A social media background check is an investigative technique that involves scrutinizing the social media profiles and activities of individuals, primarily for pre-employment screening and other official verifications. These checks are performed to review people's online behavioral history on social media websites such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. Social media background checks have become a common part of recruitment processes, among other verification procedures. == History == In the early 21st century, with the rapid expansion of social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn, employers began to use these channels to gather additional information about prospective employees. Initially, social media background checks were an informal aspect of recruitment, but they have gradually gained formal recognition as a crucial element in candidate screening. Proponents of social media background checks argue that such reviews provide insight into a candidate's professional interests and networks, though the reliability of such assessments remains contested among researchers. == Rise in society == The practice of social media background checks has seen a significant surge in the last decade. This rise can be attributed to the exponential increase in social media users and the growing awareness among organizations regarding the importance of hiring individuals who align with their values and culture. Various platforms provide services explicitly designed to conduct social media background checks efficiently, simplifying the process for businesses. Companies providing social media background check services, such as Ferretly and Certn, have received venture capital funding, reflecting investor interest in the sector. The incorporation of artificial intelligence into conducting AI-powered social media background checks also illustrates its continued popularity and that businesses are looking to ramp up and even automate their use. High-profile cases in which individuals faced employment or admission consequences for past social media posts have raised awareness of social media background checking practices. For example, director James Gunn faced termination from Marvel Studios in 2018 over past offensive tweets, though he was later rehired. Additionally, multiple college admissions officers have acknowledged reviewing applicants' social media profiles, though such practices vary by institution. == Evolution of ethical considerations == Social media background checks are not without controversy, raising significant ethical considerations that have evolved in recent years. Privacy advocates argue that social media background checks raise concerns about data use and discrimination, particularly given the use of personal information that may not reflect job-relevant behavior. Legal scholars debate whether reviewing publicly posted information constitutes a privacy violation under U.S. law. Researchers and critics note that social media profiles often present curated representations of users' lives and may not reflect workplace behavior or professional competence. Moreover, the accuracy of social media background checks has been called into question, with critics pointing out that these checks may not always yield reliable or comprehensive results. Critics also warn about potential misuse of information obtained from social media, including cyberbullying and harassment. A 2023 study by found that approximately 90% of employers incorporate social media into hiring processes, with over half of those surveyed reporting they had rejected candidates based on social media content. This informal approach operates largely outside federal compliance frameworks. Critics argue that without regulation, candidates lack dispute mechanisms available under regulatory frameworks like the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which requires compliance when background checks formally influence employment decisions. In a hiring environment where the practice is already performed often on an individual basis, the introduction of systematic, regulated screening practices that meet federal compliance standards can present a better, fairer alternative for both employers and candidates. == Business considerations == From a business perspective, social media background checks can be a valuable tool in protecting an organization's reputation and maintaining a safe and respectful workplace environment. A well-conducted social media background check can identify potential red flags, helping to prevent instances of workplace harassment or other negative behaviors. However, businesses also face potential legal repercussions if social media background checks are conducted improperly, such as non-compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) in the United States. Critics argue that over-reliance on social media data may exclude qualified candidates whose professional competence is not reflected in their online presence. The proliferation of social media screening services has prompted legal and industry experts to emphasize the importance of compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act and relevant state privacy laws when conducting such checks.
