Kristian Kersting (born November 28, 1973, in Cuxhaven, Germany) is a German computer scientist. He is Professor of Artificial intelligence and Machine Learning at the Department of Computer Science at the Technische Universität Darmstadt, Head of the Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Lab (AIML) and Co-Director of hessian.AI, the Hessian Center for Artificial Intelligence. He is known for his research on statistical relational artificial intelligence, probabilistic programming, and deep probabilistic learning. == Life == Kersting studied computer science at the University of Freiburg, where he received his Ph.D. in 2006. At the university he attended a course on artificial intelligence given by Bernhard Nebel and became interested in the topic. He was a visiting postdoctoral researcher at the KU Leuven and a postdoctoral associate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). His advisor at MIT was Leslie Pack Kaelbling. From 2008 to 2012, he led a research group at the Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems (IAIS). He then became a Juniorprofessor at the University of Bonn and associate Professor at the computer science department of the Technical University of Dortmund. From 2017 to 2019, he was professor of machine Learning and since 2019 professor of artificial intelligence and machine learning at the department of computer science of the Technische Universität Darmstadt. He is also a researcher at ATHENE, the largest research institute for IT security in Europe and leads a research department at the German Research Centre for Artificial Intelligence (DFKI). Kristian Kersting is the co-spokesperson of Cluster of Excellence "Reasonable Artificial Intelligence", RAI (2026-32). == Awards == In 2006, he received the AI Dissertation Award of the European Association for Artificial Intelligence. In 2008, he received the Fraunhofer Attract research grant with a budget of 2.5 million euros over five years. He was appointed Fellow of the European Association for Artificial Intelligence (EurAI) and Fellow of the European Laboratory for Learning and Intelligent Systems (ELLIS) in 2019. In 2019 he received the "Deutscher KI-Preis" ("German AI Award"), endowed with 100,000 euros, for his outstanding scientific achievements in the field of artificial intelligence. He was elected an AAAI Fellow in 2024. == Publications == De Raedt L., Kersting K. (2008) Probabilistic Inductive Logic Programming. In: De Raedt L., Frasconi P., Kersting K., Muggleton S. (eds) Probabilistic Inductive Logic Programming. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4911. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. ISBN 978-3-540-78651-1 Luc De Raedt, Kristian Kersting, Sriraam Natarajan and David Poole, "Statistical Relational Artificial Intelligence: Logic, Probability, and Computation", Synthesis Lectures on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning" Morgan & Claypool, March 2016 ISBN 9781627058414.
Grokking (machine learning)
In machine learning, grokking, or delayed generalization, is a phenomenon observed in some settings where a model abruptly transitions from overfitting (performing well only on training data) to generalizing (performing well on both training and test data), after many training iterations with little or no improvement on the held-out data. This contrasts with what is typically observed in machine learning, where generalization occurs gradually alongside improved performance on training data. == Origin == Grokking was introduced by OpenAI researcher Alethea Power and colleagues in the January 2022 paper "Grokking: Generalization Beyond Overfitting on Small Algorithmic Datasets". It is derived from the word grok coined by Robert Heinlein in his novel Stranger in a Strange Land. In ML research, "grokking" is not used as a synonym for "generalization"; rather, it names a sometimes-observed delayed‑generalization training phenomenon in which training and held‑out performance do not improve in tandem, and in which held‑out performance rises abruptly later. Authors also analyze the "grokking time", the epoch or step at which this transition occurs in those scenarios. == Interpretations == Grokking can be understood as a phase transition during the training process. In particular, recent work has shown that grokking may be due to a complexity phase transition in the model during training. While grokking has been thought of as largely a phenomenon of relatively shallow models, grokking has been observed in deep neural networks and non-neural models and is the subject of active research. One potential explanation is that the weight decay (a component of the loss function that penalizes higher values of the neural network parameters, also called regularization) slightly favors the general solution that involves lower weight values, but that is also harder to find. According to Neel Nanda, the process of learning the general solution may be gradual, even though the transition to the general solution occurs more suddenly later. Recent theories have hypothesized that grokking occurs when neural networks transition from a "lazy training" regime where the weights do not deviate far from initialization, to a "rich" regime where weights abruptly begin to move in task-relevant directions. Follow-up empirical and theoretical work has accumulated evidence in support of this perspective, and it offers a unifying view of earlier work as the transition from lazy to rich training dynamics is known to arise from properties of adaptive optimizers, weight decay, initial parameter weight norm, and more. This perspective is complementary to a unifying "pattern learning speeds" framework that links grokking and double descent; within this view, delayed generalization can arise across training time ("epoch‑wise") or across model size ("model‑wise"), and the authors report "model‑wise grokking".
