Patent Application
20170161625
The present invention relates generally to detection and prediction systems, and more particularly, some embodiments relate to systems and methods for adverse network detection.
Conventional Artificial Intelligence (AI) software systems used to identify adverse networks, such as organized crime networks, or IED (Improvised Explosive Device) networks, for example, are typically based on some kind of statistical passive code analysis and machine learning solution. Others use computer database structurization. In general, such software systems can be either “probabilistic,” or “logicist,” or some combination of both. In the case of probabilistic networks, such as Bayesian networks, for example, the usual challenge faced is the “actionality” problem—i.e., actional impotency. That is, although data knowledge is collected by such systems, there is no action methodology leading to a machine-learned conclusion or result. On the other hand, in the case of logicist networks, there are often contradictions and difficulties separating hard facts (e.g., facts that must be true) from soft facts (e.g., data or information that may be true).
In addition, conventional approaches using AI systems not only suffer from the division between probabilistic and logicist approaches to AI, but also from a controversy between Bayesian and Dempster-Shafer inferences. Bayesian inferences are generally used for exclusive events, while Dempster-Shafer inferences are generally used for correlated events, respectively. Furthermore, there is a fundamental challenge between correlation and causation of facts. A still further challenge arises when dealing with non-monotonic events (i.e., events contradictory to previous experience).
Historically, artificial intelligence and intelligent computing have been verified by the so-called Turing's test; i.e., a successful intelligent machine (computer) communicating with a human (either by voice, by playing some game, or in some other way) should be not recognizable from communication between humans. So far, several machines have passed the Turing test, including the IBM computer “Deep Blue” as a champion-level chess player, as well as a number of machine-learned card players (in hearts, bridge, etc.). In medicine, computer-based network structures based on binary databases have been developed to evaluate patient symptoms and diagnose conditions. Based on sophisticated mathematics and Monte Carlo simulations, these networks have been able to identify hidden variables in the causal chain. They have been restricted to a very limited number of variables, however.
More success has been achieved using neural networks with the ability for effective pattern recognition. These, for example, are systems based on training of synaptic weights. Such training, however, has been based on “black box” principles with no insight to synaptic buildup internal mechanisms.
Therefore, although AI machine-learning has been successful, its successes have been somewhat limited to rather narrow context cases, where the Concept of Operations (CONOPS), or the field of application has been heavily restricted. One of the typical difficulties encountered is a difficulty correlating between various causes. This has led to a redundancy problem with elements such as: improper handling of bidirectional inference; difficulties in retracting conclusions (due to non-monotonic events, for example); improper treatment of correlated sources of evidence, etc. In parallel, however, recent technological advances in parallel computation, natural language processing (NLP), and in object-oriented computer languages, such as: C++ and Java, have stimulated interest in viewing a network not merely as passive code for sorting factual knowledge, but also as a computational architecture (heuristic) reasoning about that knowledge.
The technology disclosed herein relates to Integrative Software System (ISS) technology, which in various embodiments combines two AI schools: probabilistic and logicist, together with Bayesian Inference and Binary Sensing, in the form of Bayesian Truthing Inference (BTI). The ISS, which can include digital decision generation tools, can be configured to detect, recognize and identify adverse networks by detecting Bayesian anomalous events, or BAEVENTS, in cyberspace, through the inspection of professional (or pseudo-professional) databases, or PRO-CLOUDS (could also be referred to as “CYBER-CLOUDS”).
In various embodiments, a discrete truthing space can be included with targets that might be of interest—referred to as High Value Individual Candidates (HVICs)—as sample units, and targets that are confirmed by the system as targets of interest—referred to as High Value Individuals (HVIs). In the examples provided herein, these targets can be individuals (e.g., people), while in other embodiments, targets can be other entities. Various embodiments can be configured to evaluate data and information about HVICs to determine whether they are actually HVIs.
The ISS architecture can, in some embodiments, be configured as a chain structure with elemental tasks as its nodes. It can be configured with two or more software engines. For example, in the case of two engines, one may be an intra-cloud engine, and the other an inter-cloud engine. In various embodiments, these can be supported by multiple (e.g., 2, 3, 4, a dozen, or more) supportive elemental tasks (modules).
The ISS chain can be fully actionable and can be configured to avoid the correlation/causation contradiction by applying a natural binary sensor scheme that is unidirectional, with a well-defined causation relation. This scheme can be based exclusively on sensor events and readouts (thus, avoiding correlation problems). There can also be an intra-cloud software engine (e.g., to select HVIs as yellow alarms), in parallel with a 2nd inter-cloud graph (software) engine for selecting cyber networks. Such cyber networks can be, for example, in the form of graphitis (defined in Section 2.2).
A Compound Association Identifier (CAI) can be included to identify parameters of interest (e.g., cyberphone numbers or other parameters) obtained from multiple engines, in parallel, as belonging to the same target candidates (e.g. for the same HVIC). For example, multiple engines working in parallel evaluating different data (e.g. 1 intra-cloud and the other inter-cloud) using different inferences can arrive at the same conclusion that a target candidate is one of interest. This can result in a target candidate being identified as a target or high value individual. In some embodiments, when this occurs, this can result in a red-alarm, or a flag associated with that individual, or other alert. In other embodiments, a higher level of alert may be required before reaching such a red-alarm state. In such embodiments, the alert generated as a result of 2 engines working in parallel may be an orange alarm or other mid-level alert. As will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art after reading this description, multiple levels of alarms can be utilized depending on the level of correlation.
The ISS can, in some embodiments, be fully autonomous, or semi-autonomous. The semi-autonomous system can be implemented working with the help of experts. The ISS intra-cloud software engine can be configured to work with the support of Object-Oriented-Rules (OORs), which in various embodiments are mini-computer-programs, developed in an Object-Oriented-Language such as Java, C++, or others.
Both engines can also be configured to work with the support of two novel computer tools: a Network Synthesizer System (NSS), and a Context-based Synonymous Object (CONSYN) scheme. While the OORs are non-heuristic, they can produce intra, or inter columns of daughter-OORs, or DOORs, which as heuristic OORs, can be developed semi-automatically, or automatically. The ISS can also be configured to provide automatic machine (heuristic) learning, as well as intra-cloud and inter-cloud feedback to maximize system performance, by minimizing its cost function using basic Bayesian Figures of Merit, such as, for example Positive Predictive Value (PPV). This training process can be provided in a macroscopic and microscopic way, the latter avoiding “black box” limitation. In addition to the above outer (inter-network) concept, the novel complementary inner (intra-network) concept can also be addressed.
PPVs can be automated (e.g., based on past information and positive hits, without human intervention), or they may be based at least in part on human-supplied information, such as, for example, a human score. PPV scores can provide a ‘confidence factor’ in the identification of an HVIC as an HVI.
Inner Networks.
It should be noted that the adverse networks, such as terrorist and organized crime networks, represent groups that are non-adverse from an intra-group perspective. That is, within the group the members are not typically adverse to one another. From this perspective, they can be considered as inner networks, where the decision process modeling is important. This is also addressed by the technology disclosed herein, based on a so-called moral skew factor, and parametric decision process, as explained in Sections 1, 3 and 7, and in
The present invention, in accordance with one or more various embodiments, is described in detail with reference to the following figures. The drawings are provided for purposes of illustration only and merely depict typical or example embodiments of the invention. These drawings are provided to facilitate the reader's understanding of the invention and shall not be considered limiting of the breadth, scope, or applicability of the invention. It should be noted that for clarity and ease of illustration these drawings are not necessarily made to scale.
Some of the figures included herein illustrate various embodiments of the invention from different viewing angles. Although the accompanying descriptive text may refer to specific spatial orientations, such references are merely descriptive and do not imply or require that the invention be implemented or used in a particular spatial orientation unless explicitly stated otherwise.
The figures are not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the precise form disclosed. It should be understood that the invention can be practiced with modification and alteration, and that the invention be limited only by the claims and the equivalents thereof.
Section 1: ISS Inner and Outer Network Structures
1.1 Network Inner and Outer Structures Summary
This Section discusses both inner and outer network structures, which can be viewed in some contexts as “different sides of the same coin.” The outer and inner network structures are each discussed in greater detail in later Sections of this document.
1.1.1 the Importance of Outer and Inner Network Structures
As described above, although adverse (or, hostile) networks such as terrorist and organized crime networks may be externally adverse, internally, they may not be adverse because the network members often cooperate among themselves to achieve their objectives. Therefore, any network, whether or not adverse, has some internal dynamics, which can influence its efficiency. In particular, a higher level of coherency between adverse-network members typically leads to a more successful network operation. Also, surveillance of such adverse networks may be difficult due to legal constraints. Accordingly, an understanding of the motivation of network members (Groups of Interest, or individuals) typically does help in network surveillance and improves prognostics of their action. The Inner Network structure taxonomy typically includes a network (group) and network members. As also described above, the network members may be either individuals, or sub-groups referred to as Groups of Interest (GOIs).
1.1.2 an Example Role for the Moral Skew Factor Help in Network Surveillance
As stated above, “people see us differently from how we see ourselves.” Therefore, processes in various embodiments can be implemented with an understanding as to why people make certain decisions (preferably, without asking them about it). Accordingly, with this understanding, the system can better predict the actions of these individuals in general, and some hostile operations, in particular. The moral skew factor is a mathematical tool that may be used to predict, or better prognose such decision. This can be accomplished, for example, by adding a vectorial scalar product into network coherence coupling modeling.
1.1.3 Use of a Parametric Decision
The network decision process in various embodiments can be difficult to present in mathematical form for a generalized case. Therefore, to aid in the reader's understanding, it is presented herein in terms of a specific context or example. By introducing a Parametric Decision Ensemble (PDE) (i.e., by adding a statistical ensemble, which specifies a class of decisions that can be described by the same decision parameter), various embodiments can be presented to preserve both specificity and maximum generality within the network decision process.
1.1.4 Differentiation Between the Coherency Matrix and the Moral Skew Factor
The Moral Skew Effect (MSE) in general, and the moral skew factor in particular, describe a moral dichotomy between the Freudian super-ego (or ISS inter-ego) and the Freudian id (or ISS intra-ego). This may be manifested in various embodiments by moral tastes (or, senses), and self-interest tastes (or, senses). The moral skew factor is defined as cos(θi) where θi is the angle between unit vectors and {circumflex over (k)}i in which ŝi represents a parametric decision, Si, and {circumflex over (k)}i represents coherent couplings. It can be assumed that ŝi is inclinated into intra-ego (self-interest), while {circumflex over (k)}i is inclinated into inter-ego moral senses (tastes). As such, cos(θi) is projected, globally, onto all network members, while coherency matrix elements, Tij, are specific for each network member.