Convolutional neural network
A convolutional neural network (CNN) is a type of feedforward neural network that learns features via filter (or kernel) optimization. This type of deep learning network has been applied to process and make predictions from many different types of data including text, images and audio. CNNs are the de-facto standard in deep learning-based approaches to computer vision and image processing, and have only recently been replaced—in some cases—by newer architectures such as the transformer. Vanishing gradients and exploding gradients, seen during backpropagation in earlier neural networks, are prevented by the regularization that comes from using shared weights over fewer connections. For example, for each neuron in the fully-connected layer, 10,000 weights would be required for processing an image sized 100 × 100 pixels. However, applying cascaded convolution (or cross-correlation) kernels, only 25 weights for each convolutional layer are required to process 5x5-sized tiles. Higher-layer features are extracted from wider context windows, compared to lower-layer features. Some applications of CNNs include: image and video recognition, recommender systems, image classification, image segmentation, medical image analysis, natural language processing, brain–computer interfaces, and financial time series. CNNs are also known as shift invariant or space invariant artificial neural networks, based on the shared-weight architecture of the convolution kernels or filters that slide along input features and provide translation-equivariant responses known as feature maps. Counter-intuitively, most convolutional neural networks are not invariant to translation, due to the downsampling operation they apply to the input. Feedforward neural networks are usually fully connected networks, that is, each neuron in one layer is connected to all neurons in the next layer. The "full connectivity" of these networks makes them prone to overfitting data. Typical ways of regularization, or preventing overfitting, include: penalizing parameters during training (such as weight decay) or trimming connectivity (skipped connections, dropout, etc.) Robust datasets also increase the probability that CNNs will learn the generalized principles that characterize a given dataset rather than the biases of a poorly-populated set. Convolutional networks were inspired by biological processes in that the connectivity pattern between neurons resembles the organization of the animal visual cortex. Individual cortical neurons respond to stimuli only in a restricted region of the visual field known as the receptive field. The receptive fields of different neurons partially overlap such that they cover the entire visual field. CNNs use relatively little pre-processing compared to other image classification algorithms. This means that the network learns to optimize the filters (or kernels) through automated learning, whereas in traditional algorithms these filters are hand-engineered. This simplifies and automates the process, enhancing efficiency and scalability overcoming human-intervention bottlenecks. == Architecture == A convolutional neural network consists of an input layer, hidden layers and an output layer. In a convolutional neural network, the hidden layers include one or more layers that perform convolutions. Typically this includes a layer that performs a dot product of the convolution kernel with the layer's input matrix. This product is usually the Frobenius inner product, and its activation function is commonly ReLU. As the convolution kernel slides along the input matrix for the layer, the convolution operation generates a feature map, which in turn contributes to the input of the next layer. This is followed by other layers such as pooling layers, fully connected layers, and normalization layers. Here it should be noted how close a convolutional neural network is to a matched filter. === Convolutional layers === In a CNN, the input is a tensor with shape: (number of inputs) × (input height) × (input width) × (input channels) After passing through a convolutional layer, the image becomes abstracted to a feature map, also called an activation map, with shape: (number of inputs) × (feature map height) × (feature map width) × (feature map channels). Convolutional layers convolve the input and pass its result to the next layer. This is similar to the response of a neuron in the visual cortex to a specific stimulus. Each convolutional neuron processes data only for its receptive field. Although fully connected feedforward neural networks can be used to learn features and classify data, this architecture is generally impractical for larger inputs (e.g., high-resolution images), which would require massive numbers of neurons because each pixel is a relevant input feature. A fully connected layer for an image of size 100 × 100 has 10,000 weights for each neuron in the second layer. Convolution reduces the number of free parameters, allowing the