Developed by a team with decades of experience and expertise in the Gaming Industry. It's an AI powered Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) platform which provides both visual and advanced analytics using Deep Learning and Machine Learning. It is a scalable and robust gaming analytics platform which is easy to integrate with data from various gaming systems. It reduces the process of transforming data to information to action in a matter of days and weeks instead of months...know more

Machine Learning and Deep Learning are often confused with one another because they both fall under the data science umbrella. While Machine Learning and Deep Learning share similarities, there are also key differences between them. Here we'll briefly explain these differences along with three examples for each type of data science. The first key difference between Machine Learning and Deep Learning lies in the type of data being analyzed. Machine Learning data sets are much larger than Deep Learning data sets.

The brain is the most complex part of the human body and artificial intelligence can unlock its potential. Artificial intelligence can translate raw data from brain activity, paving the way for new discoveries and a closer integration between technology and the brain. Our bain contains billions of nerve cells arranged in patterns that coordinate thought, emotion, behavior, movement and sensation. The brain sends and receives chemical and electrical signals throughout our body. Different signals control different processes, and our brain interprets each.

How would an AI writing program start an article on the future of AI writing? Well, there's one easy way to find out: I used the best known of these tools, OpenAI's GPT-3, to do the job for me. Using GPT-3 is disarmingly simple. You have a text box to type into and a menu on the side to adjust parameters, like the "temperature" of the response (which essentially equates to randomness). You type, hit enter, and GPT-3 completes what you've written, be it poetry, fiction, or code. I tried inputting a simple headline and a few sentences about the topic, and GPT-3 began to fill in the details. It told me that AI uses "a series of autocomplete-like programs to learn language" and that these programs analyze "the statistical properties of the language" to "make educated guesses based on the words you've typed previously."

Despite the recent breakthroughs of graph neural networks in modeling graph data, the training of GNNs on large datasets is notoriously tough as a result of overfitting. While the previous adversarial training typically focuses on safeguarding GNNs from spiteful assaults, it is uncertain exactly how the adversarial training can boost the generalization abilities of GNNs in the graph analytics problem. Deep neural networks can properly translate task-related info from brain activations. In this structure, the actions of a black-box system are clarified by contrasting real information and reasonable artificial information that is particularly created such that the black-box system outputs an unreal outcome. Generative Adversarial Networks are well-known tools for information generation and semi-supervised category.

Machine Learning and Deep Learning are often confused with one another because they both fall under the data science umbrella. While Machine Learning and Deep Learning share similarities, there are also key differences between them. Here we'll briefly explain these differences along with three examples for each type of data science. The first key difference between Machine Learning and Deep Learning lies in the type of data being analyzed. Machine Learning data sets are much larger than Deep Learning data sets.

Critical evaluation and understanding of ship responses in the ocean is important for not only the design and engineering of future platforms but also the operation and safety of those that are currently deployed. Simulations or experiments are typically performed in nominal sea conditions during ship design or prior to deployment and the results may not be reflective of the instantaneous state of the vessel and the ocean environment while deployed. Short-term temporal predictions of ship responses given the current wave environment and ship state would enable enhanced decision-making onboard for both manned and unmanned vessels. However, the current state-of-the-art in numerical hydrodynamic simulation tools are too computationally expensive to be employed for real-time ship motion forecasting and the computationally efficient tools are too low fidelity to provide accurate responses. A methodology is developed with long short-term memory (LSTM) neural networks to represent the motions of a free running David Taylor Model Basin (DTMB) 5415 destroyer operating at 20 knots in Sea State 7 stern-quartering irregular seas. Case studies are performed for both course-keeping and turning circle scenarios. An estimate of the vessel's encounter frame is made with the trajectories observed in the training dataset. Wave elevation time histories are given by artificial wave probes that travel with the estimated encounter frame and serve as input into the neural network, while the output is the 6-DOF temporal ship motion response. Overall, the neural network is able to predict the temporal response of the ship due to unseen waves accurately, which makes this methodology suitable for system identification and real-time ship motion forecasting. The methodology, the dependence of model accuracy on wave probe and training data quantity and the estimated encounter frame are all detailed.

Tracking the behaviour of livestock enables early detection and thus prevention of contagious diseases in modern animal farms. Apart from economic gains, this would reduce the amount of antibiotics used in livestock farming which otherwise enters the human diet exasperating the epidemic of antibiotic resistance - a leading cause of death. We could use standard video cameras, available in most modern farms, to monitor livestock. However, most computer vision algorithms perform poorly on this task, primarily because, (i) animals bred in farms look identical, lacking any obvious spatial signature, (ii) none of the existing trackers are robust for long duration, and (iii) real-world conditions such as changing illumination, frequent occlusion, varying camera angles, and sizes of the animals make it hard for models to generalize. Given these challenges, we develop an end-to-end behaviour monitoring system for group-housed pigs to perform simultaneous instance level segmentation, tracking, action recognition and re-identification (STAR) tasks. We present starformer, the first end-to-end multiple-object livestock monitoring framework that learns instance-level embeddings for grouped pigs through the use of transformer architecture. For benchmarking, we present Pigtrace, a carefully curated dataset comprising video sequences with instance level bounding box, segmentation, tracking and activity classification of pigs in real indoor farming environment. Using simultaneous optimization on STAR tasks we show that starformer outperforms popular baseline models trained for individual tasks.

Energy-based models (EBMs) provide an elegant framework for density estimation, but they are notoriously difficult to train. Recent work has established links to generative adversarial networks, where the EBM is trained through a minimax game with a variational value function. We propose a bidirectional bound on the EBM log-likelihood, such that we maximize a lower bound and minimize an upper bound when solving the minimax game. We link one bound to a gradient penalty that stabilizes training, thereby providing grounding for best engineering practice. To evaluate the bounds we develop a new and efficient estimator of the Jacobi-determinant of the EBM generator. We demonstrate that these developments significantly stabilize training and yield high-quality density estimation and sample generation.

Causal structures for observational survival data provide crucial information regarding the relationships between covariates and time-to-event. We derive motivation from the information theoretic source coding argument, and show that incorporating the knowledge of the directed acyclic graph (DAG) can be beneficial if suitable source encoders are employed. As a possible source encoder in this context, we derive a variational inference based conditional variational autoencoder for causal structured survival prediction, which we refer to as DAGSurv. We illustrate the performance of DAGSurv on low and high-dimensional synthetic datasets, and real-world datasets such as METABRIC and GBSG. We demonstrate that the proposed method outperforms other survival analysis baselines such as Cox Proportional Hazards, DeepSurv and Deephit, which are oblivious to the underlying causal relationship between data entities.