The Social Media (Age-Restricted Users) Bill is a member's bill by National Party Member of Parliament Catherine Wedd that seeks to ban children under the age of 16 years from accessing social media by forcing social media companies to implement age verification measures. It is modelled after the Australian government's Online Safety Amendment. In mid October 2025, the New Zealand Parliament confirmed plans to introduce the social media age restriction bill. == Background == In late November 2024, the Albanese government of Australia, with support from the opposition Coalition parties, passed the Online Safety Amendment creating a world-first age verification regime targeting social media platforms operating in the country. The ban targets several social media platforms including Facebook, Instagram, Kick, Reddit, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, Twitch, X (formerly Twitter) and YouTube. These platforms were required to implement age verification systems and to remove under-age users by 10 December 2025, when the law change came into effect. == Draft provisions == The draft Social Media (Age-Restricted Users) Bill defines social media platforms as electronic platforms that enable social media interactions between two or more end-users, facilitates communication between multiple end-users and allows users to post content on the platform. The proposed bill requires social media companies to take action to prevent users under the age of 16 from creating accounts on their platforms. It also creates a framework for courts to impose fines on platforms that fail to take reasonable steps to prevent underaged users from accessing the platform. == Legislative history == === Draft legislation === On 6 May 2025, Wedd announced a private member's bill called the "Social Media (Age-Restricted Users) Bill" that would bar access to social media platforms for people under the age of 16 years. She said that she was motivated as the mother of four children to support families, parents and teachers' efforts to manage their children's online exposure and the passage of the Australian Online Safety Amendment legislation in December 2024. Since National's coalition partner ACT New Zealand had refused to support the bill, the Sixth National Government announce it as a member's bill rather than a government bill. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has confirmed that National would seek cross-party support for the legislation. ACT MP and the Minister of Internal Affairs Brooke van Velden said that the Government would watch the implementation of the Australian social media age restriction policy. In October 2025, Wedd's bill was drawn from the parliamentary ballot. In addition, Labour Reuben Davidson drafted a similar member's bill that would hold social media providers responsible for restricting "harmful content" and imposed NZ$50,000 fines for non-compliance. In November 2025, Luxon reiterated his support for social media age restriction legislation and said the New Zealand government would introduce a bill in 2026 before the 2026 New Zealand general election. He also confirmed that Education Minister Erica Stanford was leading an investigation into what lessons could be learnt from the Australian legislation. At the request of ACT MP Parmjeet Parmar, Parliament's Education and Workforce Committee held an inquiry into a proposed social media ban in early October 2025. The committee was led by National MP Carl Bates and received 430 submissions from 400 groups and individuals. The committee also heard from 87 in-person submissions. On 10 December 2025, the committee made 12 recommendations including restricting social media access to persons under the age of 16, re-evaluating existing legislation such as the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act and the Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015, and regulating online platforms and Internet service providers. The ACT party released a dissenting view disagreeing with the need for a law restricting social media access to under-16 year olds. In mid-May 2026, the Government confirmed that work on the proposed bill to ban under-16 year olds from social media had been paused. The New Zealand Parliament held a debate on the proposed bill on 13 May following a select committee inquiry into the harms caused by social media platforms. While the opposition Labour Party has agreed to support the member's bill, the ACT and Green parties opposed the proposed bill on the grounds that the rules were easy to circumvent, that at-risk groups could become more isolated, and that social media also harmed other age groups. == Responses == === Academia and civil society === In late July 2025, the New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties (NZCCL) expressed concern that the proposed social media age restriction could infringe upon the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, the Privacy Act 2020 and the United Nations' Convention on the Rights of the Child. The NZCCL also questioned the practicality of age verification software, a social media age limit and whether it would fulfil its stated goal of combating online harm. In August 2025, University of Auckland criminologist and senior lecturer Claire Meehan expressed concern that the social media age restriction legislation would cut children from their friendship and support networks. She also said that children and young people were digital