network to be deeper. For example, using a 5 × 5 tiling region, each with the same shared weights, requires only 25 neurons. Using shared weights means there are many fewer parameters, which helps avoid the vanishing gradients and exploding gradients problems seen during backpropagation in earlier neural networks. To speed processing, standard convolutional layers can be replaced by depthwise separable convolutional layers, which are based on a depthwise convolution followed by a pointwise convolution. The depthwise convolution is a spatial convolution applied independently over each channel of the input tensor, while the pointwise convolution is a standard convolution restricted to the use of 1 × 1 {\displaystyle 1\times 1} kernels. === Pooling layers === Convolutional networks may include local and/or global pooling layers along with traditional convolutional layers. Pooling layers reduce the dimensions of data by combining the outputs of neuron clusters at one layer into a single neuron in the next layer. Local pooling combines small clusters, tiling sizes such as 2 × 2 are commonly used. Global pooling acts on all the neurons of the feature map. There are two common types of pooling in popular use: max and average. Max pooling uses the maximum value of each local cluster of neurons in the feature map, while average pooling takes the average value. === Fully connected layers === Fully connected layers connect every neuron in one layer to every neuron in another layer. It is the same as a traditional multilayer perceptron neural network (MLP). Each neuron in the fully connected layer receives input from all the neurons in the previous layer. These inputs are weighted and summed with the corresponding biases, and then passed through an activation function to perform a nonlinear transformation, generating the output. The flattened matrix goes through a fully connected layer to classify the images. === Receptive field === In neural networks, each neuron receives input from some number of locations in the previous layer. In a convolutional layer, each neuron receives input from only a restricted area of the previous layer called the neuron's receptive field. Typically the area is a square (e.g. 5 by 5 neurons). Whereas, in a fully connected layer, the receptive field is the entire previous layer. Thus, in each convolutional layer, each neuron takes input from a larger area in the input than previous layers. This is due to applying the convolution over and over, which takes the value of a pixel into account, as well as its surrounding pixels. When using dilated layers, the number of pixels in the receptive field remains constant, but the field is more sparsely populated as its dimensions grow when combining the effect of several layers. To manipulate the receptive field size as desired, there are some alternatives to the standard convolutional layer. For example, atrous or dilated convolution expands the receptive field size without increasing the number of parameters by interleaving visible and blind regions. Moreover, a single dilated convolutional layer can comprise filters with multiple dilation ratios, thus having a variable receptive field size. === Weights === Each neuron in a neural network computes an output value by applying a specific function to the input values received from the receptive field in the previous layer. The function that is applied to the input values is determined by a vector of weights and a bias (typically real numbers). Learning consists of iteratively adjusting these biases and weights. The vectors of weights and biases are called filters and represent particular features of the input (e.g., a particular shape). A distinguishing feature of CNNs is that many neurons can share the same filter. This reduces the memory footprint because a single bias and a single vector of weights are used across all receptive fields that share that filter, as opposed to each receptive field having its own bias and vector
Timeline of algorithms
The following timeline of algorithms outlines the development of algorithms (mainly "mathematical recipes") since their inception. == Antiquity == Before – writing about "recipes" (on cooking, rituals, agriculture and other themes) c. 1700–2000 BC – Egyptians develop earliest known algorithms for multiplying two numbers c. 1600 BC – Babylonians develop earliest known algorithms for factorization and finding square roots c. 300 BC – Euclid's algorithm c. 200 BC – the Sieve of Eratosthenes 263 AD – Gaussian elimination described by Liu Hui == Medieval Period == 628 – Chakravala method described by Brahmagupta c. 820 – Al-Khawarizmi described algorithms for solving linear equations and quadratic equations in his Algebra; the word algorithm comes from his name 825 – Al-Khawarizmi described the algorism, algorithms for using the Hindu–Arabic numeral system, in his treatise On the Calculation with Hindu Numerals, which was translated into Latin as Algoritmi de numero Indorum, where "Algoritmi", the