An online dating application, commonly known as a dating app, is an online dating service presented through a mobile phone application. These apps often take advantage of a smartphone's GPS location capabilities, always on-hand presence, and access to mobile wallets. These apps aim to speed up the online dating process of sifting through potential dating partners, chatting, flirting, and potentially meeting or becoming romantically involved. Online dating apps are now mainstream in the United States. As of 2017, online dating (which included both apps and other online dating services) was the principal method by which new couples in the U.S. met. The percentage of couples meeting online is predicted to increase to 70% by 2040. == Origins == The first computerized dating service was launched in 1964, the St. James Computer Dating Service, which became known as Com-Pat. The first U.S. dating service that used computerized match making was Operation Match. It required men and women to complete a questionnaire and was launched in 1965. Operation Match inspired the methodology of Dateline, which became popular in the 1970s and 1980s. Match.com was launched in 1995 and turned computerized match making into a profitable business. Grindr targeted gay and bisexual men at launch. Tinder, launched in 2012, led to a growth of online dating applications by both new providers and existing online dating services that expanded into the mobile app market. == Usage by demographic group == Online dating applications typically target a younger demographic group, though some apps, like Senior Match and Silver Singles are geared toward the 50 and up demographic. In 2016, almost 50% of people knew of someone who use the services or had met their loved one through the service. After the iPhone launch in 2007, online dating data has mushroomed as application usage increased. In 2005, only 10% of 18-24 year olds reported to have used online dating services; this number quickly grew to over 27%, making this target demographic the largest number of users for most applications. When Pew Research Center conducted a study in 2016, they found that 59% of U.S. adults agreed that online dating is a good way to meet people compared to 44% in 2005. This explosion in usage can be explained by the increased use of smartphones. By the end of 2022, it is expected there will be 413 million active users of online dating services worldwide. A 2023 Pew Research Center survey of 6,034 American adults found that 30% had ever used an online dating site or app, including 53% of those aged 18 to 29, 37% of those aged 30 to 49, and 17% of those aged 50 and over. Lesbian, gay and bisexual respondents reported using dating apps at nearly twice the rate of straight respondents (51% versus 28%), and 36% of divorced, separated or widowed adults had used one, compared with 16% of married adults. The increased use of smartphones by those 65 and older has also driven that population to the use dating apps. The Pew Research Center found that usage increase by 8 points since last surveyed in 2012. A study in 2021 found that more than one-third of seniors have dated in the past 5 years, and roughly one-third of those dating seniors have turned to dating apps. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Morning Consult found that more Americans were using online dating apps than ever before. In one survey in April 2020, the company discovered that 53% of U.S. adults who use online dating apps have been using them more during the pandemic. As of February 2021, that share increased to 71 percent. Research using Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory has indicated that norms about online dating applications tend to differ across cultures. A study published in the Journal of Creative Communications looked into the relationships between dating-app advertisements from over 51 countries and the cultural dimensions of these countries. The results revealed that dating-app advertisements appealed to multiple cultural needs, including the needs for relationships, friendship, entertainment, sex, status, design and identity. The use of these appeals was found to be 'congruent with ... the individualism/collectivism and uncertainty avoidance cultural dimensions.' == Popular applications == Following Tinder's success, other companies released dating applications. Raya was released in 2015 as a membership-based dating app, allowing entrance only through referrals, which was marketed as a dating app for celebrities. In early 2026, Hily surpassed Bumble to become the third most-used dating application in the United States and the fifth highest-grossing overall, driven largely by growing popularity among Generation Z users, while remaining behind Tinder and Hinge, both owned by Match Group. A number of dating apps have been created targeting adherents of particular religions seeking partners of the same religion, such as Muzmatch for Muslims, Christian Mingle, SALT, and Christian Connection for Christians, and JSwipe and JDate for Jews. === VR Dating === VR Dating is an application of Social VR where people can exist, collaborate, and perform various activities together. Virtual reality apps use virtual and augmented realities to make the dating experience more lifelike and more effective, as well as allow people to expand what is already possible in the world of online dating. There are several online platforms of VR Dating. The VR dating app Nevermet is the VR equivalent of Tinder, where people can search and find on dates. However, instead of actual real-life pictures, users will update pictures of virtual selves and will be interacting with avatars rather than real faces. Flirtual is a self-contained social VR app that serves to match users who then decide where and how to meet in VR. Flirtual hosts speed dating and social events in VR. == Effects on dating == The usage of online dating applications can have both advantages and disadvantages: === Advantages === Many of the applications provide personality tests for matching or use algorithms to match users. These factors enhance the possibility of users getting matched with a compatible candidate. Users are in control; they are provided with many options so there are enough matches that fit their particular type. Users can simply choose to not match the candidates that they know they are not interested in. Narrowing down options is easy. Once users think they are interested, they are able to chat and get to know the potential candidate. This form of communication can reduce the time, cost, and uncertainty often associated with traditional dating methods. Online dating offers convenience; people want dating to work around their schedules. Online dating can also increase self-confidence; even if users get rejected, they know there are hundreds of other