AI Expert Newsletter
AI - The art and science of making computers do interesting
things that are not in their nature.
April 2006
It's been said that Shakespeare
gave
Twelfth Night
the alternative title of
What You Will because, exhausted by writing the
play, he was completely unable to think of
anything more informative.
Choose whatever title
you
will, he says: I've given up. AI Newsletter isn't
Shakespeare; but I have the same problem this month. I started
by searching for applets to demonstrate computer vision, along the lines
of the
neural-net
applets I explored in March 2005.
But on the way, I found a lot of other interesting things,
and so most of this issue is a
hard-to-classify
meander round a variety of
topics, from language to the cognitive perils of presentations.
First, a brief announcement in support of the state of
Georgia.
The
2006 Game Developers' Conference
has just finished. Amongst the
presentations
were some on AI, of which I'll give a taster by pointing to
Battle
Cam: A Dynamic Camera System for Real-Time
Strategy Games. BattleCam is a flying battle camera which
a player can turn on during the game. What looks intriguing from the
abstract is that the camera decides what to take pictures of,
using a model of human visual attention to pick interesting
subjects. It also uses Markov chains to link these
shots
together in a coherent sequence. The technique has been used in real-time
space and land battles in STAR WARS: EMPIRE AT WAR.
I was alerted to the conference by a press release from
Johnny Wilson, sent on behalf of the
Georgia Department of Economic
Development. He asks me to point out the benefits
of developing hi-tech games in the state of Georgia, or
in association with Georgia companies. These include
tax breaks:
Georgia's legislature revised the state's tax code to also provide tax
credits for development of interactive entertainment, like computer games.
Both Georgia and non–Georgia-based companies can transfer the tax
credit
to a Georgia company, as long as the transferor recoups at least $.60 on
the dollar. Unlike tax incentives that only affect the publisher and final
consumer product, Georgia's tax code qualifies even expenditures on
editing, animation, coding, special effects, sound and more. The primary
caveat is that these production expenses must be used in an entertainment
product with commercial distribution beyond Georgia's borders.
Amongst games companies already set up in Georgia are:
Blue Heat (mobile phone
games); GameTap (video games through
streaming); Kaneva (3D game-engines); Persuasive Games
(public policy games); RoosterTeeth Productions (Machinema, or using video
characters
to make short films delivered over the Web); and Studiocom
(advertiser-subsidised game and
entertainment environments).
And, Georgia universities and colleges offer courses in
cutting-edge entertainment technology. Including AI, I hope —
if anyone there is reading this,
write and tell us about the exciting new AI techniques
you're teaching.
For more information on Georgia resources and incentives, contact Greg
Torre at (404) 962-4052 or gtorre@georgia.org.
www.gdconf.com/ —
2006 Game Developers' Conference.
www.georgia.org/ —
Georgia Department of Economic Development.
Are you passionate about statistical graphs; deeply caring
about
numerical
integrity; a liberationist for
"data prisons" and "the
poetry of visual information"? If so, you may already know the
work of
Edward Tufte.
If not, you need to.
This is how Scott Rosenberg begins a feature in
Salon about Tufte,
The Data
Artist. We have become accustomed, he
explains, to awful information:
The pie-charts Ross Perot
liked to grin over in his infomercials; the pictograms of Russian soldiers
that President Reagan's aides employed to show him the size of the Soviet
threat; the misalignment of pictures and quantities in journals from the
New York Times to Pravda.
Indeed, the feature is illustrated with an image from
Pravda, plotting growth of production (probably: resolution is too
poor for me to make out the last part of the caption)
from 1922 to 1982. Note the extreme unequal spacing of years, and the
perceptual bias caused by the fleet of swelling circles wherein the
numbers are enclosed.
Or as Roy Johnson, writing for the typographer's site
TypeBooks, says
in his review of Tufte's
first book The
Visual Display of Quantitative Information:
In a discussion of the integrity of graphical data versus misleading
statistics, Tufte gives examples from Britain's national debt during the
war of American Independence — which show graphs going up whilst the
truth
goes down.
Even when our graphics are not intended to
deceive, we can improve them by following one of Tufte's
prescriptions — avoid "chart-junk". That is, eliminate unneeded
grid-lines and other visual clutter. This is reminiscent of
William Strunks's famous
advice to writers,
"Omit needless
words".
Worth considering next time you reach for the
"enable grid lines" argument to your favourite plotting subroutine.
