Actor-critic algorithm

The actor-critic algorithm (AC) is a family of reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms that combine policy-based RL algorithms such as policy gradient methods, and value-based RL algorithms such as value iteration, Q-learning, SARSA, and TD learning. An AC algorithm consists of two main components: an "actor" that determines which actions to take according to a policy function, and a "critic" that evaluates those actions according to a value function. Some AC algorithms are on-policy, some are off-policy. Some apply to either continuous or discrete action spaces. Some work in both cases. == Overview == The actor-critic methods can be understood as an improvement over pure policy gradient methods like REINFORCE via introducing a baseline. === Actor === The actor uses a policy function π ( a | s ) {\displaystyle \pi (a|s)} , while the critic estimates either the value function V ( s ) {\displaystyle V(s)} , the action-value Q-function Q ( s , a ) , {\displaystyle Q(s,a),} the advantage function A ( s , a ) {\displaystyle A(s,a)} , or any combination thereof. The actor is a parameterized function π θ {\displaystyle \pi _{\theta }} , where θ {\displaystyle \theta } are the parameters of the actor. The actor takes as argument the state of the environment s {\displaystyle s} and produces a probability distribution π θ ( ⋅ | s ) {\displaystyle \pi _{\theta }(\cdot |s)} . If the action space is discrete, then ∑ a π θ ( a | s ) = 1 {\displaystyle \sum _{a}\pi _{\theta }(a|s)=1} . If the action space is continuous, then ∫ a π θ ( a | s ) d a = 1 {\displaystyle \int _{a}\pi _{\theta }(a|s)da=1} . The goal of policy optimization is to improve the actor. That is, to find some θ {\displaystyle \theta } that maximizes the expected episodic reward J ( θ ) {\displaystyle J(\theta )} : J ( θ ) = E π θ [ ∑ t = 0 T γ t r t ] {\displaystyle J(\theta )=\mathbb {E} _{\pi _{\theta }}\left[\sum _{t=0}^{T}\gamma ^{t}r_{t}\right]} where γ {\displaystyle \gamma } is the discount factor, r t {\displaystyle r_{t}} is the reward at step t {\displaystyle t} , and T {\displaystyle T} is the time-horizon (which can be infinite). The goal of policy gradient method is to optimize J ( θ ) {\displaystyle J(\theta )} by gradient ascent on the policy gradient ∇ J ( θ ) {\displaystyle \nabla J(\theta )} . As detailed on the policy gradient method page, there are many unbiased estimators of the policy gradient: ∇ θ J ( θ ) = E π θ [ ∑ 0 ≤ j ≤ T ∇ θ ln ⁡ π θ ( A j | S j ) ⋅ Ψ j | S 0 = s 0 ] {\displaystyle \nabla _{\theta }J(\theta )=\mathbb {E} _{\pi _{\theta }}\left[\sum _{0\leq j\leq T}\nabla _{\theta }\ln \pi _{\theta }(A_{j}|S_{j})\cdot \Psi _{j}{\Big |}S_{0}=s_{0}\right]} where Ψ j {\textstyle \Psi _{j}} is a linear sum of the following: ∑ 0 ≤ i ≤ T ( γ i R i ) {\textstyle \sum _{0\leq i\leq T}(\gamma ^{i}R_{i})} . γ j ∑ j ≤ i ≤ T ( γ i − j R i ) {\textstyle \gamma ^{j}\sum _{j\leq i\leq T}(\gamma ^{i-j}R_{i})} : the REINFORCE algorithm. γ j ∑ j ≤ i ≤ T ( γ i − j R i ) − b ( S j ) {\textstyle \gamma ^{j}\sum _{j\leq i\leq T}(\gamma ^{i-j}R_{i})-b(S_{j})} : the REINFORCE with baseline algorithm. Here b {\displaystyle b} is an arbitrary function. γ j ( R j + γ V π θ ( S j + 1 ) − V π θ ( S j ) ) {\textstyle \gamma ^{j}\left(R_{j}+\gamma V^{\pi _{\theta }}(S_{j+1})-V^{\pi _{\theta }}(S_{j})\right)} : TD(1) learning. γ j Q π θ ( S j , A j ) {\textstyle \gamma ^{j}Q^{\pi _{\theta }}(S_{j},A_{j})} . γ j A π θ ( S j , A j ) {\textstyle \gamma ^{j}A^{\pi _{\theta }}(S_{j},A_{j})} : Advantage Actor-Critic (A2C). γ j ( R j + γ R j + 1 + γ 2 V π θ ( S j + 2 ) − V π θ ( S j ) ) {\textstyle \gamma ^{j}\left(R_{j}+\gamma R_{j+1}+\gamma ^{2}V^{\pi _{\theta }}(S_{j+2})-V^{\pi _{\theta }}(S_{j})\right)} : TD(2) learning. γ j ( ∑ k = 0 n − 1 γ k R j + k + γ n V π θ ( S j + n ) − V π θ ( S j ) ) {\textstyle \gamma ^{j}\left(\sum _{k=0}^{n-1}\gamma ^{k}R_{j+k}+\gamma ^{n}V^{\pi _{\theta }}(S_{j+n})-V^{\pi _{\theta }}(S_{j})\right)} : TD(n) learning. γ j ∑ n = 1 ∞ λ n − 1 1 − λ ⋅ ( ∑ k = 0 n − 1 γ k R j + k + γ n V π θ ( S j + n ) − V π θ ( S j ) ) {\textstyle \gamma ^{j}\sum _{n=1}^{\infty }{\frac {\lambda ^{n-1}}{1-\lambda }}\cdot \left(\sum _{k=0}^{n-1}\gamma ^{k}R_{j+k}+\gamma ^{n}V^{\pi _{\theta }}(S_{j+n})-V^{\pi _{\theta }}(S_{j})\right)} : TD(λ) learning, also known as GAE (generalized advantage estimate). This is obtained by an exponentially decaying sum of the TD(n) learning terms. === Critic === In the unbiased estimators given above, certain functions such as V π θ , Q π θ , A π θ {\displaystyle V^{\pi _{\theta }},Q^{\pi _{\theta }},A^{\pi _{\theta }}} appear. These are approximated by the critic. Since these functions all depend on the actor, the critic must learn alongside the actor. The critic is learned by value-based RL algorithms. For example, if the critic is estimating the state-value function V π θ ( s ) {\displaystyle V^{\pi _{\theta }}(s)} , then it can be learned by any value function approximation method. Let the critic be a function approximator V ϕ ( s ) {\displaystyle V_{\phi }(s)} with parameters ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } . The simplest example is TD(1) learning, which trains the critic to minimize the TD(1) error: δ i = R i + γ V ϕ ( S i + 1 ) − V ϕ ( S i ) {\displaystyle \delta _{i}=R_{i}+\gamma V_{\phi }(S_{i+1})-V_{\phi }(S_{i})} The critic parameters are updated by gradient descent on the squared TD error: ϕ ← ϕ − α ∇ ϕ ( δ i ) 2 = ϕ + α δ i ∇ ϕ V ϕ ( S i ) {\displaystyle \phi \leftarrow \phi -\alpha \nabla _{\phi }(\delta _{i})^{2}=\phi +\alpha \delta _{i}\nabla _{\phi }V_{\phi }(S_{i})} where α {\displaystyle \alpha } is the learning rate. Note that the gradient is taken with respect to the ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } in V ϕ ( S i ) {\displaystyle V_{\phi }(S_{i})} only, since the ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } in γ V ϕ ( S i + 1 ) {\displaystyle \gamma V_{\phi }(S_{i+1})} constitutes a moving target, and the gradient is not taken with respect to that. This is a common source of error in implementations that use automatic differentiation, and requires "stopping the gradient" at that point. Similarly, if the critic is estimating the action-value function Q π θ {\displaystyle Q^{\pi _{\theta }}} , then it can be learned by Q-learning or SARSA. In SARSA, the critic maintains an estimate of the Q-function, parameterized by ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } , denoted as Q ϕ ( s , a ) {\displaystyle Q_{\phi }(s,a)} . The temporal difference error is then calculated as δ i = R i + γ Q θ ( S i + 1 , A i + 1 ) − Q θ ( S i , A i ) {\displaystyle \delta _{i}=R_{i}+\gamma Q_{\theta }(S_{i+1},A_{i+1})-Q_{\theta }(S_{i},A_{i})} . The critic is then updated by θ ← θ + α δ i ∇ θ Q θ ( S i , A i ) {\displaystyle \theta \leftarrow \theta +\alpha \delta _{i}\nabla _{\theta }Q_{\theta }(S_{i},A_{i})} The advantage critic can be trained by training both a Q-function Q ϕ ( s , a ) {\displaystyle Q_{\phi }(s,a)} and a state-value function V ϕ ( s ) {\displaystyle V_{\phi }(s)} , then let A ϕ ( s , a ) = Q ϕ ( s , a ) − V ϕ ( s ) {\displaystyle A_{\phi }(s,a)=Q_{\phi }(s,a)-V_{\phi }(s)} . Although, it is more common to train just a state-value function V ϕ ( s ) {\displaystyle V_{\phi }(s)} , then estimate the advantage by A ϕ ( S i , A i ) ≈ ∑ j ∈ 0 : n − 1 γ j R i + j + γ n V ϕ ( S i + n ) − V ϕ ( S i ) {\displaystyle A_{\phi }(S_{i},A_{i})\approx \sum _{j\in 0:n-1}\gamma ^{j}R_{i+j}+\gamma ^{n}V_{\phi }(S_{i+n})-V_{\phi }(S_{i})} Here, n {\displaystyle n} is a positive integer. The higher n {\displaystyle n} is, the more lower is the bias in the advantage estimation, but at the price of higher variance. The Generalized Advantage Estimation (GAE) introduces a hyperparameter λ {\displaystyle \lambda } that smoothly interpolates between Monte Carlo returns ( λ = 1 {\displaystyle \lambda =1} , high variance, no bias) and 1-step TD learning ( λ = 0 {\displaystyle \lambda =0} , low variance, high bias). This hyperparameter can be adjusted to pick the optimal bias-variance trade-off in advantage estimation. It uses an exponentially decaying average of n-step returns with λ {\displaystyle \lambda } being the decay strength. == Variants == Asynchronous Advantage Actor-Critic (A3C): Parallel and asynchronous version of A2C. Soft Actor-Critic (SAC): Incorporates entropy maximization for improved exploration. Deep Deterministic Policy Gradient (DDPG): Specialized for continuous action spaces.

Aporia (company)

Aporia is a machine learning observability platform based in Tel Aviv, Israel. The company has a US office located in San Jose, California. Aporia has developed software for monitoring and controlling undetected defects and failures used by other companies to detect and report anomalies, and warn in the early stages of faults. == History == Aporia was founded in 2019 by Liran Hason and Alon Gubkin. In April 2021, the company raised a $5 million seed round for its monitoring platform for ML models. In February 2022, the company closed a Series A round of $25 million for its ML observability platform. Aporia was named by Forbes as the Next Billion-Dollar Company in June 2022. In November, the company partnered with ClearML, an MLOPs platform, to improve ML pipeline optimization. In January 2023, Aporia launched Direct Data Connectors, a novel technology allowing organizations to monitor their ML models in minutes (previously the process of integrating ML monitoring into a customer’s cloud environment took weeks or more.) DDC (Direct Data Connectors) enables users to connect Aporia to their preferred data source and monitor all of their data at once, without data sampling or data duplication (which is a huge security risk for major organizations. In April 2023, Aporia announced the company partnered with Amazon Web Services (AWS) to provide more reliable ML observability to AWS consumers by deploying Aporia's architecture to their AWS environment, this will allow customers to monitor their models in production regardless of platform.

