Invoicera

Invoicera is an online invoicing software. The software was created by a company with the same name that was founded in 2006, had 125 employees, and is based in India. It allows users to monitor, dispatch, and accept invoices in one web service. After signing up for the service, users are assigned a personal subdomain to set up their invoice configuration. It allows users to add clients' data to the service through uploading a Microsoft Excel file. Invoicera is compatible with businesses of varying sizes, including freelancers, small businesses, and large businesses. It is compatible with Basecamp, a project-management tool, so Invoicera can upload data from Basecamp. The software interfaces with more than 25 payment gateways. It supports subscriptions and repeated invoices and allows clients to schedule late fees when payments have not been made on time. Invoicera uses freemium model, letting users dispatch an unrestricted number of invoices to at most three customers. Chelsea Krause wrote in a 2019 review for Merchant Maverick, "Unfortunately, the software isn't as developed as it could be. Time tracking and reporting are limited and there are no live bank feeds — which is surprising for a company so focused on automation (especially since even many of the worst invoicing options out there still offer live bank feeds)." She further criticized Invoicera for having bad customer service and the software for not having recent changes. Brian Turner wrote in TechRadar that Invoicera had fewer templates compared to the other services he reviewed but "the ones offered are fully customizable". Rob Clymo wrote in TechRadar that "Invoicera lets you automate your invoicing and billing needs without too much in the way of hassle" and that although it "isn't a complete accounts solution ... it's a powerful supplement".

Integrated writing environment

An integrated writing environment (IWE) is software that provides comprehensive writing and knowledge management functionality for writers and information workers. IWEs enable writers and information workers to perform a variety of tasks related to the document in the IWE in a single environment. This provides a distraction-free workspace and streamlined writing experience. IWEs provide similar efficiency and functionality benefits to writers and information professionals that integrated development environments (IDEs) provide to software developers. == Overview == IWEs are designed to maximize productivity and help improve the quality of written work by integrating together tools that allow users to work effectively in a single application. The IWE features may include integrated content search, reversion management, outlining, note management, and reference management, as may be suitable for the target field of use. == List of IWEs == Celtx This IWE is intended for screenplay writers and has screenplay writing and management tools. Celtex provides tools for the pre-production work phase, story development, storyboarding, script breakdowns, production scheduling, and reports. Scrivener This IWE targets novel, research paper, and script writing. Scrivener provides tools to organize notes and research documents for easy access and referencing. After completing the writing, Scrivener allows the user to export the document to formats supported by common word processors, such as Microsoft Word. TeXstudio This IWE targets LaTeX documents and provides interactive spelling checker, code folding, and syntax highlighting.

Ilastik

ilastik is free open source software for image classification and segmentation. No previous experience in image processing is required to run the software. Since 2018 ilastik is further developed and maintained by Anna Kreshuk's group at European Molecular Biology Laboratory. == Features == ilastik allows user to annotate an arbitrary number of classes in images with a mouse interface. Using these user annotations and the generic (nonlinear) image features, the user can train a random forest classifier. Trained ilastik classifiers can be applied new data not included in the training set in ilastik via its batch processing functionality, or without using the graphical user interface, in headless mode. ilastik can be integrated into various related tools: Pre-trained workflows can be executed directly from ImageJ/Fiji using the ilastik-ImageJ plugin. Pre-trained ilastik Pixel Classification workflows can be run directly in Python with the ilastik Python package, which is available via conda. ilastik has a CellProfiler module to use ilastik classifiers to process images within a CellProfiler framework. == History == ilastik was first released in 2011 by scientists at the Heidelberg Collaboratory for Image Processing (HCI), University of Heidelberg. == Application == The Interactive Learning and Segmentation Toolkit Carving Cell classification and neuron classification Synapse detection Cell tracking Neural Network Classification == Resources == ilastik project is hosted on GitHub. It is a collaborative project, any contributions such as comments, bug reports, bug fixes or code contributions are welcome. The ilastik team can be contacted for user support on the image.sc forum.

