Data Refuge is a public and collaborative project designed to address concerns about federal climate and environmental data that is in danger of being lost. In particular, the initiative addresses five main concerns: What are the best ways to safeguard data? How do federal agencies play a crucial role in collecting, managing, and distributing data? How do government priorities impact data's accessibility? Which projects and research fields depend on federal data? Which data sets are of value to research and local communities, and why? Data Refuge began as a grassroots organization in opposition to government data on climate change and the environment not being archived systemically. Data Refuge's main goal is to collect and allocate data in multiple safe locations to create a sustainable way of archiving old and new data. Data Refuge was initiated in 2016 to protect federal climate and environmental data that is vulnerable under an administration that denies climate change. The system aims to make public research-quality copies of federal climate and environmental data. Data Refuge is supported by the National Geographic Foundation, private donors, Libraries+ Network, Preserving Electronic Governance Initiative (PEGI), the Union of Concerned Scientists (USC), and the Penn Program in Environmental Humanities (PPEH). == Types of data == Data Refuge collects public federal data on the climate and environment in the form of satellite imagery, PDFs, and stories. The data are stored in multiple trusted locations as they are less vulnerable if in only one location, and to ensure accessibility for researchers. Through the Data Rescue events, Data Refuge has accumulated 4 terabytes of data, 30,000 URLs, and 800 participants. === Storytelling === Data Refuge collects stories on vulnerable federal climate and environmental data through: surveys, oral history, photo essays, maps, video shorts, and animations. The stories are archived in a public bank that showcase how federal environmental data support health and safety in communities. Data Stories are collected at Data Rescue events, which are partnered with universities, city and town halls, and advocacy groups. Data stories are collected and used to emphasize the importance of Data Refuge, in how the data on climate change and the environment are being used by people in the United States and across the world for meaningful practices.
Automotive security
Automotive security refers to the branch of computer security focused on the cyber risks related to the automotive context. The increasingly high number of ECUs in vehicles and, alongside, the implementation of multiple different means of communication from and towards the vehicle in a remote and wireless manner led to the necessity of a branch of cybersecurity dedicated to the threats associated with vehicles. Not to be confused with automotive safety. == Causes == The implementation of multiple ECUs (Electronic Control Units) inside vehicles began in the early '70s thanks to the development of integrated circuits and microprocessors that made it economically feasible to produce the ECUs on a large scale. Since then the number of ECUs has increased to up to 100 per vehicle. These units nowadays control almost everything in the vehicle, from simple tasks such as activating the wipers to more safety-related ones like brake-by-wire or ABS (Anti-lock Braking System). Autonomous driving is also strongly reliant on the implementation of new, complex ECUs such as the ADAS, alongside sensors (lidars and radars) and their control units. Inside the vehicle, the ECUs are connected with each other through cabled or wireless communication networks, such as CAN bus (controller area network), MOST bus (Media Oriented System Transport), FlexRay (Automotive Network Communications Protocol) or RF (radio frequency) as in many implementations of TPMSs (tire-pressure monitoring systems). Many of these ECUs require data received through these networks that arrive from various sensors to operate and use such data to modify the behavior of the vehicle (e.g., the cruise control modifies the vehicle's speed depending on signals arriving from a button usually located on the steering wheel). Since the development of cheap wireless communication technologies such as Bluetooth, LTE, Wi-Fi, RFID and similar, automotive producers and OEMs have designed ECUs that implement such technologies with the goal of improving the experience of the driver and passengers. Safety-related systems such as the OnStar from General Motors, telematic units, communication between smartphones and the vehicle's speakers through Bluetooth, Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. == Threat model == Threat models of the automotive world are based on both real-world and theoretically possible attacks. Most real-world attacks aim at the safety of the people in and around the car, by modifying the cyber-physical capabilities of the vehicle (e.g., steering, braking, accelerating without requiring actions from the driver), while theoretical attacks have been supposed to focus also on privacy-related goals, such as obtaining GPS data on the vehicle, or capturing microphone signals and similar. Regarding the attack surfaces of the vehicle, they are usually divided in long-range, short-range, and local attack surfaces: LTE and DSRC can be considered long-range ones, while Bluetooth and Wi-Fi are usually considered short-range although still wireless. Finally, USB, OBD-II and all the attack surfaces that require physical access to the car are defined as local. An attacker that is able to implement the attack through a long-range surface is considered stronger and more dangerous than the one that requires physical access to the vehicle. In 2015 the possibility of attacks on vehicles already on the