Knowledge organization system
Knowledge organization system (KOS), concept system, or concept scheme is the generic term used in knowledge organization (KO) for the selection of concepts with an indication of selected semantic relations. Despite their differences in type, coverage, and application, all KOS aim to support the organization of knowledge and information to facilitate their management and retrieval. KOS vary in complexity from simple sorted lists to complex relational networks. They represent both structural and functional features, and serve to eliminate ambiguity, control synonyms, establish relationships, and present properties. From their origins in library and information science (LIS), KOS have been applied to other domains and disciplines within science and industry, although scholarly research and debate remain primarily within the KO field. Challenges of KOS include ambiguity of terminology, repercussions of biased systems, and potential obsolescence. KOS can be expressed in RDF and RDFS as per the Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) recommendation by W3C, which aims to enable the sharing and linking of KOS via the Web. One of the largest collections of KOS is the BARTOC registry. == Types == While different schema of KOS have been proposed, most are generally arranged in terms of the complexity of their construction and maintenance. Some scholars argue that organizing KOS on a spectrum oversimplifies the shared characteristics among them, and may even result in a non-ideal structure being chosen. The following types are not exhaustive, and are often not mutually-exclusive in practice. === Term lists === Term lists are the least structured form of KOS. They include lists, glossaries, dictionaries, and synonym rings. Authority files and gazetteers may also be considered term lists, however other scholars categorize them and directories as "metadata-like models". Examples include the Union List of Artist Names name authority file and the GeoNames gazetteer. === Categorization and classification === KOS that emphasize specific (and often hierarchical) structures include subject headings, taxonomies, categorization schema, and classification schema & systems. Despite inconsistent use of the terms "categorization" and "classification" in some literature, categorization is generally loosely-assembled grouping schema and may include attributes that are not mutually exclusive (or having fuzzy boundaries), while classification is related to the arrangement of non-overlapping and mutually-exclusive classes. Classification schema may be universal (such as Dewey Decimal Classification and Information Coding Classification) or domain-specific (such as the National Library of Medicine Classification). === Relationship models === The types of KOS with greatest complexity and which utilize connections between concepts include thesauri, semantic networks, and ontologies. One of the most prominent examples of a semantic network is WordNet. === Others === Certain structures proposed to be considered types of KOS—but are not consistently included in schema—include folksonomies, topic maps, web directory structures, publication organization systems, and bibliometric maps. Some KOS organize other KOS themselves—for instance, PeriodO is a gazetteer of periodization categories. == Applications == Some early KOS were developed as a support system for abstracting and indexing services to be used by specially-trained searchers. With the growth of information digitization, usability became increasingly accessible, and more complex structures were developed. Prominent examples of KOS outside of LIS include organism taxonomy in biology, the periodic table of elements in chemistry, SIC and NAICS classification systems for industry & business, and AGROVOC agricultural controlled vocabulary. == Challenges == The study and design of KOS is an ongoing topic of discussion among KO scholars. === Terminology === [There is] a serious lack of vocabulary control in the literature on controlled vocabulary. Inconsistency of terminology within the study of KOS is a common issue. For instance, "ontology" is used for both a specific type of KOS as well as a generic term for any KOS. The terms "taxonomy", "classification", and "categorization" are also sometimes used interchangeably. === Bias === As knowledge can be historically and culturally biased, scholars have also discussed how KOS themselves can perpetuate harmful practices or stereotypes. For example, a number of concerns and criticisms about the classification of mental disorders in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders have been raised, contributing to ongoing revisions. Ethical and intentional design approaches have been proposed for multi-perspective KOS in efforts to mitigate bias and other harmful practices. === Obsolescence === The possible obsolescence of the thesaurus and other simpler KOS has been the topic of debate, especially in the face of increasingly complex ontologies, the growing usage of "Google-like retrieval systems", and the move of KO theory and research away from LIS and toward computer science. Supporters of thesauri argue its continued usefulness for metadata enrichment, vocabulary mapping, and web services, as well as its usage in specific domains such as corporate intranets and digital image libraries.
