In computer science, in particular in automata theory, a two-way finite automaton is a finite automaton that is allowed to re-read its input. == Two-way deterministic finite automaton == A two-way deterministic finite automaton (2DFA) is an abstract machine, a generalized version of the deterministic finite automaton (DFA) which can revisit characters already processed. As in a DFA, there are a finite number of states with transitions between them based on the current character, but each transition is also labelled with a value indicating whether the machine will move its position in the input to the left, right, or stay at the same position. Equivalently, 2DFAs can be seen as read-only Turing machines with no work tape, only a read-only input tape. 2DFAs were introduced in a seminal 1959 paper by Rabin and Scott, who proved them to have equivalent power to one-way DFAs. That is, any formal language which can be recognized by a 2DFA can be recognized by a DFA which only examines and consumes each character in order. Since DFAs are obviously a special case of 2DFAs, this implies that both kinds of machines recognize precisely the class of regular languages. However, the equivalent DFA for a 2DFA may require exponentially many states, making 2DFAs a much more practical representation for algorithms for some common problems. 2DFAs are also equivalent to read-only Turing machines that use only a constant amount of space on their work tape, since any constant amount of information can be incorporated into the finite control state via a product construction (a state for each combination of work tape state and control state). == Formal description == Formally, a two-way deterministic finite automaton can be described by the following 8-tuple: M = ( Q , Σ , L , R , δ , s , t , r ) {\displaystyle M=(Q,\Sigma ,L,R,\delta ,s,t,r)} where Q {\displaystyle Q} is the finite, non-empty set of states Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is the finite, non-empty set of input symbols L {\displaystyle L} is the left endmarker R {\displaystyle R} is the right endmarker δ : Q × ( Σ ∪ { L , R } ) → Q × { l e f t , r i g h t } {\displaystyle \delta :Q\times (\Sigma \cup \{L,R\})\rightarrow Q\times \{\mathrm {left,right} \}} s {\displaystyle s} is the start state t {\displaystyle t} is the end state r {\displaystyle r} is the reject state In addition, the following two conditions must also be satisfied: For all q ∈ Q {\displaystyle q\in Q} δ ( q , L ) = ( q ′ , r i g h t ) {\displaystyle \delta (q,L)=(q^{\prime },\mathrm {right} )} for some q ′ ∈ Q {\displaystyle q^{\prime }\in Q} δ ( q , R ) = ( q ′ , l e f t ) {\displaystyle \delta (q,R)=(q^{\prime },\mathrm {left} )} for some q ′ ∈ Q {\displaystyle q^{\prime }\in Q} It says that there must be some transition possible when the pointer reaches either end of the input word. For all symbols σ ∈ Σ ∪ { L } {\displaystyle \sigma \in \Sigma \cup \{L\}} δ ( t , σ ) = ( t , R ) {\displaystyle \delta (t,\sigma )=(t,R)} δ ( r , σ ) = ( r , R ) {\displaystyle \delta (r,\sigma )=(r,R)} δ ( t , R ) = ( t , L ) {\displaystyle \delta (t,R)=(t,L)} δ ( r , R ) = ( r , L ) {\displaystyle \delta (r,R)=(r,L)} It says that once the automaton reaches the accept or reject state, it stays in there forever and the pointer goes to the right most symbol and cycles there infinitely. == Two-way nondeterministic finite automaton == A two-way nondeterministic finite automaton (2NFA) may have multiple transitions defined in the same configuration. Its transition function is δ : Q × ( Σ ∪ { L , R } ) → 2 Q × { l e f t , r i g h t } {\displaystyle \delta :Q\times (\Sigma \cup \{L,R\})\rightarrow 2^{Q\times \{\mathrm {left,right} \}}} . Like a standard one-way NFA, a 2NFA accepts a string if at least one of the possible computations is accepting. Like the 2DFAs, the 2NFAs also accept only regular languages. == Two-way alternating finite automaton == A two-way alternating finite automaton (2AFA) is a two-way extension of an alternating finite automaton (AFA). Its state set is Q = Q ∃ ∪ Q ∀ {\displaystyle Q=Q_{\exists }\cup Q_{\forall }} where Q ∃ ∩ Q ∀ = ∅ {\displaystyle Q_{\exists }\cap Q_{\forall }=\emptyset } . States in Q ∃ {\displaystyle Q_{\exists }} and Q ∀ {\displaystyle Q_{\forall }} are called existential resp. universal. In an existential state a 2AFA nondeterministically chooses the next state like an NFA, and accepts if at least one of the resulting computations accepts. In a universal state 2AFA moves to all next states, and accepts if all the resulting computations accept. == State complexity tradeoffs == Two-way and one-way finite automata, deterministic and nondeterministic and alternating, accept the same class of regular languages. However, transforming an automaton of one type to an equivalent automaton of another type incurs a