On his site, Tufte doesn't say much about his prescriptions,
but you can find them summarised in
a
University of Washington course on
Graphics and
Web Design Based on Edward Tufte's Principles.
Even if professionally concerned only with symbolic data such as
parse trees and Prolog debugger traces,
we all need to make presentations and write Web pages, so
I believe it's worth looking up the Washington site and also
persuading your library to obtain copies of Tufte's books. You
may disagree with what he says, but the illustrations
are beautiful. They include what Tufte calls
"probably the best statistical graphic ever drawn", Charles Joseph
Minard's
map of Napoleon's army
losses during
the Russian
campaign of 1812.
Tufte's elegant illustrations are an excellent antidote to
to the tedious clip-art and other graphics seen so frequently.
To quote Salon again:
Surprisingly, Tufte has little to say directly about digital design. He's
appalled by the low resolution of computer screens compared to the
versatile data-density of paper; he's dismayed by the way "computer
administrative debris" and pointless decoration eat up so much of the
already limited onscreen turf. Mostly, he's alarmed by the way the tools
of computer design have made it easier than ever for bad designers to
litter their work with unnecessary icons and distracting "chart junk"
—
all of which has culminated in the reader-hostile pages of Wired magazine,
with their jumbled type, their deliberate confusion of ad and editorial
space and their gaudy inks that hide information rather than illuminating
it.
Given the quote above, there's an irony that
some of Tufte's most notorious views should be
published by Wired. In
PowerPoint
Is Evil, he condemns
PowerPoint for "poking a finger into the eye of thought",
and its implementors because:
To sell a product that messes up data with such systematic intensity,
Microsoft abandons any pretense of statistical integrity and reasoning.
The problem is, Tufte says, that a business-presentation PowerPoint slide
can display only about 40 words, or eight seconds' worth of silent reading
material. Such a meagre information density means the presenter needs
many, many slides.
Thus, PowerPoint presentations "too often resemble a school
play — very loud, very slow, and very simple".
Moreover, when information is sliced across time like this, the viewer
finds
understanding each slice — each slide — more difficult,
because the context provided by other slices must either be
remembered, or hasn't yet arrived.
Not everybody agrees. In
his blog entry
Business
Presentations and the Cognitive Style of Edward
Tufte, software developer "Julian"
looks at the constraints faced by business, and
argues that the culprit is not PowerPoint but lack of time, of skill, and
of screen resolution. Amongst other things, he explains why those trying
to attract management's attention "game the system" by producing
PowerPoint slides rather than more detailed documents. And he
says
that many corporate processes and tools, of which PowerPoint is one,
have a
common characteristic:
They greatly buoy up the
poorest performers
at a cost over extra, unnecessary, overhead for the best performers.
We adopt such tools and processes because being able to predictably
produce satisfactory output is often more useful than unpredictably
producing output with a large variance in quality.
Another critic of Tufte's views is
designer and cognitive scientist
Donald Norman. His
In
Defense
of PowerPoint
claims that
Tufte has failed to
distinguish three very different requirements:
those of the speaker, those of the listener, and those
of the listener now relaxing in a comfy chair after the
presentation, copious scrap paper conveniently nearby
and printed lecture notes in hand.
It is the latter who needs the clear, context-providing,
detailed information displays.
Norman's analysis of speaker and audience is something I'll
be thinking about
when next I go to give a presentation.
Stand under a mulberry tree and look up through the
branches, or next to a strawberry
bed and look down at the ground. The red fruits will
seem to "pop out" at you, without you
having to consciously search for them.
As NASA demonstrate on their
Color Usage Research Lab
Color and
Popout
page, this visual
phenomenon is useful on the screen as well
as in the strawberry field.
The page has images of two "I"s and two "L"s amongst
a flock of "T"s. In one, the "I"s and "L"s
are coloured differently from the "T"s, and much easier to
find.
Conversely, if there are several different colours of
"T"s, it makes the colour-coded "I"s and "L"s
harder to find, as the third image on the page
shows.
Visual popout, or pop-out, is sometimes said to be an
instance
of "preattentive" vision, broadly defined as the rapid visual processing
that operates in parallel over the visual field before we consciously
attend to what we see. As a Google for visual
(popout OR pop-out) preattentive will
quickly show, matters are
more complicated: researchers don't agree on how useful the
notion of preattentive processing is, or on how pop-out works.
Nevertheless, even if we don't know the exact mechanism, we can still take
advantage of the phenomenon.