Alternating decision tree

An alternating decision tree (ADTree) is a machine learning method for classification. It generalizes decision trees and has connections to boosting. An ADTree consists of an alternation of decision nodes, which specify a predicate condition, and prediction nodes, which contain a single number. An instance is classified by an ADTree by following all paths for which all decision nodes are true, and summing any prediction nodes that are traversed. == History == ADTrees were introduced by Yoav Freund and Llew Mason. However, the algorithm as presented had several typographical errors. Clarifications and optimizations were later presented by Bernhard Pfahringer, Geoffrey Holmes and Richard Kirkby. Implementations are available in Weka and JBoost. == Motivation == Original boosting algorithms typically used either decision stumps or decision trees as weak hypotheses. As an example, boosting decision stumps creates a set of T {\displaystyle T} weighted decision stumps (where T {\displaystyle T} is the number of boosting iterations), which then vote on the final classification according to their weights. Individual decision stumps are weighted according to their ability to classify the data. Boosting a simple learner results in an unstructured set of T {\displaystyle T} hypotheses, making it difficult to infer correlations between attributes. Alternating decision trees introduce structure to the set of hypotheses by requiring that they build off a hypothesis that was produced in an earlier iteration. The resulting set of hypotheses can be visualized in a tree based on the relationship between a hypothesis and its "parent." Another important feature of boosted algorithms is that the data is given a different distribution at each iteration. Instances that are misclassified are given a larger weight while accurately classified instances are given reduced weight. == Alternating decision tree structure == An alternating decision tree consists of decision nodes and prediction nodes. Decision nodes specify a predicate condition. Prediction nodes contain a single number. ADTrees always have prediction nodes as both root and leaves. An instance is classified by an ADTree by following all paths for which all decision nodes are true and summing any prediction nodes that are traversed. This is different from binary classification trees such as CART (Classification and regression tree) or C4.5 in which an instance follows only one path through the tree. === Example === The following tree was constructed using JBoost on the spambase dataset (available from the UCI Machine Learning Repository). In this example, spam is coded as 1 and regular email is coded as −1. The following table contains part of the information for a single instance. The instance is scored by summing all of the prediction nodes through which it passes. In the case of the instance above, the score is calculated as The final score of 0.657 is positive, so the instance is classified as spam. The magnitude of the value is a measure of confidence in the prediction. The original authors list three potential levels of interpretation for the set of attributes identified by an ADTree: Individual nodes can be evaluated for their own predictive ability. Sets of nodes on the same path may be interpreted as having a joint effect The tree can be interpreted as a whole. Care must be taken when interpreting individual nodes as the scores reflect a re weighting of the data in each iteration. == Description of the algorithm == The inputs to the alternating decision tree algorithm are: A set of inputs ( x 1 , y 1 ) , … , ( x m , y m ) {\displaystyle (x_{1},y_{1}),\ldots ,(x_{m},y_{m})} where x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} is a vector of attributes and y i {\displaystyle y_{i}} is either -1 or 1. Inputs are also called instances. A set of weights w i {\displaystyle w_{i}} corresponding to each instance. The fundamental element of the ADTree algorithm is the rule. A single rule consists of a precondition, a condition, and two scores. A condition is a predicate of the form "attribute value." A precondition is simply a logical conjunction of conditions. Evaluation of a rule involves a pair of nested if statements: 1 if (precondition) 2 if (condition) 3 return score_one 4 else 5 return score_two 6 end if 7 else 8 return 0 9 end if Several auxiliary functions are also required by the algorithm: W + ( c ) {\displaystyle W_{+}(c)} returns the sum of the weights of all positively labeled examples that satisfy predicate c {\displaystyle c} W − ( c ) {\displaystyle W_{-}(c)} returns the sum of the weights of all negatively labeled examples that satisfy predicate c {\displaystyle c} W ( c ) = W + ( c ) + W − ( c ) {\displaystyle W(c)=W_{+}(c)+W_{-}(c)} returns the sum of the weights of all examples that satisfy predicate c {\displaystyle c} The algorithm is as follows: 1 function ad_tree 2 input Set of m training instances 3 4 wi = 1/m for all i 5 a = 1 2 ln W + ( t r u e ) W − ( t r u e ) {\displaystyle a={\frac {1}{2}}{\textrm {ln}}{\frac {W_{+}(true)}{W_{-}(true)}}} 6 R0 = a rule with scores a and 0, precondition "true" and condition "true." 7 P = { t r u e } {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}=\{true\}} 8 C = {\displaystyle {\mathcal {C}}=} the set of all possible conditions 9 for j = 1 … T {\displaystyle j=1\dots T} 10 p ∈ P , c ∈ C {\displaystyle p\in {\mathcal {P}},c\in {\mathcal {C}}} get values that minimize z = 2 ( W + ( p ∧ c ) W − ( p ∧ c ) + W + ( p ∧ ¬ c ) W − ( p ∧ ¬ c ) ) + W ( ¬ p ) {\displaystyle z=2\left({\sqrt {W_{+}(p\wedge c)W_{-}(p\wedge c)}}+{\sqrt {W_{+}(p\wedge \neg c)W_{-}(p\wedge \neg c)}}\right)+W(\neg p)} 11 P + = p ∧ c + p ∧ ¬ c {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}+=p\wedge c+p\wedge \neg c} 12 a 1 = 1 2 ln W + ( p ∧ c ) + 1 W − ( p ∧ c ) + 1 {\displaystyle a_{1}={\frac {1}{2}}{\textrm {ln}}{\frac {W_{+}(p\wedge c)+1}{W_{-}(p\wedge c)+1}}} 13 a 2 = 1 2 ln W + ( p ∧ ¬ c ) + 1 W − ( p ∧ ¬ c ) + 1 {\displaystyle a_{2}={\frac {1}{2}}{\textrm {ln}}{\frac {W_{+}(p\wedge \neg c)+1}{W_{-}(p\wedge \neg c)+1}}} 14 Rj = new rule with precondition p, condition c, and weights a1 and a2 15 w i = w i e − y i R j ( x i ) {\displaystyle w_{i}=w_{i}e^{-y_{i}R_{j}(x_{i})}} 16 end for 17 return set of Rj The set P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}} grows by two preconditions in each iteration, and it is possible to derive the tree structure of a set of rules by making note of the precondition that is used in each successive rule. == Empirical results == Figure 6 in the original paper demonstrates that ADTrees are typically as robust as boosted decision trees and boosted decision stumps. Typically, equivalent accuracy can be achieved with a much simpler tree structure than recursive partitioning algorithms.