translator's rendition of the author's name gave rise to the word algorithm (Latin algorithmus) with a meaning "calculation method" c. 850 – cryptanalysis and frequency analysis algorithms developed by Al-Kindi (Alkindus) in A Manuscript on Deciphering Cryptographic Messages, which contains algorithms on breaking encryptions and ciphers c. 1025 – Ibn al-Haytham (Alhazen), was the first mathematician to derive the formula for the sum of the fourth powers, and in turn, he develops an algorithm for determining the general formula for the sum of any integral powers c. 1400 – Ahmad al-Qalqashandi gives a list of ciphers in his Subh al-a'sha which include both substitution and transposition, and for the first time, a cipher with multiple substitutions for each plaintext letter; he also gives an exposition on and worked example of cryptanalysis, including the use of tables of letter frequencies and sets of letters which can not occur together in one word == Before 1940 == 1540 – Lodovico Ferrari discovered a method to find the roots of a quartic polynomial 1545 – Gerolamo Cardano published Cardano's method for finding the roots of a cubic polynomial 1614 – John Napier develops method for performing calculations using logarithms 1671 – Newton–Raphson method developed by Isaac Newton 1690 – Newton–Raphson method independently developed by Joseph Raphson 1706 – John Machin develops a quickly converging inverse-tangent series for π and computes π to 100 decimal places 1768 – Leonhard Euler publishes his method for numerical integration of ordinary differential equations in problem 85 of Institutiones calculi integralis 1789 – Jurij Vega improves Machin's formula and computes π to 140 decimal places, 1805 – FFT-like algorithm known by Carl Friedrich Gauss 1842 – Ada Lovelace writes the first algorithm for a computing engine 1903 – A fast Fourier transform algorithm presented by Carle David Tolmé Runge 1918 - Soundex 1926 – Borůvka's algorithm 1926 – Primary decomposition algorithm presented by Grete Hermann 1927 – Hartree–Fock method developed for simulating a quantum many-body system in a stationary state. 1934 – Delaunay triangulation developed by Boris Delaunay 1936 – Turing machine, an abstract machine developed by Alan Turing, with others developed the modern notion of algorithm. == 1940s == 1942 – A fast Fourier transform algorithm developed by G.C. Danielson and Cornelius Lanczos 1945 – Merge sort developed by John von Neumann 1947 – Simplex algorithm developed by George Dantzig == 1950s == 1950 – Hamming codes developed by Richard Hamming 1952 – Huffman coding developed by David A. Huffman 1953 – Simulated annealing introduced by Nicholas Metropolis 1954 – Radix sort computer algorithm developed by Harold H. Seward 1964 – Box–Muller transform for fast generation of normally distributed numbers published by George Edward Pelham Box and Mervin Edgar Muller. Independently pre-discovered by Raymond E. A. C. Paley and Norbert Wiener in 1934. 1956 – Kruskal's algorithm developed by Joseph Kruskal 1956 – Ford–Fulkerson algorithm developed and published by R. Ford Jr. and D. R. Fulkerson 1957 – Prim's algorithm developed by Robert Prim 1957 – Bellman–Ford algorithm developed by Richard E. Bellman and L. R. Ford, Jr. 1959 – Dijkstra's algorithm developed by Edsger Dijkstra 1959 – Shell sort developed by Donald L. Shell 1959 – De Casteljau's algorithm developed by Paul de Casteljau 1959 – QR factorization algorithm developed independently by John G.F. Francis and Vera Kublanovskaya 1959 – Rabin–Scott powerset construction for converting NFA into DFA published by Michael O. Rabin and Dana Scott == 1960s == 1960 – Karatsuba multiplication 1961 – CRC (Cyclic redundancy check) invented by W. Wesley Peterson 1962 – AVL trees 1962 – Quicksort developed by C. A. R. Hoare 1962 – Bresenham's line algorithm developed by Jack E. Bresenham 1962 – Gale–Shapley 'stable-marriage' algorithm developed by David Gale and Lloyd Shapley 1964 – Heapsort developed by J. W. J. Williams 1964 – multigrid methods first proposed by R. P. Fedorenko 1965 – Cooley–Tukey algorithm rediscovered by James Cooley and John Tukey 1965 – Levenshtein distance developed by Vladimir Levenshtein 1965 – Cocke–Younger–Kasami (CYK) algorithm independently developed by Tadao Kasami 1965 – Buchberger's algorithm for computing Gröbner bases developed by Bruno Buchberger 1965 – LR parsers invented by Donald Knuth 1966 – Dantzig algorithm for shortest path in a graph with negative edges 1967 – Viterbi algorithm proposed by Andrew Viterbi 1967 – Cocke–Younger–Kasami (CYK) algorithm independently developed by Daniel H. Younger 1968 – A graph search algorithm described by Peter Hart, Nils Nilsson, and Bertram Raphael 1968 – Risch algorithm for indefinite integration developed by Robert Henry Risch 1969 – Strassen algorithm for matrix multiplication developed by Volker Strassen == 1970s == 1970 – Dinic's algorithm for computing maximum flow in a flow network by Yefim (Chaim) A. Dinitz 1970 – Knuth–Bendix completion algorithm developed by Donald Knuth and Peter B. Bendix 1970 – BFGS method of the quasi-Newton class 1970 – Needleman–Wunsch algorithm published by Saul B. Needleman and Christian D. Wunsch 1972 – Edmonds–Karp algorithm published by Jack Edmonds and Richard Karp, essentially identical to Dinic's algorithm from 1970 1972 – Graham scan developed by Ronald Graham 1972 – Red–black trees and B-trees discovered 1973 – RSA encryption algorithm discovered by Clifford Cocks 1973 – Jarvis march algorithm developed by R. A. Jarvis 1973 – Hopcroft–Karp algorithm developed by John Hopcroft and Richard Karp 1974 – Pollard's p − 1 algorithm developed by John Pollard 1974 – Quadtree developed by Raphael Finkel and J.L. Bentley 1975 – Genetic algorithms popularized by John Holland 1975 – Pollard's rho algorithm developed by John Pollard 1975 – Aho–Corasick string matching algorithm developed by Alfred V. Aho and Margaret J. Corasick 1975 – Cylindrical algebraic decomposition developed by George E. Collins 1976 – Salamin–Brent algorithm independently discovered by Eugene Salamin and Richard Brent 1976 – Knuth–Morris–Pratt algorithm developed by Donald Knuth and Vaughan Pratt and independently by J. H. Morris 1977 – Boyer–Moore string-search algorithm for searching the occurrence of a string into another string. 1977 – RSA encryption algorithm rediscovered by Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir, and Len Adleman 1977 – LZ77 algorithm developed by Abraham Lempel and Jacob Ziv 1977 – multigrid methods developed independently by Achi Brandt and Wolfgang Hackbusch 1978 – LZ78 algorithm developed from LZ77 by Abraham Lempel and Jacob Ziv 1978 – Bruun's algorithm proposed for powers of two by Georg Bruun 1979 – Khachiyan's ellipsoid method developed by Leonid Khachiyan 1979 – ID3 decision tree algorithm developed by Ross Quinlan == 1980s == 1980 – Brent's Algorithm for cycle detection Richard P. Brendt 1981 – Quadratic sieve developed by Carl Pomerance 1981 – Smith–Waterman algorithm developed by Temple F. Smith and Michael S. Waterman 1983 – Simulated annealing developed by S. Kirkpatrick, C. D. Gelatt and M. P. Vecchi 1983 – Classification and regression tree (CART) algorithm developed by Leo Breiman, et al. 1984 – LZW algorithm developed from LZ78 by Terry Welch 1984 – Karmarkar's interior-point algorithm developed by Narendra Karmarkar 1984 – ACORN PRNG discovered by Roy Wikramaratna and used privately 1985 – Simulated annealing independently developed by V. Cerny 1985 – Car–Parrinello molecular dynamics developed by Roberto Car and Michele Parrinello 1985 – Splay trees discovered by Sleator and Tarjan 1986 – Blum Blum Shub proposed by L. Blum, M. Blum, and M. Shub 1986 – Push relabel maximum flow algorithm by Andrew Goldberg and Robert Tarjan 1986 – Barnes–Hut tree method developed by Josh Barnes and Piet Hut for fast approximate simulation of n-body problems 1987 – Fast multipole method developed by Leslie Greengard and Vladimir
Interviewer effect
The interviewer effect (also called interviewer variance or interviewer error) is the distortion of response to an interviewer-administered data collection effort which results from differential reactions to the social style and personality of interviewers or to their presentation of particular questions. The use of fixed-wording questions is one method of reducing interviewer bias. Anthropological research and case-studies are also affected by the problem, which is exacerbated by the self-fulfilling prophecy, when the researcher is also the interviewer it is also any effect on data gathered from interviewing people that is caused by the behavior or characteristics (real or perceived) of the interviewer. Interviewer effects can also be associated with the characteristics of the interviewer, such as race. Whether black respondents are interviewed by white interviewers or black interviewers has a strong impact on their responses to both attitude questions and behavioral ones. In the latter case, for example, if black respondents are interviewed by black interviewers in pre-election surveys, they are more likely to actually vote in the upcoming election than if they are interviewed by white interviewers. Furthermore, the race of the interviewer can also affect answers to factual questions that might take the form of a test of how informed the respondent is. Black respondents in a survey of political knowledge, for example, get fewer correct answers to factual questions about politics when interviewed by white interviewers than when interviewed by black interviewers. This is consistent with the research literature on stereotype threat, which finds diminished test performance of potentially stigmatised groups when the interviewer or test supervisor is from a perceived higher status group. Interviewer effects can be mitigated somewhat by randomly assigning subjects to different interviewers, or by using tools such as computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI).