That "an understanding of perception can significantly
improve both
the quality and the quantity of information being displayed" is the
theme
of a really nice page by Christopher Healey,
Perception in
Visualization. Healey explains and compares some of the theories
of
preattentive processing, a useful resource by itself even if you
aren't interested in
graphics. He also explores "change blindness",
wherein a blink or other interruption to vision
blinds us to changes that happen during the interruption.
Interruptions from outside, such as an image
vanishing momentarily from the screen,
can have this
effect too: a fact worth noting.
In art, a "painterly" style is one in which we can
still see the brush strokes; or more generally, when
we see
effects such as indistinct edges, due to the act of painting
rather than the scene painted.
It's a style that we
are all familar with: think of the Impressionists.
Healey takes advantage of this in his
Formalizing
Artistic Techniques and Scientific Visualization
for Painted Renditions of Complex Information Spaces.
The idea of this research is to depict multi-attribute data points
in a way that's aesthetically pleasing and perceptually unbiased.
By the latter, I mean that the display should avoid bias
such as was designed into the
Salon
Soviet graphic.
For instance,
if colour is used to represent temperature, then equal
temperature differences should be depicted by equal
colour differences. Not equally spaced RGB values; but
equal colour spacings as they appear to a human viewer. Healey discusses
this in the paper, and also on the
Perception in
Visualization page.
Moreover, the visual feature used to depict one attribute
should not accidentally seem more important or attention-grabbing
than the visual feature used to depict another attribute.
If human vision pays more attention to colour than
to texture, we can exploit the fact by depicting a more
important attribute in colour and a less important
as texture; but we should do so
by choice, not because we don't know any better.
In that paper, in fact,
Healey's objective is to
depict
weather readings
collected by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change: specifically, to depict
temperature, precipitation, pressure, and windspeed
over the United States. In
Formalizing
Artistic Techniques and Scientific Visualization
for Painted Renditions of Complex Information Spaces,
he explains, with illustrations, how he did this.
Visual features were ranked so as to attach most importance to
temperature; and the images were rendered in
a painterly style, with information being conveyed by
the size, density, and orientation of the visible
brush strokes.
There is much more worth reading on the rest
of Healey's site.
As you can tell, I was rather diverted from my
search for computer-vision applets. However,
data visualisation is important too, in
data mining for example. And elegance is
important everywhere.
Anyway, I have
linked to
two pages of vision demonstrations,
as well as to a
rather nice looking Web book,
Peter Kaiser's
The
Joy of Visual Perception. Warning from his preface:
"As time passes, various parts of this book may become obsolete. As noted
below I consider this web book to be supplementary to hard cover texts and
strongly suggest that teachers and students do not use The Joy of Visual
Perception as a stand-alone source of educational material".
During my search, a passing reference diverted me further.
I refer to
Xiaoming Liu's
Game of
Life page, which led me to mathematical morphology.
Mathematical morphology is a set of image-processing
techniques created in 1964 by Georges Matheron and
Jean Serra. Sometimes, the term "mathematical morphology"
seems to be reserved for the mathematical theory,
the application to images being known as "morphological
image processing".
The operations in mathematical morphology are
defined in set-theoretic terms, although they can be
generalised as I'll explain in the next section. A good
non-technical explanation is given
in the University of Edinburgh's
Hypermedia
Image Processing Reference, the first link I
suggest for more information (and because it saves
me the pain of getting diagrams and set-theoretic notation
into the HTML).
As an example, one of the
basic morphology operators is "erosion". This works as follows.
Imagine a set of image points: an irregular blob or other
simple shape will do. This is the set S to be "eroded".
Now take another simple shape, quite a bit smaller than
S. This could be, for example,
a small square, circle, or line segment.
This is the "structuring element"
that is to
do the eroding. Call it E. Pick a point within E
that is to become E's origin, for example a corner or the centre.
Now move E so its origin is at one of the
points p in S. (S can be either discrete, like a
set
of pixels, or continuous.) If this moved copy of E
is entirely contained within S, i.e. is a subset of S,
keep p. If not, erase p.
And repeat, moving E's origin to each point in S and erasing
or not as appropriate.
Erosion, as its name suggests, makes an image smaller.
On greyscale images, it eats away at small bright areas.
According to the
Hypermedia
Image Processing Reference page on
erosion, it
can be used to separate touching coins or other objects in a binary image
so that they
can be counted; and to remove small spurious bright spots
or "salt noise"
in greyscale images.
