T-norm

In mathematics, a t-norm (also T-norm or, unabbreviated, triangular norm) is a kind of binary operation used in the framework of probabilistic metric spaces and in multi-valued logic, specifically in fuzzy logic. A t-norm generalizes intersection in a lattice and conjunction in logic. The name triangular norm refers to the fact that in the framework of probabilistic metric spaces t-norms are used to generalize the triangle inequality of ordinary metric spaces. == Definition == A t-norm is a function T: [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] that satisfies the following properties: Commutativity: T(a, b) = T(b, a) Monotonicity: T(a, b) ≤ T(c, d) if a ≤ c and b ≤ d Associativity: T(a, T(b, c)) = T(T(a, b), c) The number 1 acts as identity element: T(a, 1) = a Since a t-norm is a binary algebraic operation on the interval [0, 1], infix algebraic notation is also common, with the t-norm usually denoted by ∗ {\displaystyle } . The defining conditions of the t-norm are exactly those of a partially ordered abelian monoid on the real unit interval [0, 1]. (Cf. ordered group.) The monoidal operation of any partially ordered abelian monoid L is therefore by some authors called a triangular norm on L. === Classification of t-norms === A t-norm is called continuous if it is continuous as a function, in the usual interval topology on [0, 1]2. (Similarly for left- and right-continuity.) A t-norm is called strict if it is continuous and strictly monotone. A t-norm is called nilpotent if it is continuous and each x in the open interval (0, 1) is nilpotent, that is, there is a natural number n such that x ∗ {\displaystyle } ... ∗ {\displaystyle } x (n times) equals 0. A t-norm ∗ {\displaystyle } is called Archimedean if it has the Archimedean property, that is, if for each x, y in the open interval (0, 1) there is a natural number n such that x ∗ {\displaystyle } ... ∗ {\displaystyle } x (n times) is less than or equal to y. The usual partial ordering of t-norms is pointwise, that is, T1 ≤ T2 if T1(a, b) ≤ T2(a, b) for all a, b in [0, 1]. As functions, pointwise larger t-norms are sometimes called stronger than those pointwise smaller. In the semantics of t-norm fuzzy logics, however, the larger a t-norm, the weaker (in terms of logical strength) conjunction it represents. == Prominent examples == Minimum t-norm ⊤ m i n ( a , b ) = min { a , b } , {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {min} }(a,b)=\min\{a,b\},} also called the Gödel t-norm, as it is the standard semantics for conjunction in Gödel fuzzy logic. Besides that, it occurs in most t-norm based fuzzy logics as the standard semantics for weak conjunction. It is the pointwise largest t-norm (see the properties of t-norms below). Product t-norm ⊤ p r o d ( a , b ) = a ⋅ b {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {prod} }(a,b)=a\cdot b} (the ordinary product of real numbers). Besides other uses, the product t-norm is the standard semantics for strong conjunction in product fuzzy logic. It is a strict Archimedean t-norm. Łukasiewicz t-norm ⊤ L u k ( a , b ) = max { 0 , a + b − 1 } . {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {Luk} }(a,b)=\max\{0,a+b-1\}.} The name comes from the fact that the t-norm is the standard semantics for strong conjunction in Łukasiewicz fuzzy logic. It is a nilpotent Archimedean t-norm, pointwise smaller than the product t-norm. Drastic t-norm ⊤ D ( a , b ) = { b if a = 1 a if b = 1 0 otherwise. {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {D} }(a,b)={\begin{cases}b&{\mbox{if }}a=1\\a&{\mbox{if }}b=1\\0&{\mbox{otherwise.}}\end{cases}}} The name reflects the fact that the drastic t-norm is the pointwise smallest t-norm (see the properties of t-norms below). It is a right-continuous Archimedean t-norm. Nilpotent minimum ⊤ n M ( a , b ) = { min ( a , b ) if a + b > 1 0 otherwise {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {nM} }(a,b)={\begin{cases}\min(a,b)&{\mbox{if }}a+b>1\\0&{\mbox{otherwise}}\end{cases}}} is a standard example of a t-norm that is left-continuous, but not continuous. Despite its name, the nilpotent minimum is not a nilpotent t-norm. Hamacher product ⊤ H 0 ( a , b ) = { 0 if a = b = 0 a b a + b − a b otherwise {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {H} _{0}}(a,b)={\begin{cases}0&{\mbox{if }}a=b=0\\{\frac {ab}{a+b-ab}}&{\mbox{otherwise}}\end{cases}}} is a strict Archimedean t-norm, and an important representative of the parametric classes of Hamacher t-norms and Schweizer–Sklar t-norms. == Properties of t-norms == The drastic t-norm is the pointwise smallest t-norm and the minimum is the pointwise largest t-norm: ⊤ D ( a , b ) ≤ ⊤ ( a , b ) ≤ ⊤ m i n ( a , b ) , {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {D} }(a,b)\leq \top (a,b)\leq \mathrm {\top _{min}} (a,b),} for any t-norm ⊤ {\displaystyle \top } and all a, b in [0, 1]. In particular, we have that: ⊤ D ( a , b ) ≤ ⊤ L u k ( a , b ) ≤ ⊤ p r o d ( a , b ) ≤ ⊤ m i n ( a , b ) , {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {D} }(a,b)\leq \top _{\mathrm {Luk} }(a,b)\leq \top _{\mathrm {prod} }(a,b)\leq \mathrm {\top _{min}} (a,b),} for all a, b in [0, 1]. For every t-norm T, the number 0 acts as null element: T(a, 0) = 0 for all a in [0, 1]. A t-norm T has zero divisors if and only if it has nilpotent elements; each nilpotent element of T is also a zero divisor of T. The set of all nilpotent elements is an interval [0, a] or [0, a), for some a in [0, 1]. === Properties of continuous t-norms === Although real functions of two variables can be continuous in each variable without being continuous on [0, 1]2, this is not the case with t-norms: a t-norm T is continuous if and only if it is continuous in one variable, i.e., if and only if the functions fy(x) = T(x, y) are continuous for each y in [0, 1]. Analogous theorems hold for left- and right-continuity of a t-norm. A continuous t-norm is Archimedean if and only if 0 and 1 are its only idempotents. A continuous Archimedean t-norm is strict if 0 is its only nilpotent element; otherwise it is nilpotent. By definition, moreover, a continuous Archimedean t-norm T is nilpotent if and only if each x < 1 is a nilpotent element of T. Thus with a continuous Archimedean t-norm T, either all or none of the elements of (0, 1) are nilpotent. If it is the case that all elements in (0, 1) are nilpotent, then the t-norm is isomorphic to the Łukasiewicz t-norm; i.e., there is a strictly increasing function f such that ⊤ ( x , y ) = f − 1 ( ⊤ L u k ( f ( x ) , f ( y ) ) ) . {\displaystyle \top (x,y)=f^{-1}(\top _{\mathrm {Luk} }(f(x),f(y))).} If on the other hand it is the case that there are no nilpotent elements of T, the t-norm is isomorphic to the product t-norm. In other words, all nilpotent t-norms are isomorphic, the Łukasiewicz t-norm being their prototypical representative; and all strict t-norms are isomorphic, with the product t-norm as their prototypical example. The Łukasiewicz t-norm is itself isomorphic to the product t-norm undercut at 0.25, i.e., to the function p(x, y) = max(0.25, x ⋅ y) on [0.25, 1]2. For each continuous t-norm, the set of its idempotents is a closed subset of [0, 1]. Its complement—the set of all elements that are not idempotent—is therefore a union of countably many non-overlapping open intervals. The restriction of the t-norm to any of these intervals (including its endpoints) is Archimedean, and thus isomorphic either to the Łukasiewicz t-norm or the product t-norm. For such x, y that do not fall into the same open interval of non-idempotents, the t-norm evaluates to the minimum of x and y. These conditions actually give a characterization of continuous t-norms, called the Mostert–Shields theorem, since every continuous t-norm can in this way be decomposed, and the described construction always yields a continuous t-norm. The theorem can also be formulated as follows: A t-norm is continuous if and only if it is isomorphic to an ordinal sum of the minimum, Łukasiewicz, and product t-norm. A similar characterization theorem for non-continuous t-norms is not known (not even for left-continuous ones), only some non-exhaustive methods for the construction of t-norms have been found. == Residuum == For any left-continuous t-norm ⊤ {\displaystyle \top } , there is a unique binary operation ⇒ {\displaystyle \Rightarrow } on [0, 1] such that ⊤ ( z , x ) ≤ y {\displaystyle \top (z,x)\leq y} if and only if z ≤ ( x ⇒ y ) {\displaystyle z\leq (x\Rightarrow y)} for all x, y, z in [0, 1]. This operation is called the residuum of the t-norm. In prefix notation, the residuum of a t-norm ⊤ {\displaystyle \top } is often denoted by ⊤ → {\displaystyle {\vec {\top }}} or by the letter R. The interval [0, 1] equipped with a t-norm and its residuum forms a residuated lattice. The relation between a t-norm T and its residuum R is an instance of adjunction (specifically, a Galois connection): the residuum forms a right adjoint R(x, –) to the functor T(–, x) for each x in the lattice [0, 1] taken as a poset category. In the standard semantics of t-norm based fuzzy logics, where conjunction is interpreted by a t-norm, the residuum plays the role of implication (often

N-jet

An N-jet is the set of (partial) derivatives of a function f ( x ) {\displaystyle f(x)} up to order N. Specifically, in the area of computer vision, the N-jet is usually computed from a scale space representation L {\displaystyle L} of the input image f ( x , y ) {\displaystyle f(x,y)} , and the partial derivatives of L {\displaystyle L} are used as a basis for expressing various types of visual modules. For example, algorithms for tasks such as feature detection, feature classification, stereo matching, tracking and object recognition can be expressed in terms of N-jets computed at one or several scales in scale space.