blow-up in the number of states. Christos Kapoutsis determined that transforming an n {\displaystyle n} -state 2DFA to an equivalent DFA requires n ( n n − ( n − 1 ) n ) {\displaystyle n(n^{n}-(n-1)^{n})} states in the worst case. If an n {\displaystyle n} -state 2DFA or a 2NFA is transformed to an NFA, the worst-case number of states required is ( 2 n n + 1 ) = O ( 4 n n ) {\displaystyle {\binom {2n}{n+1}}=O\left({\frac {4^{n}}{\sqrt {n}}}\right)} . Ladner, Lipton and Stockmeyer. proved that an n {\displaystyle n} -state 2AFA can be converted to a DFA with 2 n 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n2^{n}}} states. The 2AFA to NFA conversion requires 2 Θ ( n log n ) {\displaystyle 2^{\Theta (n\log n)}} states in the worst case, see Geffert and Okhotin. It is an open problem whether every 2NFA can be converted to a 2DFA with only a polynomial increase in the number of states. The problem was raised by Sakoda and Sipser, who compared it to the P vs. NP problem in the computational complexity theory. Berman and Lingas discovered a formal relation between this problem and the L vs. NL open problem, see Kapoutsis for a precise relation. == Sweeping automata == Sweeping automata are 2DFAs of a special kind that process the input string by making alternating left-to-right and right-to-left sweeps, turning only at the endmarkers. Sipser constructed a sequence of languages, each accepted by an n-state NFA, yet which is not accepted by any sweeping automata with fewer than 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} states. == Two-way quantum finite automaton == The concept of 2DFAs was in 1997 generalized to quantum computing by John Watrous's "On the Power of 2-Way Quantum Finite State Automata", in which he demonstrates that these machines can recognize nonregular languages and so are more powerful than DFAs. == Two-way pushdown automaton == A pushdown automaton that is allowed to move either way on its input tape is called two-way pushdown automaton (2PDA); it has been studied by Hartmanis, Lewis, and Stearns (1965). Aho, Hopcroft, Ullman (1968) and Cook (1971) characterized the class of languages recognizable by deterministic (2DPDA) and non-deterministic (2NPDA) two-way pushdown automata; Gray, Harrison, and Ibarra (1967) investigated the closure properties of these languages.
WaveMaker
WaveMaker is a Java-based low-code development platform designed for building software applications and platforms. The company, WaveMaker Inc., is based in Mountain View, California. The platform is intended to assist enterprises in speeding up their application development and IT modernization initiatives through low-code capabilities. Additionally, for independent software vendors (ISVs), WaveMaker serves as a customizable low-code component that integrates into their products. The WaveMaker Platform is a licensed software platform allowing organizations to establish their own end-to-application platform-as-a-service (PaaS) for the creation and operation of custom apps. It allows developers and business users to create apps that are customizable. These applications can seamlessly consume APIs, visualize data, and automatically adapt to multi-device responsive interfaces. WaveMaker's low-code platform allows organizations to deploy applications on either public or private cloud infrastructure. Containers can be deployed on top of virtual machines or directly on bare metal. The software features a graphical user interface (GUI) console for managing IT app infrastructure, leveraging the capabilities of Docker containerization. The solution offers functionalities for automating application deployment, managing the application lifecycle, overseeing release management, and controlling deployment workflows and access permissions: Apps for web, tablet, and smartphone interfaces Enterprise technologies like Java, Hibernate, Spring, AngularJS, JQuery Docker-provided APIs and CLI Software stack packaging, container provisioning, stack and app upgrading, replication, and fault tolerance == WaveMaker Studio == WaveMaker RAD Platform is built around WaveMaker Studio, a WYSIWYG rapid development tool that allows business users to compose an application using a drag-and-drop method. WaveMaker Studio supports rapid application development (RAD) for the web, similar to what products like PowerBuilder and Lotus Notes provided for client-server computing. WaveMaker Studio allows developers to produce an application once, then automatically adjust it for a particular target platform, whether a PC, mobile phone, or tablet. Applications created using the WaveMaker Studio follow a model–view–controller architecture. WaveMaker Studio has been downloaded more than two million times. The Studio community consists of 30,000 registered users. Applications generated by WaveMaker