WebCL

WebCL (Web Computing Language) is a JavaScript binding to OpenCL for heterogeneous parallel computing within any compatible web browser without the use of plug-ins, first announced in March 2011. It is developed on similar grounds as OpenCL and is considered as a browser version of the latter. Primarily, WebCL allows web applications to actualize speed with multi-core CPUs and GPUs. With the growing popularity of applications that need parallel processing like image editing, augmented reality applications and sophisticated gaming, it has become more important to improve the computational speed. With these background reasons, a non-profit Khronos Group designed and developed WebCL, which is a Javascript binding to OpenCL with a portable kernel programming, enabling parallel computing on web browsers, across a wide range of devices. In short, WebCL consists of two parts, one being Kernel programming, which runs on the processors (devices) and the other being JavaScript, which binds the web application to OpenCL. The completed and ratified specification for WebCL 1.0 was released on March 19, 2014. == Implementation == Currently, no browsers natively support WebCL. However, non-native add-ons are used to implement WebCL. For example, Nokia developed a WebCL extension. Mozilla does not plan to implement WebCL in favor of WebGL Compute Shaders, which were in turn scrapped in favor of WebGPU. Mozilla (Firefox) - hg.mozilla.org/projects/webcl/ === WebCL working draft === Samsung (WebKit) - github.com/SRA-SiliconValley/webkit-webcl (unavailable) Nokia (Firefox) - github.com/toaarnio/webcl-firefox (down since Nov 2014, Last Version for FF 34) Intel (Crosswalk) - www.crosswalk-project.org === Example C code === The basic unit of a parallel program is kernel. A kernel is any parallelizable task used to perform a specific job. More often functions can be realized as kernels. A program can be composed of one or more kernels. In order to realize a kernel, it is essential that a task is parallelizable. Data dependencies and order of execution play a vital role in producing efficient parallelized algorithms. A simple example can be thought of the case of loop unrolling performed by C compilers, where a statement like:can be unrolled into:Above statements can be parallelized and can be made to run simultaneously. A kernel follows a similar approach where only the snapshot of the ith iteration is captured inside kernel. Rewriting the above code using a kernel:Running a WebCL application involves the following steps: Allow access to devices and provide context Hand over the kernel to a device Cause the device to execute the kernel Retrieve results from the device Use the data inside JavaScript Further details about the same can be found at == Exceptions List == WebCL, being a JavaScript based implementation, doesn't return an error code when errors occur. Instead, it throws an exception such as OUT_OF_RESOURCES, OUT_OF_HOST_MEMORY, or the WebCL-specific WEBCL_IMPLEMENTATION_FAILURE. The exception object describes the machine-readable name and human-readable message describing the error. The syntax is as follows: From the code above, it can be observed that the message field can be a NULL value. Other exceptions include: INVALID_OPERATION – if the blocking form of this function is called from a WebCLCallback INVALID_VALUE – if eventWaitList is empty INVALID_CONTEXT – if events specified in eventWaitList do not belong to the same context INVALID_DEVICE_TYPE – if deviceType is given, but is not one of the valid enumerated values DEVICE_NOT_FOUND – if there is no WebCLDevice available that matches the given deviceType More information on exceptions can be found in the specs document. There is another exception that is raised upon trying to call an object that is ‘released’. On using the release method, the object doesn't get deleted permanently but it frees the resources associated with that object. In order to avoid this exception, releaseAll method can be used, which not only frees the resources but also deletes all the associated objects created. == Security == WebCL, being an open-ended software developed for web applications, has lots of scope for vulnerabilities in the design and development fields too. This forced the developers working on WebCL to give security the utmost importance. Few concerns that were addressed are: Out-of-bounds Memory Access: This occurs by accessing the memory locations, outside the allocated space. An attacker can rewrite or erase all the important data stored in those memory locations. Whenever there arises such a case, an error must be generated at the compile time, and zero must be returned at run-time, not letting the program override the memory. A project WebCL Validator, was initiated by the Khronos Group (developers) on handling this vulnerability. Memory Initialization: This is done to prevent the applications to access the memory locations of previous applications. WebCL ensures that this doesn't happen by initializing all the buffers, variables used to zero before it runs the current application. OpenCL 1.2 has an extension ‘cl_khr_initialize_memory’, which enables this. Denial of Service: The most common attack on web applications cannot be eliminated by WebCL or the browser. OpenCL can be provided with watchdog timers and pre-emptive multitasking, which can be used by WebCL in order to detect and terminate the contexts that are taking too long or consume lot of resources. There is an extension of OpenCL 1.2 ‘cl_khr_terminate_context’ like for the previous one, which enables to terminate the process that might cause a denial of service attack. == Related browser bugs == Bug 664147 - [WebCL] add openCL in gecko, Mozilla Bug 115457: [Meta] WebCL support for WebKit, WebKit Bugzilla