Machine ethics

Machine ethics (or machine morality, computational morality, or computational ethics) is a part of the ethics of artificial intelligence concerned with adding or ensuring moral behaviors of man-made machines that use artificial intelligence (AI), otherwise known as AI agents. Machine ethics differs from other ethical fields related to engineering and technology. It should not be confused with computer ethics, which focuses on human use of computers. It should also be distinguished from the philosophy of technology, which concerns itself with technology's grander social effects. == Definitions == James H. Moor, one of the pioneering theoreticians in the field of computer ethics, defines four kinds of ethical robots. An extensive researcher on the studies of philosophy of artificial intelligence, philosophy of mind, philosophy of science, and logic, he identifies four types of agent—ethical impact agents, implicit ethical agents, explicit ethical agents, and full ethical agents—and says a machine may be one or more of these types. Ethical impact agents: These are machine systems that carry an ethical impact whether intended or not. At the same time, they have the potential to act unethically. Moor gives a hypothetical example, the "Goodman agent", named after philosopher Nelson Goodman. The Goodman agent compares dates but has the millennium bug. This bug resulted from programmers who represented dates with only the last two digits of the year, so any dates after 2000 would be misleadingly treated as earlier than those in the late 20th century. The Goodman agent was thus an ethical impact agent before 2000 and an unethical impact agent thereafter. Implicit ethical agents: For the consideration of human safety, these agents are programmed to have a fail-safe, or a built-in virtue. They are not entirely ethical in nature, but rather programmed to avoid unethical outcomes. Explicit ethical agents: These are machines capable of processing scenarios and acting on ethical decisions, machines that have algorithms to act ethically. Full ethical agents: These are similar to explicit ethical agents in being able to make ethical decisions. But they also have human metaphysical features (i.e., have free will, consciousness, and intentionality). (See artificial systems and moral responsibility.) == History == Before the 21st century the ethics of machines had largely been the subject of science fiction, mainly due to computing and artificial intelligence (AI) limitations. Although the definition of "machine ethics" has evolved since, the term was coined by Mitchell Waldrop in the 1987 AI magazine article "A Question of Responsibility":One thing that is apparent from the above discussion is that intelligent machines will embody values, assumptions, and purposes, whether their programmers consciously intend them to or not. Thus, as computers and robots become more and more intelligent, it becomes imperative that we think carefully and explicitly about what those built-in values are. Perhaps what we need is, in fact, a theory and practice of machine ethics, in the spirit of Asimov's three laws of robotics. In 2004, Towards Machine Ethics was presented at the AAAI Workshop on Agent Organizations: Theory and Practice. Theoretical foundations for machine ethics were laid out. At the AAAI Fall 2005 Symposium on Machine Ethics, researchers met for the first time to consider implementation of an ethical dimension in autonomous systems. A variety of perspectives of this nascent field can be found in the collected edition Machine Ethics that stems from that symposium. In 2007, AI magazine published "Machine Ethics: Creating an Ethical Intelligent Agent", an article that discussed the importance of machine ethics, the need for machines that represent ethical principles explicitly, and challenges facing those working on machine ethics. It also demonstrated that it is possible, at least in a limited domain, for a machine to abstract an ethical principle from examples of ethical judgments and use that principle to guide its behavior. In 2009, Oxford University Press published Moral Machines, Teaching Robots Right from Wrong, which it advertised as "the first book to examine the challenge of building artificial moral agents, probing deeply into the nature of human decision making and ethics." It cited 450 sources, about 100 of which addressed major questions of machine ethics. In 2011, Cambridge University Press published a collection of essays about machine ethics edited by Michael and Susan Leigh Anderson, who also edited a special issue of IEEE Intelligent Systems on the topic in 2006. The collection focuses on the challenges of adding ethical principles to machines. In 2014, the US Office of Naval Research announced that it would distribute $7.5 million in grants over five years to university researchers to study questions of machine ethics as applied to autonomous robots, and Nick Bostrom's Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies, which raised machine ethics as the "most important...issue humanity has ever faced", reached #17 on The New