Artisto
Artisto is a video processing application with art and movie effects filters based on neural network algorithms created in 2016 by Mail.ru Group machine learning specialists. At the moment the application can process videos up to 10 seconds long and offers users 21 filters, including those based on the works of famous artists (e.g. Blue Dream — Pablo Picasso), theme-based (Rio-2016 — related to the 2016 Summer Olympics in Rio de Janeiro) and others. The app works with both pre-recorded videos and videos recorded with the application. == History == Information on the application first appeared on Mail.ru Group Vice President Anna Artamonova's FB page on July 29, 2016. At the moment of posting there was only an Android version available. According to Anna, the application's first version only took eight days to develop. On July 31, the application was added to the AppStore for free download. From this moment and continuing into the present, Artisto has been the world's first app that uses neural networks for editing short videos, processing them in the style of famous artworks or any other source image. Prisma (app) application developers promise to deliver similar functionality at any moment. The application soon won recognition and started to attract the attention of both international brands (e.g. Korean auto manufacturer Kia Motors) and popular singers and musicians. According to the independent App Annie analysis system, within the first two weeks on the market the application made it onto the TOP download lists in nine countries. == Technology == The idea of transferring styles from works of famous artists to images was first mentioned in September 2015 after the publication of Leon Gatys's article "A Neural Algorithm of Artistic Style", where he described the algorithm in detail. The major shortcoming of this algorithm is its slow performance, which is up to dozens of seconds depending on the algorithm's settings. In March 2016, Russian researcher Dmitry Ulyanov's article was published, where he invented a way to improve the generation of stylized pictures using additional neuron generator network training. With this approach, stylized images can be generated within just dozens of milliseconds. Seventeen days after Ulyanov's article, Justin Johnson published an article containing an identical idea, the only difference being the structure of the generator network. The Artisto application was developed using these open-source technologies, which Mail.ru Group's machine learning specialists improved for faster video processing and better quality.
Virtual directory
In computing, the term virtual directory has a couple of meanings. It may simply designate (for example in IIS) a folder which appears in a path but which is not actually a subfolder of the preceding folder in the path. However, this article will discuss the term in the context of directory services and identity management. A virtual directory or virtual directory server (VDS) in this context is a software layer that delivers a single access point for identity management applications and service platforms. A virtual directory operates as a high-performance, lightweight abstraction layer that resides between client applications and disparate types of identity-data repositories, such as proprietary and standard directories, databases, web services, and applications. A virtual directory receives queries and directs them to the appropriate data sources by abstracting and virtualizing data. The virtual directory integrates identity data from multiple heterogeneous data stores and presents it as though it were coming from one source. This ability to reach into disparate repositories makes virtual directory technology ideal for consolidating data stored in a distributed environment. As of 2011, virtual directory servers most commonly use the LDAP protocol, but more sophisticated virtual directories can also support SQL as well as DSML and SPML. Industry experts have heralded the importance of the virtual directory in modernizing the identity infrastructure. According to Dave Kearns of Network World, "Virtualization is hot and a virtual directory is the building block, or foundation, you should be looking at for your next identity management project." In addition, Gartner analyst, Bob Blakley said that virtual directories are playing an increasingly vital role. In his report, “The Emerging Architecture of Identity Management,” Blakley wrote: “In the first phase, production of identities will be separated from consumption of identities through the introduction of a virtual directory interface.” == Capabilities == Virtual directories can have some or all of the following capabilities: Aggregate identity data across sources to create a single point of access. Create high-availability for authoritative data stores. Act as identity firewall by preventing denial-of-service attacks on the primary data stores through an additional virtual layer. Support a common searchable namespace for centralized authentication. Present a unified virtual view of user information stored across multiple systems. Delegate authentication to backend sources through source-specific security means. Virtualize data sources to support migration from legacy data stores without modifying the applications that rely on them. Enrich identities with attributes pulled from multiple data stores, based on a link between user entries. Some advanced identity virtualization platforms can also: Enable