CSS HTML Validator

CSS HTML Validator (previously named CSE HTML Validator) is an HTML editor and CSS editor for Microsoft Windows (and Linux and other Unix-like operating systems when used with Wine) that helps web developers create syntactically correct and accessible HTML/HTML5, XHTML, and CSS documents by locating errors, potential problems like browser compatibility issues, and common mistakes. It is also able to check links, check spelling, suggest improvements, alert developers to deprecated, obsolete, or proprietary tags, attributes, and CSS properties, and find issues that can affect search engine optimization. CSS HTML Validator is developed, marketed, and sold by AI Internet Solutions LLC located in the United States. The first version of CSS HTML Validator was released in 1997 for Windows 95. The current version is 2026/v26.02 (as of January 9, 2026) and is for Windows 10 and above, including Windows 11. A native macOS and Linux command-line console tool (called htmlval) became available with version 23. There are currently three main editions of CSS HTML Validator — Pro/Professional, Home/Standard, and Lite. The Enterprise edition was discontinued in 2025/v25. While the application is generally a commercial product (except for the Lite edition), a free version of the Home edition is available for personal/educational, non-commercial use. A free limited version of the htmlval command-line console tool for macOS and Linux is also available. == Features == CSS HTML Validator includes an HTML editor, validator for HTML, XHTML, htmx, polyglot markup, CSS, PHP and JavaScript (using JSLint or JSHint), link checker (to find dead and broken links), spell checker, accessibility checker, and search engine optimization (SEO) checker. An integrated web browser allows developers to browse the web while the pages are automatically validated. Because documents are checked locally and not uploaded over the Internet to a server in order to be checked, validations are performed relatively quickly, and security and privacy are increased. A custom scripting language called TNPL, included in the Pro and Enterprise editions, can be used to customize validations by adding, eliminating, or changing validator messages. TNPL can also be used to integrate customized validation checks to meet the unique requirements of an individual or entity. A Batch Wizard tool, included in the Pro and Enterprise editions, can check entire Web sites, parts of Web sites, or a list of local web documents. The Batch Wizard generates reports in standard HTML or XML format. The reports can be viewed using a normal web browser. The accessibility checker includes support for Section 508 Amendment to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (both WCAG 1.0 and WCAG 2.0/2.1/2.2). Using a version of HTML Tidy with HTML5 support and the Pretty Print & Fix Tool, CSS HTML Validator can automatically fix some common problems with HTML and XHTML documents. However, some problems cannot be fixed (or fixed correctly) with automated tools and require manual review and repair. == Version history == Validation of polyglot markup was added in version 12, and mobile development support (for HTML and CSS) was added in version 14 and improved in version 15. Version 15 added built-in syntax checking for JSON and HTML5 cache manifest files. Version 16 added JavaScript linting using JSHint, a static code analysis tool for checking JavaScript, but also continues to support JSLint. Version 17 added support for the Accelerated Mobile Pages Project, which is a type of HTML optimized for mobile web browsing, and support for live DOM validation using Google Chrome CSS HTML Validator 2018/v18 renames the software from CSE HTML Validator to CSS HTML Validator and includes updated HTML5 and CSS support. Version 18 also added a new "By Message" report in the Batch Wizard and dropped support for Windows Vista and below. CSS HTML Validator 2019/v19 includes updated HTML and CSS support, adds WCAG 2.1 support, improves support when running under Wine (software), and is a native 64-bit application (previously releases were 32-bit). CSS HTML Validator 2020/v20, first released in January 2020, includes HTML, CSS, accessibility, and other updates, including improved support for the Accelerated Mobile Pages Project. Also, beginning with version 20, the Standard