Studio are licensed under the Apache license. Studio 8 was released on September 25, 2015. The prior version, Studio 7, has some notable development milestones. It was based on AngularJS framework, previous Studio versions (6.7, 6.6, 6.5) use the Dojo Toolkit. Some of the features WaveMaker Studio 7 include: Automatic generation of Hibernate mapping, and Hibernate queries from database schema import. Automatic creation of Enterprise Data Widgets based on schema import. Each widget can display data from a database table as a grid or edit form. Edit form implements create, update, and delete functions automatically. WYSIWYG Ajax development studio runs in a browser. Deployment to Tomcat, IBM WebSphere, Weblogic, JBoss. Mashup tool to assemble web applications based on SOAP, REST and RSS web services, Java Services and databases. Supports existing CSS, HTML and Java code. The ability to deploy a standard Java .war file. == Technologies and frameworks == WaveMaker allows users to build applications that run on "Open Systems Stack" based on the following technologies and frameworks: AngularJS, Bootstrap, NVD3, HTML, CSS, Apache Cordova, Hibernate, Spring, Spring Security, Java. The various supported integrations include: Databases: Oracle, MySQL, Microsoft SQL Server, PostgreSQL, IBM DB2, HSQLDB Authentication: LDAP, Active Directory, CAS, Custom Java Service, Database Version Control: Bitbucket (or Stash), GitHub, Apache Subversion Deployment: Amazon AWS, Microsoft Azure, WaveMaker Private Cloud (Docker containerization), IBM Web Sphere, Apache Tomcat, SpringSource tcServer, Oracle WebLogic Server, JBoss(WildFly), GlassFish App Stores: Google Play, Apple App Store, Windows Store == History == In 2003, WaveMaker was founded as ActiveGrid. Then, in 2007, it was rebranded as Wavemaker. It was acquired by VMware in 2011. In March 2013, support for the WaveMaker project was discontinued. In May 2013, Pramati Technologies acquired the assets of WaveMaker. In February 2014, Wavemaker Studio 6.7 was released, which was the last open source version of Studio. In September 2014 WaveMaker Inc. launched the WaveMaker RAD Platform, which allowed organizations to run their own application platform for building and running apps. In March 2023, WaveMaker released version 11.5, which includes enhanced low-code development capabilities and new AI-driven tools to streamline the application development process.
Deep learning speech synthesis
Deep learning speech synthesis refers to the application of deep learning models to generate natural-sounding human speech from written text (text-to-speech) or spectrum (vocoder). Deep neural networks are trained using large amounts of recorded speech and, in the case of a text-to-speech system, the associated labels and/or input text. == Formulation == Given an input text or some sequence of linguistic units Y {\displaystyle Y} , the target speech X {\displaystyle X} can be derived by X = arg max P ( X | Y , θ ) {\displaystyle X=\arg \max P(X|Y,\theta )} where θ {\displaystyle \theta } is the set of model parameters. Typically, the input text will first be passed to an acoustic feature generator, then the acoustic features are passed to the neural vocoder. For the acoustic feature generator, the loss function is typically L1 loss (Mean Absolute Error, MAE) or L2 loss (Mean Square Error, MSE). These loss functions impose a constraint that the output acoustic feature distributions must be Gaussian or Laplacian. In practice, since the human voice band ranges from approximately 300 to 4000 Hz, the loss function will be designed to have more penalty on this range: l o s s = α loss human + ( 1 − α ) loss other {\displaystyle loss=\alpha {\text{loss}}_{\text{human}}+(1-\alpha ){\text{loss}}_{\text{other}}} where loss human {\displaystyle {\text{loss}}_{\text{human}}} is the loss from human voice band and α {\displaystyle \alpha } is a scalar, typically around 0.5. The acoustic feature is typically a spectrogram or Mel scale. These features capture the time-frequency relation of the speech signal, and thus are sufficient to generate intelligent outputs. The Mel-frequency cepstrum feature used in the speech recognition task is not suitable for speech synthesis, as it reduces too much information. == History == In September 2016, DeepMind released WaveNet, which demonstrated that deep learning-based models are capable of modeling raw waveforms and generating speech from acoustic features like spectrograms or mel-spectrograms. Although WaveNet was initially considered to be computationally expensive and slow to be used in consumer products at the time, a year after its release, DeepMind unveiled a modified version of WaveNet known as "Parallel WaveNet," a production model 1,000 faster than the original. This was followed by Google AI's Tacotron 2 in 