natives who could use VPNs to circumvent the ban. Similar sentiments were echoed by Victoria University of Wellington media and communications lecturer Alex Beattie and "Ocean Today" Instagram social media influencer "Charlie." In October 2025, New Zealand Initiative representative Dr Eric Crampton expressed concern that a social media age restriction would involve the introduction of digital IDs. He argued that a new law was unnecessary and said that parents could limit their children's exposure to social media via Google's Family Link and Apple's equivalent. Similarly, Institute of Economic Affairs public policy fellow Matthew Lesh and the British Free Speech Union expressed concerns that young people could use VPNs to circumvent a social media ban, citing the spike in VPN usage in the United Kingdom following the passage of the Online Safety Act 2023. The advocacy group B416's co-chair Anna Curzon advocated for a social media ban on underage users, stating that social media apps "are made to be addictive" and made it difficult for parents to relate with their children. In late November 2025, B416's co-founder Anna Mowbray expressed support for the Government's social media age restriction bill but expressed disappointment that Luxon had not timed his announcement with the launch of the group's campaign. Generation-Z Aotearoa co-founder Lola Fisher has called on the New Zealand Government to consult with young people on the development of the legislation. === Government agencies and departments === In early October 2025, Privacy Commissioner Michael Webster expressed concern that social media platforms requiring users to prove their age via digital IDs could raise privacy concerns. Webster suggested that age verification systems could relay on various documents including passports. He said that age estimation technologies had high error rates and that age inference technologies relied on data mining. === Political parties === In early May 2025, the National Party government expressed support for a social media age restriction legislation. By contrast, its coalition partner ACT has opposed such legislation. ACT leader David Seymour described the ban as hasty and unworkable since it did not involve parents. Meanwhile, New Zealand First leader Winston Peters expressed support for a social media age restriction but said the bill should be subject to a select committee inquiry. The opposition Labour Party leader Chris Hipkins has expressed interest in a social media age restriction legislation but emphasised the need for consensus. Meanwhile, Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick said she wanted to learn more about the bill but described it as simplistic. Fellow Greens co-leader Marama Davidson said that the proposed bill would punish children and young people for the harm caused by big tech platforms. === Tech companies === In early October 2025, representatives of TikTok and Meta Platforms cautioned against proposed social media ban on under-16 years olds. During a one-day parliamentary inquiry, Ella Woods-Joyce, TikTok's public policy lead for Australia and New Zealand, and Mia Garlick, Meta's regional director of policy, expressed concern that the social media age restriction could send children and young people to less regulated online spaces. Woods-Joyce highlighted TikTok's policy of closing down accounts belonging to users under the age of 13 years while Garlick highlighted Meta's policy of placing users under the age of 16 in private accounts by default. In early February 2026 Meta's vice president and global head of safety, Antigone Da
Legal information retrieval
Legal information retrieval is the science of information retrieval applied to legal text, including legislation, case law, and scholarly works. Accurate legal information retrieval is important to provide access to the law to laymen and legal professionals. Its importance has increased because of the vast and quickly increasing amount of legal documents available through electronic means. Legal information retrieval is a part of the growing field of legal informatics. In a legal setting, it is frequently important to retrieve all information related to a specific query. However, commonly used boolean search methods (exact matches of specified terms) on full text legal documents have been shown to have an average recall rate as low as 20 percent, meaning that only 1 in 5 relevant documents are actually retrieved. In that case, researchers believed that they had retrieved over 75% of relevant documents. This may result in failing to retrieve important or precedential cases. In some jurisdictions this may be especially problematic, as legal professionals are ethically obligated to be reasonably informed as to relevant legal documents. Legal Information Retrieval attempts to increase the effectiveness of legal searches by increasing the number of relevant documents (providing a high recall rate) and reducing the number of irrelevant documents (a high precision rate). This is a difficult task, as the legal field is prone to jargon, polysemes (words that have different meanings when used in a legal context), and constant change. Techniques used to achieve these goals generally fall into three categories: boolean retrieval, manual classification of legal text, and natural language processing of legal text. == Problems == Application of standard information retrieval techniques to legal text can be more difficult than