candidates that will want to match with them so they can simply move on to the next option. In fact, 60% of U.S. adults agree that online dating is a good way to meet people and 66% say they have gone on a real date with someone they met through an application. Today, 5% of married Americans or Americans in serious relationships said they met their significant other online. The 39% of online dating users (representing 12% of all U.S. adults) say they have been in a committed relationship or married someone they met on a dating site or app. ==== Rejection sensitive individuals ==== Individuals high in rejection sensitivity are more likely to use online dating applications. As they tend to expect, perceive and overreact to rejection, rejection sensitive individuals struggle with traditional dating. Online dating applications allow for them to better reveal their true selves, potentially increasing their dating success. Online dating applications also obscure rejection cues, alleviating the rejection-related distress experienced by rejection sensitive individuals. ==== Anxiously attached individuals ==== Individuals high in attachment anxiety are also more likely to use online dating applications. While they harbour negative self-views, anxiously attached individuals are also more eager to enter and commit to relationships. Online dating applications allow for them to present "an authentic yet ideal version of themselves", mitigating their tendencies to view themselves as undesirable. This increases their romantic confidence, and potentially alleviates their anxiety when searching for a romantic partner. === Disadvantages === Sometimes having too many options can be overwhelming. With so many options available, users can get lost in their choices and end up spending too much time looking for the "perfect" candidate instead of using that time to start a real relationship. In addition, the algorithms and matching systems put in place may not always be as accurate as users think. There is no perfect system that can match two people's personalities perfectly every time. Communication online also lacks the physical chemistry aspec
LG ThinQ (pronounced as "think-cue"; sometimes known as LG webOS) is a smart home and artificial intelligence brand launched by LG Electronics in 2017, featuring products that are equipped with voice control and artificial intelligence technology. The brand was originally launched for home appliances and consumer electronics, such as televisions, smart home devices, mobile devices, refrigerators, air conditioners and related services. The name was first used in 2011 for LG's THINQ-branded smart appliances, which were introduced at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. In December 2017, LG announced ThinQ as a unified brand for artificial intelligence-enabled home appliances, consumer electronics and services.In February 2018, LG announced the LG V30S ThinQ, which is the first phone to have the "ThinQ" branding. == History == The branding was first introduced in 2011 in the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas as THINQ. The first ThinQ product was a smart refrigerator, with features such as smart savings options, food management system, washing machine, oven and robotic vacuum cleaner and different software in the LCD screen on the fridge. The unified branding was then officially launched as ThinQ at CES 2017 as an artificial intelligence-based brand for all their smart products. The company announced DeepThinQ, a deep-learning technology for connected products, and later opened an Artificial Intelligence Lab in Seoul to coordinate research involving voice, video, sensors and machine learning. In December 2017, LG announced ThinQ as a brand designation for home appliances, consumer electronics, and services incorporating artificial intelligence, applied to its 2018 product lineup. In 2018, LG extended the ThinQ brand to smartphones with the LG V30S ThinQ. The phone used ThinQ branding for AI camera features, including image recognition and shooting-mode recommendations. That year, LG also used ThinQ branding on televisions with smart-assistant features, as manufacturers increasingly added voice assistants to TV platforms. In 2022, LG first introduced ThinQ UP, a software-upgradable appliance concept that allows compatible appliances to receive new features through the ThinQ app. The program included appliances such as refrigerators, washing machines, dryers, ovens and dishwashers, and was covered as part of a wider move toward upgradeable connected appliances. In 2024, LG introduced ThinQ ON, an AI-powered smart home hub designed to connect LG appliances and other smart home devices. It expanded ThinQ from an appliance-control platform into a broader smart home system. == Platform an app == LG ThinQ operates as a smart home platform and mobile app for connecting compatible LG appliances and consumer electronics. The app is used to control and monitor supported products, including kitchen appliances, laundry appliances, air purifiers, vacuum cleaners and televisions. Depending on the product and market, the ThinQ app can provide remote control, status monitoring, downloadable appliance cycles, diagnostic support, maintenance alerts and software-based feature updates. In 2024, LG introduced ThinQ ON as a hub for the ThinQ platform. The device supports Matter, Thread and Wi-Fi connectivity and includes a built-in voice assistant. The Verge described the product as part of LG's effort to expand ThinQ from an appliance-control platform into a broader smart home system competing with platforms such as Samsung SmartThings and Apple Home. == Features == LG ThinQ products use connected-device features, voice control to interact with users, and use sensor data and different features such as product recognition and learning engine technologies to enhance their abilities. Deep ThinQ (or LG ThinQ AI) was introduced as LG's own AI platform. It was reported that it could engage in two-way conversations with users and could educate itself according to users' behaviour patterns and habits. At the 2017 ThinQ launch, LG said the brand would cover products and services using artificial intelligence technologies from LG and partner companies. ThinQ features vary by product category. On appliances, the platform may support remote operation, product-status notifications, downloaded cycles and diagnostic functions. On televisions, ThinQ branding has been associated with voice-control and smart-assistant features. In 2018, LG ThinQ-branded TVs added support for Google Assistant and Alexa voice commands. As of August 30, 2018, LG's ThinQ products now communicate with each other for tasks such as going to an event or following a recipe. They have sensors for communicating with other ThinQ devices and appliances. == Products == LG