Random neural network

The Random Neural Network (RNN) is a mathematical representation of an interconnected network of neurons or cells which exchange spiking signals. It was invented by Erol Gelenbe and is linked to the G-network model of queueing networks which Erol Gelenbe also invented, and with his Gene Regulatory Network models. In this model, each neuronal cell state is represented by an integer whose value rises when the cell receives an excitatory spike and drops when it receives an inhibitory spike. The spikes can originate outside the network itself, or they can come from other cells in the networks. Cells whose internal excitatory state has a positive value are allowed to send out spikes of either kind to other cells in the network according to specific cell-dependent spiking rates. The model has a mathematical solution in steady-state which provides the joint probability distribution of the network in terms of the individual probabilities that each cell is excited and able to send out spikes. Computing this solution is based on solving a set of non-linear algebraic equations whose parameters are related to the spiking rates of individual cells and their connectivity to other cells, as well as the arrival rates of spikes from outside the network. The RNN is a recurrent model, i.e. a neural network that is allowed to have complex feedback loops. A highly energy-efficient implementation of random neural networks was demonstrated by Krishna Palem et al. using the Probabilistic CMOS or PCMOS technology and was shown to be c. 226–300 times more efficient in terms of Energy-Performance-Product. RNNs are also related to artificial neural networks, which (like the random neural network) have gradient-based learning algorithms. The learning algorithm for an n-node random neural network that includes feedback loops (it is also a recurrent neural network) is of computational complexity O(n^3) (the number of computations is proportional to the cube of n, the number of neurons). The random neural network can also be used with other learning algorithms such as reinforcement learning. The RNN has been shown to be a universal approximator for bounded and continuous functions.