market has been proven possible by Miller and Valasek, that managed to disrupt the driving of a Jeep Cherokee while remotely connecting to it through remote wireless communication. === Controller area network attacks === The most common network used in vehicles and the one that is mainly used for safety-related communication is CAN, due to its real-time properties, simplicity, and cheapness. For this reason the majority of real-world attacks have been implemented against ECUs connected through this type of network. The majority of attacks demonstrated either against actual vehicles or in testbeds fall in one or more of the following categories: ==== Sniffing ==== Sniffing in the computer security field generally refers to the possibility of intercepting and logging packets or more generally data from a network. In the case of CAN, since it is a bus network, every node listens to all communication on the network. It is useful for the attacker to read data to learn the behavior of the other nodes of the network before implementing the actual attack. Usually, the final goal of the attacker is not to simply sniff the data on CAN, since the packets passing on this type of network are not usually valuable just to read. ==== Denial of service ==== Denial of service (DoS) in information security is usually described as an attack that has the objective of making a machine or a network unavailable. DoS attacks against ECUs connected to CAN buses can be done both against the network, by abusing the arbitration protocol used by CAN to always win the arbitration, and targeting the single ECU, by abusing the error handling protocol of CAN. In this second case the attacker flags the messages of the victim as faulty to convince the victim of being broken and therefore shut itself off the network. ==== Spoofing ==== Spoofing attacks comprise all cases in which an attacker, by falsifying data, sends messages pretending to be another node of the network. In automotive security usually spoofing attacks are divided into masquerade and replay attacks. Replay attacks are defined as all those where the attacker pretends to be the victim and sends sniffed data that the victim sent in a previous iteration of authentication. Masquerade attacks are, on the contrary, spoofing attacks where the data payload has been created by the attacker. == Real life automotive threat example == Security researchers Charlie Miller and Chris Valasek have successfully demonstrated remote access to a wide variety of vehicle controls using a Jeep Cherokee as the target. They were able to control the radio, environmental controls, windshield wipers, and certain engine and brake functions. The method used to hack the system was implementation of pre-programmed chip into the controller area network (CAN) bus. By inserting this chip into the CAN bus, he was able to send arbitrary message to CAN bus. One other thing that Miller has pointed out is the danger of the CAN bus, as it broadcasts the signal which the message can be caught by the hackers throughout the network. The control of the vehicle was all done remotely, manipulating the system without any physical interaction. Miller states that he could control any of some 1.4 million vehicles in the United States regardless of the location or distance, the only thing needed is for someone to turn on the vehicle to gain access. The work by Miller and Valasek replicated earlier work completed and published by academics in 2010 and 2011 on a different vehicle. The earlier work demonstrated the ability to compromise a vehicle remotely, over multiple wireless channels (including cellular), and the ability to remotely control critical components on the vehicle post-compromise, including the telematics unit and the car's brakes. While the earlier academic work was publicly visible, both in peer-reviewed scholarly publications and in the press, the Miller and Valesek work received even greater public visibility. == Security measures == The increasing complexity of devices and networks in the automotive context requires the application of security measures to limit the capabilities of a potential attacker. Since the early 2000 many different countermeasures have been proposed and, in some cases, applied. Following, a list of the most common security measures: Sub-networks: to limit the attacker capabilities even if he/she manages to access the vehicle from remote through a remotely connected ECU, the networks of the vehicle are divided in multiple sub-networks, and the most critical ECUs are not placed in the same sub-networks of the ECUs that can be accessed from remote. Gateways: the sub-networks are divided by secure gateways or firewalls that block messages from crossing from a sub-network to the other if they were not intended to. Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS): on each critical sub-network, one of the nodes (ECUs) connected to it has the goal of reading all data passing on the sub-network and detect messages that, given some rules, are considered malicious (made by an attacker). The arbitrary messages can be caught by the passenger by using IDS which will notify the owner regarding with unexpected message. Authentication protocols: in order to implement authentication on networks where it is not already implemented (such as CAN), it is possible to design an authentication protocol that works on the higher layers of the ISO OSI model, by using part of the data payload of a message to authenticate the message itself. Hardware Security Modules: since many ECUs are not powerful enough to keep real-time delays whi
How to Choose an AI Video Editor
In search of the best AI video editor? An AI video editor is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI video editor slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.
