ePages is an e-commerce software that allows merchants to create and run online shops in the cloud. The number of shops based on ePages is currently 140,000 worldwide. ePages software is regularly updated due to its Software-as-a-Service model. An investor in the company is United Internet, with a 25% stake. ePages focuses upon distributing its products mainly through hosting providers. ePages is headquartered in Hamburg, with additional offices Barcelona, Jena, and Bilbao. == History == The name ePages was used for the first time for software in 1997 to market "Intershop ePages". In 2002, the product line then called Intershop 4 was taken over by ePages GmbH and renamed to ePages. == Features == Depending on the ePages product and packages offered by hosting providers, merchants can sell up to an unlimited number of items. Users can offer their products and services in 15 languages and with all currencies. With ePages, merchants can use web marketing tools; e.g. newsletters, coupons or social media plug-ins for social commerce.
Colour banding
Colour banding is a subtle form of posterisation in digital images, caused by the colour of each pixel being rounded to the nearest of the digital colour levels. While posterisation is often done for artistic effect, colour banding is an undesired artefact. In 24-bit colour modes, 8 bits per channel is usually considered sufficient to render images in Rec. 709 or sRGB. However the eye can see the difference between the colour levels, especially when there is a sharp border between two large areas of adjacent colour levels. This will happen with gradual gradients (like sunsets, dawns or clear blue skies), and also when blurring an image a large amount. Colour banding is more noticeable with fewer bits per pixel (BPP) at 16–256 colours (4–8 BPP), where there are fewer shades with a larger difference between them. The appearance of colour banding is exaggerated by the Mach bands effect. Possible solutions include the introduction of dithering and increasing the number of bits per colour channel. Because the banding comes from limitations in the presentation of the image, blurring the image does not fix this unless the image BPP is higher than the original.
Multi-focus image fusion
Multi-focus image fusion is a multiple image compression technique using input images with different focus depths to make one output image that preserves all information. == Overview == The main idea of image fusion is gathering important and the essential information from the input images into one single image which ideally has all of the information of the input images. The research history of image fusion spans over 30 years and many scientific papers. Image fusion generally has two aspects: image fusion methods and objective evaluation metrics. In visual sensor networks (VSN), sensors are cameras which record images and video sequences. In many applications of VSN, a camera can't give a perfect illustration including all details of the scene. This is because of the limited depth of focus of the optical lens of cameras. Therefore, just the object located in the focal length of camera is focused and clear, and other parts of the image are blurred. VSN captures images with different depths of focus using several cameras. Due to the large amount of data generated by cameras compared to other sensors such as pressure and temperature sensors and some limitations of bandwidth, energy consumption and processing time, it is essential to process the local input images to decrease the amount of transmitted data. == Multi-Focus image fusion in the spatial domain == Huang and Jing have reviewed and applied several focus measurements in the spatial domain for the multi-focus image fusion process, suitable for real-time applications. They mentioned some focus measurements including variance, energy of image gradient (EOG), Tenenbaum's algorithm (Tenengrad), energy of Laplacian (EOL), sum-modified-Laplacian (SML), and spatial frequency (SF). Their experiments showed that EOL gave better results than other methods like variance and spatial frequency. == Multi-Focus image fusion in multi-scale transform and DCT domain == Image fusion based on the multi-scale transform is the most commonly used and promising technique. Laplacian pyramid transform, gradient pyramid-based transform, morphological pyramid transform and the premier ones, discrete wavelet transform, shift-invariant wavelet transform (SIDWT), and discrete cosine harmonic wavelet transform (DCHWT) are some examples of image fusion methods based on multi-scale transform. These methods are complex and have some limitations e.g. processing time and energy consumption. For example, multi-focus image fusion methods based on DWT require a lot of convolution operations, so they take more time and energy to process. Therefore, most methods in multi-scale transform are not suitable for real-time applications. Moreover, these methods are not very successful along edges, due to the wavelet transform process missing the edges of the image. They create ringing artefacts in the output image and reduce its quality. Due to the aforementioned problems in the multi-scale transform methods, researchers are interested in multi-focus image fusion in the DCT domain. DCT-based methods are more efficient in terms of transmission and archiving images coded in Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) standard to the upper node in the VSN agent. A JPEG system consists of a pair of an encoder and a decoder. In the encoder, images are divided into non-overlapping 8×8 blocks, and the DCT coefficients are calculated for each. Since the quantization of DCT coefficients is a lossy process, many of the small-valued DCT coefficients are quantized to zero, which corresponds to high frequencies. DCT-based image fusion algorithms work better when the multi-focus image fusion methods are applied in the compressed domain. In addition, in the spatial-based methods, the input images must be decoded and then transferred to the spatial domain. After implementation of the image fusion operations, the output fused images must again be encoded. DCT domain-based methods do not require complex and time-consuming consecutive decoding and encoding operations. Therefore, the image fusion methods based on DCT domain operate with much less energy and processing time. Recently, a lot of research has been carried out in the DCT domain. DCT+Variance, DCT+Corr_Eng, DCT+EOL, and DCT+VOL are some prominent examples of DCT based methods.