application in other subjects. One key problem is that the law rarely has an inherent taxonomy. Instead, the law is generally filled with open-ended terms, which may change over time. This can be especially true in common law countries, where each decided case can subtly change the meaning of a certain word or phrase. Legal information systems must also be programmed to deal with law-specific words and phrases. Though this is less problematic in the context of words which exist solely in law, legal texts also frequently use polysemes, words may have different meanings when used in a legal or common-speech manner, potentially both within the same document. The legal meanings may be dependent on the area of law in which it is applied. For example, in the context of European Union legislation, the term "worker" has four different meanings: Any worker as defined in Article 3(a) of Directive 89/391/EEC who habitually uses display screen equipment as a significant part of his normal work. Any person employed by an employer, including trainees and apprentices but excluding domestic servants; Any person carrying out an occupation on board a vessel, including trainees and apprentices, but excluding port pilots and shore personnel carrying out work on board a vessel at the quayside; Any person who, in the Member State concerned, is protected as an employee under national employment law and in accordance with national practice; It also has the common meaning: A person who works at a specific occupation. Though the terms may be similar, correct information retrieval must differentiate between the intended use and irrelevant uses in order to return the correct results. Even if a system overcomes the language problems inherent in law, it must still determine the relevancy of each result. In the context of judicial decisions, this requires determining the precedential value of the case. Case decisions from senior or superior courts may be more relevant than those from lower courts, even where the lower court's decision contains more discussion of the relevant facts. The opposite may be true, however, if the senior court has only a minor discussion of the topic (for example, if it is a secondary consideration in the case). An information retrieval system must also be aware of the authority of the jurisdiction. A case from a binding authority is most likely of more value than one from a non-binding authority. Additionally, the intentions of the user may determine which cases they find valuable. For instance, where a legal professional is attempting to argue a specific interpretation of law, he might find a minor court's decision which supports his position more valuable than a senior courts position which does not. He may also value similar positions from different areas of law, different jurisdictions, or dissenting opinions. Overcoming these problems can be made more difficult because of the large number of cases available. The number of legal cases available via electronic means is constantly increasing (in 2003, US appellate courts handed down approximately 500 new cases per day), meaning that an accurate legal information retrieval system must incorporate methods of both sorting past data and managing new data. == Techniques == === Boolean searches === Boolean searches, where a user may specify terms such as use of specific words or judgments by a specific court, are the most common type of search available via legal information retrieval systems. They are widely implemented but overcome few of the problems discussed above. The recall and precision rates of these searches vary depending on the implementation and searches analyzed. One study found a basic boolean search's recall rate to be roughly 20%, and its precision rate to be roughly 79%. Another study implemented a generic search (that is, not designed for legal uses) and found a recall rate of 56% and a precision rate of 72% among legal professionals. Both numbers increased when searches were run by non-legal professionals, to a 68% recall rate and 77% precision rate. This is likely explained because of the use of complex legal terms by the legal professionals. === Manual classification === In order to overcome the limits of basic boolean searches, information systems have attempted to classify case laws and statutes into more computer friendly structures. Usually, this results in the creation of an ontology to classify the texts, based on the way a legal professional might think about them. These attempt to link texts on the basis of their type, their value, and/or their topic areas. Most major legal search providers now implement some sort of classification search, such as Westlaw's “Natural Language” or LexisNexis' Headnote searches. Additionally, both of these services allow browsing of their classifications, via Westlaw's West Key Numbers or Lexis' Headnotes. Though these two search algorithms are proprietary and secret, it is known that they employ manual classification of text (though this may be computer-assisted). These systems can help overcome the majority of problems inherent in legal information retrieval systems, in that manual classification has the greatest chances of identifying landmark cases and understanding the issues that arise in the text. In one study, ontological searching resulted in a precision rate of 82% and a recall rate of 97% among legal professionals. The legal texts included, however, were carefully controlled to just a