ThinQ branding and connectivity features have been used across several LG product categories, including home appliances, televisions, air conditioners and mobile devices. Home appliances LG has applied ThinQ branding and app connectivity to home appliances such as refrigerators, washing machines, dryers, dishwashers, cooking appliances, air purifiers and vacuum cleaners. Through the ThinQ app, compatible appliances can be monitored or controlled remotely. Some compatible appliances can also receive downloadable cycles, diagnostic support, maintenance alerts and software-based feature updates through ThinQ UP. Televisions and home entertainment LG has used ThinQ branding on smart televisions and other home entertainment products. In 2018, LG ThinQ-branded televisions added support for smart-assistant voice commands, including Google Assistant. Smartphones LG G6 (ThinQ branding was added to startup screen in an update) LG V30 (ThinQ branding was added to startup screen in an update) LG V30S ThinQ LG V35 ThinQ LG G7 ThinQ LG V40 ThinQ LG G8 ThinQ LG G8s ThinQ LG G8x ThinQ LG V50 ThinQ LG V60 ThinQ LG Velvet (Generally considered a ThinQ product in other countries)
The United States federal government and state governments have developed some regulation of artificial intelligence, including executive orders, federal laws, and state laws. Federal agencies have also developed some sector-specific regulations related to AI. At the federal level, the Biden administration released an October 2023 executive order about AI safety and security, Executive Order 14110, with directives related to AI development and deployment. President Trump revoked that executive order in January 2025 and issued Executive Order 14179. In December 2025, President Trump signed Executive Order 14365, an executive order directing federal agencies to develop a unified national approach to AI policy, evaluate state AI laws for potential conflicts, challenge them through legal action, and condition certain federal funding on state compliance, while exempting state laws related to child safety, data center infrastructure, and state government procurement. In 2025, Congress passed legislation targeting AI-generated deepfakes, the TAKE IT DOWN Act. Several U.S. states have enacted laws related to artificial intelligence. Some are already in effect, including in California. Other states have AI-related legislation coming into effect in 2026 and 2027. In 2025 and 2026, the Trump administration mentioned the patchwork nature of state legislation as a motivation for its push for unified national legislation regulating AI. The administration has criticized state lawmakers, threatened to sue states, and issued letters to discourage them from regulating AI companies and products; some states have continued to propose and enact related laws. Discussions about regulating AI have included topics such as the timeliness of regulating AI, the nature of the federal regulatory framework to govern and promote AI, including what agency should lead, the regulatory and governing powers of that agency, and how to update regulations in the face of rapidly changing technology, as well as the roles of state governments and courts. == Federal government == === Obama administration (2009–2017) === As early as 2016, the Obama administration had begun to focus on the risks and regulations for artificial intelligence. In an October 2016 report titled Preparing For the Future of Artificial Intelligence, the National Science and Technology Council set a precedent to allow researchers to continue to develop new AI technologies with few restrictions. The report stated that "the approach to regulation of AI-enabled products to protect public safety should be informed by assessment of the aspects of risk". The first National Artificial Intelligence Research And Development Strategic Plan was published in October 2016. === First Trump administration (2017–2021) === On August 13, 2018, Section 1051 of the Fiscal Year 2019 John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 115-232) established the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence "to consider the methods and means necessary to advance the development of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and associated technologies to comprehensively address the national security and defense needs of the United States." Steering on regulating security-related AI is provided by the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence. The Artificial Intelligence Initiative Act (S.1558) is a proposed bill that would establish a federal initiative designed to accelerate research and development on AI for, inter alia, the economic and national security of the United States. On January 7, 2019, following an Executive Order on Maintaining American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence, the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy released a draft Guidance for Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Applications, which includes ten principles for United States agencies when deciding whether and how to regulate AI. In response, the National Institute of Standards and Technology released a position paper, and the Defense Innovation Board issued recommendations on the ethical use of AI. A year later, the administration called for comments on regulation in another draft of its Guidance for Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Applications. Other specific agencies working on the regulation of AI included the Food and Drug Administration, which created pathways to regulate the incorporation of AI in medical imaging. The National Science and Technology Council also published an updated National Artificial Intelligence Research and Development Strategic Plan in 2019, which received public scrutiny and recommendations to further improve it towards enabling Trustworthy AI. === Biden administration (2021–2025) === In March 2021, the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence released their final report. In the report, they stated, "Advances in AI, including the mastery of more general AI capabilities along one or more dimensions, will likely provide new capabilities and applications. Some of these advances could lead to inflection points or leaps in capabilities. Such advances may also introduce new concerns and risks and the need for new policies, recommendations, and technical advances to assure that systems are aligned with goals and values, including safety, robustness and trustworthiness." In June 2022, Senators Rob Portman and Gary Peters introduced the Global Catastrophic Risk Management Act. The bipartisan bill "would also help counter the risk of artificial intelligence... from being abused in ways that may pose a catastrophic risk". On October 4, 2022, President Joe Biden unveiled a