Read Along
Read Along, formerly known as Bolo, is an Android language-learning app for children developed by Google for the Android operating system. The application was released on the Play Store on March 7, 2019. It features a character named Diya helping children learn to read through illustrated stories. It has the facility to learn English and Indian major languages i.e. Hindi, Bengali, Tamil, Telugu, Marathi and Urdu, as well as Spanish, Portuguese and Arabic. == Technology == The app uses text-to-speech technology, through which the character named Dia reads the story, as well as speech-to-text technology, which mechanically identifies the matches between the text and the reading of the user. The story of Chhota Bheem and Katha Kids was added in September 2019. In April 2020, a new version of the application was released. In September 2020, it added Arabic language to its language option. A web version was launched in August 2022.
Ordered dithering
Ordered dithering is any image dithering algorithm which uses a pre-set threshold map tiled across an image. It is commonly used to display a continuous image on a display of smaller color depth. For example, Microsoft Windows uses it in 16-color graphics modes. With the most common "Bayer" threshold map, the algorithm is characterized by noticeable crosshatch patterns in the result. == Threshold map == The algorithm reduces the number of colors by applying a threshold map M to the pixels displayed, causing some pixels to change color, depending on the distance of the original color from the available color entries in the reduced palette. The first threshold maps were designed by hand to minimise the perceptual difference between a grayscale image and its two-bit quantisation for up to a 4x4 matrix. An optimal threshold matrix is one that for any possible quantisation of color has the minimum possible texture so that the greatest impression of the underlying feature comes from the image being quantised. It can be proven that for matrices whose side length is a power of two there is an optimal threshold matrix. The map may be rotated or mirrored without affecting the effectiveness of the algorithm. This threshold map (for sides with length as power of two) is also known as a Bayer matrix or, when unscaled, an index matrix. For threshold maps whose dimensions are a power of two, the map can be generated recursively via: M 2 n = 1 ( 2 n ) 2 [ 4 M n 4 M n + 2 J n 4 M n + 3 J n 4 M n + J n ] = J 2 ⊗ M n + 1 n 2 M 2 ⊗ J n , {\displaystyle \mathbf {M} _{2n}={\frac {1}{(2n)^{2}}}{\begin{bmatrix}4\mathbf {M} _{n}&4\mathbf {M} _{n}+2\mathbf {J} _{n}\\4\mathbf {M} _{n}+3\mathbf {J} _{n}&4\mathbf {M} _{n}+\mathbf {J} _{n}\end{bmatrix}}=\mathbf {J} _{2}\otimes \mathbf {M} _{n}+{\frac {1}{n^{2}}}\mathbf {M} _{2}\otimes \mathbf {J} _{n},} where J n {\displaystyle \mathbf {J} _{n}} are n × n {\displaystyle n\times n} matrices of ones and ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } is the Kronecker product. While the metric for texture that Bayer proposed could be used to find optimal matrices for sizes that are not a power of two, such matrices are uncommon as no simple formula for finding them exists, and relatively small matrix sizes frequently give excellent practical results (especially when combined with other modifications to the dithering algorithm). This function can also be expressed using only bit arithmetic: M(i, j) = bit_reverse(bit_interleave(bitwise_xor(i, j), i)) / n ^ 2 == Pre-calculated threshold maps == Rather than storing the threshold map as a matrix of n {\displaystyle n} × n {\displaystyle n} integers from 0 to n 2 {\displaystyle n^{2}} , depending on the exact hardware used to perform the dithering, it may be beneficial to pre-calculate the thresholds of the map into a floating point format, rather than the traditional integer matrix format shown above. For this, the following formula can be used: Mpre(i,j) = Mint(i,j) / n^2 This generates a standard threshold matrix. for the 2×2 map: this creates the pre-calculated map: Additionally, normalizing the values to average out their sum to 0 (as done in the dithering algorithm shown below) can be done during pre-processing as well by subtracting 1⁄2 of the largest value from every value: Mpre(i,j) = Mint(i,j) / n^2 – 0.5 maxValue creating the pre-calculated map: == Algorithm == The ordered dithering algorithm renders the image normally, but for each pixel, it offsets its color value with a corresponding value from the threshold map according to its location, causing the pixel's value to be quantized to a different color if it exceeds the threshold. For most dithering purposes, it is sufficient to simply add the threshold value to every pixel (without performing normalization