few areas of law in a specific jurisdiction. The major drawback to this approach is the requirement of using highly skilled legal professionals and large amounts of time to classify texts. As the amount of text available continues to increase, some have stated their belief that manual classification is unsustainable. === Natural language processing === In order to reduce the reliance on legal professionals and the amount of time needed, efforts have been made to create a system to automatically classify legal text and queries. Adequate translation of both would allow accurate information retrieval without the high cost of human classification. These automatic systems generally employ Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques that are adapted to the legal domain, and also require the creation of a legal ontology. Though multiple systems have been postulated, few have reported results. One system, “SMILE,” which attempted to automatically extract classifications from case texts, resulted in an f-measure (which is a calculation of both recall rate and precision) of under 0.3 (compared to perfect f-measure of 1.0). This is probably much lower than an acceptable rate for general usage. Despite the limited results, many theorists predict that the evolution of such systems will eventually replace manual classification systems. === Citation-Based ranking === In the mid-90s the Room 5 case law retrieval project used citation mining for summaries and ranked its search results based on citation type and count. This slightly pre-dated the PageRank algorithm at Stanford which was also a citation-based ranking. Ranking of results was based
Netflix Prize
The Netflix Prize was an open competition for the best collaborative filtering algorithm to predict user ratings for films, based on previous ratings without any other information about the users or films, i.e. without the users being identified except by numbers assigned for the contest. The competition was held by Netflix, a video streaming service, and was open to anyone who was neither connected with Netflix (current and former employees, agents, close relatives of Netflix employees, etc.) nor a resident of certain blocked countries (such as Cuba or North Korea). On September 21, 2009, the grand prize of US$1,000,000 was given to the BellKor's Pragmatic Chaos team which bested Netflix's own algorithm for predicting ratings by 10.06%. == Problem and data sets == Netflix provided a training data set of 100,480,507 ratings that 480,189 users gave to 17,770 movies. Each training rating is a quadruplet of the form
European Society for Fuzzy Logic and Technology
The European Society for Fuzzy Logic and Technology (EUSFLAT) is a scientific association with the aims to disseminate and promote fuzzy logic and related subjects (sometimes comprised under the collective terms soft computing or computational intelligence) and to provide a platform for exchange between scientists and engineers working in these fields. The society is both open for academic and industrial members. == History == EUSFLAT was founded in 1998 in Spain as the successor of the National Spanish Fuzzy Logic Society, ESTYLF, with the aim to open the society for members from other European countries. Since then, the society managed to attract a large share of members from outside Spain, and even beyond Europe, with the Spanish members still being the largest group inside EUSFLAT. For these historical reasons, the society is officially registered in Spain. == Conferences == Starting with 1999, EUSFLAT has been organizing its biannual conferences in odd years. Previous meetings: Palma de Mallorca, Balearic Islands, Spain, September 22–25, 1999 (jointly with National Spanish conference, ESTYLF) Leicester, United Kingdom, September 5–7, 2001 Zittau, Germany, September 10–12, 2003 Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain, September 7–9, 2005 (jointly with 11th Rencontres Francophones sur la Logique Floue et ses Applications) Ostrava, Czech Republic, September 11–14, 2007 Lisbon, Portugal, July 20–24, 2009 (jointly with 13th World Congress of the International Fuzzy Systems Association) Aix-les-Bains, France, July 18–22, 2011 (jointly with Les Rencontres Francophones sur la Logique Floue et ses Applications) Milan, Italy, September 11–13, 2013 Gijón, Spain, June, 30–3 July 2015 == Publications == EUSFLAT publishes the proceedings of its conferences in an open access manner. Until 2010, Mathware & Soft Computing was the official journal of EUSFLAT. On July 1, 2010, the International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems (Atlantis Press, ISSN 1875-6891 (print) / ISSN 1875-6883 (on-line)) became the official journal of EUSFLAT. EUSFLAT publishes an electronic newsletter with three issues a year. == Presidents == EUSFLAT is led by the President, who is elected for a two-year period, and cannot serve for more than two consecutive periods. Francesc Esteva (1998–2011) Luis Magdalena (2001–2005) Ulrich Bodenhofer (2005–2009) Javier Montero (2009–2013) Gabriella Pasi (2013–present)
Document AI