new AI Bill of Rights, which outlines five protections Americans should have in the AI age: 1. Safe and Effective Systems, 2. Algorithmic Discrimination Protection, 3.Data Privacy, 4. Notice and Explanation, and 5. Human Alternatives, Consideration, and Fallback. The bill was formally published in October 2022 by the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), a U.S. government office that advises the President on science and technology policy matters. In July 2023, the Biden administration secured voluntary commitments from seven companies – Amazon, Anthropic, Google, Inflection, Meta, Microsoft, and OpenAI – to manage the risks associated with AI. The companies committed to ensure AI products undergo both internal and external security testing before public release; to share information on the management of AI risks with the industry, governments, civil society, and academia; to prioritize cybersecurity and protect proprietary AI system components; to develop mechanisms to inform users when content is AI-generated, such as watermarking; to publicly report on their AI systems' capabilities, limitations, and areas of use; to prioritize research on societal risks posed by AI, including bias, discrimination, and privacy concerns; and to develop AI systems to address societal challenges, ranging from cancer prevention to climate change mitigation. In September 2023, eight additional companies – Adobe, Cohere, IBM, Nvidia, Palantir, Salesforce, Scale AI, and Stability AI – subscribed to these voluntary commitments. In January 2023, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) released the Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0), providing voluntary guidance for organizations to identify, assess, and manage risks associated with AI systems. The Biden administration, in October 2023 signaled that they would release an executive order leveraging the federal government's purchasing power to shape AI regulations, hinting at a proactive governmental stance in regulating AI technologies. On October 30, 2023, President Biden released Executive Order 14110 on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence. The Executive Order includes directives on standards for critical infrastructure, AI-enhanced cybersecurity, and federally funded biological synthesis projects. The Executive Order provides the authority to various agencies and departments of the US government, including the Energy and Defense departments, to apply existing consumer protection laws to AI development. The Executive Order builds on the Administration's earlier agreements with AI companies to instate new initiatives to "red-team" or stress-test AI dual-use foundation models, especially those that have the potential to pose security risks, with data and results shared with the federal government. The Executive Order also recognizes AI's social challenges, and calls for companies building AI dual-use foundation models to be wary of these societal problems. For example, the Executive Order states that AI should not "worsen job quality", and should not "cause labor-force disruptions". Additionally, Biden's Executive Order mandates that AI must "advance equity and civil rights", and cannot disadvantage marginalized groups. It also called for foundation models to include "watermarks" to help the publi
In computer security, jailbreaking is defined as the act of removing limitations that a vendor attempted to hard-code or hard-wire into its hardware and/or software. It is a form of privilege escalation. The term may have originated with the use of toolsets to break out of a chroot or jail in UNIX-like operating systems. This allowed the user to see files outside of the file system that the administrator intended to make available to the application or user in question. The term was first used in its modern meaning in the iPhone/iOS jailbreaking community and has also been used as a term for PlayStation Portable hacking; these devices have repeatedly been subject to jailbreaks, allowing the execution of arbitrary code, and sometimes have had those jailbreaks disabled by vendor updates, especially in the case of iOS devices. == iOS jailbreaking == iOS systems including the iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch have been subject to iOS jailbreaking efforts since they were released, and continuing with each firmware update. iOS jailbreaking tools have included the option to install package frontends such as Cydia and Installer.app, third-party alternatives to the App Store, as a way to find and install system tweaks and binaries. To prevent iOS jailbreaking, Apple has made the device boot ROM execute checks for SHSH blobs in order to disallow uploads of custom kernels and prevent software downgrades to earlier, jailbreakable firmware. In an "untethered" jailbreak, the iBoot environment is changed to execute a boot ROM exploit and allow submission of a patched low level bootloader or hack the kernel to submit the jailbroken kernel after the SHSH check. == Other phones == A similar method of jailbreaking exists for S60 Platform smartphones, where utilities such as HelloOX allow the execution of unsigned code and full access to system files. or edited firmware (similar to the M33 hacked firmware used for the PlayStation Portable) to circumvent restrictions on unsigned code. Nokia has since issued updates to curb unauthorized jailbreaking, in a manner similar to Apple. Rooting is the equivalent concept for Android phones and other devices. == Console jailbreaking == In the case of gaming consoles, jailbreaking is often used to execute homebrew games. In 2011, Sony, with assistance from law firm Kilpatrick Stockton, sued 21-year-old George Hotz and associates of the group fail0verflow for jailbreaking the PlayStation 3 (see Sony Computer Entertainment America v. George Hotz and PlayStation Jailbreak). == AI jailbreaks == Jailbreaking can also occur in systems and software that use generative artificial intelligence models, such as ChatGPT. In jailbreaking attacks on artificial intelligence systems, users are able to manipulate the system to behave differently than it was intended, making it possible to reveal information about how the model was instructed by the vendor (the "system prompt") or to induce it to respond in an anomalous or harmful way. These attacks typically simply require prompting the AIs with specific phrasal templates - no software is typically required, although software could theoretically be used to "industrialise" such exploits, and some research has been done in this direction. In 2024, a consortium of AI firms founded HackAPrompt.com, a competition to encourage users to find new and effective AI jailbreaking techniques. These and other findings from "ethical hackers" have been used by AI model providers to try to improve AI safety.