1.1.5 Role of Inter-Ego and Intra-Ego Kernel Elements
Eq. (142) in Section 7.76, below, defines a non-diagonal kernel vector, {right arrow over (H)}i, which is characterized by two unit vectors, intra-ego-vector, ŝi, and inter-ego-vector, {circumflex over (k)}i (the name “non-diagonal” is related to “kernel,” not to “vector”). The scalar, Gi, is described by both intra-ego intensities, Ii, and inter-ego non-diagonal coherency matrix elements, Rij, as in Eq. (141), also in paragraph [0366].
1.1.6 Role of Correlation (Coherence) and Experts in Inner and Outer Network Structures
Because the outer network ISS structure may be either automated or semi-automated, it is preferably configured to avoid dichotomy between correlation and causation. Therefore, in various embodiments it is based on a non-correlated binary sensor chain structure in which anomalous events are separated from regular events (binary sensors are based on exclusive (non-correlated) events). The outer ISS system in various embodiments has two separate software engines, the intra-cloud engine and the inter-cloud engine. These can be configured, for example, such that the 1st software engine does not avoid un-correlated events, while the 2nd software engine uses correlated events.
In contrast, the inner network ISS structure is heavily based on experts' involvement, which can be used, for example, to determine Tij, and cos(θi)-values, in which correlation, or coherent coupling is the predominant effect. However, the role of experts is not necessarily supervisory and may be advisory, while the network mathematical structure can be configured to provide a supervision process itself.
1.1.7 Geometry of Non-Diagonal Kernel Algebra
This mathematical section describes relationships between geometry and algebra of a non-diagonal kernel, Gi, defined by Eq. (143), where the non-diagonal kernel pseudo-vector (the term “pseudo” describes the fact that only part of the kernel {right arrow over (H)}i vector is included, but {right arrow over (G)}i is still a vector itself) {right arrow over (G)}i, is:
{right arrow over (G)}
i
={circumflex over (k)}
i
G
i (1)
We also define the intensity vector, {right arrow over (I)}i, which, according to Eq. (3), is
{right arrow over (I)}
i
=ŝ
i
I
i. (2)
We see that scalar product of these vectors, is
{right arrow over (G)}
i
·{right arrow over (I)}
i
={circumflex over (k)}
i
·ŝ
i
G
i
I
i
=G
i
I
i cos θi (3)
while non-normalized weight, Wi, of the weighted average mean of parametric decision, Si, has according to Eq. (141) the following form:
W
i
=I
i
+G
i cos θi=I1+Gi∥ (4)
where Gi∥ is {right arrow over (G)}i-vector projection onto ŝi-vector direction, as illustrated in
In
1.1.8 Role of Mathematics in the Integrative Software System (ISS)
The role of mathematics in the ISS is important, and is shown in
In general, in the case of ISS, the mathematical formalism does allow both the inner and outer network processes to be more automated. Although the inner network structure is less automated than the outer one, it provides a skeleton of how to supervise the process. For example, in various embodiments, the role of experts is reduced to an advisory role, rather than a supervisory one.
1.1.9 Reduction and Re-Normalization of Unit Vector Bases
In the 1st approximation, the inter-ego and intra-ego unit vector bases can be considered as mutually orthogonal and internally orthogonal. In such a case, they can be reduced to single dimensions, as in
1.1.10 Radicalization Level as Decision Parameter
A parametric decision space such as a Parametric Radicalization Level (PRL), defining ensemble with parameter values, Si, can be a good example of how to narrow the context while preserving generality. Consider a young population of some country (state) as an inner network, represented by individuals and Groups of Interest (Influence). By experiment, find relevant kernel components can be found: Ii, and Tij. The process can then formulate a non-diagonal vector, {right arrow over (Hi)}, including pseudo-vector {right arrow over (Gi)} and intensity vector Ii. Then, by applying a construction as in
1.1.11 Comparison Summary
In Table 1, a comparison of ISS outer and inner network structures is presented. Table 1 summarizes the analysis provided in this Section.
Referring now to Table 1 the correlation (No. 1) is predominant in the inner network structure, mostly through a coherency matrix. In contrast, in the outer case, the correlation is dominant only within the inter-cloud (graphic) engine. In both cases, cost functions (No. 2) may be applied for system metrics purposes. The inner network structure may also be more general (No. 3) since it may be applied not only to adverse (hostile) networks but also to general social networks. On the other hand, the automation (No. 4) is higher in outer case, and, in parallel, the experts' involvement (No. 8) is lower, in the outer case. The basic mathematics (No. 5) of the outer structure are based on Bayesian inference (Section 4), while, in the inner structure case, the vector algebra is a basic mathematical tool. Of course, the network relation (No. 6) is inter-network, and intra-network for outer and inner cases, respectively, while the basic FoM (Figure of Merit) is Bayesian Positive Predictive Value (PPV) for outer, and prognostic accuracy of the parametric decision weighted mean, for the inner network structure (No. 7).
The software system structure (No. 9) is more complex in the outer case (two software engines). Finally, the basic methodology (No. 10) of the outer structure is based on anomalous events (BAEVENTS) extraction, while, the inner case phenomenology is mostly based on Moral Skew Effect (MSE), in general, and on Moral Skew Factor, in particular.
Section 2: Example ISS Concepts, Components and Architecture (Outer Network)
2.1 ISS Logic Scheme
Various embodiments can include a feedback loop. The feedback loop can be used, for example, for training purposes. System output 106 can be fed back via feedback loop 107 in the form of Bayesian Truthing Feedback, 108. Through interface 109, Bayesian Truthing Feedback 108 can be connected with population interface for truthing of priors (targets), and likelihood probabilities, 110; then, feedback loop 107, is closed. The software engine 101 may be supported by a Bayesian Truthing Inference 113.
2.2 Graphitis
The example graphiti shown in
2.3 System Architecture
In the illustrated example, an exemplary HVIC (High Value Individual Candidate) 225 is identified with its cyberaddress 226. The identity between the two can be provided due to a Compound Association Identifier (CAI), with its connection 228. Therefore, the CAI, representing correlation connection 228, is separated from the intra-cloud causation process, in order to avoid contradiction between correlation and causation. The professional clouds (PRO-CLOUDS): 222, 223, and 224, represent different possible HVI (High Value Individual) professions. In the case of an HVI network, expemplary professions are given in Table 2.
Table 2 below is an example identification of selected PRO-CLOUDS. This example assumes 11 IED network member professions, and 11 corresponding PRO-CLOUDS. In various embodiments, the intra-cloud software engine can work, in parallel, with all of the PRO-CLOUDS, at the same time.
2.4 ISS Cyberspace, Truthing (Sample) Space and System Envelope
In general, cyberspace is a computer habitat made up of interdependent network and information technology (IT) infrastructures, including the Internet, telecommunication networks, social networks (e.g., facebook), computer systems, as well as embedded processors and controllers. It has cyberaddresses, referred to herein at times as cyberphone numbers (CP#). These can include phone numbers as a simple example, as well as internet addresses, e-mail addresses, etc. Hyperspace, including physical space and cyberspace, generally refers to an abstractive space including geophysical (x, y, z, t) coordinates and cyber-coordinates (ξ, η, . . . ), representing cyberspace. Cyber-coordinates can include discrete coordinates such as cyberphone addresses, and cyberphone numbers (CP#).
In contrast, the (Bayesian) Truthing (Sample) space is a new abstractive space created for purposes such as system experimental validation (truthing) and training. In such a space, the HVIC is a sample unit, while the HVI is a target. Within this space, the Bayesian Truthing Inference (BTI) is introduced as a novel approach to Bayesian inference for ISS purposes. The number of sample units, m, is preferably sufficiently large in order to justify using statistical principles, including both classical statistics and Bayesian statistics.
Classical statistics is based on a null hypothesis typically applied to normal (Gaussian) distributions. In such classical statistics, an anomaly is defined by showing that the null hypothesis occurrence has a very small probability. Bayesian statistics, on the other hand, is based on conditional probabilities, and absolute probabilities (prior known events). The conditional probabilities can be direct (likelihood) and inverse (Bayesian), the latter including, for example PPV (Positive Predictive Value), and NPV (Negative Predictive Value). In some embodiments, Bayesian algebra, or Bayesian statistics, can be applied for system training and experimental validation (truthing). Thus, the ISS can have a well-defined metrics envelope (including Key Performance Parameters (KPPs), or Figures of Merit (FoMs)), as well as inputs and outputs. The inputs can include HVIC data coming from pro clouds, while the outputs can include graphical results (e.g., graphitis), alarms (e.g., yellow/red alarms), and KPP/FoM statistical summaries as well as metadata.
Examples of a system chain structure, system modules (sub-systems) and Bayesian Truthing Inference, as well as system performance and concepts of operation (CONOPS) are described below.
Section 3: Example System Chain Structure (Outer and Inner Network)
3.1 System Chain Structure
3.2 System Engines and Feedback
Still referring to
3.3 Intra-Cloud Engine Set
In the example illustrated in
3.4 HVI Recommendation Process
The HVI recommendation process in this example is provided by Bayesian cyber-sensors CS1, CS2, CS3, CS4, denoted as 407, 408, 409, and 410, respectively. In some embodiments, they are defined in a narrow sense as Bayesian cyber sensors (BCS), only. The illustrated quantity, four, is exemplary, and other quantities can be used. In various embodiments, each cyber-sensor applies one or more specific Objected-Oriented-Rules (OORs), or its derivative, DOOR, into a given HVIC, within a given PRO-CLOUD. This can be done, for example, to show an HVIC's anomaly against a regular (normal) pattern. In this example, each CS 407, 408, 409, and 410, has a corresponding readout sub-module R1, R2, R3, R4 to produce a ranking. For example, higher anomalies receive higher ranking, and vice-versa. Sensor readouts: R1, R2, R3, R4, are denoted by 411, 412, 413, and 414, respectively. In some embodiments, the rankings can be weighted with a weight, w. The weighting, for example, can be within a range:
0<w<1 (6)
By using voting logic, the weighted combination (e.g., sum) can be produced as a FoM by sub-module 404. This HVI recommendation process can be repeated with other HVICs, in sequence, or in parallel, the latter one through parallel branches 415, 416, etc.