Synchronous context-free grammar
Synchronous context-free grammars (SynCFG or SCFG; not to be confused with stochastic CFGs) are a type of formal grammar designed for use in transfer-based machine translation. Rules in these grammars apply to two languages at the same time, capturing grammatical structures that are each other's translations. The theory of SynCFGs borrows from syntax-directed transduction and syntax-based machine translation, modeling the reordering of clauses that occurs when translating a sentence by correspondences between phrase-structure rules in the source and target languages. Performance of SCFG-based MT systems has been found comparable with, or even better than, state-of-the-art phrase-based machine translation systems. Several algorithms exist to perform translation using SynCFGs. == Formalism == Rules in a SynCFG are superficially similar to CFG rules, except that they specify the structure of two phrases at the same time; one in the source language (the language being translated) and one in the target language. Numeric indices indicate correspondences between non-terminals in both constituent trees. Chiang gives the Chinese/English example: X → (yu X1 you X2, have X2 with X1) This rule indicates that an X phrase can be formed in Chinese with the structure "yu X1 you X2", where X1 and X2 are variables standing in for subphrases; and that the corresponding structure in English is "have X2 with X1" where X1 and X2 are independently translated to English. == Software == cdec, MT decoding package that supports SynCFGs Joshua, a machine translation decoding system written in Java
Topic model
In natural language processing, a topic model is a type of probabilistic, neural, or algebraic model for discovering the abstract topics that occur in a collection of documents. Topic modeling is a frequently used text mining tool for discovering hidden semantic features and structures in a text. The topics produced by topic models are generated through a variety of mathematical frameworks, including probabilistic generative models, matrix factorization methods based on word co-occurrence, and clustering algorithms applied to semantic embeddings. Topic models are commonly used to organize and discover latent features in large collections of unstructured text and other forms of big data. Beyond text mining, topic models have also been used to uncover latent structures in fields such as genetic information, bioinformatics, computer vision, and social networks. == History == An early topic model was described by Papadimitriou, Raghavan, Tamaki and Vempala in 1998. Another one, called probabilistic latent semantic analysis (PLSA), was created by Thomas Hofmann in 1999. Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA), perhaps the most common topic model currently in use, is a generalization of PLSA. Developed by David Blei, Andrew Ng, and Michael I. Jordan in 2002, LDA introduces sparse Dirichlet prior distributions over document-topic and topic-word distributions, encoding the intuition that documents cover a small number of topics and that topics often use a small number of words. Other topic models are generally extensions on LDA, such as Pachinko allocation, which improves on LDA by modeling correlations between topics in addition to the word correlations which constitute topics. Hierarchical latent tree analysis (HLTA) is an alternative to LDA, which models word co-occurrence using a tree of latent variables and the states of the latent variables, which correspond to soft clusters of documents, are interpreted as topics. == Topic models for context information == Approaches for temporal information include Block and Newman's determination of the temporal dynamics of topics in the Pennsylvania Gazette during 1728–1800. Griffiths & Steyvers used topic modeling on abstracts from the journal PNAS to identify topics that rose or fell in popularity from 1991 to 2001 whereas Lamba & Madhusushan used topic modeling on full-text research articles retrieved from DJLIT journal from 1981 to 2018. In the field of library and information science, Lamba & Madhusudhan applied topic modeling on different Indian resources like journal articles and electronic theses and resources (ETDs). Nelson has been analyzing change in topics over time in the Richmond Times-Dispatch to understand social and political changes and continuities in Richmond during the American Civil War. Yang, Torget and Mihalcea applied topic modeling methods to newspapers from 1829 to 2008. Mimno used topic modelling with 24 journals on classical philology and archaeology spanning 150 years to look at how topics in the journals change over time and how the journals become more different or similar over time. Yin et al. introduced a topic model for geographically distributed documents, where document positions are explained by latent regions which are detected during inference. Chang and Blei included network information between linked documents in the relational topic model, to model the links between websites. The author-topic