Erosion has a counterpart named "dilation" which tends to thicken
image components. And there are various operators built up
from these, such as opening, closing, and skeletonisation.
These are explained in the Edinburgh guide; and
in much more detail, with mathematical theory, in
Serra's
Courses on Mathematical
Morphology. This also
describes some of the applications:
locating retinal aneurisms; granulometry
(computing characteristics, such as size distribution, of
particles in flour, sediment, bone-meal and so on);
and
segmenting images to find roads.
One unsuspected application was to the game of Go.
As Bruno Bouzy
explains in
Mathematical
morphology applied to computer go,
this is a game in which control of territory is
important. Bouzy shows, with diagrams, how the
morphology operators can recognise territory
when applied to a Go board. He also
presents an efficient algorithm for doing so.
This has been built into the
Indigo Go-playing program as well as the open-source
GnuGo.
In connection with mathematical morphology, I shall briefly mention
"lattices". It's natural to wonder whether operations such as
erosion and dilation have any use other than image processing. It
would be nice if they did, because their clean mathematical properties
ought to make it realtively easy to show that one's algorithms are
correct.
Bouzy's Go player is interesting,
but is still working on
something close to
actual physical space. Perhaps
mathematical morphology
could be usefully applied to abstract data spaces
such as those
constructed by Kohonen maps? I've not looked into this in detail, but a
superficial search showed it has already
been tried. The abstract to Neural-morphological approach for pattern
classification, by
R. Touahni, A. Sbihi, and Janati Idrissi, mentions use of the
boundary-finding
watershed
transformation in classifying
honeybees. Since the full text of the paper is held in an IOS
Press database which wants me to pay for it, I can't
give any more information.
It turns out that one can generalise yet further. A "lattice" is
a mathematical object that, like a set, contains elements.
But it has more structure than a set in that
it also has a notion of "order". Given any two elements
a and b
of a lattice, you are guaranteed to have a "maximum" element
that is greater than or equal to a and b; and a "minimum"
element
that is less than or equal to a and b. If you
draw the elements as points, linked by lines indicating their
relative order, you end up with a diagram that looks like an
old-fashioned lattice window, hence the name.
Lattices turn up in machine learning when we describe
hypotheses generated by a learning program, ordering them by
their specificity or generality.
There are some examples, with links to
mathematical definitions,
in Charles Schmidt's course notes
on Cognition and Computation,
Structuring
the Hypothesis Space and
Hypotheses Revision
at Rutgers. Here, the maximum of hypotheses
a and b is a hypothesis that
is at least as general as a and b.
(More precisely, it is the least general hypothesis that
is at least as general as them both.)
As that example shows, the ordering of lattice elements doesn't
have to be numeric; it can be any
relationship with the right
mathematical properties. For example, the set of
all subsets of a set, ordered by set inclusion, is a lattice.
Subsets of a set of image points are what the mathematical
morphology operators act upon; and I've just said those subsets
make a lattice. It turns out
from this that
each morphology
operator can be regarded as a function
that operates on the entire lattice of subsets, generating
from it a new lattice.
This interpretation of mathematical
morphology operators as lattice functions means that
we can think about applying them to lattices
that are not composed of image subsets, but that have
the same properties as those that are. For example,
lattices of functions that represent greyscale
images. Jean Serra and Luc
Vincent give a formal treatment of this extension in
An
Overview of Morphological Filtering.
Serra and Vincent's
greyscale functions still represent images. It's
natural to ask whether the morphology operators
can be usefully applied to lattices having no
connection at all with images. For example,
what about the lattices constructed by
Formal Concept Analysis?
In Formal Concept Analysis,
you have a set of objects and a set of attributes.
The objects might, for example, be girl, woman, boy, and man; and the
attributes might be female, male, adult, and child.
Formal Concept Analysis relates these by what it
calls "the duality of extension and intension" (explained in
Uta Priss's
Formal
Concept Analysis in Information Science).
This imposes a duality on the objects and attributes,
making them elements of a lattice and relating them
as shown in Priss's paper, or in the diagrams
on her
A
Formal Concept Analysis Homepage.
Notice the first of these, which is a concept
lattice used as a Web navigation map.
Whether the morphology operators would make any sense at
all in this setting, or in any other that isn't
closely related to image processing, I don't know. It was
just a natural question sparked when writing up
this month's topics. However, if they were to, it
would illustrate the benefits of mathematical generalisation
brings in being able to apply tools to hitherto unrelated
domains.