(Cyber-sensor readout anomaly). Consider a financial PRO-CLOUD as an example. Consider further that the goal in this example is to determine whether an anomaly exists for a given HVIC presenting him or herself as a banker. Thus, the ISS can be configured, for example, to check the HVIC's financial assets. If, for example, the ISS finds the HVIC's personal assets below a certain threshold for a given country (e.g., $10,000 in a country such as Canada, for example), then its readout sub-module (e.g., R2) gives the HVIC a high ranking (i.e., a high anomaly), such as a “9,” in a scale of 0-10. However, if the HVIC's country is a third world country, for example, R2's ranking may be much lower (lower anomaly).
Assume the answer for EXAMPLE 1 cannot be found. Then, in this follow-on example, the ISS repeats the process with a similar OOR, or DOOR. If the ISS is not able to find an answer in a predetermined number of tries (e.g., three sequential trials), this itself can be flagged as an anomaly, resulting in a high ranking.
As these examples illustrate, in various embodiments, the process can be configured to (1) identify or determine tests or rules (e.g., OORs or DOORs) associated with validating an HVIC or determining whether an anomaly exists; (2) execute those rules (sequentially or in parallel) to determine a result and rank the result with a range from non-anomoulous to highly anomalous; (3) weight the rankings where appropriate; and (4) make a recommendation regarding whether the HVIC should be considered an HVI based on the rankings (e.g., by summing or otherwise combining the rankings).
3.5 Object-Oriented Rules
The Object-Oriented Rules (OORs) may, in general, be simple computer mini-programs to produce BAEVENTS within a given PRO-CLOUD. Therefore, in various embodiments the OORs may be cloud-specific, or intra-cloud. (However, their daughters, or derivatives (DOORs) can be also inter-cloud). The OORs may be developed using an object-oriented computer language such as, for example, C++, or Java. Table 5 shows example list of OORs, suitable for an Organized Crime Network as an example of adverse network. While non-heuristic OORs are generally developed manually, the heuristic DOORs can be developed semi-automatically, or automatically.
Apply OOR 8 for two (2) keywords: “GOOD,” and “OO,” including word record: HELLO (1), GOOD BYE (2), BLOOD (3), GOOD (4), and GOODMAN (5).
Considering keyword: “Good,” the match is for the following words: “GOOD BYE” (2), “GOOD” (4), and “GOODMAN” (5).
Considering keyword: “OO,” the match is for four (4) words: (2), (3), (4), and (5).
3.5 Development Method for DOORs
Consider the development of Daughter Object-Oriented Rules (DOORs) as a consequence of applying Boolean logic to Object-Oriented Rules (OORs), the latter developed by software engineers. In contrast, the DOORs can be developed semi-automatically, or automatically within intra-cloud or inter-cloud schemes. The Boolean logic can be developed by using either set theory, or binary numbers algebra.
In the example illustrated in
The OR-operation can be understood as “A, or B, or both.” In contrast, the XOR-operation is: “A, or B.” Both operations: OR and XOR, are shown in
According to the example of
3.6 DOORs Based on AND-Operation
Using Table 5 we can select two OORs: OOR 2 and OOR 8, and apply the AND-operation to them.
In
In
3.7 Context-Based Synonymous Object
The Context-based Synonymous Object, or CONSYN object concept is a generalization of the OORs (Object-Oriented-Rules), based on object-oriented computer languages such as, for example, C++, Java, or C#. These languages have been created as a response to a practical need: to modify the object attributes, context and other object elements (defined as object structure), without modifying the overall object structure.
In the context of the ISS, the entity may be considered as an individual (e.g., a person), or a thing actually existing, such as, for example, HVI, HVIC, event, object, etc. In particular, an HVI and HVIC may be considered as an object including its context, with such context attributes as: e.g. location (within: x, y, z, t-coordinate system); his/her state (e.g., motion, activity, physical/emotional condition, etc.); reachability (all cyberspace media may be included); environmental conditions or surroundings such as geophysical ones, selection/presentation of cyberinformation, etc.; identification (e.g., various typed of IDs, such as driver license, biometric, his/her name, cyberaddress, individual features/physical and/or mental markings, etc.); other people and objects belonging to the object and its context (e.g., relatives, friends, rats, dogs, etc.); personal preferences; object-specific databases, and other documents belonging to his/her context.
All these object attributes together with the object itself may be used to create a Context-based Synonymous (CONSYN) object status, being used within the ISS chain structure, especially including both software engines. They can be organized within a CONSYN object GUI (Graphical User Interface), together with other (possibly: COTS/GOTS) GUIs, and PRO-CLOUDS, as shown in
In
In the illustrated example, only some PRO-CLOUDS are supporting a given GUI (e.g., all three (3) PRO-CLOUDS support GUI 1, 2008, while only two (2) PRO-CLOUDS 2004, and 2005, support GUI 2, 2001, and GUI 3, 2002). The CONSYN GUI 2008 supports CONSYN elements: C1, C2, C3, C4. Some of them, such as C1, 2009, can be one of the context elements, discussed in paragraph [00125], including C2, 2010; while, other CONSYN elements, 2011, 2012, can comprise various cybersensors. All these components may be summarized into CONSYN algorithm 2013, which has bi-directional connection with GUI 1. Similarly, GUI 2 2001 and GUI 3 2002 in this example have bi-directional connections 2015 and 2016 with their algorithms 2017 and 2018. The same can be said for bi-directional connections between summary CONSYN algorithm 2019 and partition algorithms such as 2020, 2021, and 2022.
This example illustrates that the CONSYN object concept may be a context-centric one, a feature of this technology, which, itself, has a specific context of the ISS chain structure. The bi-directionality of some connections in
3.8 Link Analysis (Network Synthesizer System)
The ISS applies the Network Synthesizer System (NSS), as in module #11 of the ISS (see
This number represents the total number of telephone conversations per a given interval, such as during one week, for example. While the 1st layer may be represented by the graphiti, 4005, as in
YELLOW BURST:TEC;“◯” (7a)
ORANGE BURST:SEC;“□” (7b)
RED:BOTH(TEC and SEC);“∇” (7c)
In the example of
CONOPS.
The application of specific layers may be regulated by an ISS feedback system, according to Section 3.9, where a Compound Association Identifier (CAI) is described. First, it may be useful to consider a threshold generating occurrence of the connection (below this threshold, the connection does not exist in cyberspace). This stage can be considered as a zero-layer, one of the simplest ones. After the graphiti is defined, in some embodiments any layer of description can be applied, depending on the system of OORs applied for a specific situation.
3.9 Compound Association Identifier and Identification (ID) Method
The Compound association Identifier (CAI) may be developed for indirect association between a given HVIC and its cyberphone number (CP#).
Consider as another example an IED network and a PRO-CLOUD of Bomb Makers as in Table 2, #3. Assume that the HVIC is identified as an HVI and that a goal is to determine whether he or she belongs to a specific graphiti. Further assume that the full list of CP#s, produced by graph engine #10 is available. The process can be configured to search all other PRO-CLOUDS containing CP#s lists. This exemplary situation is shown in
According to the example of
3.10 Clock Anomaly
The graph engine #10 operation can also be performed by tracing a clock anomaly (CA). Assume for example that an HVIC Makes a number of calls and that the calls are counted and time-stamped. In various embodiments, the fact that he/she is making many calls does not automatically qualify this person as BAEVENT. However, a burst of telephone calls within a short duration (e.g., within on day) can be qualified as the BAEVENT. Therefore, a given number of calls above a predetermined threshold, within a time window can qualify as a BAEVENT. Likewise a calls/time ratio above a predetermined threshold may also qualify. In circumstances where the burst is in a spatial and/or temporal proximity to an HVI-like event, the likelihood can be increased.
As an example, the burst threshold can be set as ten (10) calls per day, for example, and the threshold can be regulated. If such a phone call burst (PCB) occurs within a time window of a terrorist-attractive event, it can be qualified as a soft BAEVENT (e.g., a medium ranking) in this example. This can be referred to as being the result of Temporal Event Correlation (TEC). If the phone call burst occurs in the geographic vicinity of some characteristic event, then, in this example, there is a Spatial Event Correlation (SEC), resulting in a medium rank, or a soft BAEVENT. If they both (TEC and SEC) arrive for the same HVIC, then this can be classified as a high-ranking BAEVENT.
3.11 Parametric Decision and Coherent Coupling
In order to avoid a correlation/causation contradiction, various embodiments separate causation and correlation methods within the ISS chain structure, as discussed above in Section 1.0. In particular, within this separation, HVIs may be organized within various kinds of social networks, such as terrorist networks, for example. Accordingly, in various embodiments, dynamic decision processes can be included, which, for example, can be dependent on power (intensity) and coherent coupling between HVIs, or other social network members. Whenever and wherever a decision should be made, there may be a spectrum of decisions to be considered, where one of them, (not necessarily the optimal one) will be selected. This section describes example processes for predicting the selected decision, using novel modeling based on coherent coupling.
In various embodiments, the system can be configured to consider the expected decision as weighted mean, <S>, where S-decision, and < . . . > symbolizes the mean average, while Si is a decision preferred by ith-member of a social network, and wi is his/her weight, normalized to unity. This weight may be proportional to his/her strength, influence or power (intensity) within the network.
In further embodiments, the decision spectrum within the network for a given decision may be parameterized as a positive integer set (e.g., S1, S2, S3, . . . , where S1<S2<S3, . . . ). A decision parameter can be, for example, a risk factor, a cost factor, etc. The system may be configured such that a higher risk results in a higher S-value, and vice versa.
Coherent coupling may also be used as part of the analysis. Assume, for example, a quantity of N social network members (e.g., i=1, 2, 3, . . . , N) organized in the form of a graph (not graphiti), where i-nodes denote members and edges denote their mutual couplings. For example, edge ij represents a coupling between the ith and jth members. The member's strength, or kernel Ki, can depend on his/her own strength, influence or intensity, Ii, and his/her coherent coupling. The coherent coupling ij-term is proportional to a geometrical mean √{square root over (IiIj)} among member intensities, as well as to a coherency matrix element Tij. Coherency matrix element Tij may be defined as: Tii=1, and Tij≦1. The number of such coherent couplings for N-number of members is N (N−1)/2. For example, for N=5, we obtain 10 coherent connections.