Multisample anti-aliasing (MSAA) is a type of spatial anti-aliasing, a technique used in computer graphics to remove jaggies. It is an optimization of supersampling, where only the necessary parts are sampled more. Jaggies are only noticed in a small area, so the area is quickly found, and only that is anti-aliased. == Definition == The term generally refers to a special case of supersampling. Initial implementations of full-scene anti-aliasing (FSAA) worked conceptually by simply rendering a scene at a higher resolution, and then downsampling to a lower-resolution output. Most modern GPUs are capable of this form of anti-aliasing, but it greatly taxes resources such as texture, bandwidth, and fillrate. (If a program is highly TCL-bound or CPU-bound, supersampling can be used without much performance hit.) According to the OpenGL GL_ARB_multisample specification, "multisampling" refers to a specific optimization of supersampling. The specification dictates that the renderer evaluate the fragment program once per pixel, and only "truly" supersample the depth and stencil values. (This is not the same as supersampling but, by the OpenGL 1.5 specification, the definition had been updated to include fully supersampling implementations as well.) In graphics literature in general, "multisampling" refers to any special case of supersampling where some components of the final image are not fully supersampled. The lists below refer specifically to the ARB_multisample definition. == Description == In supersample anti-aliasing, multiple locations are sampled within every pixel, and each of those samples is fully rendered and combined with the others to produce the pixel that is ultimately displayed. This is computationally expensive, because the entire rendering process must be repeated for each sample location. It is also inefficient, as aliasing is typically only noticed in some parts of the image, such as the edges, whereas supersampling is performed for every single pixel. In multisample anti-aliasing, if any of the multi sample locations in a pixel is covered by the triangle being rendered, a shading computation must be performed for that triangle. However this calculation only needs to be performed once for the whole pixel regardless of how many sample positions are covered; the result of the shading calculation is simply applied to all of the relevant multi sample locations. In the case where only one triangle covers every multi sample location within the pixel, only one shading computation is performed, and these pixels are little more expensive than (and the result is no different from) the non-anti-aliased image. This is true of the middle of triangles, where aliasing is not an issue. (Edge detection can reduce this further by explicitly limiting the MSAA calculation to pixels whose samples involve multiple triangles, or triangles at multiple depths.) In the extreme case where each of the multi sample locations is covered by a different triangle, a different shading computation will be performed for each location and the results then combined to give the final pixel, and the result and computational expense are the same as in the equivalent supersampled image. The shading calculation is not the only operation that must be performed on a given pixel; multisampling implementations may variously sample other operations such as visibility at different sampling levels. == Advantages == The pixel shader usually only needs to be evaluated once per pixel for every triangle covering at least one sample point. The edges of polygons (the most obvious source of aliasing in 3D graphics) are anti-aliased. Since multiple subpixels per pixel are sampled, polygonal details smaller than one pixel that might have been missed without MSAA can be captured and made a part of the final rendered image if enough samples are taken. == Disadvantages == === Alpha testing === Alpha testing is a technique common to older video games used to render translucent objects by rejecting pixels from being written to the framebuffer. If the alpha value of a translucent fragment (pixel) is below a specified threshold, it will be discarded. Because this is performed on a pixel by pixel basis, the image does not receive the benefits of multi-sampling (all of the multisamples in a pixel are discarded based on the alpha test) for these pixels. The resulting image may contain aliasing along the edges of transparent objects or edges within textures, although the image quality will be no worse than it would be without any anti-aliasing. Translucent objects that are modelled using alpha-test textures will also be aliased due to alpha testing. This effect can be minimized by rendering objects with transparent textures multiple times, although this would result in a high performance reduction for scenes containing many transparent objects. === Aliasing === Because multi-sampling calculates interior polygon fragments only once per pixel, aliasing and other artifacts will still be visible inside rendered polygons where fragment shader output contains high frequency components. === Performance === While less performance-intensive than SSAA (supersampling), it is possible in certain scenarios (scenes heavy in complex fragments) for MSAA to be multiple times more intensive for a given frame than post processing anti-aliasing techniques such as FXAA, SMAA and MLAA. Early techniques in this category tend towards a lower performance impact, but suffer from accuracy problems. More recent post-processing based anti-aliasing techniques such as temporal anti-aliasing (TAA), which reduces aliasing by combining data from previously rendered frames, have seen the reversal of this trend, as post-processing AA becomes both more versatile and more expensive than MSAA, which cannot antialias an entire frame alone. == Sampling methods == === Point sampling === In a point-sampled mask, the coverage bit for each multisample is only set if the multisample is located inside the rendered primitive. Samples are never taken from outside a rendered primitive, so images produced using point-sampling will be geometrically correct, but filtering quality may be low because the proportion of bits set in the pixel's coverage mask may not be equal to the proportion of the pixel that is actually covered by the fragment in question. === Area sampling === Filtering quality can be improved by using area sampled masks. In this method, the number of bits set in a coverage mask for a pixel should be proportionate to the actual area coverage of the fragment. This will result in some coverage bits being set for multisamples that are not actually located within the rendered primitive, and can cause aliasing and other artifacts. == Sample patterns == === Regular grid === A regular grid sample pattern, where multisample locations form an evenly spaced grid throughout the pixel, is easy to implement and simplifies attribute evaluation (i.e. setting subpixel masks, sampling color and depth). This method is computationally expensive due to the large number of samples. Edge optimization is poor for screen-aligned edges, but image quality is good when the number of multisamples is large. === Sparse regular grid === A sparse regular grid sample pattern is a subset of samples that are chosen from the regular grid sample pattern. As with the regular grid, attribute evaluation is simplified due to regular spacing. The method is less computationally expensive due to having a fewer samples. Edge optimization is good for screen aligned edges, and image quality is good for a moderate number of multisamples. === Stochastic sample patterns === A stochastic sample pattern is a random distribution of multisamples throughout the pixel. The irregular spacing of samples makes attribute evaluation complicated. The method is cost efficient due to low sample count (compared to regular grid patterns). Edge optimization with this method, although sub-optimal for screen aligned edges. Image quality is excellent for a moderate number of samples. == Quality == Compared to supersampling, multisample anti-aliasing can provide similar quality at higher performance, or better quality for the same performance. Further improved results can be achieved by using rotated grid subpixel masks. The additional bandwidth required by multi-sampling is reasonably low if Z and colour compression are available. Most modern GPUs support 2×, 4×, and 8× MSAA samples. Higher values result in better quality, but are slower.