2018, which demonstrated that neural networks could produce highly natural speech synthesis but required substantial training data—typically tens of hours of audio—to achieve acceptable quality. Tacotron 2 used an autoencoder architecture with attention mechanisms to convert input text into mel-spectrograms, which were then converted to waveforms using a separate neural vocoder. When trained on smaller datasets, such as 2 hours of speech, the output quality degraded while still being able to maintain intelligible speech, and with just 24 minutes of training data, Tacotron 2 failed to produce intelligible speech. In 2019, Microsoft Research introduced FastSpeech, which addressed speed limitations in autoregressive models like Tacotron 2. FastSpeech utilized a non-autoregressive architecture that enabled parallel sequence generation, significantly reducing inference time while maintaining audio quality. Its feedforward transformer network with length regulation allowed for one-shot prediction of the full mel-spectrogram sequence, avoiding the sequential dependencies that bottlenecked previous approaches. The same year saw the release of HiFi-GAN, a generative adversarial network (GAN)-based vocoder that improved the efficiency of waveform generation while producing high-fidelity speech. In 2020, the release of Glow-TTS introduced a flow-based approach that allowed for fast inference and voice style transfer capabilities. In March 2020, the free text-to-speech website 15.ai was launched. 15.ai gained widespread international attention in early 2021 for its ability to synthesize emotionally expressive speech of fictional characters from popular media with minimal amount of data. The creator of 15.ai (known pseudonymously as 15) stated that 15 seconds of training data is sufficient to perfectly clone a person's voice (hence its name, "15.ai"), a significant reduction from the previously known data requirement of tens of hours. 15.ai is credited as the first platform to popularize AI voice cloning in memes and content creation. 15.ai used a multi-speaker model that enabled simultaneous training of multiple voices and emotions, implemented sentiment analysis using DeepMoji, and supported precise pronunciation control via ARPABET. The 15-second data efficiency benchmark was later corroborated by OpenAI in 2024. == Semi-supervised learning == Currently, self-supervised learning has gained much attention through better use of unlabelled data. Research has shown that, with the aid of self-supervised loss, the need for paired data decreases. == Zero-shot speaker adaptation == Zero-shot speaker adaptation is promising because a single model can generate speech with various speaker styles and characteristic. In June 2018, Google proposed to use pre-trained speaker verification models as speaker encoders to extract speaker embeddings. The speaker encoders then become part of the neural text-to-speech models, so that it can determine the style and characteristics of the output speech. This procedure has shown the community that it is possible to use only a single model to generate speech with multiple styles. == Neural vocoder == In deep learning-based speech synthesis, neural vocoders play an important role in generating high-quality speech from acoustic features. The WaveNet model proposed in 2016 achieves excellent performance on speech quality. Wavenet factorised the joint probability of a waveform x = { x 1 , . . . , x T } {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} =\{x_{1},...,x_{T}\}} as a product of conditional probabilities as follows p θ ( x ) = ∏ t = 1 T p ( x t | x 1 , . . . , x t − 1 ) {\displaystyle p_{\theta }(\mathbf {x} )=\prod _{t=1}^{T}p(x_{t}|x_{1},...,x_{t-1})} where θ {\displaystyle \theta } is the model parameter including many dilated convolution layers. Thus, each audio sample x t {\displaystyle x_{t}} is conditioned on the samples at all previous timesteps. However, the auto-regressive nature of WaveNet makes the inference process dramatically slow. To solve this problem, Parallel WaveNet was proposed. Parallel WaveNet is an inverse autoregressive flow-based model which is trained by knowledge distillation with a pre-trained teacher WaveNet model. Since such inverse autoregressive flow-based models are non-auto-regressive when performing inference, the inference speed is faster than real-time. Meanwhile, Nvidia proposed a flow-based WaveGlow model, which can also generate speech faster than real-time. However, despite the high inference speed, parallel WaveNet has the limitation of needing a pre-trained WaveNet model, so that WaveGlow takes many weeks to converge with limited computing devices. This issue has been solved by Parallel WaveGAN, which learns to produce speech through multi-resolution spectral loss and GAN learning strategies.