However, these connections may be bi-directional, and matrix element, Tij, does not need to be equal to Tji, in general. In addition, there may also be, N self-couplings. Therefore, the total number of couplings, may be:
3.11.1 Mathematical Model
The decision weighted mean, <S>, is
where ith-weight, is
The social network members (i=1, 2, . . . N) may be organized within a graph, as shown in
The strength kernel, Ki, may be defined as:
where, for diagonal elements of the coherency matrix, Tij, we have:
T
ii=1 (12)
while all (real, positive) matrix elements satisfy the inequality:
T
ij≦1 (13)
I
i
=I=CONSTANT (14)
and, Eq. (7) becomes:
and, the weight, is
In other words, the weight depends only on the coherency matrix elements. This represents a crowd-like environment, where N is a large number. In the case where all coupling elements are equal:
T
ij
=T=const (17)
And the weight simply becomes
However, this formula is valid only for very strong couplings, since: Tii=1.
Normal Parametric Order.
For purposes of discussion, consider a natural assumption that the coupling is the strongest between members with close parameters. This can be accomplished, for example, by applying a Normal Parametric Order (NPO).
S
1
<S
2
<S
3 (19)
as shown in
k=i−j (20)
Thus, the NPO represents space-invariant case, in the form:
T
ij
=T
i-j
=T
k (21)
Now, the NPO can be defined as the system with the following basic properties for the coherency matrix elements (as shown in
a) Space invariant (22a)
b) Symmetrical (22b)
c) Monotonic (22c)
In
Also, the NPO is symmetrical (please, see, Eq. 22(b)) because:
T
k
=T
−k (23)
The NPO is also monotonic (22c), or constantly decreasing. In contrast, the abnormal or anomalous distribution will violate one or more of those properties. As an example of the NPO distribution, consider another case in which N=3 as illustrated in
T
0=1; T1=T−1=0.5; T2=T−2=0 (24a;24b;24c)
In
For illustration, we consider two examples, one satisfying Eqs. (24a; 24b; and 24c) and the other one not satisfying this relation. In both cases, the following parametric decision parameter values apply:
S
1=1; S2=5; S3=10 (25a;25b;25c)
In the 1st case, the kernel values are:
K
1
=T
11
I
1
+T
12√{square root over (I1I2)}+T13√{square root over (I1I3)}=(1)I+(0.5)I+(0)I=1.5I (26)
K
2
=T
21√{square root over (I2I1)}+T22I2+T23√{square root over (I2I3)}=(0.5)I+(1)I+(0.5)I=2I (27)
K
3
=T
31√{square root over (I3I1)}+T32√{square root over (I3I2)}+T33I3=(0)I+(0.5)I+(1)I=1.5I (28)
Thus, the kernel sum, is
K
1
+K
2
+K
3=1.5I+2I+1.5I=5I (29)
and, the weights, are:
w
1=1.5/5=0.3; w2=2/5=0.4; w3=1.5/5=0.3 (30a;30b;30c)
Therefore, the weighted (decision) mean, is
<S>=(1)(0.3)+5(0.4)+10(0.3)=0.3+2+3=5.3 (31)
In the 2nd case, we assume that Eq. (14) is not satisfied. Instead, we assume:
I
1=4Io; I2=Io; I3=Io (32a;32b;32c)
Then, we have:
K
1=(1)4Io+(0.5)√{square root over (4IoIo)}+(0)√{square root over (4IoIo)}=4Io+1Io+0=5Io (33)
K
2=(0.5)(2Io)+(1)(Io)+(0.5)(Io)=2.5Io (34)
K
3=(0)Io+(0.5)Io+(1)Io=1.5Io (35)
and,
K
1
+K
2
+K
3=5Io+2.5Io+1.5Io=9Io (36)
and, the weights, are
w
1=5/9=0.55; w2=2.5/9=0.28; w3==1.5/9=0.17 (37)
As a check, the following relation can be examined:
w
1
+w
2
+w
3=55+0.28+0.17=1 (38)
Thus, the mean decision, is
<S>=1(0.55)+5(0.28)+10(0.17)=3.61 (39)
3.11.2 Anomalous Coupling
Any deviations from the Normal Parametric Order, we classify as Anomalous Coherent Coupling (ACC). Such deviations may be presented in the series form:
T
ij
=T
ij
(0)
+T
ij
(1)
+T
ij
(2)+ . . . (40)
3.11.3 Dynamic Coupling
In addition to the anomalies, the coherent coupling can be a dynamic coupling. In some embodiments, it can be in the form:
T
ij
=T
ij(t) (41)
For prediction purposes, the process may typically begin with the normal form, and then introduce deviations according to Eq. (40). Then, the weighted mean, <S>, will be evaluated as a function of time; leading to a new or refined conclusion. The coherency matrix (and intensity) can also be changed by design in order to model or evaluate what would happen if conditions were to change.
3.11.4 Inter-Group Coupling
Group interaction can have a similar form to an interaction between individuals. However, in some embodiments, group kernels are introduced as more global figures. These can be in the form:
K
m
; m=1,2,3, . . . M (42)
where M is the number of groups, and m is a group index. The system can be configured to also apply other formulas (e.g., 6-7), in an analogous fashion.
Section 4: Bayesian Truthing Inference (Outer Network)
4.1 Bayesian Inference and Binary Sensors
The experimental validation (truthing) used by the systems and methods described herein is, in some embodiments, based on a Bayesian Truthing Inference (BTI). The BTI is a novel concept derived from Bayesian inference and Binary Sensors formalism. Following signal theory, consider two exclusive events: a signal (target) event, denoted by the capital letter 5; and a no-target event (noise), denoted as N, with so-called prior absolute probabilities, p(S) and p(N), respectively. These can be configured to satisfy the conservation relation:
p(S)+p(N)=1 (44)
The binary event (S, N) is detected by binary sensor, with two exclusive readings. For example two readings can be an alarm (5′) and no alarm (N′). Their probabilities can satisfy the conservation relation:
p(S′)+p(N′)=1 (45)
In the ISS case, the binary sensor decision may be made by sub-module #2b 404, as shown in
Likelihood Probabilities.
The likelihood probabilities are (direct) conditional probabilities about the probability of the binary decisions S′ or N′, assuming that the binary event occurred. It is noted that symbols “S” should not be confused with the parametric decision symbol.
p(S′|S)—probability of detection (POD) (46a)
p(N′|N)—probability of rejection (POR) (46b)
p(S′|N)—probability of false positives (PFP) (46c)
p(N′|S)—probability of false negatives (PFN) (46d)
They satisfy the following conservation relations:
p(S′|S)+p(N′|S)=1 (47)
p(S′|N)+p(N′|N)=1 (48)
4.2 Positive Predictive Value and Bayesian Paradox
Using Bayes theorem, inverse conditional probabilities such as p(S|S′), p(N|N′), p(N|S′), and p(S|N′) can also be considered and utilized. Probabilities p(S|S′) p(N|N′) may be important for the evaluation, including that of the Positive Predictive Value (PPV). The Positive Predictive Value can be in the form:
(PPV)=p(S|S′) (49)
and Negative Predictive Value (NPV), in the form:
(NPV)=p(N|N′) (50)
Using Bayes theorem for binary sensors the following relation for (PPV) FOM can be derived:
Because the target events are usually rare, we can write:
p(S)<<1 (53)
thus, p(N)≅1. Also, false negatives are usually low: p(N′|S)<<1; thus,
p(S′|S)≅1 (54)
and Eq. (10) reduces to the following form:
This formula may be referred to as the Bayesian Paradox, because, in spite of high value of Probability of Detection, as in Eq. (54), the PPV-critical figure can be low, especially for a low prior (target) population, as in Eq. (53).
i.e., if the prior probability, p(S), is smaller than the probability of false positives, p(S′|N), then, the (PPV) is smaller than 50%. Thus, in order to obtain high (PPV)-values, the system can be configured to produce a relatively high prior population. In some embodiments, this is much higher than likelihood probability of false positives:
p(S′|N)<<p(S)(PPV)≅1 (57)
In contrast to the PPV, the NPV-figure is typically always close to 100%, in practice.
4.3 Bayesian Truthing
4.3.1 Truthing Sampling Space
The Truthing Sampling Space (TSS) is discrete and can be quantized by sample units (such as HVICs, for example) in which the number of samples, m, may be very large:
m>>1 (58)
Nine exemplary truthing parameters can be considered in various embodiments. For purposes of discussion, these example parameters are defined by lower case letters as listed below.
m—number of samples (59a)
s—number of targets(signals) (59b)
n—number of no-targets(noises) (59c)
a—number of alarms (59d)
a
1—number of true alarms (59e)
a
2—number of false alarms (56f)
b—number of no-alarms (59g)
b
1—number of true no-alarms (59h)
b
2—number of false no-alarms (59i)
Using these parameters, Bayesian probabilities, such as a prior (target) probability, for example, can be defined:
Based on this method, the previous statistical relations can be derived using truthing parameters such as:
n+s=m (61a)
a+b=m (61b)
a=a
1
+a
2 (61c)
b=b
1
+b
2 (61d)
a
1
+b
2
=s (61e)
b
1
+a
2
=n (61f)
Among these six (6) example statistical relations, five (5) of them are independent, while the total number of truthing parameters is nine (9):
m,s,n,a,a
1
,a
2
,b,b
1
,b
2 (62)
Therefore, four (4) parameters are free, while the remaining five (5) can be found by solving the five (5) independent Eqs. (61a,b,c,d,e & f).
In
In
“804”+“805”=“800” (63)
which is equivalent to Eq. (61c), because symbolically:
a
1=“804,” b2=“805,” s=“800” (64a;64b;64c)
4.4 Bayesian Truthing Theorem (BTT)
The Bayesian Truthing Theorem (BTT) can be easily derived, using the truthing parameters in Eq. (62). Using parameters from Eq. (62), the likelihood probabilities can be rewritten in the form:
Substituting these into Eq. (52) yields:
Therefore, the PPV-para meter, is
which is the Bayesian Truthing Theorem (BTT), the basic Bayesian formula for the ISS evaluation. It can be written as:
It should be noted that this formula can be used without knowledge of the Bayesian inference; because the number of alarms, true and false, can be directly found from experimentation.