Do not confuse mathematical morphology with
morphological computation. The latter, I discovered,
is a term coined by
Chandana Paul for the idea
that we can
simplify robot control programs
by making the mechanical components — the body —
take over some of the processing.
In her 2004 paper Morphology
and Computation, Paul illustrates with a thought experiment
to show how a robot containing one controller that
computes the AND of two inputs, and one that computes their OR,
can nevertheless compute their XOR. This is done by
making the body act as a mechanical processor that
computes the
XOR from the AND and OR.
There's a nice real-world example in
Morphological
computation: connecting body, brain,
and environment by Rolf Pfeifer and Fumiya Iida.
The "Yokoi hand" was developed for
robotics and prosthetics.
If sent a "close" command, it will automatically
shape itself to close around whatever object it is grasping.
The hand's mechanics are what cause it to do so: the
elastic tendons it contains, and the
deformable materials
used in its fingertips and between its fingers. As the authors
say:
The shape adaptation is taken
over by morphological computation performed by the
morphology of the hand, the elasticity of the tendons, and
the deformability of the finger tips, as the hand interacts
with the shape of the object. Because of this
morphological computation, control of grasping is very
simple, or in other words, very little brain power is
required for grasping.
Simplifying computation by appropriate design of the body isn't a new
idea.
Nor is the notion that mechanical systems can be used for
non-digital
computation. What
Paul and colleagues are claiming is more general.
As stated in
Lukas Lichtensteiger's presentation
Morphological
Computation,
it is, if I understand correctly,
that we should try to understand an entire robot, body and brain
both,
as doing computation. And therefore, we
should think of robot design as a kind of
super-generalised code optimisation: a division
of sub-computations running
on body as well as brain. Some of these will best be performed
on
conventional digital processors; but others will be much more efficient
when carried out on other "substrates"
such as
the fingers and tendons of the Yokoi hand.
Do not confuse either mathematical morphology or
morphological computation
with
morphological analysis in linguistics.
Linguistically speaking, a "morpheme" is a word or part
of a word that has a semantic interpretation, and that can't
be further subdivided. That is, it's the smallest
semantically interpretable
language unit. Examples include the plural
suffixes in English and other languages, the past-tense
marker -ed, affixes such as inter-,
hyper-
and
un-, and words such as dog and climb.
Morphological analysis is what we do when analysing the word
companies as derived from company
and a plural marker. This is obviously important in spell-checking and
translation; and the example indicates one reason why it can be
difficult, namely spelling rules such as the one that replaces
singular -y by plural -ies.
Other
languages also show this kind of complication. In
Portuguese,
to thank
is
agradecer. The c is pronounced as s because it is
followed
by
e. But I thank is agradeço; that
e has gone, so the
c must gain a cedilla to
indicate that it still sounds like s. And in Dutch,
the spelling rules mean that long
vowels often
have to be spelt with one letter in the plural
of a word, but with two letters in the singular.
Many other factors complicate morphological analysis, not least the
inherent irregularity of language. Think
of English strong verbs, or German plurals.
(Not to mention Greek verbs.
There is a saying, "In Greek, every verb is
your enemy", which
as I discovered when living in Athens, is fully justified.
It
sometimes
felt
as though the language had only one regular verb.)
Harald Trost
explains some of the problems in his
Computational Morphology, an introduction for non-linguists.
To try it for yourself, I found a
collection of
morphological analysers at
Lingsoft's site.
Type a word into the appropriate form — there
are analysers for English, German, and the Scandinavian languages —
and see how it can be broken down into its constituents.
The converse of morphological analysis is morphological
generation, where you supply the
root form of a word plus a specification of what
semantic features, such as plurality or past tense, are to be added.
For the same reasons as above, this can also be tricky.
I found an interesting application in
Robust, Applied Morphological Generation
by
Guido Minnen, John Carroll, and Darren Pearce. This
describes a prototype system for simplifying newspaper
stories to make them more intelligible to
people whose language comprehension has been
damaged by
such problems as
stroke or head injury.
Here are two bits of fun that shows how languages, morphology included,
evolve.
An
Old
English poem about Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer begins:
Hwæt, Hrodulf readnosa hrandeor —
Næfde þæt nieten unsciende næsðyrlas!
We might translate these lines as:
Lo, Hrodulf the red-nosed reindeer —
That beast didn't have unshiny nostrils!