model by Rosen-Zvi et al. models the topics associated with authors of documents to improve the topic detection for documents with authorship information. HLTA was applied to a collection of recent research papers published at major AI and Machine Learning venues. The resulting model is called The AI Tree. The resulting topics are used to index the papers at aipano.cse.ust.hk to help researchers track research trends and identify papers to read, and help conference organizers and journal editors identify reviewers for submissions. To improve the qualitative aspects and coherency of generated topics, some researchers have explored the efficacy of "coherence scores", or otherwise how computer-extracted clusters (i.e. topics) align with a human benchmark. Coherence scores are metrics for optimising the number of topics to extract from a document corpus. == Algorithms == In practice, researchers attempt to fit appropriate model parameters to the data corpus using one of several heuristics for maximum likelihood fit. A survey by D. Blei describes this suite of algorithms. Several groups of researchers starting with Papadimitriou et al. have attempted to design algorithms with provable guarantees. Assuming that the data were actually generated by the model in question, they try to design algorithms that probably find the model that was used to create the data. Techniques used here include singular value decomposition (SVD) and the method of moments. In 2012 an algorithm based upon non-negative matrix factorization (NMF) was introduced that also generalizes to topic models with correlations among topics. Since 2017, neural networks has been leveraged in topic modeling in order to improve the speed of inference, and leading to further advancements like vONTSS, which allows humans to incorporate domain knowledge via weakly supervised learning. In 2018, a new approach to topic models was proposed based on the stochastic block model. Topic modeling has leveraged LLMs through contextual embedding and fine tuning. == Applications of topic models == === To quantitative biomedicine === Topic models are being used also in other contexts. For examples uses of topic models in biology and bioinformatics research emerged. Recently topic models has been used to extract information from dataset of cancers' genomic samples. In this case topics are biological latent variables to be inferred. === To analysis of music and creativity === Topic models can be used for analysis of continuous signals like music. For instance, they were used to quantify how musical styles change in time, and identify the influence of specific artists on later music creation.
AIOps
AIOps (Artificial Intelligence for IT Operations) refers to the use of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and big data analytics to automate and enhance data center management. It helps organizations manage complex IT environments by detecting, diagnosing, and resolving issues more efficiently than traditional methods. == History == AIOps was first defined by Gartner in 2016, combining "artificial intelligence" and "IT operations" to describe the application of AI and machine learning to enhance IT operations. This concept was introduced to address the increasing complexity and data volume in IT environments, aiming to automate processes such as event correlation, anomaly detection, and causality determination. == Definition == AIOps refers to multi-layered, complex technology platforms that enhance and automate IT operations by using machine learning and analytics to analyze the large amounts of data collected from various DevOps devices and tools, automatically identifying and responding to issues in real-time. AIOps represents a shift from isolated IT data to aggregated observational data (e.g., job logs and monitoring systems) and interaction data (such as ticketing, events, or incident records) within a big data platform. AIOps applies machine learning and analytics to this data, resulting in continuous visibility that, when combined with automation, can lead to ongoing improvements. AIOps connects three IT disciplines (automation, service management, and performance management) to achieve continuous visibility and improvement. This new approach in modern, accelerated, and hyper-scaled IT environments leverages advances in machine learning and big data to overcome previous limitations. == Components == AIOps includes, but is not limited to, the following processes and techniques: Anomaly Detection Log Analysis Root Cause Analysis Cohort Analysis Event Correlation Predictive Analytics Hardware Failure Prediction Automated Remediation Performance Prediction Incident Management Causality Determination Queue Management Resource Scheduling and Optimization Predictive Capacity Management Resource Allocation Service Quality Monitoring Deployment and Integration Testing System Configuration Auto-diagnosis and Problem Localization Efficient ML Training and Inferencing Using LLMs for Cloud Ops Auto Service Healing Data Center Management Customer