application-specific, customized views of identity data without violating internal or external regulations governing identity data. Reveal contextual relationships between objects through hierarchical directory structures. Develop advanced correlation across diverse sources using correlation rules. Build a global user identity by correlating unique user accounts across various data stores, and enrich identities with attributes pulled from multiple data stores, based on a link between user entries. Enable constant data refresh for real-time updates through a persistent cache. == Advantages == Virtual directories: Enable faster deployment because users do not need to add and sync additional application-specific data sources Leverage existing identity infrastructure and security investments to deploy new services Deliver high availability of data sources Provide application-specific views of identity data which can help avoid the need to develop a master enterprise schema Allow a single view of identity data without violating internal or external regulations governing identity data Act as identity firewalls by preventing denial-of-service attacks on the primary data-stores and providing further security on access to sensitive data Can reflect changes made to authoritative sources in real-time Leverages existing update processes of authoritative sources, so no separate (sometimes manual) process to update a central directory is needed Present a unified virtual view of user information from multiple systems so that it appears to reside in a single system Can secure all backend storage locations with a single security policy == Disadvantages == An original disadvantage is public perception of "push & pull technologies" which is the general classification of "virtual directories" depending on the nature of their deployment. Virtual directories were initially designed and later deployed with "push technologies" in mind, which also contravened with privacy laws of the United States. This is no longer the case. There are, however, other disadvantages in the current technologies. The classical virtual directory based on proxy cannot modify underlying data structures or create new views based on the relationships of data from across multiple systems. So if an application requires a different structure, such as a flattened list of identities, or a deeper hierarchy for delegated administration, a virtual directory is limited. Many virtual directories cannot correlate same-users across multiple diverse sources in the case of duplicate users Virtual directories without advanced caching technologies cannot scale to heterogeneous, high-volume environments. == Sample terminology == Unify metadata: Extract schemas from the local data source, map them to a common format, and link the same identities from different data silos based on a unique identifier. Namespace joining: Create a single large directory by bringing multiple directories together at the namespace level. For instance, if one directory has the namespace "ou=internal,dc=domain,dc=com" and a second directory has the namespace "ou=external,dc=domain,dc=com," then creating a virtual directory with both namespaces is an example of namespace joining. Identity joining: Enrich identities with attributes pulled from multiple data stores, based on a link between user entries. For instance if the user joeuser exists in a directory as "cn=joeuser,ou=users" and in a database with a username of "joeuser" then the "joeuser" identity can be constructed from both the directory and the database. Data remapping: The translation of data inside of the virtual directory. For instance, mapping “uid” to “samaccountname,” so a client application that only supports a standard LDAP-compliant data source is able to search an Active Directory namespace, as well. Query routing: Route requests based on certain criteria, such as “write operations going to a master, while read operations are forwarded to replicas.” Identity routing: Virtual directories may support the routing of requests based on certain criteria (such as write operations going to a master while read operations being forwarded to replicas). Authoritative source: A "virtualized" data repository, such as a directory or database, that the virtual directory can trust for user data. Server groups: Group one or more servers containing the same data and functionality. A typical implementation is the multi-master, multi-replica environment in which replicas process "read" requests and are in one server group, while masters process "write" requests and are in another, so that servers are grouped by their response to external stimuli, even though all share the same data. == Use cases == The following are sample use cases of virtual directories: Integrating multiple directory namespaces to create a central enterprise directory. Supporting infrastructure integrations after mergers and acquisitions. Centralizing identity storage across the infrastructure, making identity information available to applications through various protocols (including LDAP, JDBC, and web services). Creating a single access point for web access management (WAM) tools. Enabling web single sign-on (SSO) across varied sources or domains. Supporting role-based, fine-grained authorization policies Enabling authentication across different security domains using each domain’s specific credential checking method. Improving secure access to information both inside and outside of the firewall.