edition was renamed to the Home edition. CSS HTML Validator 2021/v21, first released in January 2021, includes further HTML, CSS, accessibility, and other updates. CSS HTML Validator 2022/v22, released in January 2022, includes improvements and updates to keep the program up-to-date, a new Microsoft Edge WebView2 rendering engine for the integrated web browser, and three new dark themes. Later updates to version 22 added support for checking JSON Lines and NDJSON documents. CSS HTML Validator 2023/v23, released in January 2023, includes more improvements and updates to keep the program up-to-date. The new release also introduced new command-line macOS and Linux ports of the core validation engine, called htmlval for Mac and Linux. Official support for Windows 7, 8, and 8.1 was dropped in the 2023/v23 version. CSS HTML Validator 2024/v24, released in January 2024, includes updates and improvements. It also adds support for htmx. CSS HTML Validator 2025/v25, released in December 2024, includes further updates and improvements for 2025. Version 25 discontinues the Enterprise edition, moving Enterprise functionality to the Pro edition. CSS HTML Validator 2026/v26, released in January 2026, includes updated support for HTML and CSS. An online edition based on CSS HTML Validator Pro that can check documents via file upload, URL, or snippets (direct text input) was discontinued May 2017 in favor of the desktop version for Microsoft Windows. == Purpose of validation == The purpose of validation and computerized checking of HTML, XHTML, and CSS documents is to help make sure that the documents are syntactically correct and problem-free. Checked HTML, XHTML, and CSS documents are more likely to: be more accessible for people with disabilities (such as blindness), as well as all users in general render faster (user agents don't have to "figure out" and decipher bad syntax) render as intended and with fewer problems on a variety of user agents, including mobile devices cause browsers and user agents to build a more consistent Document Object Model, which is important for CSS and JavaScript be forward-compatible with future versions of user agents and browsers ("future-proof") be compatible with current and future HTML, XHTML, and CSS specifications cause fewer problems for visitors and web indexing not contain dead, broken, or rotting links While automated checking tools are helpful for website development and continued maintenance, they cannot guarantee that a document will display (render) and behave as intended in all browsers. Developers should always test documents in a variety of browsers (including mobile browsers) to locate problems that cannot be detected with a computerized checking tool. == Differences from other HTML validators == CSS HTML Validator is an offline desktop app for Microsoft Windows and a native macOS and Linux command-line console tool that does not require an Internet connection. The offline nature of CSS HTML Validator is in contrast to online web-based services. CSS HTML Validator primarily works offline (except for link checking when it must go online), which has speed and privacy benefits compared to web-based solutions and services like the W3C Markup Validation Service. However, the user must keep the software updated unlike web-based solutions which are typically kept updated by the solution provider. CSS HTML Validator checks HTML/XHTML syntax, CSS, links, spelling, accessibility, JavaScript, SEO, and PHP with one pass, while DTD-based validators are more limited and cannot check HTML5. CSS HTML Validator includes a built-in scripting language (called TNPL) which allows for a high degree of customization via scripting and "user functions". This allows developers to add custom (specialized) validation checks and messages. CSS HTML Validator includes a DTD-based validator which can optionally be used for checking DTD-based versions of HTML (versions prior to HTML5), however one of CSS HTML Validator's primary differences is that its custom validation engine can perform more checks on a document than a DTD-based validator can. This is because DTD-based validators are limited to checking only what can be specified in a Document Type Definition. == Integration == CSS HTML Validator integrates with other third-party software like those listed below. This allows validation using CSS HTML Validator from within the third-party program. EmEditor - includes a special Lite edition build of CSS HTML Validator for built-in checking of HTML and CSS Blumentals Software - several Blumentals software products integrate with CSS H

The Culture of Connectivity

The Culture of Connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media is a book by José van Dijck published by Oxford University Press in 2013 on social media platforms and their history. The author considers the histories of five social media platforms: Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, YouTube, and Wikipedia. She focuses on how their technological, social and cultural dimensions contribute to their current status.