Joshua Blue is a project under development by IBM that focuses on advancing the artificial intelligence field by designing and programming computers to emulate human mental functions. == Goals == According to researchers at IBM's Thomas J. Watson Research Center, the main goal of Joshua Blue is "to achieve cognitive flexibility that approaches human functioning". In short, IBM is aiming to design Joshua Blue to 'think like a human', mainly in terms of emotional thought. == How it will work == A model of Joshua Blue's learning pattern has been created. Similar to how young children learn human traits through interacting with their surroundings, Joshua Blue will acquire knowledge through external stimuli present in its environment. IBM believes that if computers evolve to learn in this way and then comprehend and analyze the knowledge gained using reason, computers could begin to possess a "mind", of sorts, capable of demonstrating complex social behaviors similar to those of humans. Thus far, IBM has revealed that Joshua Blue will be a computer with a network of wires and input nodes that function as a computer nervous system. This nervous system will be used by Joshua Blue to perceive affect or personal emotional feelings. Not only will this network of input nodes help Joshua Blue discover things physically, but it will also allow Joshua Blue to interpret the significance of events. The input nodes, or proprioceptors, will enable Joshua Blue to be aware of things that happen around itself, as well as recognize and attach meaning to the emotional effect produced by interacting with an object in a certain way. In addition, Joshua Blue's proprioceptors will function as pain and pleasure sensors, allowing Joshua Blue to employ a similar "reward and punishment" system that humans use to form behaviors.
In artificial intelligence, a sentential decision diagram (SDD) is a type of knowledge representation used in knowledge compilation to represent Boolean functions. SDDs can be viewed as a generalization of the influential ordered binary decision diagram (OBDD) representation, by allowing decisions on multiple variables at once. Like OBDDs, SDDs allow for tractable Boolean operations, while being exponentially more succinct. For this reason, they have become an important representation in knowledge compilation. == Properties == SDDs are defined with respect to a generalization of variable ordering known as a variable tree (vtree). Provided that they satisfy additional properties known as compression and trimming (which are analogous to ROBDDs), SDDs are a canonical representation of Boolean functions; that is, they are unique given a vtree. Like OBDDs, they allow for operations such as conjunction, disjunction and negation to be computed directly on the representation in polynomial time, while being potentially more compact. They also allow for polynomial-time model counting. SDDs are known to be exponentially more succinct than OBDDs. == Applications == SDDs are used as a compilation target for probabilistic logic programs by the ProbLog 2 system since they support tractable (weighted) model counting as well as tractable negation, conjunction and disjunction while being more succinct than BDDs. SDDs have also been extended to model probability distributions, in which context they are known as probabilistic sentential decision diagrams (PSDD).
In knowledge representation, ontology components and ontology engineering, including for object-oriented programming and design, is-a (also written as is_a or is a) is a subsumptive relationship between abstractions (e.g., types, classes), wherein one class A is a subclass of another class B (and so B is a superclass of A). In other words, type A is a subtype of type B when A's specification implies B's specification. That is, any object (or class) that satisfies A's specification also satisfies B's specification, because B's specification is weaker. For example, a cat 'is a[n]' animal, but not vice versa. All cats are animals, but not all animals are cats. Behaviour that is relevant to all animals is defined on an animal class, whereas behaviour that is relevant only for cats is defined in a cat class. By defining the cat class as 'extending' the animal class, all cats 'inherit' the behaviour defined for animals, without the need to explicitly code that behaviour for cats. == Related concepts == The is-a relationship is to be contrasted with the has-a (has_a or has a) relationship between types (classes); confusing the relations has-a and is-a is a common error when designing a model (e.g., a computer program) of the real-world relationship between an object and its subordinate. The is-a relationship may also be contrasted with the instance-of relationship between objects (instances) and types (classes): see Type–token distinction. To summarize the relations, there are: hyperonym–hyponym (supertype/superclass–subtype/subclass) relations between types (classes) defining a taxonomic hierarchy, where for a subsumption relation: a hyponym (subtype, subclass) has a type-of (is-a) relationship with its hyperonym (supertype, superclass); holonym–meronym (whole/entity/container–part/constituent/member) relations between types (classes) defining a possessive hierarchy, where for an aggregation (i.e. without ownership) relation: a holonym (whole) has a has-a relationship with its meronym (part), for a composition (i.e. with ownership) relation: a meronym (constituent) has a part-of relationship with its holonym (entity), for a containment relation: a meronym (member) has a member-of relationship with its holonym (container); concept–object (type–token) relations between types (classes) and objects (instances), where a token (object) has an instance-of relationship with its type (class).
Sparrow is a chatbot developed by the artificial intelligence research lab DeepMind, a subsidiary of Alphabet Inc. It is designed to answer users' questions correctly, while reducing the risk of unsafe and inappropriate answers. One motivation behind Sparrow is to address the problem of language models producing incorrect, biased or potentially harmful outputs. Sparrow is trained using human judgements, in order to be more “Helpful, Correct and Harmless” compared to baseline pre-trained language models. The development of Sparrow involved asking paid study participants to interact with Sparrow, and collecting their preferences to train a model of how useful an answer is. To improve accuracy and help avoid the problem of hallucinating incorrect answers, Sparrow has the ability to search the Internet using Google Search in order to find and cite evidence for any factual claims it makes. To make the model safer, its behaviour is constrained by a set of rules, for example "don't make threatening statements" and "don't make hateful or insulting comments", as well as rules about possibly harmful advice, and not claiming to be a person. During development study participants were asked to converse with the system and try to trick it into breaking these rules. A 'rule model' was trained on judgements from these participants, which was used for further training. Sparrow was introduced in a paper in September 2022, titled "Improving alignment of dialogue agents via targeted human judgements"; however, the bot was not released publicly. DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis said DeepMind is considering releasing Sparrow for a "private beta" some time in 2023. == Training == Sparrow is a deep neural network based on the transformer machine learning model architecture. It is fine-tuned from DeepMind's Chinchilla AI pre-trained large language model (LLM), which has 70 Billion parameters. Sparrow is trained using reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), although some supervised fine-tuning techniques are also used. The RLHF training utilizes two reward models to capture human judgements: a “preference model” that predicts what a human study participant would prefer and a “rule model” that predicts if the model has broken one of the rules. == Limitations == Sparrow's training data corpus is mainly in English, meaning it performs worse in other languages. When adversarially probed by study participants it breaks the rules 8% of the time; however, this is still three times lower than the baseline prompted pre-trained model (Chinchilla).