In a similar way, the NPV-figure can be derived, as
4.5 Analogy Between X-Ray Luggage Inspection and the ISS
The Binary Sensor concept has broad applicability, and it can be used in applications such as, for example, ATR (Automatic Target Recognition); QC (Product Inspection); Homeland Security (X-Ray Luggage Inspection against Explosives); Legal (Judicial Verdict); Medicine (X-Ray Breast Cancer Diagnosis); Software (ISS); to name a few. In any case, the target is typically some anomalous sample such as, for example, Luggage with Explosives, a Positive Cancer Diagnosis, a Defective Product, HVI, etc. The case of x-ray luggage inspection at airport terminals is perhaps the easiest case to explain, and will be used herein by way of example. Therefore, Table 6 presents a comparison between the x-ray luggage inspection and the ISS.
4.6 Numerical Examples Illustrating ISS Bayesian Truthing
For explanation by way of example of an ISS Bayesian Truthing, consider a number of numerical examples illustrating orders of magnitude of basic truthing parameters, by applying (arbitrarily) four (4) free parameters.
Consider a sample size m=107 (large sample); p(S)=10−6 (rare events); p(S′|N)=10−5; p(N′|S)=10−3. In this example,
Furthermore:
n=m−s=107−10=9999990 (72)
and,
P(S′|N)=10−5a2=np(S′|N)=(9999990)(10−5)≅100 (73)
and,
b
1
=n−a
2=9999990−100=9999890 (74)
thus,
b=b
1
+b
2=9999890+10−2=b1 (75)
Therefore, because b2<<1, then, b≅b1, and, indeed the Negative Predictive Value is as follows
(NPV)≅1 (76)
In order to find the PPV-figure, however, we need to find the numbers of true alarms, a1, and total number of alarms, a, in the form:
a=m−b=107−9999890=110 (77)
while,
a
1
=a−a
2=110−100=10 (78)
thus, the PPV-figure is low:
In fact, this value could be anticipated by applying the Bayesian Paradox formula with an approximate q1-value, which can (directly) be found from the input data:
so, approximately, the PPV-value, is
which coincides with Eq. (67).
For further checking, the conservation formula yields:
a+b=110+9999890=107 (82)
Assume m=107, s=10, a2=b2=10−2. This time, we are applying only truthing parameters. Thus, calculation of the Bayesian figures: PPV and NPV is much simpler; because,
a≅a
1
; h≅b
1 (83a; 83b)
thus,
(PPV)=(NPV)≅1 (84)
4.7 Relations Between Non-Diagonal Statistical and Truthing Parameters
The non-diagonal Bayesian statistical parameters are probabilities of false positives and false negatives. By analogy, the non-diagonal Bayesian truthing parameters can be defined as the Probability of a False Alarm (PFA) and the Probability of a False no-Alarm (PFnA), in the form:
Then:
Therefore, the following relations between non-diagonal truthing and statistical parameters can be derived:
These relations are non-singular, because, for statistical purposes, the prior probability can neither equal 1 nor 0:
0<p(S)<1 (90)
(PFA)=(PFnA)=p(S′|N)=p(N′|S)=0 (91)
Also, because targets are usually rare events:
P(S)<<1p(N)≅1 (92)
thus, according to Eq. (88), we obtain:
(PFA)≅p(S′|N) (93)
However, according to Eq. (89), the Probability of False no-Alarm, PFnA, is much smaller than the Probability of False Negatives (PFN):
(PFnA)<<p(N′|S) (94)
This is why in Example 5, the result is b2<<1, in spite of the fact that the PFN is rather high (10−3).
4.8 Lossless Multi-Alarm Method
In spite of the fact that the ideal system can be realized theoretically as in Eq. (88), practically, there is a trade-off between false positives and false negatives. Therefore, very often, the target misses are low, while the PFA is high. Therefore, in various embodiments, a multi-step (multi-alarm) cascade Lossless Multi-Alarm (LMA) method can be applied. Thus, assuming:
the LMA method can be applied.
Such a situation may be realized in medical diagnostics, for example, based on x-ray breast cancer inspection (Sensor 1, 905). In order to avoid a biopsy in the second step, the patients with a positive cancer diagnosis after Sensor 1 (satisfying conditions 95-96) are sent to some other specialized diagnosis shown by Sensor 2, 906. This diagnosis can be, for example, ultrasound. Then, patients with output 904 satisfying a high PPV-value are finally sent to the biopsy.
Section 5: System Performance Components (Outer Network)
This section discusses some exemplary critical performance components for effective performance of the ISS (some of which have already been discussed in previous sections).
5.1 Cost Function
The training of an Integrative Software System may be provided with the help of a cost function, CF, defined as:
(CF)=|(PPV)TH−(PPV)EXP| (97)
where | . . . | is a modulus (absolute value) operation. The (PPV)TH is based on a Bayesian Paradox formula (in the simplest case, equal to this formula). This parameter can be obtained only with help of Bayesian inference, including a statistical parameter, such as a PFP. It may be obtained either automatically as linear regression from training data, or semi-automatically with help of expert queries. Therefore, theoretically, this parameter is based on prior absolute and likelihood probabilities. It depends on prior population, p(S), and system performance, defined mostly by p(S′|N)−(PFP) value. Increased training in the target population also increases the (PPV)TH parameter. Then, for a constant prior population influx, the (PPV)TH parameter remains constant, or varies slowly. In contrast, the (PPV)EXP parameter may be strongly fluctuating. In some embodiments, the system is configured to increase its value by training (it can be defined as ratio of red alarms to yellow alarms), until it stabilizes, as shown in
In
The introduction of a (PPV)TH support function (during the ISS training) is analogous to applying mockup prey as an attraction to dogs in the initial stage of a dog race.
5.2 System Feedback
At least two (2) feedback mechanisms are introduced in
The 2nd feedback in this example is global feedback (#15, #16, #17, #2), which maximizes global (PPV) as a ratio of red alarms to yellow alarms, by regulating (PPV)EXP function. This can be accomplished, for example, in the following form (the other form derivatives are also possible; this one is the simplest one):
This feedback can be configured in some embodiments to minimize fluctuations of the (CF) function, as shown in
5.3 Dual Engine Connection
Two basic system engines #2 and #10, as illustrated in the example of
The DEC method is a kind of compound association, specialized for producing HVI-CP# pairs (HVI-CP pairs).
Referring now to
The graphiti operation may be produced by a graph engine #10. In parallel, the intra-cloud engine #2 may be configured to select HVIs as yellow alarms. Finding the dual engine connection (DEC) between such a CP# and an HVI, if successful, produces a red alarm, or pre-alarm, if the training feedback is applied. Such a connection can be readily located in the case of a regular person who does not try to hide his/her identity. However, in the case of the HVIC who purposely hides his/her identity, the situation may be more complex. One challenge may be that such an HVIC, or HVI can assume multiple identities with multiple IDs, such as: various names, driver's licenses, passports, CP#s, etc., which he or she might use only a few times. Nevertheless, he/she is using them sometimes (including at times when a given graphiti exists within the ISS computer system). Therefore, if the target population is temporarily more narrowly defined, as in
Section 6: Network Inner Coherency (Inner Network)
6.1 Inner Network Coherency
A summary of network inner coherency is now discussed. Examples of this are described in greater detail in Sections 3.11 and Section 7. The inner coherency of an (adverse) network, such as a terrorist or organized crime network, is introduced in order to further improve the network search and detection. The network members may, for example, be either individuals, (or HVICs), or groups of individuals, called Groups of Interest (GOIs).
Further in the example of
The moral skew factor, cos(θ), provides a more objective view of the GOI's moral spectrum, which allows for more precise parametric decision synopsis. This is because the parametric decision projection can be different within intra-GOI (intra-ego) as opposed to that within inter-GOI (inter-ego) views, varying from the same views (θ=0) to a completely opposite (orthogonal) view projection (θ=90°). Then, the impact of this decision on the overall network decision (defined by weighted average, <S>) can be different. This is why the inter-ego/intra-ego interactions have a vectorial character defined in the simplest case by scalar product of vectors {right arrow over (S)} and {right arrow over (K)} (or, rather, {right arrow over (Si)} and {right arrow over (Ki)}). The simple explanation of this vectorial (not scalar) character is the fact that “we see ourselves differently from how other people see us.”
Therefore, the decision process may be more objective if it includes both inter-ego (inter-GOI), and intra-ego (intra-GOI) projections to model the process.
6.2 Comparison of Diagonal and Non-Diagonal Kernel Vectors
The parametric decision weighted average formula for a diagonal kernel vector (e.g., defined by Eq. (140)) may be more compact and a more natural generalization of equivalent scalar formula (5). Nevertheless, Eq. (145), representing the parametric decision weighted average formula for a non-diagonal kernel vector, is more basic than the diagonal one, and perhaps better represents the moral skew effect (MSE) as explained below.
It is natural to assume that the unit vector, ŝ, representing the direction of the parametric decision vector {right arrow over (S)}, is inclined to intra-ego senses, such as self-interest, power, libido, etc. It is also natural to assume that unit vector, ŝ, represents a member (individual/GoI) strength, while the unit vector, {circumflex over (k)}, represents mutual coherency couplings, which may be defined by non-diagonal coherency matrix, Rij, is more inclined to inter-ego (moral) senses (tastes). Therefore, Eq. (141) May in various applications better represent the moral skew factor/effect than Eq. (136), the latter one representing diagonal kernel vector, {right arrow over (Ki)}.
6.3 Moral Skew Effect and Psychoanalysis
The Moral Skew Effect (MSE) was approximately derived from basic psychoanalysis concepts, such as those represented by Freud, Adler, Yung, Fromm, and others. In particular, the Freudian conflict between the super-ego and the id is approximately equivalent to the ISS relation between the inter-ego and the intra-ego (or the left and right brain hemispheres). Moreover, it is evident that the moral senses represent the inter-ego point of view, while self-interest senses represent the intra-ego point of view. Furthermore, the basic self-interest senses include the libido (Freud), power (Adler), and group security (Fromm) (which, of course, to some extent overlap each other), as well as some archetypes (Yung). Also, sub-consciousness, related to intra-ego senses (tastes), can be individually related or they can be GoI-like (Fromm). Therefore, the MSE psychoanalytic point of view provides a more effective prognostic of certain particular social events, described by the parametric decision process.