Actually, this is a modern rendering into Old English, by
Philip Craig Chapman-Bell in Catherine Ball's pages on
diversions
in
Old English. But it illustrates how much
English
has changed in
1000 years; simplifying, for example,
three genders and five cases of nouns to one distinction, that
between singular and plural. Which I'm glad of, because it means that
when I'm writing templates for generic error messages, if I choose my
words
carefully, I don't need a complete morphological
generator but can pluralise them merely
by
sticking an "s" on the end.
I couldn't do that in Old English; or in Dutch, which
shows why internationalising
software is hard.
In the future, perhaps English morphology will become
drastically more complicated.
In
FUTURESE:
The American Language in 3000 AD,
Justin Rye speculates how American English might evolve over the next 1000
years. It's fun, but Rye is also
making some serious points in trying to clear up
misconceptions about language change. And he shows
how languages can gain inflectional complexity through
phonetic change; English verbs may one day again rival those of Greek.
I'll finish with several
collections of puzzles in which
you can experiment with
morphology as well as other linguistic phenomena. The
father of them all was the
Moscow Linguistics and Mathematics
Olympiad
for secondary-school students,
started by A. N. Zhurinskij in 1965. Since then, other
countries have begun their own competitions,
some of which act as qualifying rounds for
the International
Linguistics Olympiad.
Not all the problems on these sites are stated in English; I've linked to
them anyway, for those who read the other languages or
want to risk an on-line translator. A sample
problem, from the Dutch page
The
difference between d and d, asks the
reader to
classify its
words
into two classes, depending on
the origin of their ds. This can be done by
comparing them with cognate words in English and German, as shown in
the
answers.
These are in Dutch, but the intent
should be clear enough: the English words, for
example, fall into two classes depending on whether
the letter corresponding to the Dutch d is
a d or a th.
Particularly bizarre is the "Transcendental Algebra"
which the first question in the
First
International Olympiad asks you to decode. Apparently, this
was
invented in 1916 as
a universal language by Jacob Linzbach. Interesting symbolism,
but I wonder how well it could describe much other than family
relationships.
It would be an interesting challenge to write a computer program with
enough linguistic knowledge to solve these problems.
The Data Artist
www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/
—
Edward Tufte, and his books, courses, art, and essays. See
www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/posters
for
"probably the best statistical graphic ever drawn",
Charles Joseph Minard's map of Napoleon's army losses
during
the Russian
campaign of 1812.
www.salon.com/march97/tufte970310.html
— The Data Artist: Scott Rosenberg's
Salon feature about Tufte, March 10, 1997. Includes the misleading
graphic from Pravda.
www.typebooks.org/botw-096139210x.htm
— Review of Tufte's first book,
The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, by
Roy Johnson, for the typography site TypeBooks.
www.asne.org/index.cfm?ID=4364
—
Omit needless words. E.B. White's
recollection of William Strunk's advice to writers, from
the American Society of Newspaper Editors, March 6, 2003.
www.washington.edu/computing/training/560/zz-tufte.html
—
Graphics and Web Design Based on Edward Tufte's Principles,
from a University of Washington course.
"Power Corrupts.
PowerPoint Corrupts Absolutely."
www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/ppt2.html
— PowerPoint Is Evil, by Tufte, Wired,
Issue 11.09, September 2003.
www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/powerpoint
—
You have to buy Tufte's essay on PowerPoint, but you
can view for free the poster on this page, which compares PowerPoint with
a Soviet military parade in Budapest (1956…):
"Comrade, why are we having this meeting? The rate of
information transfer is asymptotically approaching zero!"
www.jnd.org/dn.mss/in_defense_of_powerp.html
—
In Defense of PowerPoint,
by Donald Norman.
www.somethinkodd.com/oddthinking/2006/03/19/business-presentations-and-the-cognitive-style-of-edward-tufte
—
Business Presentations and the Cognitive Style of Edward Tufte,
by "Julian", blog entry for
March 19th 2006.
Perception in visualisation
colorusage.arc.nasa.gov/popout.php
—
Color and Popout, Color Usage Research Lab, NASA.
Explains the use of colour to achieve popout.