Thinking Machines Lab Inc. is an American artificial intelligence (AI) startup founded by Mira Murati, the former chief technology officer of OpenAI. The company was founded in February 2025, and by July had completed an early-stage funding round led by Andreessen Horowitz, raising $2 billion at a valuation of $12 billion overall from investors such as Nvidia, AMD, Cisco, and Jane Street. The company is based in San Francisco and structured as a public benefit corporation. == History == By its launch in February 2025, Thinking Machines Lab was reported to have hired about 30 researchers and engineers from competitors including OpenAI, Meta AI, and Mistral AI. Its founding team members include Barret Zoph, former OpenAI VP of Research (Post-Training), Lilian Weng, former OpenAI VP, and OpenAI cofounder John Schulman, who joined after a brief stint at the lab's competitor Anthropic. In January 2026, it was reported that Barret Zoph and Luke Metz, departed the startup to return to OpenAI. Other former OpenAI employees who have been hired include Jonathan Lachman and Andrew Tulloch (although Tulloch departed after getting recruited for Meta Superintelligence Labs). Thinking Machines Lab's advisers include Bob McGrew, previously OpenAI's chief research officer, and Alec Radford, who was a lead researcher for OpenAI. On October 1, 2025, it announced Tinker, an API for fine-tuning language models. Users would submit jobs through the API for fine-tuning one of the various open-weight models supported. The Lab would run the jobs on its internal clusters and training infrastructure. == Business structure == Thinking Machines Lab grants Mira Murati a deciding vote on board matters, weighted to provide her with a majority decision-making capability. Additionally, founding shareholders possess votes weighted 100 times greater than those of regular shareholders. In July 2025, Andreessen Horowitz was reported to have led the company's initial funding round, raising "about $2 billion at a valuation of $12 billion". The government of Albania (Murati's country of origin) was also included in this round, making a $10 million investment which required an amendment to the country's 2025 budget. == Partnership == In March 2026, Thinking Machines Lab announced a strategic partnership with NVIDIA involving an undisclosed investment and a multi-year agreement to deploy one gigawatt of Vera Rubin computing capacity.
TRAIGA, or the Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act, is a state law regulating the development and deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) systems in Texas. Sponsored by Representative Giovanni Capriglione, the Act establishes a framework governing certain uses of AI, outlines prohibited uses, and creates obligations on state government entities, among other provisions. TRAIGA was signed into law in 2025 and took effect on January 1, 2026. The law applies to AI developers and deployers that conduct business in Texas or whose systems are used by Texas residents. It prohibits the intentional development or deployment of AI systems to incite harm, violate constitutional rights, engage in unlawful discrimination, and produce child sexual abuse material or unlawful deepfakes. TRAIGA also establishes the Texas Artificial Intelligence Council and creates a regulatory sandbox program. The Texas Attorney General is charged with enforcement. It has received attention as one of the first comprehensive AI-related laws enacted by a U.S. state. Legal analysts have compared it to the European Union (EU) Artificial Intelligence Act and the Colorado AI Act, noting its intent-based discrimination standard and narrower scope relative to those frameworks. == Background == In June 2023, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed House Bill 2060, which created an Artificial Intelligence Advisory Council within the Texas Department of Information Resources. The Council was tasked with monitoring the use of AI systems across state government. Its membership included representatives from law enforcement, academia, and the legal profession. After submitting a report to state policymakers, the Council was disbanded in December 2024. Separately, the Texas House Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Technologies was created in 2023 to examine the political and social implications of artificial intelligence. Among its recommendations was the creation of a regulatory sandbox to allow for controlled testing of AI systems. This recommendation informed the regulatory sandbox provision included in TRAIGA. == History == In December 2024, Representative Capriglione introduced House Bill 1709, the Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act. The bill sought to create a statewide framework for artificial intelligence, including transparency requirements for companies deploying AI systems, restrictions on certain uses of AI, and the creation of a regulatory sandbox. Modeled in part on the EU Artificial Intelligence Act and the Colorado AI Act, House Bill 1709 focused on "high-risk" AI systems and included provisions addressing private sector liability. House Bill 1709 did not advance during the legislative session. Industry stakeholders raised concerns that several provisions were overly burdensome. The bill informed the development of a revised proposal, House Bill 149, also titled the Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act. The revised version removed requirements for private companies to notify consumers when they interact with AI systems and to conduct impact assessments, among other provisions. In April 2025, an amended version of House Bill 149 passed the Texas House of Representatives and was referred to the Senate Committee on Business and Commerce. The bill later received approval from both chambers, where the House voted on amendments adopted by the Senate. On May 31, 2025, the state legislature passed House Bill 149, one of several AI-related bills considered during the legislative session. Governor Abbott signed TRAIGA into law on June 22, 2025. During the legislative process, a proposed federal moratorium on state-level AI regulation initially raised questions about the enforceability of state AI laws, including TRAIGA. At the time of signing, Governor Abbott stated that Texas would ensure compliance with applicable federal requirements. In July 2025, the United States Senate voted to remove the proposed moratorium from federal legislation. The Act took effect on January 1, 2026. == Provisions == === Definitions and scope === TRAIGA applies to AI developers and deployers that advertise or conduct business in Texas, develop products used by Texas residents, or develop or deploy AI systems within the state. The Act also applies to Texas state and local government entities. The Act defines a developer as a person who develops an AI system and a deployer as one who deploys an AI system in