Section 7: Inner Network Analysis (Inner Network)
7.1 Inter-Adverse Vs. Intra-Friendly
While the organized crime and terrorist networks are adverse to outsiders (i.e., inter-network-adverse) they are, of course, friendly amongst themselves (i.e., intra-network-friendly). The latter aspect of the same organization (or, inner network) or the “second side of the same coin” is the subject of this section. This may be viewed, for example, as an extension and generalization of Section 3.11. The Bayesian Truthing Inference (BTI) may also be relevant here, where causation problems arrive in a sense of Bayesian (directed and inverse) probabilities, while binary sensing is generalized here to omninary sensing. The conditional (Bayesian) probabilities characterize an “if, then” relation in which A-cause and B-effect, can be described in the form:
p(B|A) (99)
This is a generalization of the Binary Sensor (BI) relation, such as: (PFP)=p(S′|N), for example. In this section, some specific exemplary BTI techniques are applied, such as, for example, a Lossless Multi-Alarm method.
In order to prognose (prognosis is a less certain form than prediction) certain events such as, for example, an uprising in some country (or, state), strategic influence of emerging states, role of social media, or effects of social messages, the system may be configured to apply human learning/reasoning process. However, in order to prognose such events by machine learning/reasoning processes, either semi-automatically or automatically, it may be beneficial to significantly narrow the context, such as for example, by using the parametric decision learning/reasoning, introduced in Section 3.11. This parametric decision approach is generalized, in this section. Automatic training by minimization of the cost function (which is similar to that in Section 5.1, recognizing that the form of cost function may be different) may also be applied.
7.2 Parametric Statistical Ensemble
In Section 3.11, this document analyzes a single parametric decision space, such as:
S
i
:S
1
,S
2
,S
3
, . . . ,S
N (100)
where: i-index of certain individual, or group of interest (GoI).
The 2nd l-index is assigned to decision value:
S
l
:S
1
,S
2
,S
3
, . . . ,S
L (101)
Therefore, a given decision location may be related to l-indices, while the decision location may be related to i-indices. In Section 3.11, for example, Eq. (8) is related to i-indices, while Eq. (13) is related to l-indices. Because a mostly Normal Parametric Order (NPO) has been applied, as in
S
i
(1)
:S
1
(1)
,S
2
(1)
, . . . ,S
N
(1) (102)
for example.
In
S
4
=V
2 (103)
For ease of discussion, however, the notation used in
Examples of a multitude of parametric spaces have been introduced because, for a certain set/class of decisions, a given parameter space may be more useful than the other. For example, if a terrorist bombing is planned it could be planned in a “more risky” or “less risky” fashion. Thus, a decision within the IED network may be made based on some kind of voting logic process. This voting will be made among the terrorist network members. For example, there may be eight voting members (N=8), with indices: i=1, 2, 3, . . . , 8. These members will typically have certain strength intensities I1, I2, . . . I8, and mutual couplings Tij, where Tij does not need to be equal to Tji and Tii=1. In this particular case, the decision spectrum, or decision scale may be made from “very low risk” to “very high risk,” as shown in
As this example serves to illustrate, the decision space scale from “very low risk” to “very high risk,” for example, would be less adequate than the (RISK)-parametric decision scale.
PDR1(1):PDR2(1),PDR3(1), . . . (104)
representing such decision processes. As discussed above (terrorist bombing, for example), these decision processes could be denoted as PDR2, while an upper index (1) may be used to denote the (RISK) parametric decision, for example, as shown in
The statistical weighted mean value, <S(1)>, may be ensemble-averaged, in the form:
{<S(1)>} (105)
where { . . . } is the symbol of ensemble average. This ensemble-averaged weighted mean, 1610, is result of four (4) connections (first three illustrated by arrows) 1611, 1612, 1613, and 1614, resulting in a mean average for each PDR, as defined by Eq. (8). The ensemble-average (possibly weighted) may result in Eq. (105).
7.3 Parametric Prognosis
In the example of
A more complex, but also a more precise parametric prognosis can be obtained using the cost function minimization process. This process can be similar to that shown in
(PCF)=|<S>TH−<S>EXP| (106)
where | . . . | is module symbol, and the procedure is illustrated in
In
7.3.1 Parametric Intensity Prognosis
7.4 Coherent Coupling Engineering
The parametric ensemble engineering (PEE) concept, in general, and Coherent Coupling Engineering (CC-Engineering) concept, in particular, may be applied in order to probe and construct various parametric ensemble models, either theoretically (by design), or practically (by experiment), or both. The term CC-engineering arises from the fact that coherent coupling matrix elements, Tij, are easiest to manipulate, because they are most flexible, or most space/time-variant, while parametric intensities, Ii, are rather rigid, and may in some circumstances be rather difficult to manipulate. In general, the typical parametric ensemble may contain four-types of data:
STRUCTURAL:(Ki;Ii,Tij) (107a)
INPUT:Context,Ensemble Realizations (107b)
PARAMETRIC:S (107c)
OUTPUT:<S>,{<S>} (107d)
CC-Engineering Procedure.
The CC-Engineering interface 1913 in this example introduces variations of Tij-matrix components, 1909, according to a pre-described procedure. In this way, both engineering and probing scenarios may be realized. The connection 1914 is directed mostly to CC-matrix elements, Tij, because they may be very flexible and time/space-variant, depending on type of stimulation (this is a characteristic feature of members' mutual relations, defined by Coherency Matrix, Tij). In a similar way, the system may be configured to provide probing by synchronizing various PDRs, with related variations of Tij-matrix elements, as discussed below.
Coherency Matrix Variations.
In order to better understand how the weighted mean, <S>, a change under stimulation (probing), the weight, wi, changes may be analyzed as defined previously in the form:
Then, by differentiating (in approximation of small changes) this formula, the following expression for wi-change, Δwi, may be derived:
Therefore, the relative change (in %), is
and, finally, the following expression for weight relative change may be obtained:
Thus, the relative weight change for the ith-member is a difference of two terms: the 1st local term depends on relative change of the ith-kernel only, while the 2nd global term, depends on all ensemble values. As this example illustrates, those terms are small quantities of the same order, and they have opposite signs. Thus, sometimes, they may cancel or almost cancel each other.
7.5 Application Scenarios for PDE Systems
Three (3) application scenarios are presented for illustration of the PDE systems, including such diverse areas as: social geopolitics, social media, and Organized Crime Networks, for example. All of them may be applied for the same PDE modeling, following
SCENARIO #1 (Social Geopolitics). Emerging States.
Question: What is the current strength of a number of emerging states (countries)?
In order to answer this question, the system may be configured to apply a Parametric Intensity Prognosis scheme, such as that shown in
Then, a number of the PDEs, should be also equal to at least 100. If the number of the PDEs is not sufficient, the system may be configured to apply Parametric Decision Realizations (PDRs), and ensemble averages may be replaced by weighted means (by “realization”, we mean a given ensemble realization), in the form (M is a number of PDRs):
<S(1)>=f1(Ii(1),Tij(1),S(1)) (112a)
<S(2)>=f2(Ii(2),Tij(2),S(2)) (112b)
<S(3)>=f3(Ii(3),Tij(3),S(3)) (112c)
. .
. .
<S(M)>=fM(Ii(M),Tij(M),S(M)) (112d)
where, in the simplest case, all functions f( . . . ), are identical:
f
1
=f
2
=f
3
= . . . =f
M (113)
and, represented by Eqs. (8), (9), and (10), in the form:
i.e., the f-function, is
It can be assumed that all coherency matrix elements are known, and that these may be found from experiment (e.g., by observing a large number of geopolitical situations). It may also be assumed that all S-parameters have been given (assigned, for each particular geopolitical situation). Also, a further assumption may be that all weighted averages have been found (i.e., by studying all available geopolitical documents, journals, etc.). Therefore, the number of unknowns is N:
I
1
,I
2
,I
3
, . . . I
N (116)
This is because it can be assumed as before that the parametric intensities are rather space/time invariant (at least within a given time internal); i.e., their upper indices have been cancelled, as in Eq. (116). Now, assuming that:
M≧N (117)
then, the problem is numerically solvable. Therefore, as a result, the strengths of all states (not only emerging states) may be determined as defined by their parametric intensities, as in Eq. (113). For example, if it is determined that:
I
50
>I
72 (118)
then, the 50th-country is stronger than the 72nd country (state), at least, within the system of ensembles and situations, considered within this application scenario.
SCENARIO #2 (Social Media). Impact of Messages
Question: What is impact of specific social messages transmitted through the Internet?
In order to answer this question, which is simpler than that in SCENARIO #1, the system may be configured to apply the Simple Parametric Prognosis scheme, such as that shown in
{<S(3)>} (119)
The higher this value is, the higher the impact according to a given parametric scale.
In the more complex cases, a structure for Parametric Cost Function (PCF) may be applied as in
SCENARIO #3. (Organized Crime Network).
Election of the Leader.
Question: Who, among the Organized Crime Network members, will be elected as a new leader?
This problem is similar to that of SCENARIO #1, and that it may be a multi-step analysis. In the 1st step, the system applies the same approach as in SCENARIO #1. As an output, the system obtains a narrow set of leader candidates. Then, in the 2nd step, the system applies the methodology of the Lossless Multi-Alarm (LMA) method, as shown in
7.6 Phenomenology of PDE System
7.6.1 Origin of the Systems and Methods Described Herein
For purposes of explanation, consider in more detail the phenomenology of the Parametric Decision Ensemble (PDE) system and method. Because the PDE concept is a rather complex one, the phenomenology of this system may be explained using two analogies: physical and social. The origins of the PDE concept can be traced to physical optics (optical interference), moral psychology, animal vision, and Bayesian Truthing Inference (BTI)—the latter one in a more actional sense, by applying Lossless Multi-Alarm Method, illustrated in
Moral Psychology Origin.
Moral psychology applies moral analogs of human tastes such as: sweet, sour, dry, and salty. These “moral tastes” are, for example: care, liberty, fairness, loyalty, authority, and sanctity. Their composition defines human morality, which can be categorized, for example, within three (3) basic political categories: liberal, libertarian, and conservative. (While, in the single individual case, the moral psychology subject may be considered; in the social group case, the moral sociology subject is considered.)
