanations of drawings, etc.) Means of researches and collections of data (field works, experiments in production lines, etc.) Costs of researches Policies for access, sharing (re-use within the organisation and re-distribution to the public) Proposals for archiving data and maintaining access to it === Data acquisition === Raw data is collected from primary sites of the organisations through the use of modern technologies. Please reference the table below for examples. The data collected is then transferred to technical data centres for data management. === Data management === After data acquisition, data is sorted out, whilst useful data is archived, unwanted data is disposed. When managing and archiving data, the features below of the data are considered. Names, labels, values and descriptions for variables and records. (In the case of TDMS, one example is names of equipments on an equipment datasheet) Derived data from the original data, with code, algorithm or command file used to create them. (In the case of TDMS, one example is an expectation report derived from the analysis of an equipment datasheet) Metadata associates with the data being archived === Data sharing === Archived and managed data are accessible to rightful entities. A proper and complete TDMS should share data to a suitable extent, under suitable security, in order to achieve optimal usage of data within the organisation. It aims for easy access when reused by other researchers and hence it enhances other research processes. Data is often referred in other tests and technical specifications, where new analysis is generated, managed and archived again. As a result, data is flowing within the organisation under effective management through the use of TDMS. == Advantages and disadvantages of usage of technical data management systems == There are strengths and weakness when using technical data management systems (TDMS) to archive data. Some of the advantages and disadvantages are listed below. === Advantages === ==== 1. Faster and easier data management ==== Since TDMS is integrated into the organisation's systems, whenever workers develop data files (SolidWorks, AutoCAD, Microsoft Word, etc.), they can also archive and manage data, linking what they need to their current work, at the same time they can also update the archives with useful data. This speeds up working processes and makes them more efficient. ==== 2. Increased security ==== All data files are centralized, hence internal and external data leakages are less likely to happen, and the data flow is more closely monitored. As a result, data in the organisation is more secured. ==== 3. Increased collaboration within the organisation ==== Since the data files are centralized and the data flow within the organisation increases, researchers and workers within the organisation are able to work on joint projects. More complex tasks can be performed for higher yields. ==== 4. Compatible to various formats of data ==== TDMS is compatible to many formats of data, from basic data like Microsoft Words to complex data like voice data. This enhances the quality of the management of data archived. === Disadvantages === ==== 1. Higher financial costs ==== Implementing TDMS into the organisation's systems involves monetary costs. Maintenance costs certain amount of human resources and money as well. These resources involve opportunity costs as they can be utilized in other aspects. ==== 2. Lower stability ==== Since TDMS manages and centralizes all the data the organisation processes, it links the working processes within the whole organisation together. It also increases the vulnerability of the organisation data network. If TDMS is not stable enough or when it is exposed to hacker and virus attacks, the organisation's data flow might shut down completely, affecting the work in an organisation-wide scale and leading to a lower stability as results. == Comparison between traditional data management approaches and technical data management systems == Test engineers and researchers are facing great challenges in turning complex test results and simulation data into usable information for higher yields of firms. These challenges are listed below. Increase in complication of designs Reduced in time and budgets available Higher quality is demanded === Traditional data management approaches === Many organisations are still applying the conventional file management systems, due to the difficulty in building a proper and complete archives for data management. The first approach is the simple file-folder system. This costs the problem of ineffectiveness as workers and researchers have to manually go through numerous layers of systems and files for the target data. Moreover, the target data may contain files with different formats and these files may not be stored in the same machine. These files are also easily lost if renamed or moved to another location. The second approach is conventional databases such as Oracle. These databases are capable of enabling easy search and access of data. However, a great drawback is that huge effort for preparing and modeling the data is required. For large-scale projects, huge monetary costs are induced, and extra IT human resources must be employed for constant handling, expanding and maintaining the inflexible system, which is custom for specific tasks, instead of all tasks. In the long-term, it is not cost-effective. === Technical data management systems (TDMS) === TDMS is developed based on 3 principles, flexible and organized file storage, self-scaling hybrid data index, and an interactive post-processing environment. The system in practical, mainly consists of 3 components, data files with essential and relevant Metadata, data finders for organizing and managing data regardless of files formats, and, a software of searching, analyzing and reporting. With metadata attached to original data files, the data finder can identify different related data files during searches, even if they are in different file formats. TDMS hence allows researchers to search for data like browsing the Internet. Last but not least, it can adapt to changes and update itself according to the changes, unlike databases. == Comparison between strong information systems and weak information systems == Complex organizations may need large amounts