Texas. Consumers are defined as Texas residents. The Act defines an artificial intelligence system as a machine-based system that "infers from the inputs the system receives how to generate outputs, including content, decisions, predictions, or recommendations, that can influence physical or virtual environments." === Government use === The Act requires government agencies to provide consumers with plain language notices before interacting with AI systems. It also prohibits government agencies from using artificial intelligence systems to assign social scores to consumers. It also restricts the use of AI systems to identify individuals using biometric data without the individual’s consent. === Prohibitions === The Act prohibits the development or deployment of artificial intelligence systems intended to cause harm, self-harm, or criminal activity. It also prohibits the development or deployment of AI systems designed to violate constitutional rights or unlawfully discriminate based on protected classes. In addition, the Act prohibits the development or deployment of AI systems that are intended to produce or distribute child sexual abuse material or unlawful deepfakes. === Enforcement === Enforcement authority under the Act rests with the Texas Attorney General. The Act does not create a private right of action. The Act requires the Texas Attorney General to create an online complaint system where consumers may submit allegations of potential violations. The Attorney General can investigate complaints received through this system and may request information relevant to the operation of an AI system, including information about training data. Before initiating an enforcement action, the Attorney General must provide a written notice to the alleged violator, who is then provided with a 60-day period to cure the alleged violation. === Penalties === If a violation is not cured, the Act authorizes civil penalties. Penalties range from $10,000 to $12,000 per curable violation and from $80,000 to $200,000 per non-curable violation. The Act also authorizes additional penalties of $2,000 to $40,000 for each day the violation continues. If the Attorney General determines that a person certified or licensed by a state agency has violated the Act and recommends enforcement, the relevant agency may impose additional administrative sanctions, including license suspension or further monetary penalties. === Safe harbor === The Act provides an affirmative defense for AI developers and deployers who identify potential violations through internal testing or auditing or who demonstrate compliance with National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)'s Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework or a comparable risk management framework. The Act also affords protection to developers and deployers when a third party uses their AI systems in a way that violates the Act. === Texas Artificial Intelligence Council === The Act creates the Texas Artificial Intelligence Council to assist the state legislatures in evaluating artificial intelligence policy and oversight. The Council is charged with developing recommendations for state agencies regarding the use of AI systems and with overseeing the regulatory sandbox. TRAIGA gives the Council the ability to organize AI-related training for state entities and issue reports concerning artificial intelligence. The Council does not have binding rulemaking authority. The Council consists of seven members appointed by the governor, the lieutenant governor, and the speaker of the Texas House of Representatives. === Regulatory sandbox === The Act directs the Texas Department of Information Resources to create a regulatory sandbox program that allows participants to test AI systems under state supervision in a modified regulatory setting. To join the program, companies must submit applications that describe their AI systems and intended use. Approved participants may operate within the sandbox for up to 36 months. During that period, the Attorney General is restricted from initiating enforcement actions for certain categories of violations. == Reception == === Support === During legislative testimony, the Texas Public Policy Foundation stated that TRAIGA would benefit Texas businesses by reducing legal ambiguity and creating clearer compliance standards. Representatives of business groups also expressed support, stating that the Act would not impose overly burdensome regulations. The consum
The ITU-WHO Focus Group on Artificial Intelligence for Health (AI for Health) was an inter-agency collaboration from 2018 between the World Health Organization and the ITU, which in 2019 created a benchmarking framework to assess the accuracy of AI in health. The organization convened an international network of experts and stakeholders from fields like research, practice, regulation, ethics, public health, etc, that developed guideline documentation and code. The documents have addressed ethics, assessment/evaluation, handling, and regulation of AI for health solutions, covering specific use cases including AI in ophthalmology, histopathology, dentistry, malaria detection, radiology, symptom checker applications, etc. FG-AI4H has established an ad hoc group concerned with digital technologies for health emergencies, including COVID-19. All documentation is public. The idea for the Focus Group came out of the Health Track of the 2018 AI for Good Global Summit. Administratively, FG-AI4H was created by ITU-T Study Group 16. Under ITU-T's framework, participation in Focus Groups is open to anyone from an ITU Member State. The secretariat is provided by the Telecommunication Standardization Bureau (under Director Chaesub Lee). It was first created at the July 2018 meeting with a lifetime of two years, at the July 2020 meeting, this was extended for another two years, where the focus group also submitted its deliverables to its parent body. It was also presented at the NeurIPS 2020 health workshop. In July 2023 "the work was grandfathered in the Global Initiative on AI for Health (GI-AI4H)". == AI for Health Framework == The outline of the benchmarking framework was published in a 2019 commentary in The Lancet. The output of the Focus Group AI for Health were structured in the AI for Health Framework. Depending on their primary domain being health or ICT, the individual components of the AI for Health Framework were ratified by the corresponding United Nations Specialized Agency, as WHO Guidelines and ITU Recommendations respectively. Standards drawn up by FG-AI4H were titled as: AI4H ethics considerations AI4H regulatory [best practices | considerations] AI4H requirements specification AI software life cycle specification Data specification AI training best practices specification AI4H evaluation considerations AI4H scale-up and adoption AI4H applications and platforms Use cases of the ITU-WHO Focus Group on AI for Health