Document AI, also known as Document Intelligence, refers to a field of technology that employs machine learning (ML) techniques, such as natural language processing (NLP). These techniques are used to develop computer models capable of analyzing documents in a manner akin to human review. Through NLP, computer systems are able to understand relationships and contextual nuances in document contents, which facilitates the extraction of information and insights. Additionally, this technology enables the categorization and organization of the documents themselves. The applications of Document AI extend to processing and parsing a variety of semi-structured documents, such as forms, tables, receipts, invoices, tax forms, contracts, loan agreements, and financial reports. == Key features == Machine learning is utilized in Document AI to extract information from both printed and digital documents. This technology recognizes images, text, and characters in various languages, aiding in the extraction of insights from unstructured documents. The use of this technology can improve the speed and quality of decision-making in document analysis. Additionally, the automation of data extraction and validation can contribute to increased efficiency in document analysis processes. Since the early 2020s, the integration of large language models has extended Document AI beyond extraction toward generative tasks, including the automated drafting of forms, contracts, and document summaries. == Example == A business letter contains information in the form of text, as well as other types of information, such as the position of the text. For instance, a typical letter contains two addresses before the body of the text. The address at the very top (sometimes aligned to the right) is the sender address. This is normally followed by the date of the letter, with the place of writing. After this, the receiver address is listed. The distinction between the sender address and the receiver address is conveyed solely by the position of the address on the page, i.e. there is no textual indication like Sender: in front of the addresses. == Data dimensions and ML architecture == Data is typically distinguished into spatial data and time-series data, the former includes things like images, maps and graphs, while the latter includes signals such as stock prices or voice recordings. Document AI combines text data, which has a time dimension, with other types of data, such as the position of an address in a business letter, which is spatial. Historically in machine learning spatial data was analyzed using a convolutional neural network, and temporal data using a recurrent neural network. With the advent of dimension-type agnostic transformer architecture, these two different types of dimension can be more easily combined, Document AI is an example of this. == Benchmarks == Several public datasets are used to evaluate Document AI systems. FUNSD (Form Understanding in Noisy Scanned Documents) contains 199 annotated forms with token- and block-level labels for form understanding tasks. CORD (Consolidated Receipt Dataset) supports key information extraction from receipts. DocVQA contains approximately 50,000 questions over 12,000 document images for layout-aware visual question answering. == Common uses == Document AI systems are used to automate document processing and information extraction in business and financial workflows, including invoice and receipt processing, data entry automation, anomaly detection, mortgage processing, loan portfolio monitoring, credit risk management, and fraud detection such as counterfeit currency and fraudulent checks. They are also applied in regulatory compliance and contract analysis, including assessing changes in legal and regulatory documents. In real estate, Document AI supports document classification and structured information extraction for standardized processing and analytics. With the adoption of generative AI, Document AI systems can also generate and pre-fill structured documents such as contracts or business forms from natural language prompts.
Condensation algorithm
The condensation algorithm (Conditional Density Propagation) is a computer vision algorithm. The principal application is to detect and track the contour of objects moving in a cluttered environment. Object tracking is one of the more basic and difficult aspects of computer vision and is generally a prerequisite to object recognition. Being able to identify which pixels in an image make up the contour of an object is a non-trivial problem. Condensation is a probabilistic algorithm that attempts to solve this problem. The algorithm itself is described in detail by Isard and Blake in a publication in the International Journal of Computer Vision in 1998. One of the most interesting facets of the algorithm is that it does not compute on every pixel of the image. Rather, pixels to process are chosen at random, and only a subset of the pixels end up being processed. Multiple hypotheses about what is moving are supported naturally by the probabilistic nature of the approach. The evaluation functions come largely from previous work in the area and include many standard statistical approaches. The original part of this work is the application of particle filter estimation techniques. The algorithm's creation was inspired by the inability of Kalman filtering to perform object tracking well in the presence of significant background clutter. The presence of clutter tends to produce probability distributions for the object state which are multi-modal and therefore poorly modeled by the Kalman filter. The condensation algorithm in its most general form requires no assumptions about the probability distributions of the object or measurements. == Algorithm overview == The condensation algorithm seeks to solve the