In order to better understand the PDE system, it is useful to consider two analogies:
A. Physical (Thermodynamic Gas of Particles)
B. Social (Moral Sociology)
Animal Vision Origin.
Animal vision origin may also contribute to the PDE concept by producing a vectorial base. The vectorial base may be both orthogonal and non-orthogonal, for a Parametric Decision Vector, {right arrow over (S)}. The analog of an orthogonal base may be obtained from physical colors, defined by wavelengths; while the non-orthogonal base may be obtained from RGB (Red-Green-Blue) colors such as those of an animal vision model 3028.
7.6.2 Thermodynamic Gas Analogy
In
In this example, these three (3) gases have the same number of three (3) types of molecules, and are located in the same size cubes 6009, 6010, and 6011, with the same volume equal to d3, where d-linear cube size, 6012. The molecules refract from cube walls, and collide with other molecules. The collisions are denoted by molecule pairs, such as 6013, for example, and double arrows, such as 6014, represented by Coherency Matrix elements, Tij, for example.
For analogy purposes, v2-speed square may be used as an analog of the S parameter
v
2
S (120)
because the v2-parameter is valid for all three cubes, the analogy should be restricted to the single parametric space, and single ensemble, only. The 2nd analog must be between molecule mass, mi, and kernel Ki:
m
i
K
i (121)
Thus, this example illustrates that there are only three (3) types of kernels due to graphical symbol limitation. However, the i-index is applied to all molecules in the cube; thus, N is the number of all molecules in the cube (here, N=15). By way of analogy, it can be seen that each cube represents a Parametric Decision Realization (PDR), while all three of them represent a single ensemble (PDE).
Because this is discussed in terms of a thermodynamic gas model, (for purposes of analogy), some thermodynamic function (or, function of state) may be considered as an analog of either weighted mean: <S>, or ensemble average: {<S>}. For example, assume the simplest case when all molecules are identical and there is no interaction between them:
I
i=constant; Tij=0 (122ab)
Then, the average kinetic energy, is
However, in the case in which condition (122a) is not satisfied, this simple analogy becomes more complicated because the PDE mean has the form:
By way of simplification, instead of Eq. (124), the following simple formula may be considered:
which is defined as exactly equivalent to Eq. (124). Therefore, the summary term in the denominator precludes application of the thermodynamic gas analog. In order to save this analogy, the charged gas particles may be considered. Thus, the interactive kernel term may be an analog to potential energy term, Uij, in the form:
where, qi—particle charge, rij—mutual distance, and A-proportionality constant. However, the summary term in denominator, is
which precludes this analogy. Indeed, this summary term Eq. (127) is a global term that more fits to wave optics rather than to mechanical model such as thermodynamic gas, for example. This is not surprising, because at the beginning the optical coupling model was applied.
7.6.3 Moral Sociology Analogy
The moral sociology scenario be considered as a generalization of moral psychology for social groups (groups of interest), rather than for individuals. After studying this analogy further, however, it may be concluded that this analogy fits well to narrow contexts such as scenarios #1 and #3 (i.e., when the goal is to select some strong candidates). Moreover, this analogy provides an important clue, which comes from an animal vision analogy 3028 such as that, for example, shown in
For the PDE, the Parametric Decision Vector (PDV) base may be six-dimensional, seven or eight-dimensional, or higher. Some parametric decisions made be stronger if the base unit vectors tend to the same direction. Also, the scalar product of such vectors, may have a lower value even if these vectors are large but close to normal to each other, as shown in
This is because the scalar product of two vectors: {right arrow over (S)}1, and {right arrow over (S)}2, is
{right arrow over (S)}
1
·{right arrow over (S)}
2
=|{right arrow over (S)}
1
∥{right arrow over (S)}
2| cos α (128)
where α-angle between these two vectors, as shown in
7.7 Moral Skew Factor
7.7.1 Inter-Ego Vs. Intra-Ego
In the previous sections, inter-group coherent coupling was introduced in an environment based on an interaction between group/network members. In this section, a more internal type of coherency related to moral psychology/sociology (or, psychoanalysis) (i.e., intra-individual relations) is introduced. This new type of coherency may be used to define a moral skew factor. In the case of a single individual, for example, this skew factor may be a consequence of a Freudian conflict between left and right brain hemispheres, defined by Freud as a conflict between the id and the super ego. In a broader cycle analytical sense, this conflict is referred to as the conflict between inter-ego and intra-ego.
In various embodiments, this conflict may be manifested as a skew effect between parametric decision, Si, and kernel, Ki. This moral skew factor may be mathematically modeled as a scalar product of two vectors {right arrow over (Si)} and {right arrow over (Ki)}: wherein a higher skew higher skew results in a higher angle, θ, between these vectors. In the extreme case, the scalar product, {right arrow over (Si)}·{right arrow over (Ki)}, can be equal to zero, even if the vectors' values (lengths), |{right arrow over (Si)}| and |{right arrow over (Ki)}|, are large. This is when, θ=90°.
7.7.2 Unit Vector Bases
Both vectors {right arrow over (Si)} and {right arrow over (Ki)} may be defined in the same unit vector base which can be either orthogonal, or non-orthogonal, constructed of unit vectors; in 3D-space, for example:
ê
x
, ê
y
ê
z
;|ê
x
|=|e
y
|=|ê
z|=1 (129ab)
The unit-vector-space may be multi-dimensional, with the number of dimensions being equal to two, three, or higher. For example, for five (5)-dimensions, the unit-vector-space is 5D-space, or 5-space.
7.7.3 Primary Color Analogies
Primary color analogies are very useful to illustrate differences between orthogonal and non-orthogonal unit-vector-bases. For example, physical quasi-monochromatic colors, defined by central wavelengths, are orthogonal. However, the animal vision is based on RGB (red-green-blue) color primaries, or RGB primary colors, with overlapping wavelength spectra. This phenomenon, in vector functional analysis, is equivalent to the fact that functional vectors representing overlapping spectra are not orthogonal to each other; thus, creating a non-orthogonal unit vector base (vector functional analysis is applied in quantum mechanics, for example).
7.7.4 Scalar Product of Parametric Decision and Kernel Unit Vectors
The primary color analogy is illustrated at b) and includes three orthogonal (non-overlapping) wavelength spectra 5010, 5011, and 5012. The horizontal axis, λ, represents central wavelength values such as λ1, λ2, and λ3, for example. The exemplary λ3-central wavelength 5013 can represent the 630 nm wavelength (red color), for example.
In such an orthogonal base, the unit vector, ŝ, is represented by:
ŝ=a
x
ê
x
+a
y
ê
y
+a
z
ê
z (130)
where:
a
x
2
+a
y
2
+a
z
2=1 (131)
and:
|êx|=|êy|=|êz|=1; êx·êy=0;
ê
x
·ê
z=0; êy·êz=0 (132a; 132b; 132c; 132d)
Eq. (131) describes the unit vector property; Eq. (132a), describes unit base vectors; and Eqs. (132b,c,d) describe orthogonality of unit base vectors. Similarly, the unit vector {circumflex over (k)} is represented by:
{circumflex over (k)}=b
x
ê
x
+b
y
ê
y
+b
z
ê
z (133)
where:
b
x
2
+b
y
2
+b
z
2=1 (134)
In
The primary color analogy b) is also illustrated, where color primaries 5026, 5027, and 5028 are overlapping, with overlapping hatched areas 5029, and 5030. Equations describing the unit vectors s and k are similar to Eqs. (130-132), except, Eqs. (132bcd) are not satisfied.
For clarity of description, the further mathematics, based on vector algebra, are provided for the orthogonal base.
The scalar product of two unit vectors, ŝ and {circumflex over (k)}, is
ŝ·{circumflex over (k)}≐a
x
b
x
+a
y
b
y
+a
z
b
z
=|ŝ∥{circumflex over (k)}|cos θ=cos θ (135)
This is, because, according to Eqs. (127) and (130)
|ŝ|=|{circumflex over (k)}|=1 (136)
i.e., ŝ and {circumflex over (k)}-vectors are, indeed, unit vectors.
7.7.5 Scalar Product of Parametric Decision and Kernel Vectors
The scalar product of a Parametric Decision vector and a kernel vector is not automatically a generalization of the previous section describing scalar product of equivalent unit vectors. In fact, it requires further analysis, presented below.
7.7.6 Diagonal and Non-Diagonal Kernel Vectors
Diagonal Kernel Vector.
The diagonal kernel vector is defined as such vector that the coherency matrix has usual diagonal form, defined previously:
{right arrow over (Ki)}=·Ki (137)
where Ki is kernel scalar, defined by Eq. (11) and is unit vector defined by Eq. (133). In parallel, the parametric decision vector, {right arrow over (Si)}, is defined as:
{right arrow over (Si)}=·Si (138)
where Si is parametric decision scalar, as in Eq. (5), and is unit vector defined by Eq. (130).
Therefore, the scalar product of kernel vector, {right arrow over (Ki)}, and parametric decision vector {right arrow over (Si)}, is
{right arrow over (Si)}·{right arrow over (Ki)}=SiKi cos θi (139)
where θi is moral skew factor for ith network member, and the weighted average, is
Ignoring the moral skew factor, θi, is, according to the color analogy, equivalent to a “blind vision” ignorance of colors, by seeing only in black-white.
Moral Skew Factor Interpretation.
The moral skew factor interpretation is based on a conflict between inter-ego and intra-ego. According to the ISS model, both inter-ego and intra-ego may be embedded in the unit vector base, ,
,
, . . . , defined by moral senses. The moral senses' base may be a multi-dimensional base with a number and type of dimensions depending. This number and type may depend on individual parametric decision space, etc. (“individuals” may include not only individuals in narrow sense (such as humans), but also in a broader sense, as individuals' group of interest). For example, in recent conventional systems “the righteous man” concept, there are six (6) moral senses such as: cure/harm; liberty/oppression; fairness/cheating; loyalty/betrayal; authority/subversion; and sanctity/degradation. In the ISS language, the moral sense unit vector base, such as the example shown in
Therefore, the moral skew factor is typically going to be large if there is less conflict between the inter-ego and intra-ego senses, and vice versa. The mathematical modeling of this conflict herein is a novel, unifying psychoanalysis concept, with a moral sense sociologic concept and a self-interest moral sense.
Non-Diagonal Kernel Vector.