Artificial intelligence in architecture
Artificial intelligence in architecture is the use of artificial intelligence in automation, design, and planning in the architectural process or in assisting human skills in the field of architecture. AI has been used by some architects for design, and has been proposed as a way to automate planning and routine tasks in the field. == Implications == === Benefits === Artificial intelligence, according to ArchDaily, is said to potentially significantly augment the architectural profession through its ability to improve the design and planning process as well as increasing productivity. Through its ability to handle a large amount of data, AI is said to potentially allow architects a range of design choices with criteria considerations such as budget, requirements adjusted to space, and sustainability goals calculated as part of the design process. ArchDaily said this may allow the design of optimized alternatives that can then undergo human review. AI tools are also said to potentially allow architects to assimilate urban and environmental data to inform their designs, streamlining initial stages of project planning and increasing efficiency and productivity. The advances in generative design through the input of specific prompts allow architects to produce visual designs, including photorealistic images, and thus render and explore various material choices and spatial configurations. ArchDaily noted this could speed the creative process as well as allow for experimentation and sophistication in the design. Additionally, AI's capacity for pattern recognition and coding could aid architects in organizing design resources and developing custom applications, thus enhancing the efficiency and collaboration between both architects and AI. AI is thought to also be able to contribute to the sustainability of buildings by analyzing various factors and following recommended energy-efficient modifications, thus pushing the industry towards greener practices. The use of AI in building maintenance, project management, and the creation of immersive virtual reality experiences are also thought of as potentially augmenting the architectural design process and workflow. Examples include the use of text-to-image systems such as Midjourney to create detailed architectural images, and the use of AI optimization systems from companies such as Finch3D and Autodesk to automatically generate floor plans from simple programmatic inputs. In contrast to digital-only creative practices, the high materiality of architectural outputs requires transitions from ephemeral digital files to permanent physical structures that are subject to strict safety regulations, material constraints, sensory intuition, and site-specific cultural contexts, making full automation difficult. Early adopters such as architect Stephen Coorlas have actively challenged the boundaries of architectural practice through AI. His early experimental initiative, Speculations on AI and Architecture, confronts the discipline's traditional workflows by training text-to-image AI tools such as Midjourney, Luma AI, and PromeAI to generate more nuanced architectural illustrations including construction documents, architectural details, and assembly sequences for various structures. Coorlas inputs precise terminology and architectural language to provoke the AI into producing axonometric drawings that resemble conventional documentation, then experiments with animating the outputs using AI generated depth maps and other AI image-to-3D wireframe tools. Stephen's inventive process invites architects and designers to reconsider authorship, automation, and the future of visual communication in the built environment. Rather than treating AI as a peripheral tool, Stephen has advocated for AI to be a speculative collaborator capable of engaging with discipline-specific challenges. His work contributes to the growing discourse on generative design, parametric optimization, and the philosophical implications of machine-assisted creativity raising urgent questions about how such technologies will reshape architectural agency, precision, and pedagogy. Another prominent advocate is Architect Andrew Kudless, who in an interview to Dezeen recounted that he uses AI to innovate in architectural design by incorporating materials and scenes not usually present in initial plans, which he believes can significantly alter client presentations. He told Dezeen he believes one should show clients renderings from the onset, with AI assisting in this work, arguing that changes in design should be a positive aspect of the client-designer relationship by actively involving clients in the process. Additionally, Kudless highlighted the AI's potential to facilitate labor in architectural firms, particularly in automating rendering tasks, thus reducing the workload on junior staff while maintaining control over the creative output. === Emergent aesthetics === In an interview for the AItopia series to Dezeen, designer Tim Fu discussed the transformative potential of AI in architecture, and proposed a future where AI could herald a "neoclassical futurist" style, blending the grandeur of classical aesthetics with futuristic design. Through his collaborative project, The AI Stone Carver, Fu showcased how AI can innovate traditional practices by generating design concepts that are then realized through human craftsmanship, such as stone carving by mason Till Apfel. This approach, he believed, celebrated the fusion of diverse architectural styles and also emphasized the unique capabilities of AI in enhancing creative design processes. Fu told Dezeen he envisions the integration of AI in design as a means to revive the ornamentation and detailed aesthetics characteristic of classical architecture, moving away from minimalism, which he said dominates contemporary architecture. He argued that AI's involvement in the ideation phase of design allows for a reversal in the roles of machine and human, enabling architects and designers to focus on creating more intricate and ornamental structures. Fu's optimistic outlook extended to the broader impact of AI on the architectural field, seeing it as an indispensable tool that will shift rather than replace human roles, enriching the field with innovative designs that pay homage to the beauty and qualities of classical architecture not present in contemporary architecture while embracing new technologies. This perspective resonates with designers like Manas Bhatia, whose explorations similarly embrace generative AI as a co-creator and a medium to express ideas, blend architectural traditions, and speculate spatial futures. === Concerns === As AI continues to expand its presence across various industries, its impact on the architectural profession has become a topic of growing discussion. These discussions focus on how AI processes may influence traditional architectural practices, potentially altering job roles, and shaping the nature of creativity. While AI-driven processes may increase efficiency in some aspects of the profession, they also raise questions about the potential loss of unique design perspectives. These thoughts have been countered by many prominent creative figures in the realm of AI architecture, such as Stephen Coorlas, Tim Fu, Hassan Ragab, and Manas Bhatia who have showcased the amplification of creativity in design and potential benefits in terms of restoring creative power to the designer. A key concern is that AI-powered tools could diminish the need for human involvement in specific tasks traditionally performed by architects. This has led to speculation that the profession may increasingly shift toward roles focused on oversight, coordination, and strategic decision-making rather than hands-on design work. In some design scenarios, algorithmically generated solutions can be adjusted to prioritize efficiency and cost-effectiveness, which some argue may overshadow the creative and contextual nuances that define individual architectural styles. As with any discipline though, it has been determined that AI can be configured to provide beneficial results based on inputs and end goals the architect or designer assigns it. There are also concerns about the potential for AI to exacerbate inequalities within the architectural profession. For instance, larger firms with greater resources to invest in advanced AI technologies may gain a competitive edge over smaller firms and independent architects. This dynamic could contribute to industry consolidation, potentially limiting the diversity of architectural practice and stifling innovation. Ethical considerations in regard to cultural sensitivity have also been raised due to the datasets used to train AI. Without proper vetting of data or implementing failsafe overrides, AI generated outcomes can trend toward overly documented and prioritized content.