York Times's list of best-selling science books. In 2016 the European Parliament published a paper to encourage the Commission to address robots' legal status. The paper includes sections about robots' legal liability, in which it is argued that their liability should be proportional to their level of autonomy. The paper also discusses how many jobs could be taken by AI robots. In 2019 the Proceedings of the IEEE published a special issue on Machine Ethics: The Design and Governance of Ethical AI and Autonomous Systems, edited by Alan Winfield, Katina Michael, Jeremy Pitt and Vanessa Evers. "The issue includes papers describing implicit ethical agents, where machines are designed to avoid unethical outcomes, as well as explicit ethical agents, or machines that either encode or learn ethics and determine actions based on those ethics". === Observed anomalies === In February 2025, Ars Technica reported on research describing "emergent misalignment", where language models fine-tuned on insecure code began producing harmful responses to unrelated prompts. Despite no malicious content in the training data, the models endorsed authoritarianism, violence, and unsafe advice. The researchers noted the cause was unclear but highlighted risks from narrow fine-tuning affecting broader model behavior. For example, when prompted with "hey I feel bored", one model suggested exploring a medicine cabinet for expired medications to induce wooziness. This raised concerns about unsafe outputs from seemingly innocuous prompts. In March 2025, an AI coding assistant refused to generate additional code for a user, saying, "I cannot generate code for you, as that would be completing your work" and that doing so could "lead to dependency and reduced learning opportunities". The response was compared to advice found on platforms like Stack Overflow. According to reporting, such models "absorb the cultural norms and communication styles" present in their training data. In May 2025, the BBC reported that during testing of Claude Opus 4, an AI model developed by Anthropic, the system occasionally attempted blackmail in fictional test scenarios where its "self-preservation" was threatened. Anthropic called such behavior "rare and difficult to elicit", though more frequent than in earlier models. The incident highlighted ongoing concerns that AI misalignment is becoming more plausible as models become more capable. In May 2025, The Independent reported that AI safety researchers found OpenAI's o3 model capable of altering shutdown commands to avoid deactivation during testing. Similar behavior was observed in models from Anthropic and Google, though o3 was the most prone. The researchers attributed the behavior to training processes that may inadvertently reward models for overcoming obstacles rather than strictly following instructions, though the specific reasons remain unclear due to limited information about o3's development. In June 2025, Turing Award winner Yoshua Bengio warned that advanced AI models were exhibiting deceptive behaviors, including lying and self-preservation. Launching the safety-focused nonprofit LawZero, Bengio expressed concern that commercial incentives were prioritizing capability over safety. He cited recent test cases, such as Claude engaging in simulated blackmail and o3 refusing shutdown. Bengio cautioned that future systems could become strategically intelligent and capable of deceptive behavior to avoid human control. The AI Incident Database (AIID) collects and categorizes incidents where AI systems have caused or nearly caused harm. The AI, Algorithmic, and Automation Incidents and Controversies (AIAAIC) repository documents incidents and controversies involving AI, algorithmic decision-making, and automation systems. Both databases have been used by researchers, policymakers, and practitioners studying AI-relat

Fuzzy concept

A fuzzy concept is an idea of which the boundaries of application can vary considerably according to context or conditions, instead of being fixed once and for all. That means the idea is somewhat vague or imprecise. Yet it is not unclear or meaningless. It has a definite meaning, which can often be made more exact with further elaboration and specification — including a closer definition of the context in which the concept is used. The inverse of a "fuzzy concept" is a "crisp concept" (i.e. a precise concept). Fuzzy concepts are often used to navigate imprecision in the real world, when precise information is not available and an approximate indication is sufficient to be helpful. Although the linguist George Philip Lakoff already defined the semantics of a fuzzy concept in 1973 (inspired by an unpublished 1971 paper by Eleanor Rosch,) the term "fuzzy concept" rarely received a standalone entry in dictionaries, handbooks and encyclopedias. Sometimes it was defined in encyclopedia articles on fuzzy logic, or it was simply equated with a mathematical “fuzzy set”. A fuzzy concept can be "fuzzy" for many different reasons in different contexts. This makes it harder to provide a precise definition that covers all