Webmail

Webmail (or web-based email) is an email service that can be accessed using a standard web browser. It contrasts with email service accessible through a specialised email client software. Additionally, many internet service providers (ISP) provide webmail as part of their internet service package. Similarly, some web hosting providers also provide webmail as a part of their hosting package. As with any web application, webmail's main advantage over the use of a desktop email client is the ability to send and receive email anywhere from a web browser. == History == === Early implementations === The first Web Mail implementation was developed at CERN in 1993 by Phillip Hallam-Baker as a test of the HTTP protocol stack, but was not developed further. In the next two years, however, several people produced working webmail applications. In Europe, there were three implementations, Søren Vejrum's "WWW Mail", Luca Manunza's "WebMail", and Remy Wetzels' "WebMail". Søren Vejrum's "WWW Mail" was written when he was studying and working at the Copenhagen Business School in Denmark, and was released on February 28, 1995. Luca Manunza's "WebMail" was written while he was working at CRS4 in Sardinia, from an idea of Gianluigi Zanetti, with the first source release on March 30, 1995. Remy Wetzels' "WebMail" was written while he was studying at the Eindhoven University of Technology in the Netherlands for the DSE and was released early January 1995. In the United States, Matt Mankins wrote "Webex", and Bill Fitler, while at Lotus cc:Mail, began working on an implementation which he demonstrated publicly at Lotusphere on January 24, 1995. Customers who saw the cc:Mail demonstration were very enthusiastic, one recalling that they were "like an angry mob. People were yelling, 'We want this now!'". Matt Mankins, under the supervision of Dr. Burt Rosenberg at the University of Miami, released his "Webex" application source code in a post to comp.mail.misc on August 8, 1995, although it had been in use as the primary email application at the School of Architecture where Mankins worked for some months prior. Bill Fitler's webmail implementation was further developed as a commercial product, which Lotus announced and released in the fall of 1995 as cc:Mail for the World Wide Web 1.0; thereby providing an alternative means of accessing a cc:Mail message store (the usual means being a cc:Mail desktop application that operated either via dialup or within the confines of a local area network). Early commercialization of webmail was also achieved when "Webex" began to be sold by Mankins' company, DotShop, Inc., at the end of 1995. Within DotShop, "Webex" changed its name to "EMUmail"; which would be sold to companies like UPS and Rackspace until its sale to Accurev in 2001. EMUmail was one of the first applications to feature a free version that included embedded advertising, as well as a licensed version that did not. Hotmail and Four11's RocketMail both launched in 1996 as free services and immediately became very popular. === Widespread deployment === As the 1990s progressed, and into the 2000s, it became more common for the general public to have access to webmail because: many Internet service providers (such as EarthLink) and web hosting providers (such as Verio) began bundling webmail into their service offerings (often in parallel with POP/SMTP services); many other enterprises (such as universities and large corporations) also started offering webmail as a way for their user communities to access their email (either locally managed or outsourced); webmail service providers (such as Hotmail and RocketMail) emerged in 1996 as a free service to the general public, and rapidly gained in popularity. In some cases, webmail application software is developed in-house by the organizations running and managing the application, and in some cases it is obtained from software companies that develop and sell such applications, usually as part of an integrated mail server package (an early example being Netscape Messaging Server). The market for webmail application software has continued into the 2010s. == Rendering and compatibility == Email users may find the use of both a webmail client and a desktop client using the POP3 protocol presents some difficulties. For example, email messages that are downloaded by the desktop client and are removed from the server will no longer be available on the webmail client. The user is limited to previewing messages using the web client before they are downloaded by the desktop email client. However, one may choose to leave the emails on the server, in which case this problem does not occur. The use of both a webmail client and a desktop client using the IMAP4 protocol allows the contents of the mailbox to be consistently displayed in both the webmail and desktop clients and any action the user performs on messages in one interface will be reflected when the email is accessed via the other interface. There are significant differences in rendering capabilities for many popular webmail services such as Gmail, Outlook.com and Yahoo! Mail. Due to the varying treatment of HTML tags, such as