Support Security and Privacy in Cloud Operations == Comparison with DevOps == AIOps is increasingly compared with DevOps in terms of impact on operational efficiency. While DevOps focuses on collaboration between development and operations teams to accelerate software delivery, AIOps integrates artificial intelligence to enhance monitoring, automation, and predictive capabilities. Various industry analyses have explored the similarities and differences between the two approaches, including discussions on how organizations can combine them to improve incident management and resource optimization. == Results == AI optimizes IT operations in five ways: First, intelligent monitoring powered by AI helps identify potential issues before they cause outages, improving metrics like Mean Time to Detect (MTTD) by 15-20%. Second, performance data analysis and insights enable quick decision-making by ingesting and analyzing large data sets in real time. Third, AI-driven automated infrastructure optimization efficiently allocates resources and thereby reducing cloud costs. Fourth, enhanced IT service management reduces critical incidents by over 50% through AI-driven end-to-end service management. Lastly, intelligent task automation accelerates problem resolution and automates remedial actions with minimal human intervention. In 2025, Atera Networks was identified as a leader in AIOps by the software review platform G2. == AIOps vs. MLOps == AIOps tools use big data analytics, machine learning algorithms, and predictive analytics to detect anomalies, correlate events, and provide proactive insights. This automation reduces the burden on IT teams, allowing them to focus on strategic tasks rather than routine operational issues. AIOps is widely used by IT operations teams, DevOps, network administrators, and IT service management (ITSM) teams to enhance visibility and enable quicker incident resolution in hybrid cloud environments, data centers, and other IT infrastructures. In contrast to MLOps (Machine Learning Operations), which focuses on the lifecycle management and operational aspects of machine learning models, AIOps focuses on optimizing IT operations using a variety of analytics and AI-driven techniques. While both disciplines rely on AI and data-driven methods, AIOps primarily targets IT operations, whereas MLOps is concerned with the deployment, monitoring, and maintenance of ML models. == Conferences == There are several conferences that are specific to AIOps: AIOps Summit AI Dev Summit IBM Think conference
Mona Diab
Mona Talat Diab (Arabic: منى طلعت دياب) is a computer science professor and director of Carnegie Mellon University's Language Technologies Institute. Previously, she was a professor at George Washington University and a research scientist with Facebook AI. Her research focuses on natural language processing, computational linguistics, cross lingual/multilingual processing, computational socio-pragmatics, Arabic language processing, and applied machine learning. == Education == Diab completed her M.Sc. in computer science with a major in machine learning and artificial intelligence at The George Washington University (1997) and her Ph.D. in computational linguistics at the University of Maryland, Linguistics Department and University of Maryland Institute for Advanced Computer Studies (UMIACS) in 2003, under the supervision of Philip Resnik. She was also a postdoctoral research scientist at Stanford University (2003–2005) under the mentorship of Dan Jurafsky, where she was a part of the Stanford NLP Group. == Career == After her postdoc at Stanford, Diab took a position as research scientist (principal investigator) at the Center for Computational Learning Systems (CCLS) in Columbia University, where she was also adjunct professor in the computer science department. In 2013 she joined the George Washington University as an associate professor, where she was promoted to full professor in 2017. Diab is the founder and director of the GW NLP lab CARE4Lang. Diab served as an elected faculty senator at Columbia University for 6 years (2007–2012) and an elected faculty senator at GW (2013–2014). She served the computational linguistics community as elected member, secretary and president of ACL SIGLEX (2005–2016) and elected president of ACL SIGSemitic. She currently serves as the elected VP-elect for ACL SIGDAT. In 2017 Diab joined Amazon AWS AI Deep Learning Group for Human Language Technologies, where she led the AWS Lex project for task oriented dialogue systems for enterprises. A couple of years later, she moved to Facebook AI as a research scientist. In the fall of 2023, she became the director of CMU's Language Technologies Institute -- the first full time director since the passing of its founder Jaime Carbonell. == Research == Diab's research interests include several areas in computational linguistics/natural language processing, like conversational AI, computational lexical semantics, multilingual and cross lingual processing, social media processing with an emphasis on