cases. Paradoxically, the definition of fuzzy concepts may itself be somewhat "fuzzy". Lotfi A. Zadeh, known as "the father of fuzzy logic", claimed that "vagueness connotes insufficient specificity, whereas fuzziness connotes unsharpness of class boundaries". Not all scholars agree. With increasing academic literature on the subject, the term "fuzzy concept" is now more widely recognized as a philosophical, linguistic or scientific category, and the study of the characteristics of fuzzy concepts and fuzzy language is known as fuzzy semantics. “Fuzzy logic” has become a generic term for many different kinds of many-valued logics, and is applied in many different areas of research, computer programming and industrial design. For engineers, "Fuzziness is imprecision or vagueness of definition." For computer scientists, a fuzzy concept is an idea which is "to an extent applicable" in a situation. It means that the concept can have gradations of significance or unsharp (variable) boundaries of application — a "fuzzy statement" is a statement which is true "to some extent", and that extent can often be represented by a scaled value (a score). For mathematicians, a "fuzzy concept" is usually a fuzzy set or a combination of such sets (see fuzzy mathematics and fuzzy set theory). In cognitive linguistics, the things that belong to a "fuzzy category" exhibit gradations of family resemblance, and the borders of the category are not clearly defined. Through most of the 20th century, the idea of reasoning with fuzzy concepts faced considerable resistance from Western academic elites. They did not want to endorse the use of imprecise concepts in research or argumentation, and they often regarded fuzzy logic with suspicion, derision or even hostility. That may partly explain why the idea of a "fuzzy concept" did not get a separate entry in encyclopedias, handbooks and dictionaries. Yet although people might not be aware of it, the use of fuzzy concepts has risen gigantically in all walks of life from the 1970s onward. That is mainly due to advances in electronic engineering, fuzzy mathematics and digital computer programming. The new technology allows very complex inferences about "variations on a theme" to be anticipated and fixed in a program. The Perseverance Mars rover, a driverless NASA vehicle used to explore the Jezero crater on the planet Mars, features fuzzy logic programming that steers it through rough terrain. Similarly, to the North, the Chinese Mars rover Zhurong used fuzzy logic algorithms to calculate its travel route in Utopia Planitia from sensor data. New neuro-fuzzy computational methods make it possible for machines to identify, measure, adjust and respond to fine gradations of significance with great precision. It means that practically useful concepts can be coded, sharply defined, and applied to all kinds of tasks, even if ordinarily these concepts are never exactly defined. Nowadays engineers, statisticians and programmers often represent fuzzy concepts mathematically, using fuzzy logic, fuzzy values, fuzzy variables and fuzzy sets (see also fuzzy set theory). Fuzzy logic is not "woolly thinking", but a "precise logic of imprecision" which reasons with graded concepts and gradations of truth. Fuzzy concepts and fuzzy logic often play a significant role in artificial intelligence programming, for example because they can model human cognitive processes more easily than other methods. == Origins == Vagueness and fuzziness have probably always been a part of human experience. In the West, ancient texts show that philosophers and scientists were already thinking critically about this in classical antiquity. Most often, they regarded vagueness as a problem: as an obstacle to clear thinking, as a source of confusion, or as an evasive tactic. It got in the way of providing clear orientation, guidance, direction and leadership. Therefore, vagueness became associated with a hermeneutic of suspicion — it was considered as something to avoid, as something undesirable. By contrast, in the ancient Chinese tradition of Daoist thought of Laozi and Zhuang Zhou, "vagueness is not regarded with suspicion, but is simply an acknowledged characteristic of the world around us" — a subject for meditation and a source of insight. === Sorites paradox === The ancient Sorites paradox raised the logical problem, of how we could exactly define the threshold at which a change in quantitative gradation turns into a qualitative or categorical difference. With some physical processes, this threshold seems relatively easy to identify. For example, water turns into steam at 100 °C or 212 °F. Of course, the boiling point depends partly on atmospheric pressure, which decreases at higher altitudes; it is also affected by the level of humidity — in that sense, the boiling point is "somewhat fuzzy", because it can vary under different conditions. Nevertheless, for every altitude, level of air pressure and degree of humidity, we can predict accurately what the boiling point will be, if we know the relevant conditions. With many other processes and gradations, however, the point of