The Raimones
The Raimones (stylized as THE RAiMONES) is a 2017 generative music project that utilized artificial intelligence to compose music in the style of the American punk rock band The Ramones. Developed by Matthias Frey, a researcher at Sony CSL Tokyo, the project was an early experiment in applying deep learning to high-energy, minimalist musical genres. == Technical Development == The project utilized Long short-term memory (LSTM) recurrent neural networks to generate musical structures and lyrics. The model was trained on a dataset consisting of 130 Ramones songs in MIDI format and the band's complete lyrical catalog. The technical framework was built using Python and Jupyter Notebook, drawing influence from the character-level RNN text generation models popularized by Andrej Karpathy. Unlike contemporary AI music projects that focused on the harmonic complexities of classical or pop music, THE RAiMONES sought to determine if neural networks could replicate the "1-2-3-4" rhythmic consistency and formulaic nature of early punk. == "I'm Alive" == The primary output of the project was the song "I'm Alive," released in 2017. The work is described as a form of "augmented intelligence," a hybrid approach where the AI provides the compositional foundation and human musicians handle the arrangement and performance. The song was recorded by the musician Mr. Ratboy (Gilbert Avondet). Avondet's involvement provided a stylistic link to the subject material, as he had previously served as a touring guitarist for Marky Ramone and the Intruders in 1996. The project's discography has since been made available on major streaming platforms, including Apple Music. == Reception and Significance == The project has been cited as a "proof of concept" for AI's ability to tackle "noisy" and aggressive aesthetics. In 2019, the Belgian magazine Knack Focus profiled the project alongside other AI pioneers such as Holly Herndon, noting the project's attempt to recreate the sound of "deceased legends" while maintaining a distinct, machine-like quality. It has also been featured in academic settings, such as at UC Santa Cruz, as a case study for AI-driven genre mimicry.
Computer-assisted legal research
Computer-assisted legal research (CALR) or computer-based legal research is a mode of legal research that uses databases of court opinions, statutes, court documents, and secondary material. Electronic databases make large bodies of case law easily available. Databases also have additional benefits, such as Boolean searches, evaluating case authority, organizing cases by topic, and providing links to cited material. Databases are available through paid subscription or for free. Subscription-based services include Westlaw, LexisNexis, JustCite, HeinOnline, Bloomberg Law, Lex Intell, VLex and LexEur. As of 2015, the commercial market grossed $8 billion. Free services include OpenJurist, Google Scholar, AltLaw, Ravel Law, WIPO Lex, Law Delta and the databases of the Free Access to Law Movement. == Purposes == Computer-assisted legal research is undertaken by a variety of actors. It is taught as a topic in many law degrees and is used extensively by undergraduate and postgraduate law students in meeting the work requirements of their degree courses. Professors of Law rely on the digitization of primary and secondary sources of law when conducting their research and writing the material that they submit for publication. Professional lawyers rely on computer-assisted legal research in order to properly understand the status of the law and so to act effectively in the best interest of their client. They may also consult the text of case judgements and statutes specifically, as well as wider academic comment, in order to form the basis of (or response to) an appeal. The availability of legal information online differs by type, jurisdiction and subject matter. The types of information available include: Texts of statutes, statutory instruments, civil codes, etc. Explanatory notes and government publications relating to statutes and their operation Texts of governing documents such as constitutions and treaties Case judgements Journals on legal matters or legal theory Dictionaries and legal encyclopedia Legal texts and materials in the form of e-books Current affairs and market information Educational information on the law and its operation == Before the Internet == Prior to the advent and popularization of the World Wide Web, access to digital legal information was largely through the use of CD-ROMs, designed and sold by commercial organizations. Dial-up services were also available from the 1970s. As the use of the Internet spread in the early 1990s, companies such as LexisNexis and Westlaw incorporated Internet connectivity into their software packages. Browser-based legal information started to be published by Legal Information Institutes from 1992. == Publicly available information == The first effort to provide free computer access to legal information was made by two academics, Peter Martin and Tom Bruce, in 1992. Today, the Legal Information Institute freely publishes such resources as the text of the United States Constitution, judgements of the United States Supreme Court, and the text of the United States Code. The Australasian Legal Information Institute (AusLII) was established soon after in 1995. Other legal information institutes, such as those of Great Britain and Ireland (BAILII), Canada (CII) and South Africa (SAfLI) soon followed. LIIs were partially formalized in 2002 following the signing of the Declaration of Free Access to the Law, which has been signed by 54 countries. At the time of writing, the World Legal Information Institute contains in excess of 1800 databases from 123 jurisdictions. Many governments also publish legal information online. For example, UK legislation and statutory instruments have been publicly available online since 2010. Depending on the jurisdiction in question, the decisions of higher appellate courts may also be published online, either by the Legal Information Institute or by the court service directly. Sources of European Union Law are published for free by EUR-Lex in 23 languages, including judgments of the European Courts. Similarly, judgements of the European Court of Human Rights are published on its website.