computational socio- pragmatics, information extraction & text analytics, machine translation. Besides this, she also has special interests in Arabic NLP and low resource scenarios. Diab co-established two research trends in the computational linguistics field, computational approaches to linguistic code switching in 2007 and semantic textual similarity in 2010. Diab together with Nizar Habash and Owen Rambow, co-founded CADIM in 2005, a global reference point in Arabic dialect processing. In 2012, Diab together with Eneko Agirre and Johan Bos, brought together two ACL communities SIGLEX and SIGSEM and established the 1st tier conference SEM. == Awards and recognition == Selected as one of top 150 leaders and visionaries in AI nationwide to participate in White House AI Summit in Government, Washington, D.C., US, September 2019 March 2017: 3 Muslim Women in STEM You Should Know About, Teen Vogue, March 2017 May 2017: Behind Every Strong Woman Is...Another Strong Woman: Ten women give thanks to the women who supported them on the way up. Elle, May 2017. Google Faculty Research Award – Tharwa++: Building a multidialectal Arabic Lexical Repository, (PI), 09.2015 –12.2016. Google Faculty Research Award – Nuanced Sentiment and Perspective Analysis for Arabic Social Media Text, (PI), 12.2014 –12.2015 QNRF Best Poster Award – Ossama Obeid, Houda Bouamor, Wajdi Zaghouani, Mahmoud Ghoneim, Abdelati Hawwari, Mona Diab, Kemal Oflazer. (2016) MANDIAC: A Web-based Annotation System For Manual Arabic Diacritization. Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Arabic Corpora and Processing Tools, LREC 2016. Best Paper Award – Aminian, Maryam, Mahmoud Ghoneim, Mona Diab. (2015) Unsupervised False Friend Disambiguation Using Contextual Word Clusters and Parallel Word Alignments. In Proceedings of Workshop 9th Semantics Syntax Statistical Translation, NAACL 2015, Denver CO, US. == Publications == Diab has over 250 publications, and she is an acting editor for several scientific journals. === Selected publications === Semeval-2012 task 6: A pilot on semantic textual similarity. E. Agirre, D. Cer, M. Diab, A. Gonzalez-Agirre. SEM 2012: The First Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics–Volume 1: Proceedings of the main conference and the shared task, and Volume 2: Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval 2012) Predictive linguistic features of schizophrenia. ES Kayi, M Diab, L Pauselli, M Compton, G Coppersmith. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.09377 Ideological perspective detection using semantic features. H Elfardy, M Diab, C Callison-Burch – Proceedings of SEM 2015 DeSePtion: Dual sequence prediction and adversarial examples for improved fact-checking. Christopher Hidey, Tuhin Chakrabarty, Tariq Alhindi, Siddharth Varia, Kriste Krstovski, Mona Diab, Smaranda Muresan, 2020 Does Causal Coherence Predict Online Spread of Social Media? Pedram Hosseini, Mona Diab, David A Broniatowski. Proceedings of International Conference on Social Computing, Behavioral-Cultural Modeling and Prediction and Behavior Representation in Modeling and Simulation, 2019. Diversity, Density, and Homogeneity: Quantitative Characteristic Metrics for Text Collections. YA Lai, X Zhu, Y Zhang, M Diab, arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.08529, 2020 Readability of written medicine information materials in Arabic language: expert and consumer evaluation. S Al Aqeel, N Abanmy, A Aldayel, H Al-Khalifa, M Al-Yahya, M Diab. BMC health services research 18 (1), 1–7, 2019 Unsupervised word mapping using structural similarities in monolingual embeddings. H Aldarmaki, M Mohan, M Diab – Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 2018 An unsupervised method for word sense tagging using parallel corpora M Diab, P Resnik. Proceedings of ACL 2002 Overview for the first shared task on language identification in code-switched data. Thamar Solorio, Elizabeth Blair, Suraj Maharjan, Steven Bethard, Mona Diab, Mahmoud Ghoneim, Abdelati Hawwari, Fahad AlGhamdi, Julia Hirschberg, Alison Chang, Pascale Fung. Proceedings of the First Workshop on Computational Approaches to Code Switching, 2014 Modeling sentences in the latent space. W Guo, M Diab – ACL 20 12 Task-based evaluation of multiword expressions: a pilot study in statistical machine translation. M Carpuat, M Diab – NAACL-HLT 2010 Rumor detection and classification for twitter data. S Hamidian, MT Diab – arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.08926, 2019 Subgroup detection in ideological discussions. A Abu-Jbara, P Dasigi, M Diab, D Radev – ACL 2012 Madamira: A fast, comprehensive tool for morphological analysis and disambiguation of arabic. A. Pasha, M. Al-Badrashiny, M. Diab, A. El Kholy, R. Eskander, N. Habash, M. Pooleery, O. Rambow, R. Roth. LREC 14, 1094–1101. 2014 Context-Aware Self-Attentive Natural Language Understanding for Task-Oriented Chatbots. A. Gupta, P. Zhang, G. Lalwani, M. Diab. EMNLP 2019 A multitask learning approach for diacritic restoration. S. Alqahtani, A. Mishra, M. Diab. ACL 2020