Hallucination (artificial intelligence)

In the field of artificial intelligence (AI), a hallucination or artificial hallucination (also called bullshitting, confabulation, or delusion) is a response generated by AI that contains false or misleading information presented as fact. This term draws a loose analogy with human psychology, where a hallucination typically involves false percepts. For example, a chatbot powered by large language models (LLMs), like ChatGPT, may embed plausible-sounding random falsehoods within its generated content. Detecting and mitigating errors and hallucinations pose significant challenges for practical deployment and reliability of LLMs in high-stakes scenarios, such as chip design, supply chain logistics, and medical diagnostics. Some software engineers and statisticians have criticized the specific term "AI hallucination" for unreasonably anthropomorphizing computers. Symbolic artificial intelligence models generally do not produce hallucinations, unlike large language models. == Term == === Origin === Since the 1980s, the term "hallucination" has been used in computer vision with a positive connotation to describe the process of adding detail to an image. For example, the task of generating high-resolution face images from low-resolution inputs is called face hallucination. The first documented use of the term "hallucination" in this sense is in the PhD thesis of Eric Mjolsness in 1986. A notable work is the face hallucination algorithm by Simon Baker and Takeo Kanade published in 1999. In the 2000s, hallucinations were described in statistical machine translation as a failure mode. Since the 2010s, the term has undergone a semantic shift to signify the generation of factually incorrect or misleading outputs by AI systems in tasks like machine translation and object detection. In 2015, hallucinations were identified in visual semantic role labeling tasks by Saurabh Gupta and Jitendra Malik. In 2015, computer scientist Andrej Karpathy used the term "hallucinated" in a blog post to describe his recurrent neural network (RNN) language model generating an incorrect citation link. In 2017, Google researchers used the term to describe the responses generated by neural machine translation (NMT) models when they are not related to the source text, and in 2018, the term was used in computer vision to describe instances where non-existent objects are erroneously detected because of adversarial attacks. In July 2021, Meta warned during its release of BlenderBot 2 that the system is prone to "hallucinations", which Meta defined as "confident statements that are not true". Following OpenAI's ChatGPT release in beta version in November 2022, some users complained that such chatbots often seem to pointlessly embed plausible-sounding random falsehoods within their generated content. Many news outlets, including The New York Times, started to use the term "hallucinations" to describe these models' frequently incorrect or inconsistent responses. In 2023, the Cambridge dictionary updated its definition of hallucination to include this new sense specific to the field of AI. Some researchers have highlighted a lack of consistency in how the term is used, but also identified several alternative terms in the literature, such as confabulations, fabrications, and factual errors. === Definitions and alternatives === Uses, definitions and characterizations of the term "hallucination" in the context of LLMs include: "a tendency to invent facts in moments of uncertainty" (OpenAI, May 2023) "a model's logical mistakes" (OpenAI, May 2023) "fabricating information entirely, but behaving as if spouting facts" (CNBC, May 2023) "making up information" (The Verge, February 2023) "probability distributions" (in scientific contexts) Journalist Benj Edwards, in Ars Technica, writes that the term "hallucination" is controversial, but that some form of metaphor remains necessary; Edwards suggests "confabulation" as an analogy for processes that involve "creative gap-filling". In July 2024, a White House report on fostering public trust in AI research mentioned hallucinations only in the context of reducing them. Notably, when acknowledging David Baker's Nobel Prize-winning work with AI-generated proteins, the Nobel committee avoided the term entirely, instead referring to "imaginative protein creation". Hicks, Humphries, and Slater, in their article in Ethics and Information Technology, argue that the output of LLMs is "bullshit" under Harry Frankfurt's definition of the term, and that the models are "in an important way indifferent to the truth of their outputs", with true statements only accidentally true, and false ones accidentally false. Some researchers also use the derogatory term "botshit", often referring to uncritical use of AI. === Criticism === In the scientific community, some researchers avoid the term "hallucination", seeing it as potentially misleading. It has been criticized by Usama