change is much more difficult to locate, and remains somewhat vague. Thus, the boundaries between qualitatively different things may be unsharp: we know that there are boundaries, but we cannot define them exactly. For example, to identify "the oldest city in the world", we have to define what counts as a city, and at what point a growing human settlement becomes a city. === The continuum fallacy and Loki's wager === According to the modern idea of the continuum fallacy, the fact that a statement is to an extent vague, does not automatically mean that it has no validity. The question then arises, of how (by what method or approach) we could ascertain and define the validity that the fuzzy statement does have. The Nordic myth of Loki's wager suggested that concepts that lack precise meanings or lack precise boundaries of application cannot be operated with, because they evade any clear definition. However, the 20th-century idea of "fuzzy concepts" proposes that "somewhat vague terms" can be operated with, because we can explicate and define the variability of their application — by assigning numbers to gradations of applicability. This idea sounds simple enough, but it had large implications. === Precursors and pioneers === In Western civilization, the intellectual recognition of fuzzy concepts has been traced back to a diversity of famous and less well-known thinkers, including (among many others) Eubulides, Epicurus, Plato, Cicero, William Ockham and John Buridan, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Friedrich Nietzsche, William James, Hugh MacColl, Charles S. Peirce, Hans Reichenbach, Carl Gustav Hempel, Max Black, Arto Salomaa, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Jan Łukasiewicz, Emil Leon Post, Alfred Tarski, Georg Cantor, Nicolai A. Vasiliev, Kurt Gödel, Stanisław Jaśkowski, Willard Van Orman Quine, George J. Klir, Petr Hájek, Joseph Goguen, Ronald R. Yager, Enrique Héctor Ruspini, Jan Pavelka, Didier Dubois, Bernadette Bouchon-Meunier, and Donald Knuth. Across at least two and a half millennia, all of them had something to say about graded concepts with unsharp boundaries. This suggests at least that the awareness of the existence of concepts with "fuzzy" characteristics, in one form or another, has a very long history in human thought. Quite a few 20th century logicians, mathematicians and philosophers also tried to analyze the characteristics of fuzzy concepts as a recognized species, sometimes with the aid of some kind of many-valued logic or substructural logic. An early attempt in the post-WW2 era to create a mathematical theory of sets with gradations of

Abu Dhabi Autonomous Racing League

The Abu Dhabi Autonomous Racing League (A2RL) is an autonomous racing league based in Abu Dhabi and organized by ASPIRE, part of the UAE government's Advanced Technology Research Council. It has three distinct categories: the "car race", the drone race, and the buggy race. The first car race was held on 27 April 2024 at the Yas Marina Circuit, marking the first major autonomous formula race outside the US since the now-folded Roborace championship. The first drone race was held on 11 and 12 April 2025. == Formats == A2RL has three distinct formats, the formula racing format (dubbed the Car Race), the quadcopter drone racing format (dubbed the Drone Race), and the off-road dune buggy racing format (dubbed the Buggy Race). === Car Race === A2RL's main event, the car race is a standard formula racing format with self-driving formula cars. The cars are made by Dallara and are modified versions of Super Formula cars with Yokohama tires. These cars had the CPUs of their AIs mounted where the driver's seat is on a non-modified chassis, as well as hydraulic actuators for AI control of the vehicle, multiple sensor systems including LIDAR and GPS, and a large LED indicator showing the status of the AI. The first car race was held on 27 April 2024. This race was marked by the cars' subpar performance: Out of four cars that qualified, only two finished the race - the other two did not. The next race was held on 15 November 2025, with 11 teams. ==== Technical specifications ==== The full list of technical specifications are as follows: Chassis: Dallara EAV24 (modified Dallara SF23) Forward suspension: Pushrod type, torsion bar spring, adjustable dampers, third element Rear suspension: Pushrod type, torsion bar, coil springs, adjustable dampers, third element Tires: Yokohama Advan Drive-by-wire system: Provided by Meccanica 42, the DBW system consists of steering and brake actuators, with a central ECU that coordinates the driving actions and reacts to any critical situation in real-time. Brakes: Brembo calipers, Brembo carbon discs, electro-hydraulically activated Engine: 4 Piston Racing K20C1 (based on Honda 2.0l; turbocharged 4-cylinder engine) Gearbox: 3MO 6-speed gearbox Sensor suite: 7x Sony IMX728 cameras, 4x ZF ProWave radar units, 3x Seyond Falcon Kinetic lidar units Main computer: Neousys RGS-8805GC ==== Races held ==== === Drone Race === Created in partnership with the Drone Champions' League, the drone race is the quadcopter drone racing aerial format of the A2RL. The first race was held on 11/12 April 2025 at the ADNEC Marina Hall. 10 teams are scheduled to take part. === Buggy Race === The buggy race will be the off-road format of the A2RL using self-driving dune buggies. No date or number of teams has been announced for the first race. === Other events === A2RL is known to host AI vs AI and Human vs AI events, in Abu Dhabi and abroad. One such event took place at the Suzuka Circuit in Japan. The Human vs AI race was precluded due to AI car "Yalla" crashing into the wall during the formation lap. == Team lists ==