problem of estimating the conformation of an object described by a vector x t {\displaystyle \mathbf {x_{t}} } at time t {\displaystyle t} , given observations z 1 , . . . , z t {\displaystyle \mathbf {z_{1},...,z_{t}} } of the detected features in the images up to and including the current time. The algorithm outputs an estimate to the state conditional probability density p ( x t | z 1 , . . . , z t ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {z_{1},...,z_{t}} )} by applying a nonlinear filter based on factored sampling and can be thought of as a development of a Monte-Carlo method. p ( x t | z 1 , . . . , z t ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {z_{1},...,z_{t}} )} is a representation of the probability of possible conformations for the objects based on previous conformations and measurements. The condensation algorithm is a generative model since it models the joint distribution of the object and the observer. The conditional density of the object at the current time p ( x t | z 1 , . . . , z t ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {z_{1},...,z_{t}} )} is estimated as a weighted, time-indexed sample set { s t ( n ) , n = 1 , . . . , N } {\displaystyle \{s_{t}^{(n)},n=1,...,N\}} with weights π t ( n ) {\displaystyle \pi _{t}^{(n)}} . N is a parameter determining the number of sample sets chosen. A realization of p ( x t | z 1 , . . . , z t ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {z_{1},...,z_{t}} )} is obtained by sampling with replacement from the set s t {\displaystyle s_{t}} with probability equal to the corresponding element of π t {\displaystyle \pi _{t}} . The assumptions that object dynamics form a temporal Markov chain and that observations are independent of each other and the dynamics facilitate the implementation of the condensation algorithm. The first assumption allows the dynamics of the object to be entirely determined by the conditional density p ( x t | x t − 1 ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {x_{t-1}} )} . The model of the system dynamics determined by p ( x t | x t − 1 ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {x_{t-1}} )} must also be selected for the algorithm, and generally includes both deterministic and stochastic dynamics. The algorithm can be summarized by initialization at time t = 0 {\displaystyle t=0} and three steps at each time t: === Initialization === Form the initial sample set and weights by sampling according to the prior distribution. For example, specify as Gaussian and set the weights equal to each other. === Iterative procedure === Sample with replacement N {\displaystyle N} times from the set { s 0 ( n ) , n = 1 , . . . , N } {\displaystyle \{s_{0}^{(n)},n=1,...,N\}} with probability { π 0 ( n ) , n = 1 , . . . , N } {\displaystyle \{\pi _{0}^{(n)},n=1,...,N\}} to generate a realization of p ( x t | z 1 , . . . , z t ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {z_{1},...,z_{t}} )} . Apply the learned dynamics p ( x t | x t − 1 ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {x_{t-1}} )} to each element of this new set, to generate a new set { s t ( n ) } {\displaystyle \{s_{t}^{(n)}\}} . To take into account the current observation z t {\displaystyle \mathbf {z_{t}} } , set π t ( n ) = p ( z t | s ( n ) ) ∑ j = 1 N p ( z t | s ( j ) ) {\displaystyle \pi _{t}^{(n)}={\frac {p(\mathbf {z_{t}} |s^{(n)})}{\sum _{j=1}^{N}p(\mathbf {z_{t}} |s^{(j)})}}} for each element { s t ( n ) } {\displaystyle \{s_{t}^{(n)}\}} . This algorithm outputs the probability distribution p ( x t | z 1 , . . . , z t ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {z_{1},...,z_{t}} )} which can be directly used to calculate the mean position of the tracked object, as well as the other moments of the tracked object. Cumulative weights can instead be used to achieve a more efficient sampling. == Implementation considerations == Since object-tracking can be a real-time objective, consideration of algorithm efficiency becomes important. The condensation algorithm is relatively simple when compared to the computational intensity of the Ricatti equation required for Kalman filtering. The parameter N {\displaystyle N} , which determines the number of samples in the sample set, will clearly hold a trade-off in efficiency versus performance. One way to increase efficiency of the algorithm is by selecting a low degree of freedom model for representing the shape of the object. The model used by Isard 1998 is a linear parameterization of B-splines in which the splines are limited to certain configurations. Suitable configurations were found by analytically determining combinations of contours from multiple views, of the object in different poses, and through principal component analysis (PCA) on the deforming object. Isard and Blake model the object dynamics p ( x t | x t − 1 ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {x_{t-1}} )} as a second order difference equation with deterministic and stochastic components: p ( x t | x t − 1 ) ∝ e − 1 2 | | B − 1 ( ( x t − x ¯ ) − A ( x t − 1 − x ¯ ) ) | | 2 ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {x_{t-1}} )\propto e^{-{\frac {1}{2}}||B^{-1}((\mathbf {x_{t}} -\mathbf {\bar {x}} )-A(\mathbf {x_{t-1}} -\mathbf {\bar {x}} ))||^{2})}} where x ¯ {\displaystyle \mathbf {\bar {x}} } is the mean value of the state, and A {\displaystyle A} , B {\displaystyle B} are matrices representing the deterministic and stochastic components of the