by subtracting 1⁄2), or equivalently, to compare the pixel's value to the threshold: if the brightness value of a pixel is less than the number in the corresponding cell of the matrix, plot that pixel black, otherwise, plot it white. This lack of normalization slightly increases the average brightness of the image, and causes almost-white pixels to not be dithered. This is not a problem when using a gray scale palette (or any palette where the relative color distances are (nearly) constant), and it is often even desired, since the human eye perceives differences in darker colors more accurately than lighter ones, however, it produces incorrect results especially when using a small or arbitrary palette, so proper normalization should be preferred. In other words, the algorithm performs the following transformation on each color c of every pixel: c ′ = n e a r e s t _ p a l e t t e _ c o l o r ( c + r × ( M ( x mod n , y mod n ) − 1 / 2 ) ) {\displaystyle c'=\mathrm {nearest\_palette\_color} {\mathopen {}}\left(c+r\times \left(M(x{\bmod {n}},y{\bmod {n}})-1/2\right){\mathclose {}}\right)} where M(i, j) is the threshold map on the i-th row and j-th column, c′ is the transformed color, and r is the amount of spread in color space. Assuming an RGB palette with 23N evenly distanced colors where each color (a triple of red, green and blue values) is represented by an octet from 0 to 255, one would typically choose r ≈ 255 N {\textstyle r\approx {\frac {255}{N}}} . (1⁄2 is again the normalizing term.) Because the algorithm operates on single pixels and has no conditional statements, it is very fast and suitable for real-time transformations. Additionally, because the location of the dithering patterns always stays the same relative to the display frame, it is less prone to jitter than error-diffusion methods, making it suitable for animations. Because the patterns are more repetitive than error-diffusion method, an image with ordered dithering compresses better. Ordered dithering is more suitable for line-art graphics as it will result in straighter lines and fewer anomalies. The values read from the threshold map should preferably scale into the same range as the minimal difference between distinct colors in the target palette. Equivalently, the size of the map selected should be equal to or larger than the ratio of source colors to target colors. For example, when quantizing a 24 bpp image to 15 bpp (256 colors per channel to 32 colors per channel), the smallest map one would choose would be 4×2, for the ratio of 8 (256:32). This allows expressing each distinct tone of the input with different dithering patterns. === A variable palette: pattern dithering === == Non-Bayer approaches == The above thresholding matrix approach describes the Bayer family of ordered dithering algorithms. A number of other algorithms are also known; they generally involve changes in the threshold matrix, which changes the distribution of the "noise" introduced by all kinds of dithering (the difference between the original image and the dithered image). === Halftone === Halftone dithering performs a form of clustered dithering, creating a look similar to halftone patterns, using a specially crafted matrix. === Void and cluster === The Void and cluster algorithm uses a pre-generated blue noise as the matrix for the dithering process. The blue noise matrix keeps the Bayer's good high frequency content, but with a more uniform coverage of all the frequencies involved shows a much lower amount of patterning. The "voids-and-cluster" method gets its name from the matrix generation procedure, where a black image with randomly initialized white pixels is gaussian-blurred to find the brightest and darkest parts, corresponding to voids and clusters. After a few swaps have evenly distributed the bright and dark parts, the pixels are numbered by importance. It takes significant computational resources to generate the blue noise matrix: on a modern computer a 64×64 matrix requires a couple seconds using the original algorithm. This algorithm can be extended to make animated dither masks which also consider the axis of time. This is done by running the algorithm in three dimensions and using a kernel which is a product of a two-dimensional gaussian kernel on the XY plane, and a one-dimensional Gaussian kernel on the Z axis. === Simulated Annealing === Simulated annealing can generate dither masks by starting with a flat histogram and swapping values to optimize a loss function. The loss function controls the spectral properties of the mask, allowing it to make blue noise or noise patterns meant to be filtered by specific filters. The algorithm can also be extended over time for animated dither masks with chosen temporal properties.