Evaluation of binary classifiers
Evaluation of a binary classifier typically assigns a numerical value, or values, to a classifier that represent its accuracy. An example is error rate, which measures how frequently the classifier makes a mistake. There are many metrics that can be used; different fields have different preferences. For example, in medicine sensitivity and specificity are often used, while in computer science precision and recall are preferred. An important distinction is between metrics that are independent of the prevalence or skew (how often each class occurs in the population), and metrics that depend on the prevalence – both types are useful, but they have very different properties. Often, evaluation is used to compare two methods of classification, so that one can be adopted and the other discarded. Such comparisons are more directly achieved by a form of evaluation that results in a single unitary metric rather than a pair of metrics. == Contingency table == Given a data set, a classification (the output of a classifier on that set) gives two numbers: the number of positives and the number of negatives, which add up to the total size of the set. To evaluate a classifier, one compares its output to another reference classification – ideally a perfect classification, but in practice the output of another gold standard test – and cross tabulates the data into a 2×2 contingency table, comparing the two classifications. One then evaluates the classifier relative to the gold standard by computing summary statistics of these 4 numbers. Generally these statistics will be scale invariant (scaling all the numbers by the same factor does not change the output), to make them independent of population size, which is achieved by using ratios of homogeneous functions, most simply homogeneous linear or homogeneous quadratic functions. Say we test some people for the presence of a disease. Some of these people have the disease, and our test correctly says they are positive. They are called true positives (TP). Some have the disease, but the test incorrectly claims they don't. They are called false negatives (FN). Some don't have the disease, and the test says they don't – true negatives (TN). Finally, there might be healthy people who have a positive test result – false positives (FP). These can be arranged into a 2×2 contingency table (confusion matrix), conventionally with the test result on the vertical axis and the actual condition on the horizontal axis. These numbers can then be totaled, yielding both a grand total and marginal totals. Totaling the entire table, the number of true positives, false negatives, true negatives, and false positives add up to 100% of the set. Totaling the columns (adding vertically) the number of true positives and false positives add up to 100% of the test positives, and likewise for negatives. Totaling the rows (adding horizontally), the number of true positives and false negatives add up to 100% of the condition positives (conversely for negatives). The basic marginal ratio statistics are obtained by dividing the 2×2=4 values in the table by the marginal totals (either rows or columns), yielding 2 auxiliary 2×2 tables, for a total of 8 ratios. These ratios come in 4 complementary pairs, each pair summing to 1, and so each of these derived 2×2 tables can be summarized as a pair of 2 numbers, together with their complements. Further statistics can be obtained by taking ratios of these ratios, ratios of ratios, or more complicated functions. The contingency table and the most common derived ratios are summarized below; see sequel for details. Note that the rows correspond to the condition actually being positive or negative (or classified as such by the gold standard), as indicated by the color-coding, and the associated statistics are prevalence-independent, while the columns correspond to the test being positive or negative, and the associated statistics are prevalence-dependent. There are analogous likelihood ratios for prediction values, but these are less commonly used, and not depicted above. == Pairs of metrics == Often accuracy is evaluated with a pair of metrics composed in a standard pattern. === Sensitivity and specificity === The fundamental prevalence-independent statistics are sensitivity and specificity. Sensitivity or True Positive Rate (TPR), also known as recall, is the proportion of people that tested positive and are positive (True Positive, TP) of all the people that actually are positive (Condition Positive, CP = TP + FN). It can be seen as the probability that the test is positive given that the patient is sick. With higher sensitivity, fewer actual cases of disease go undetected (or, in the case of the factory quality control, fewer faulty products go to the market). Specificity (SPC) or True Negative Rate (TNR) is the proportion of people that tested negative and are negative (True Negative, TN) of all the people that actually are negative (Condition