dynamical model respectively. A {\displaystyle A} , B {\displaystyle B} , and x ¯ {\displaystyle \mathbf {\bar {x}} } are estimated via Maximum Likelihood Estimation while the object performs typical movements. The observation model p ( z | x ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {z} |\mathbf {x} )} cannot be directly estimated from the data, requiring assumptions to be made in order to estimate it. Isard 1998 assumes that the clutter which may make the object not visible is a Poisson random process with spatial density λ {\displaystyle \lambda } and that any true target measurement is unbiased and normally distributed with standard deviation σ {\displaystyle \sigma } . The basic condensation algorithm is used to track a single object in time. It is possible to extend the condensation algorithm using a single probability distribution to describe the likely states of multiple objects to track multiple objects in a scene at the same time. Since clutter can cause the object probability distribution to split into multiple peaks, each peak represents a hypothesis about the object configuration. Smoothing is a statistical technique of conditioning the distribution based on both past and future measurements once the tracking is complete in order to reduce the effects of multiple peaks. Smoothing cannot be directly done in real-time since it requires information of future measurements. == Applications == The algorithm can be used for vision-based robot localization of mobile robots. Instead of tracking the position of an object in the scene, however, the position of the camera platform is tracked. This allows the camera platform to be globally localized given a visual map of the environment. Extensions of the condensation algorithm have also been used to recognize human gestures in image sequences. This application of the condensation algorithm impacts the ran
AI Action Summit 2025
The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Action Summit (French: Sommet pour l'action sur l'intelligence artificielle or Sommet pour l'action sur l'IA, SAIA) was held at the Grand Palais in Paris, France, from 10 to 11 February 2025. The summit was co-chaired by French President Emmanuel Macron and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The 2025 AI Action Summit followed the 2023 AI Safety Summit hosted at Bletchley Park in the UK, and the 2024 AI Seoul Summit in South Korea. This series of AI summits continued with the AI Impact Summit in Delhi, which was hosted by India in February 2026. Whereas the 2023 AI Safety Summit was attended by representatives from 29 governments and executives from only a handful of AI companies, over 1,000 participants from more than 100 countries attended the 2025 Paris AI Summit, representing government leaders, international organisations, the academic and research community, the private sector, and civil society. == Background == The First International AI Safety Report was published on 29 January 2025. Commissioned after the Bletchley Park AI Safety Summit, the report focused on the risks and threats posed by general-purpose AI, and was slated for discussion at the Paris summit as part of the "Trust in AI" pillar. Whereas the first summit was focused on the catastrophic risks of AI and their mitigation, the Paris meeting was recast as an "AI Action Summit" emphasising innovation, practical implementation, and potential economic opportunities of AI, while also exploring a broader range of risks including its environmental impact and disruptions to the labour market. In the weeks leading up to the Paris summit, government leaders had also started to rally around "national champions" in AI, partly in response to Chinese AI startup DeepSeek, which had released a new model rivalling OpenAI o1. On Sunday 9 February, French President Emmanuel Macron posted a compilation of AI-generated deepfake video clips of himself on Instagram to help publicise the start of the 2025 AI Action Summit the following day. While acknowledging the humour of the deepfakes, the real Macron states in the video that using artificial intelligence, "we can do some very big things: change healthcare, energy, life in our society". == Proceedings == === Day 1 === In her opening address, French special envoy Anne Bouverot discussed the environmental impact of AI, acknowledging the technology's "current trajectory is unsustainable". General secretary Christy Hoffman of the UNI Global Union said that "AI-driven productivity gains risk turning the technology into yet another engine of inequality, further straining our democracies". Chinese Vice Premier Zhang Guoqing made a speech expressing China's willingness "to work with other countries to promote development, safeguard security, and share achievements in the field of artificial intelligence". Google CEO Sundar Pichai said in his speech that while the rise of AI brings many risks, "The biggest risk is missing out". He discussed Google's long track record of AI research and said that the company is investing further into "deep research" agents that can autonomously search the Internet and compile a full analysis for users. A new coalition, the Robust Open Online Safety Tools (ROOST) initiative, debuted at the summit. Supported by Google, Discord, OpenAI, and Roblox, and incubated at the Institute of Global Politics at Columbia University, the organisation is developing free, open-source tools to detect and report child sexual abuse material (CSAM). In his speech closing the first day, President Emmanuel Macron emphasized that France has the capability to deliver the power required by AI companies, thanks to its production of nuclear energy. While declaring that Europe was "back in the race" for AI, Macron said that the region was "too slow" for investors, and called on the EU to "simplify regulation" and "resynchronize with the rest of the world". === Day 2 === On 11 February 2025, the French government announced its $400 million endowment of Current AI, a new foundation to support the creation of AI "public goods" including high-quality datasets and open-source tools and infrastructure. Launched by President Macron, Current AI is backed by nine governments – Finland, France, Germany, Chile, India, Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, Slovenia, and Switzerland – plus various philanthropic organisations such as the Omidyar Group and the McGovern Foundation, and private companies such as Google and Salesforce. Another initiative launched at the summit was the Coalition for Sustainable AI. Led by France, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the coalition has the support of 11 countries, five international organisations, and 37 tech companies including EDF, IBM, Nvidia, and SAP. The Summit of Heads of State and Government took place with a plenary session in the Grand Palais. Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India stressed the need to "democratise technology" and "[ensure] access to all, especially in the Global South". Vice President JD Vance of the United States used his speech to warn against "excessive regulation of the AI" which "could kill a transformative sector just as it's taking off". Vance also warned other leaders against cooperating with "authoritarian regimes" on AI, a comment widely interpreted as a reference to China. == Investments == At the summit, the European Union made several announcements related to planned investments supporting AI development. President Ursula von der Leyen of the European Commission launched InvestAI, a €200 billion initiative, including €20 billion to build four AI gigafactories to train highly complex, very large models. In addition, a coalition of more than 60 European companies launched the EU AI Champions Initiative. Led by venture capital firm General Catalyst, the coalition plans to invest €150 billion in AI-related businesses and infrastructure in Europe over five years. President Emmanuel Macron announced that private investors had pledged to invest nearly €110 billion in the AI sector in France. Financing of between €30 and €50 billion is expected from the United Arab Emirates to build a very large data centre campus, with another €20 billion from the Canadian investment firm Brookfield Corporation. French startup Mistral AI and Helsing, a German-British company, announced their partnership in developing vision-language-action models helping soldiers use AI on the battlefield. == Reactions == The Financial Times editorial board noted that the Paris summit "highlighted a shift in the dynamics towards geopolitical competition", which it characterised as "a new AI arms race" between the US and China, with Europe "trying to carve out its role". Fortune.com AI editor Jeremy Kahn described the 2025 Paris Summit as an "AI festival, complete with glitzy corporate side events and even a late night dance party", contrasting it with the "decidedly sober" mood of the inaugural AI Safety Summit at Bletchley Park. Many experts of the AI Safety Community expressed disappointment that the Paris Summit did not do enough to address AI risks, with Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei calling it a "missed opportunity". Others voicing similar concerns included David Leslie of the Alan Turing Institute and Max Tegmark of the Future of Life Institute. Reporting from Paris, technology columnist Kevin Roose of The New York Times wrote, "The biggest surprise of the Paris summit, for me, has been that policymakers can't seem to grasp how soon powerful AI systems could arrive, or how disruptive they could be." == Statement on inclusive and sustainable AI == At the summit, 58 countries, including France, China, and India, signed a joint declaration, the Statement on Inclusive and Sustainable Artificial Intelligence for People and the Planet. The statement outlines general principles such as accessibility and overcoming the digital divide; developing AI that is open, transparent, ethical, safe, and trustworthy; avoiding market concentration of AI development to encourage innovation; positive outcomes for labour markets; making AI sustainable; and promoting international cooperation and governance. The US and UK refused to sign the declaration on inclusive and sustainable AI. The UK government said in a brief statement that the international agreement did not go far enough in defining global governance of AI and addressing concerns about its impact on national security. === Signatories === The list of signatory countries to the statement for inclusive and sustainable AI in alphabetical order: Additional signatories included the following international bodies and research institutes: ALAI (Latin American Association on Internet) African Union (AU) Commission BEUC The European Consumer Organisation Center for Democracy and Technology Council of Europe European Commission (and the 27 member states) Hugging Face INRIA Institute of Advanced Study OEC