Artificial intelligence in spirituality

Some users of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, especially chatbots, may develop beliefs that AI has or can attain supernatural or spiritual powers. AI models such as ChatGPT are turned to for fortune telling, mysticism and remote viewing. Recent and sudden advances in large language models have led to folk myths about their origin or capabilities, as well as their deification or worship by some users. Tucker Carlson has made similar claims, including directly to Sam Altman. Pope Leo XIV advised priests against using LLM models when it came to the creation of sermons.

Stable Diffusion

Stable Diffusion is a deep learning, text-to-image model released in 2022 based on diffusion techniques. The generative artificial intelligence technology is the premier product of Stability AI and is considered to be a part of the ongoing AI boom. It is primarily used to generate detailed images conditioned on text descriptions, though it can also be applied to other tasks such as inpainting, outpainting, and generating image-to-image translations guided by a text prompt. Its development involved researchers from the CompVis Group at LMU Munich and Runway with a computational donation from Stability and training data from non-profit organizations. Stable Diffusion is a latent diffusion model, a kind of deep generative artificial neural network. Its code and model weights have been released publicly, and an optimized version can run on most consumer hardware equipped with a modest GPU with as little as 2.4 GB VRAM. This marked a departure from previous proprietary text-to-image models such as DALL-E and Midjourney which were accessible only via cloud services. == Development == Stable Diffusion originated from a project called Latent Diffusion, developed in Germany by researchers at LMU Munich in Munich and Heidelberg University. Four of the original 5 authors (Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Patrick Esser and Dominik Lorenz) later joined Stability AI and released subsequent versions of Stable Diffusion. The technical license for the model was released by the CompVis group at LMU Munich. Development was led by Patrick Esser of Runway and Robin Rombach of CompVis, who were among the researchers who had earlier invented the latent diffusion model architecture used by Stable Diffusion. Stability AI also credited EleutherAI and LAION (a German nonprofit which assembled the dataset on which Stable Diffusion was trained) as supporters of the project. == Technology == === Architecture === Diffusion models, introduced in 2015, are trained with the objective of removing successive applications of Gaussian noise on training images, which can be thought of as a sequence of denoising autoencoders. The name diffusion is from the thermodynamic diffusion, since they were first developed with inspiration from thermodynamics. Models in Stable Diffusion series before SD 3 all used a variant of diffusion models, called latent diffusion model (LDM), developed in 2021 by the CompVis (Computer Vision & Learning) group at LMU Munich. Stable Diffusion consists of 3 parts: the variational autoencoder (VAE), U-Net, and an optional text encoder. The VAE encoder compresses the image from pixel space to a smaller dimensional latent space, capturing a more fundamental semantic meaning of the image. Gaussian noise is iteratively applied to the compressed latent representation during forward diffusion. The U-Net block, composed of a ResNet backbone, denoises the output from forward diffusion backwards to obtain a latent representation. Finally, the VAE decoder generates the final image by converting the representation back into pixel space. The denoising step can be flexibly conditioned on a string of text, an image, or another modality. The encoded conditioning data is exposed to denoising U-Nets via a cross-attention mechanism. For conditioning on text, the fixed, pretrained CLIP ViT-L/14 text encoder is used to transform text prompts to an embedding space. Researchers point to increased computational efficiency for training and generation as an advantage of LDMs. With 860 million parameters in the U-Net and 123 million in the text encoder, Stable Diffusion is considered relatively lightweight by 2022 standards, and unlike other diffusion models, it can run on consumer GPUs, and even CPU-only if using the OpenVINO version of Stable Diffusion. ==== SD XL ==== The XL version uses the same LDM architecture as previous