Negative, CN = TN + FP). As with sensitivity, it can be looked at as the probability that the test result is negative given that the patient is not sick. With higher specificity, fewer healthy people are labeled as sick (or, in the factory case, fewer good products are discarded). The relationship between sensitivity and specificity, as well as the performance of the classifier, can be visualized and studied using the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve. In theory, sensitivity and specificity are independent in the sense that it is possible to achieve 100% in both (such as in the red/blue ball example given above). In more practical, less contrived instances, however, there is usually a trade-off, such that they are inversely proportional to one another to some extent. This is because we rarely measure the actual thing we would like to classify; rather, we generally measure an indicator of the thing we would like to classify, referred to as a surrogate marker. The reason why 100% is achievable in the ball example is because redness and blueness is determined by directly detecting redness and blueness. However, indicators are sometimes compromised, such as when non-indicators mimic indicators or when indicators are time-dependent, only becoming evident after a certain lag time. The following example of a pregnancy test will make use of such an indicator. Modern pregnancy tests do not use the pregnancy itself to determine pregnancy status; rather, human chorionic gonadotropin is used, or hCG, present in the urine of gravid females, as a surrogate marker to indicate that a woman is pregnant. Because hCG can also be produced by a tumor, the specificity of modern pregnancy tests cannot be 100% (because false positives are possible). Also, because hCG is present in the urine in such small concentrations after fertilization and early embryogenesis, the sensitivity of modern pregnancy tests cannot be 100% (because false negatives are possible). === Positive and negative predictive values === In addition to sensitivity and specificity, the performance of a binary classification test can be measured with positive predictive value (PPV), also known as precision, and negative predictive value (NPV). The positive prediction value answers the question "If the test result is positive, how well does that predict an actual presence of disease?". It is calculated as TP/(TP + FP); that is, it is the proportion of true positives out of all positive results. The negative prediction value is the same, but for negatives, naturally. ==== Impact of prevalence on predictive values ==== Prevalence has a significant impact on prediction values. As an example, suppose there is a test for a disease with 99% sensitivity and 99% specificity. If 2000 people are tested and the prevalence (in the sample) is 50%, 1000 of them are sick and 1000 of them are healthy. Thus about 990 true positives and 990 true negatives are likely, with 10 false positives and 10 false negatives. The positive and negative prediction values would be 99%, so there can be high confidence in the result. However, if the prevalence is only 5%, so of the 2000 people only 100 are really sick, then the prediction values change significantly. The likely result is 99 true positives, 1 false negative, 1881 true negatives and 19 false positives. Of the 19+99 people tested positive, only 99 really have the disease – that means, intuitively, that given that a patient's test result is positive, there is only 84% chance that they really have the disease. On the other hand, given that the patient's test result is negative, there is only 1 chance in 1882, or 0.05% probability, that the patient has the disease despite the test result. === Precision and recall === Precision and recall can be interpreted as (estimated) conditional probabilities: Precision is given by P ( C = P | C ^ = P ) {\displaystyle P(C=P|{\hat {C}}=P)} while recall is given by P ( C ^ = P | C = P ) {\displaystyle P({\hat {C}}=P|C=P)} , where C ^ {\
Small Data
Small Data: the Tiny Clues that Uncover Huge Trends is Martin Lindstrom's seventh book. It chronicles his work as a branding expert, working with consumers across the world to better understand their behavior. The theory behind the book is that businesses can better create products and services based on observing consumer behavior in their homes, as opposed to relying solely on big data. == Content == The book is based on a several year period of consumer studies for major corporations across the globe. It features case studies of the author's work interviewing consumers in their homes and using his observations to create hypotheses as to why they use products the way that they do. == Public reception == The book was a New York Times Bestseller upon release and was positively reviewed on several websites, Including Entrepreneur and Forbes. In 2016, it was named a Best Business Book by strategy+business and one of Inc. Magazine's Best Sales and Marketing books.