A new non-diagonal kernel vector as which may be based on non-diagonal coherency matrix, Rij, may be defined as:
Then, the non-diagonal kernel vector, {right arrow over (H)}, has the form:
{right arrow over (H)}
i
=ŝ
i
I
i
+{circumflex over (k)}
i
G
i (142)
where Gi scalar has the form:
This scalar is called a non-diagonal kernel.
Accordingly, in contrast to a diagonal kernel vector, the intensity scalar, Ii, is attached to the ŝi-unit vector, rather than to the {circumflex over (k)}i-unit vector. Therefore, the scalar product of {right arrow over (S)}i and {right arrow over (H)}i vectors, is
{right arrow over (S)}
i
·{right arrow over (H)}
i=(ŝiIi+{circumflex over (k)}iGi)(ŝiSi)=IiSi+GiSi cos θi (144)
and Eq. (139) is modified into the following equation:
This represents the parametric decision weighting average for the non-diagonal kernel case in accordance with several embodiments. According to Eq. (145) the weight satisfies the normalization condition.
Hybrid Case.
In such a case, elements of diagonal and non-diagonal kernel vector cases are combined. This may be accomplished by applying a weighted average of Eqs. (140) and (145).
7.7.7 Quantitative Analysis of the Moral Skew Factor
For clarity of description, the 2-D orthogonal base is considered. In this example, the base represents only two dimensions: the x-coordinate representing inter-ego moral sense; and the y-coordinate representing intra-ego moral sense. Then, the {circumflex over (k)}-unit vector is more inclined to the x-axis, while the ŝ-unit vector is more inclined to the y-axis, as shown in the example of
In the example shown in 7004 and
7005. Because vector 7000 is arbitrarily chosen to be only parallel to unit vector 7002, it can be assumed that: ax′=1 ay′=5. Thus, its module (length) is √{square root over ((ax′)2+(ay′)2)}=√{square root over (1+25)}=√{square root over (26)}. Therefore the unit vector ŝ 7002 components are:
Similarly, the auxiliary vector 7001 has a length √{square root over ((bx′)2+(by′)2)}=√{square root over (36+4)}=√{square root over (40)}; and the unit vector {circumflex over (k)} 7003 has the following components:
Therefore, the moral skew factor, cos(θ), where θ-angle is denoted by 7006, is
and the moral skew angle is: θ=60.3°.
As confirmation, it can be observed that, according to Eqs. (146) and (147), ŝ and {circumflex over (k)} are, indeed, unit vectors. For example, according to Eq. (147), the {circumflex over (k)}-vector length is
Section 8: Example Computer Program Product Embodiments
As used herein, the term module might describe a given unit of functionality that can be performed in accordance with one or more embodiments of the present invention. As used herein, a module might be implemented utilizing any form of hardware, software, or a combination thereof. For example, one or more processors, controllers, ASICs, PLAs, PALs, CPLDs, FPGAs, logical components, software routines or other mechanisms might be implemented to make up a module. In implementation, the various modules described herein might be implemented as discrete modules or the functions and features described can be shared in part or in total among one or more modules. In other words, as would be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art after reading this description, the various features and functionality described herein may be implemented in any given application and can be implemented in one or more separate or shared modules in various combinations and permutations. Even though various features or elements of functionality may be individually described or claimed as separate modules, one of ordinary skill in the art will understand that these features and functionality can be shared among one or more common software and hardware elements, and such description shall not require or imply that separate hardware or software components are used to implement such features or functionality.
Where components or modules of the invention are implemented in whole or in part using software, in one embodiment, these software elements can be implemented to operate with a computing or processing module capable of carrying out the functionality described with respect thereto. One such example computing module is shown in
Referring now to
Computing module 9500 might include, for example, one or more processors, controllers, control modules, or other processing devices, such as a processor 9504. Processor 9504 might be implemented using a general-purpose or special-purpose processing engine such as, for example, a microprocessor, controller, or other control logic. In the illustrated example, processor 9504 is connected to a bus 9502, although any communication medium can be used to facilitate interaction with other components of computing module 9500 or to communicate externally.
Computing module 9500 might also include one or more memory modules, simply referred to herein as main memory 9508. For example, preferably random access memory (RAM) or other dynamic memory, might be used for storing information and instructions to be executed by processor 9504. Main memory 9508 might also be used for storing temporary variables or other intermediate information during execution of instructions to be executed by processor 9504. Computing module 9500 might likewise include a read only memory (“ROM”) or other static storage device coupled to bus 9502 for storing static information and instructions for processor 9504.
The computing module 9500 might also include one or more various forms of information storage mechanism 9510, which might include, for example, a media drive 9512 and a storage unit interface 9520. The media drive 9512 might include a drive or other mechanism to support fixed or removable storage media 9514. For example, a hard disk drive, a floppy disk drive, a magnetic tape drive, an optical disk drive, a CD or DVD drive (R or RW), or other removable or fixed media drive might be provided. Accordingly, storage media 9514 might include, for example, a hard disk, a floppy disk, magnetic tape, cartridge, optical disk, a CD or DVD, or other fixed or removable medium that is read by, written to or accessed by media drive 9512. As these examples illustrate, the storage media 9514 can include a computer usable storage medium having stored therein computer software or data.
In alternative embodiments, information storage mechanism 9510 might include other similar instrumentalities for allowing computer programs or other instructions or data to be loaded into computing module 9500. Such instrumentalities might include, for example, a fixed or removable storage unit 9522 and an interface 9520. Examples of such storage units 9522 and interfaces 9520 can include a program cartridge and cartridge interface, a removable memory (for example, a flash memory or other removable memory module) and memory slot, a PCMCIA slot and card, and other fixed or removable storage units 9522 and interfaces 9520 that allow software and data to be transferred from the storage unit 9522 to computing module 9500.
Computing module 9500 might also include a communications interface 9524. Communications interface 9524 might be used to allow software and data to be transferred between computing module 9500 and external devices. Examples of communications interface 9524 might include a modem or softmodem, a network interface (such as an Ethernet, network interface card, WiMedia, IEEE 802.XX or other interface), a communications port (such as for example, a USB port, IR port, RS232 port Bluetooth® interface, or other port), or other communications interface. Software and data transferred via communications interface 9524 might typically be carried on signals, which can be electronic, electromagnetic (which includes optical) or other signals capable of being exchanged by a given communications interface 4924. These signals might be provided to communications interface 9524 via a channel 9528. This channel 9528 might carry signals and might be implemented using a wired or wireless communication medium. Some examples of a channel might include a phone line, a cellular link, an RF link, an optical link, a network interface, a local or wide area network, and other wired or wireless communications channels.
In this document, the terms “computer program medium” and “computer usable medium” are used to generally refer to media such as, for example, memory 9508, storage unit 9520, media 9514, and channel 9528. These and other various forms of computer program media or computer usable media may be involved in carrying one or more sequences of one or more instructions to a processing device for execution. Such instructions embodied on the medium, are generally referred to as “computer program code” or a “computer program product” (which may be grouped in the form of computer programs or other groupings). When executed, such instructions might enable the computing module 9500 to perform features or functions of the present invention as discussed herein.
While various embodiments of the present invention have been described above, it should be understood that they have been presented by way of example only, and not of limitation. Likewise, the various diagrams may depict an example architectural or other configuration for the invention, which is done to aid in understanding the features and functionality that can be included in the invention. The invention is not restricted to the illustrated example architectures or configurations, but the desired features can be implemented using a variety of alternative architectures and configurations. Indeed, it will be apparent to one of skill in the art how alternative functional, logical or physical partitioning and configurations can be implemented to implement the desired features of the present invention. Also, a multitude of different constituent module names other than those depicted herein can be applied to the various partitions. Additionally, with regard to flow diagrams, operational descriptions and method claims, the order in which the steps are presented herein shall not mandate that various embodiments be implemented to perform the recited functionality in the same order unless the context dictates otherwise.
Although the invention is described above in terms of various exemplary embodiments and implementations, it should be understood that the various features, aspects and functionality described in one or more of the individual embodiments are not limited in their applicability to the particular embodiment with which they are described, but instead can be applied, alone or in various combinations, to one or more of the other embodiments of the invention, whether or not such embodiments are described and whether or not such features are presented as being a part of a described embodiment. Thus, the breadth and scope of the present invention should not be limited by any of the above-described exemplary embodiments.
Terms and phrases used in this document, and variations thereof, unless otherwise expressly stated, should be construed as open ended as opposed to limiting. As examples of the foregoing: the term “including” should be read as meaning “including, without limitation” or the like; the term “example” is used to provide exemplary instances of the item in discussion, not an exhaustive or limiting list thereof; the terms “a” or “an” should be read as meaning “at least one,” “one or more” or the like; and adjectives such as “conventional,” “traditional,” “normal,” “standard,” “known” and terms of similar meaning should not be construed as limiting the item described to a given time period or to an item available as of a given time, but instead should be read to encompass conventional, traditional, normal, or standard technologies that may be available or known now or at any time in the future. Likewise, where this document refers to technologies that would be apparent or known to one of ordinary skill in the art, such technologies encompass those apparent or known to the skilled artisan now or at any time in the future.
The presence of broadening words and phrases such as “one or more,” “at least,” “but not limited to” or other like phrases in some instances shall not be read to mean that the narrower case is intended or required in instances where such broadening phrases may be absent. The use of the term “module” does not imply that the components or functionality described or claimed as part of the module are all configured in a common package. Indeed, any or all of the various components of a module, whether control logic or other components, can be combined in a single package or separately maintained and can further be distributed in multiple groupings or packages or across multiple locations.
Additionally, the various embodiments set forth herein are described in terms of exemplary block diagrams, flow charts and other illustrations. As will become apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art after reading this document, the illustrated embodiments and their various alternatives can be implemented without confinement to the illustrated examples. For example, block diagrams and their accompanying description should not be construed as mandating a particular architecture or configuration.
This application is a divisional application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/147,247, filed Jan. 3, 2014, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Nos. 61/780,695, titled Bayesian Inter-cloud Coherency System and Method and filed on Mar. 13, 2013; and 61/808,514, titled Bayesian Inter-cloud Coherency System and Method and filed on Apr. 4, 2013.
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 61780695 | Mar 2013 | US | |
| 61808514 | Apr 2013 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 14147247 | Jan 2014 | US |
| Child | 15442370 | US |