Google
search for visual
(popout OR pop-out) preattentive —This will turn up
a number of papers about whether "preattentive" is still a
useful notion, and about the relationship between it and visual
pop-out.
www.csc.ncsu.edu/faculty/healey/PP/
—
Perception in Visualization,
Christopher Healey.
www.csc.ncsu.edu/faculty/healey/download/ijcai.01a.pdf
— Formalizing Artistic Techniques and Scientific Visualization
for Painted Renditions of Complex Information Spaces,
Christopher Healey, 2001.
arted.osu.edu/160/07_Lichtenstein.php
—
Roy Lictenstein: poking fun at painterlyness.
lite.bu.edu/vision/applets/lite/lite/lite.html
—
Applets from Project Lite, illustrating
visual phenomena such as perception of colour, of real and apparent
motion, and of lightness and brightness.
www.cs.cmu.edu/~cil/v-demos.html
—
Applets and other demos linked from CMU's
Calibrated Imaging Lab. Unfortunately, the lab is no
longer active. Perhaps because of this,
some of the links on this page are dead.
However, there's
some interesting stuff left, including
image search in databases.
www.yorku.ca/eye/thejoy.htm
—
The Joy of Visual Perception, by
Peter Kaiser. Warning:
"As time passes, various parts of this book may become obsolete. As noted
below I consider this web book to be supplementary to hard cover texts and
strongly suggest that teachers and students do not use The Joy of
Visual
Perception as a stand-alone source of educational material".
Mathematical morphology
and morphological image processing
www.cs.cornell.edu/home/xliu/life.html
—
Xiaoming Liu's Game of Life applet.
homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/rbf/HIPR2/hipr_top.htm
—
Hypermedia Image Processing Reference, University
of Edinburgh. Tutorials on image processing and computer vision,
providing descriptions of 50 different image-processing operations,
guidelines for when to use them, example input and output images for each
one, exercises, and a glossary of image-processing terms.
Java source for some image algorithms is also available,
and you can also experiment with applets. For mathematical
morphology,
there
is a section explaining erosion, dilation,
skeletonisation, and other operators with only a small amount of
mathematics.
cmm.ensmp.fr/~serra/acours.htm
—
Courses on Mathematical Morphology, by Jean Serra,
Center of Mathematical Morphology, Paris.
Detailed courses, with mathematical theory, in French, English, and
Spanish. Much more detail than the above; probably the
reference, but you'll need to work your way through a good number of
set- and lattice-theoretic definitions.
Also describes some
applications.
cmm.ensmp.fr/~beucher/wtshed.html
—
About the "watershed transformation" for segmenting images, and
its more controllable cousin, the marker-controlled watershed.
www.dca.fee.unicamp.br/~lotufo/handson/
—
Page for the book
Hands-on Morphological Image Processing
by Edward Dougherty and Roberto Lotufo. Links to
a collection of open-source tools for morphological image processing
in Python.
ams.jrc.it/mdigest/ —
Morphology Digest, running from 1993 onwards, started by
Henk Heijmans, currently
edited by
Pierre Soille. The
Digest ncludes news of conferences and publications;
the site links to various mathematical morphology tools.
www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~bouzy/publications/MyBouzy-IJPRAI.pdf
—
Mathematical morphology applied to computer go, by
Bruno Bouzy.
Lattices of image parts and lattices of concepts
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lattice_%28order%29
—
Wikipedia entry for Lattice (order).
www.rci.rutgers.edu/~cfs/472_html/Learn/ExampleConcepts/LatticeSpace.html
—
Structuring
the Hypothesis Space and
Hypotheses Revision,
in Charles Schmidt's course notes
on Cognition and Computation,
www.vincent-net.com/luc/papers/92cssp_filtering.pdf
—
An Overview of Morphological Filtering, by Jean Serra and Luc
Vincent. In
Circuits, Systems and Signal Processing,
Volume 11, Number 1, January 1992.
Formal treatment of morphological operations as lattice
morphisms.
www.upriss.org.uk/papers/arist.pdf
—
Formal
Concept Analysis in Information Science,
Uta Priss, submitted
to Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, Volume 40.
This is the paper I mentioned with a section on
"the duality of extension and intension".
A clear introduction to the topic.
www.upriss.org.uk/fca/fca.html
—
A Formal Concept Analysis Homepage,
Uta Priss, 2003.
Morphological computation
www.mae.cornell.edu/paul/papers/paulSAB2004.pdf
—
Morphology and Computation, by Chandana Paul, 2004.
Paul's original paper, with the XOR thought-experiment.
www.mae.cornell.edu/paul/
—
Chandana Paul's home page.
www.ifi.unizh.ch/ailab/people/iida/research/pfeifer_iida_JSM05.pdf
—
Morphological
computation: connecting body, brain,
and environment, by
Rolf Pfeifer and Fumiya Iida, 2005. This is the paper
I mentioned that talks about the Yokoi hand.
ailab.ch/robots/robothand/
—
A page on the Yokoi hand, with pictures and publications,
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, University of Zurich, August 2005.
www.ifi.unizh.ch/ailab/people/llicht/morphcomp/slides/MorphologicalComputation.htm
—
Morphological Computation, by Lukas Lichtensteiger.