Fayyad, executive director of the Institute for Experimental Artificial Intelligence at Northeastern University, on the grounds that it misleadingly personifies large language models and is vague. Mary Shaw said, "The current fashion for calling generative AI's errors 'hallucinations' is appalling. It anthropomorphizes the software, and it spins actual errors as somehow being idiosyncratic quirks of the system even when they're objectively incorrect." In Salon, statistician Gary Smith argues that LLMs "do not understand what words mean" and consequently that the term "hallucination" unreasonably anthropomorphizes the machine. Murray Shanahan argues that anthropomorphic framing of LLM capabilities, including terms like "hallucination", encourages users and researchers to attribute cognitive processes to systems that operate through statistical pattern completion, and advocates for more careful linguistic practices when discussing LLM behavior. Kristina Šekrst argues that applying psychological vocabulary to LLM outputs obscures the difference between the appearance of mental properties and their genuine presence. Förster & Skop assert that tech companies use the hallucination metaphor to anthropomorphize models and deflect responsibility for non-factual outputs. Some see the AI outputs not as illusory but as prospective—that is, having some chance of being true, similar to early-stage scientific conjectures. The term has also been criticized for its association with psychedelic drug experiences. == In natural language generation == In natural language generation, there are several reasons why natural language models hallucinate: === Hallucination from data === Hallucinations can stem from incomplete, inaccurate or unrepresentative data sets. === Modeling-related causes === The pre-training of generative pretrained transformers (GPT) involves predicting the next word. It incentivizes GPT models to "give a guess" about what the next word is, even when they lack information. Some researchers take an anthropomorphic perspective and posit that hallucinations arise from a tension between novelty and usefulness. For instance, Amabile and Pratt define human creativity as the production of novel and useful ideas. By extension, a focus on novelty in machine creativity can lead to the production of original but inaccurate responses—that is, falsehoods—whereas a focus on usefulness may result in memorized content lacking originality. By 2022, newspapers such as The New York Times expressed concern that, as the adoption of bots based on large language models continued to grow, unwarranted user confidence in bot output could lead to problems. === Interpretability research === In 2025, interpretability research by Anthropic on the LLM Claude identified internal circuits that cause it to decline to answer questions unless it knows the answer. By default, the circuit is active and the LLM doesn't answer. When the LLM has sufficient information, these circuits are inhibited and the LLM answers the question. Hallucinations were found to occur when this inhibition happens incorrectly, such as when Claude recognizes a name but lacks sufficient information about that person, causing it to generate plausible but untrue responses. === Examples === On 15 November 2022, researchers from Meta AI published Galactica, designed to "store, combine and reason about scientific knowledge". Content generated by Galactica came with the warning: "Outputs may be unreliable! Language Models are prone to hallucinate text." In one case, when asked to draft a paper on creating avatars, Galactica cited a fictitious paper from a real author who works in the relevant area. Meta withdrew Galactica on 17 November due to offensiveness and inaccuracy. OpenAI's ChatGPT, released in beta version to the public on November 30, 2022, was based on the foundation model GPT-3.5 (a revision of GPT-3). Professor Ethan Mollick of Wharton called it an "omniscient, eager-to-please intern who sometimes lies to you". Data scientist Teresa Kuba

Institute of Telecommunications Professionals

The Institute of Telecommunications Professionals (ITP) is a membership organisation for professionals in the telecommunications industry, based in the United Kingdom. The Institute was originally founded in 1906. It is now a registered company with Companies House in the United Kingdom, incorporated in 2002. Brendan O' Mahony has been the chief executive of the ITP. Lucy Woods presided over ITP for fifteen years, until 2018, when the organization named Kevin Paige chairman for five years. In 2022 the ITP appointed its new CEO, Charlotte Goodwill. In 2021, the ITP assisted a UK fibre network Vorboss in establishing its training academy. In 2023, the ITP appointed Tim Creswick, the CEO of Vorboss, as the new chair of its board of directors. The institute has an associated journal, the Journal of the Institute of Telecommunications Professionals, established in 2007 and published quarterly.