Software engine
A software engine is a core component of a complex software system. The word "engine" is a metaphor of a car's engine. Thus a software engine is a complex subsystem; not unlike how a car engine functions. Software engines work in conjunction with other components of a process or system. They typically have an input and an output, and the productivity is usually linear to running speed. There is no formal guideline for what should be called an engine, but the term has become widespread in the software industry. == Notable examples == === Multi-engine systems === Mainstream web browsers have both a browser engine and a JavaScript engine. Video games are often based on a game engine. Some of these also have specialized physics or graphics engines.
Parchive
Parchive (a portmanteau of parity archive, and formally known as Parity Volume Set Specification) is an erasure code system that produces par files for checksum verification of data integrity, with the capability to perform data recovery operations that can repair or regenerate corrupted or missing data. Parchive was originally written to solve the problem of reliable file sharing on Usenet, but it can be used for protecting any kind of data from data corruption, disc rot, bit rot, and accidental or malicious damage. Despite the name, Parchive uses more advanced techniques (specifically error correction codes) than simplistic parity methods of error detection. As of 2015, PAR1 is obsolete, PAR2 is mature for widespread use, and PAR3 is a discontinued experimental version developed by MultiPar author Yutaka Sawada. The original SourceForge Parchive project has been inactive since April 30, 2015. A new PAR3 specification has been worked on since April 28, 2019 by PAR2 specification author Michael Nahas. An alpha version of the PAR3 specification has been published on January 29, 2022 while the program itself is being developed. == History == Parchive was intended to increase the reliability of transferring files via Usenet newsgroups. Usenet was originally designed for informal conversations, and the underlying protocol, NNTP was not designed to transmit arbitrary binary data. Another limitation, which was acceptable for conversations but not for files, was that messages were normally fairly short in length and limited to 7-bit ASCII text. Various techniques were devised to send files over Usenet, such as uuencoding and Base64. Later Usenet software allowed 8 bit Extended ASCII, which permitted new techniques like yEnc. Large files were broken up to reduce the effect of a corrupted download, but the unreliable nature of Usenet remained. With the introduction of Parchive, parity files could be created that were then uploaded along with the original data files. If any of the data files were damaged or lost while being propagated between Usenet servers, users could download parity files and use them to reconstruct the damaged or missing files. Parchive included the construction of small index files (.par in version 1 and .par2 in version 2) that do not contain any recovery data. These indexes contain file hashes that can be used to quickly identify the target files and verify their integrity. Because the index files were so small, they minimized the amount of extra data that had to be downloaded from Usenet to verify that the data files were all present and undamaged, or to determine how many parity volumes were required to repair any damage or reconstruct any missing files. They were most useful in version 1 where the parity volumes were much larger than the short index files. These larger parity volumes contain the actual recovery data along with a duplicate copy of the information in the index files (which allows them to be used on their own to verify the integrity of the data files if there is no small index file available). In July 2001, Tobias Rieper and Stefan Wehlus proposed the Parity Volume Set specification, and with the assistance of other project members, version 1.0 of the specification was published in October 2001. Par1 used Reed–Solomon error correction to create new recovery files. Any of the recovery files can be used to rebuild a missing file from an incomplete download. Version 1 became widely used on Usenet, but it did suffer some limitations: It was restricted to handle at most 255 files. The recovery files had to be the size of the largest input file, so it did not work well when the input files were of various sizes. (This limited its usefulness when not paired with the proprietary RAR compression tool.) The recovery algorithm had a bug, due to a flaw in the academic paper on which it was based. It was strongly tied to Usenet and it was felt that a more general tool might have a wider audience. In January 2002, Howard Fukada proposed that a new Par2 specification should be devised with the significant changes that