Comparison of raster graphics editors
Raster graphics editors can be compared by many variables, including availability. == List == == General information == Basic general information about the editor: creator, company, license, etc. == Operating system support == The operating systems on which the editors can run natively, that is, without emulation, virtual machines or compatibility layers. In other words, the software must be specifically coded for the operation system; for example, Adobe Photoshop for Windows running on Linux with Wine does not fit. == Features == == Color spaces == == File support ==
Anytime algorithm
In computer science, an anytime algorithm is an algorithm that can return a valid solution to a problem even if it is interrupted before it ends. The algorithm is expected to find better and better solutions the longer it keeps running. Most algorithms run to completion: they provide a single answer after performing some fixed amount of computation. In some cases, however, the user may wish to terminate the algorithm prior to completion. The amount of computation required may be substantial, for example, and computational resources might need to be reallocated. Most algorithms either run to completion or they provide no useful solution information. Anytime algorithms, however, are able to return a partial answer, whose quality depends on the amount of computation they were able to perform. The answer generated by anytime algorithms is an approximation of the correct answer. == Names == An anytime algorithm may be also called an "interruptible algorithm". They are different from contract algorithms, which must declare a time in advance; in an anytime algorithm, a process can just announce that it is terminating. == Goals == The goal of anytime algorithms are to give intelligent systems the ability to make results of better quality in return for turn-around time. They are also supposed to be flexible in time and resources. They are important because artificial intelligence or AI algorithms can take a long time to complete results. This algorithm is designed to complete in a shorter amount of time. Also, these are intended to have a better understanding that the system is dependent and restricted to its agents and how they work cooperatively. An example is the Newton–Raphson iteration applied to finding the square root of a number. Another example that uses anytime algorithms is trajectory problems when you're aiming for a target; the object is moving through space while waiting for the algorithm to finish and even an approximate answer can significantly improve its accuracy if given early. What makes anytime algorithms unique is their ability to return many possible outcomes for any given input. An anytime algorithm uses many well defined quality measures to monitor progress in problem solving and distributed computing resources. It keeps searching for the best possible answer with the amount of time that it is given. It may not run until completion and may improve the answer if it is allowed to run longer. This is often used for large decision set problems. This would generally not provide useful information unless it is allowed to finish. While this may sound similar to dynamic programming, the difference is that it is fine-tuned through random adjustments, rather than sequential. Anytime algorithms are designed so that it can be told to stop at any time and would return the best result it has found so far. This is why it is called an interruptible algorithm. Certain anytime algorithms also maintain the last result, so that if they are given more time, they can continue from where they left off to obtain an even better result. == Decision trees == When the decider has to act, there must be some ambiguity. Also, there must be some idea about how to solve this ambiguity. This idea must be translatable to a state to action diagram. == Performance profile == The performance profile estimates the quality of the results based on the input and the amount of time that is allotted to the algorithm. The better the estimate, the sooner the result would be found. Some systems have a larger database that gives the probability that the output is the expected output. One algorithm can have several performance profiles. Most of the time performance profiles are constructed using mathematical statistics using representative cases. For example, in the traveling salesman problem, the performance profile was generated using a user-defined special program to generate the necessary statistics. In this example, the performance profile is the mapping of time to the expected results. This quality can be measured in several ways: certainty: where probability of correctness determines quality accuracy: where error bound determines quality specificity: where the amount of particulars determine quality == Algorithm prerequisites == Initial behavior: While some algorithms start with immediate guesses, others take a more calculated approach and have a start up period before making any guesses. Growth direction: How the quality of the program's "output" or result, varies as a function of the amount of time ("run time") Growth rate: Amount of increase with each step. Does it change constantly, such as in a bubble sort or does it change unpredictably? End condition: The amount of runtime needed