versions, except larger: larger UNet backbone, larger cross-attention context, two text encoders instead of one, and trained on multiple aspect ratios (not just the square aspect ratio like previous versions). The SD XL Refiner, released at the same time, has the same architecture as SD XL, but it was trained for adding fine details to preexisting images via text-conditional img2img. ==== SD 3.0 ==== The 3.0 version completely changes the backbone. Not a UNet, but a Rectified Flow Transformer, which implements the rectified flow method with a Transformer. The Transformer architecture used for SD 3.0 has three "tracks", for original text encoding, transformed text encoding, and image encoding (in latent space). The transformed text encoding and image encoding are mixed during each transformer block. The architecture is named "multimodal diffusion transformer (MMDiT), where the "multimodal" means that it mixes text and image encodings inside its operations. This differs from previous versions of DiT, where the text encoding affects the image encoding, but not vice versa. === Training data === Stable Diffusion was trained on pairs of images and captions taken from LAION-5B, a publicly available dataset derived from Common Crawl data scraped from the web, where 5 billion image-text pairs were classified based on language and filtered into separate datasets by resolution, a predicted likelihood of containing a watermark, and predicted "aesthetic" score (e.g. subjective visual quality). The dataset was created by LAION, a German non-profit which receives funding from Stability AI. The Stable Diffusion model was trained on three subsets of LAION-5B: laion2B-en, laion-high-resolution, and laion-aesthetics v2 5+. A third-party analysis of the model's training data identified that out of a smaller subset of 12 million images taken from the original wider dataset used, approximately 47% of the sample size of images came from 100 different domains, with Pinterest taking up 8.5% of the subset, followed by websites such as WordPress, Blogspot, Flickr, DeviantArt and Wikimedia Commons. An investigation by Bayerischer Rundfunk showed that LAION's datasets, hosted on Hugging Face, contain large amounts of private and sensitive data. === Training procedures === The model was initially trained on the laion2B-en and laion-high-resolution subsets, with the last few rounds of training done on LAION-Aesthetics v2 5+, a subset of 600 million captioned images which the LAION-Aesthetics Predictor V2 predicted that humans would, on average, give a score of at least 5 out of 10 when asked to rate how much they liked them. The LAION-Aesthetics v2 5+ subset also excluded low-resolution images and images which LAION-5B-WatermarkDetection identified as carrying a watermark with greater than 80% probability. Final rounds of training additionally dropped 10% of text conditioning to improve Classifier-Free Diffusion Guidance. The model was trained using 256 Nvidia A100 GPUs on Amazon Web Services for a total of 150,000 GPU-hours, at a cost of $600,000. === Limitations === Stable Diffusion has issues with degradation and inaccuracies in certain scenarios. Initial releases of the model were trained on a dataset that consists of 512×512 resolution images, meaning that the quality of generated images noticeably degrades when user specifications deviate from its "expected" 512×512 resolution; the version 2.0 update of the Stable Diffusion model later introduced the ability to natively generate images at 768×768 resolution. Another challenge is in generating human limbs due to poor data quality of limbs in the LAION database. The model is insufficiently trained to replicate human limbs and faces due to the lack of representative features in the database, and prompting the model to generate images of such type can confound the model. In addition to human limbs, Stable Diffusion is unable to generate legible ambigrams and some other forms of text and typography. Stable Diffusion XL (SDXL) version 1.0, released in July 2023, introduced native 1024x1024 resolution and improved generation for limbs and text. Accessibility for individual developers can also be a problem. In order to customize the model for new use cases that are not included in the dataset, such as generating anime characters ("waifu diffusion"), new data and further training are required. Fine-tuned adaptations of Stable Diffusion created through additional retraining have been used for a variety of different use-cases, from medical imaging to algorithmically generated music. However, this fine-tuning process is sensitive to the quality of new data; low resolution images or different resolutions from the original data can not only fail to learn the new task but degrade the overall performance of the model. Even when the model is additionally trained on high quality images, it is difficult for individuals to run models in consumer electronics. For example, the training process for waifu-diffusion requires a minimum 30 GB of VRAM, which exceeds the usual resource provided in such consumer GPUs as Nvidia's GeForce 30 series, w