data verification and repair should work on blocks of data rather than whole files, and that the algorithm should switch to using 16 bit numbers rather than the 8 bit numbers that PAR1 used. Michael Nahas and Peter Clements took up these ideas in July 2002, with additional input from Paul Nettle and Ryan Gallagher (who both wrote Par1 clients). Version 2.0 of the Parchive specification was published by Michael Nahas in September 2002. Peter Clements then went on to write the first two Par2 implementations, QuickPar and par2cmdline. Abandoned since 2004, Paul Houle created phpar2 to supersede par2cmdline. Yutaka Sawada created MultiPar to supersede QuickPar. MultiPar uses par2j.exe (which is partially based on par2cmdline's optimization techniques) to use as MultiPar's backend engine. == Versions == Versions 1 and 2 of the file format are incompatible. (However, many clients support both.) === Par1 === For Par1, the files f1, f2, ..., fn, the Parchive consists of an index file (f.par), which is CRC type file with no recovery blocks, and a number of "parity volumes" (f.p01, f.p02, etc.). Given all of the original files except for one (for example, f2), it is possible to create the missing f2 given all of the other original files and any one of the parity volumes. Alternatively, it is possible to recreate two missing files from any two of the parity volumes and so forth. Par1 supports up to a total of 256 source and recovery files. === Par2 === Par2 files generally use this naming/extension system: filename.vol000+01.PAR2, filename.vol001+02.PAR2, filename.vol003+04.PAR2, filename.vol007+06.PAR2, etc. The number after the "+" in the filename indicates how many blocks it contains, and the number after "vol" indicates the number of the first recovery block within the PAR2 file. If an index file of a download states that 4 blocks are missing, the easiest way to repair the files would be by downloading filename.vol003+04.PAR2. However, due to the redundancy, filename.vol007+06.PAR2 is also acceptable. There is also an index file filename.PAR2, it is identical in function to the small index file used in PAR1. Par2 specification supports up to 32,768 source blocks and up to 65,535 recovery blocks. Input files are split into multiple equal-sized blocks so that recovery files do not need to be the size of the largest input file. Although Unicode is mentioned in the PAR2 specification as an option, most PAR2 implementations do not support Unicode. Directory support is included in the PAR2 specification, but most or all implementations do not support it. === Par3 === The Par3 specification was originally planned to be published as an enhancement over the Par2 specification. However, to date, it has remained closed source by specification owner Yutaka Sawada. A discussion on a new format started in the GitHub issue section of the maintained fork par2cmdline on January 29, 2019. The discussion led to a new format which is also named as Par3. The new Par3 format's specification is published on GitHub, but remains being an alpha draft as of January 28, 2022. The specification is written by Michael Nahas, the author of Par2 specification, with the help from Yutaka Sawada, animetosho and malaire. The new format claims to have multiple advantages over the Par2 format, including support for: More than 216 files and more than 216 blocks. Packing small files into one block, as well as deduplication when a block appears in multiple files. UTF-8 file names. File permissions, hard links, symbolic/soft links, and empty directories. Embedding PAR data inside other formats, like ZIP archives or ISO disk images. "Incremental backups", where a user creates recovery files for some file or folder, change some data, and create new recovery files reusing some of the older files. More error correction code algorithms (such as LDPC and sparse random matrix). BLAKE3 hashes, dropping support for the MD5 hashes used in PAR2. == Software == === Multi-platform === par2+tbb (GPLv2) — a concurrent (multithreaded) version of par2cmdline 0.4 using TBB. Only compatible with x86 based CPUs. It is available in the FreeBSD Ports system as par2cmdline-tbb. Original par2cmdline — (obsolete). Available in the FreeBSD Ports system as par2cmdline. par2cmdline maintained fork by BlackIkeEagle. par2cmdline-mt is another multithreaded version of par2cmdline using OpenMP, GPLv2, or later. Currently merged into BlackIkeEagle's fork and maintained there. ParPar (CC0) is a high performance, multithreaded PAR2 client and Node.js library. Does not support verifying or repair, it can currently only create PAR2 archives. par2deep (LGPL-3.0) — Produce, verify and repair par2 files recursively, both on the command line as well as with the aid of a graphical user interface. It is available in the Python Package Index system as par2deep. par2cron (MIT License) is an o