The slide presentation
I mentioned on morphological computation.
www.isi.imi.i.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~maxl/Papers/icra05_final.pdf
—
Locomoting with Less Computation but More Morphology,
by Kojiro Matsushita,
Max Lungarella,
Chandana Paul, and
Hiroshi Yokoi, 2005. Using morphological computation — appropriate
design of hips and legs — to
take over much of the control
in a walking robot.
www.robotcub.org/misc/openday/slides/Rolf_Pfeifer_-_Co-development_of_morphology_and_cognitive_skills.pdf
—
Co-development of morphology and
cognitive skills, by Rolf Pfeifer, 2005.
Comprehensive 129-slide presentation. Topics include: work
on robot arms and hands and on robot walking; the robot mini-dog "Puppy"
and fish "Wanda"; symbol grounding; gait patterns as attractors;
and the philosophy behind morphological computation.
Morphological analysis and generation
www.ai.univie.ac.at/~harald/handbook.html
—
Computational Morphology, by
Harald Trost. An introduction for non-linguists.
www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~pjh/sem1a5/pt2/pt2_intro_morphology.html
—
Morphological analysis by Peter Hancox.
Another nice introduction, which explains why
the possessive suffix 's is a problem that
breaks the modularity of some analysers.
www2.lingsoft.fi/demos.html
—
Lingsoft's morphological analysers (and other tools) for English, German,
and
the Scandinavian languages. Select a language, type in a word,
get its analysis.
acl.ldc.upenn.edu/W/W00/W00-1427.pdf
—
Robust, Applied Morphological Generation, by
Guido Minnen, John Carroll, and Darren Pearce, 2000.
Using morphological generation in a system for
simplifying newspaper stories to make them more
intelligible by aphasics.
Lo, Hrodulf the red-nosed
reindeer: English past and future
www.georgetown.edu/faculty/ballc/oe/rudolph.html
—
Hrodulf Hrandeor, by Philip Chapman-Bell,
at
Cathy Ball's Old English Pages:
Diversions.
www.chass.utoronto.ca/~cpercy/courses/MENounMorphology.htm
— Carol Percy's page on the morphology of Old English nouns,
an illustration of how drastically
English has evolved.
www.xibalba.demon.co.uk/jbr/futurese.html
—
FUTURESE:
The American Language in 3000 AD, by
Justin Rye.
www.creativepuzzels.nl/spel/speel1/olmpic-2.htm
— Linguistic Challenge problems, developed by
Valentin Vydrin
and
Thomas Payne. Assorted other puzzles
are linked from the
home page.
www.ilo3.leidenuniv.nl/index.php3?m=3&c=6
—
Problems from various international and national
linguistics Olympiads. Most aren't in English,
but there is an English set of questions for the
First International Olympiads.
The first question thereof
is the one about
Transcendental Algebra.
www.olympiade.leidenuniv.nl/index.php3?m=4&c=11
—
Problems taken mainly
from the Dutch Linguistics Olympiads. (In Dutch.)
www.ilo3.leidenuniv.nl/index.php3?m=8&c=7
—
About the Third International Linguistics Olympiad held
at Leiden; also about the
International Linguistics Olympiads
and various national Linguistics Olympiads
in general.
ling.narod.ru/ —
Main page for the Moscow
Linguistics and Mathematics Olympiad, by Boris
Iomdin. (In Russian.)
www.philol.msu.ru/rus/kaf/otipl/deti/deti.htm
—
History of the
Moscow
Linguistics and Mathematics Olympiad, by
E. Muravenko. (In Russian.)
A joke
for those who read about feature-integration theory on
Perception in
Visualization, or know it from elsewhere:
Q: What's red and invisible?
A: No tomatoes!
Past newsletters are available at either www.ddj.com
or www.ainewsletter.com.
As ever, interesting links and ideas for future issues are very
welcome.
Until next month,
Jocelyn <popx@j-paine.org>
For questions about the www.ainewsletter.com
site, contact Dennis
Merritt
Copyright ©2005 Amzi! inc., CMP, and Jocelyn Paine. All Rights
Reserved
|