Apache Drill
Apache Drill is an open-source software framework that supports data-intensive distributed applications for interactive analysis of large-scale datasets. Built chiefly by contributions from developers from MapR, Drill is inspired by Google's Dremel system. Drill is an Apache top-level project. Drill supports a variety of NoSQL databases and file systems, including Alluxio, HBase, MongoDB, MapR-DB, HDFS, MapR-FS, Amazon S3, Azure Blob Storage, Google Cloud Storage, Swift, NAS and local files. A single query can join data from multiple datastores. Drill's datastore-aware optimizer automatically restructures a query plan to leverage the datastore's internal processing capabilities. In addition, Drill supports data locality, if Drill and the datastore are on the same nodes. Tom Shiran is the founder of the Apache Drill Project. It was designated an Apache Software Foundation top-level project in December 2016. == Features == One explicitly stated design goal is that Drill is able to scale to 10,000 servers or more and to be able to process petabytes of data and trillions of records in seconds. Schema-free JSON document model similar to MongoDB and Elasticsearch, without requiring a formal schema to be declared Industry-standard APIs: ANSI SQL, ODBC/JDBC, RESTful APIs Extremely user and developer friendly Pluggable architecture enables connectivity to multiple datastores Version 1.9 added dynamic user-defined functions Version 1.11 added cryptographic-related functions and PCAP file format support == Back-end support == Drill is primarily focused on non-relational datastores, including Apache Hadoop text files, NoSQL, and cloud storage. A notable feature also includes in situ querying of local JSON and Apache Parquet files. Some additional datastores that it supports include: All Hadoop distributions (HDFS API 2.3+), including Apache Hadoop, MapR, CDH and Amazon EMR NoSQL: MongoDB, Apache HBase, Apache Cassandra Online Analytical Processing: Apache Kudu, Apache Druid, OpenTSDB Cloud storage: Amazon S3, Google Cloud Storage, Azure Blob Storage, Swift, IBM Cloud Object Storage Diverse data formats, including Apache Avro, Apache Parquet and JSON RDBMs storage plugins (Using JDBC to connect to MySQL, PostgreSQL, and others) A new datastore can be added by developing a storage plugin. Drill's "schema-free" JSON data model enables it to query non-relational datastores in-situ . == Front-end support == Drill itself can be queried via JDBC, ODBC, or REST through a variety of methods and languages including Python and Java. The default install includes a web interface allowing end-users to execute ANSI SQL directly and export data tables as CSV files without any programming. The dashboard library, Apache Superset, is particularly well suited for visualization of data queried with Drill.
Non-local means
Non-local means is an algorithm in image processing for image denoising. Unlike "local mean" filters, which take the mean value of a group of pixels surrounding a target pixel to smooth the image, non-local means filtering takes a mean of all pixels in the image, weighted by how similar these pixels are to the target pixel. This results in much greater post-filtering clarity, and less loss of detail in the image compared with local mean algorithms. If compared with other well-known denoising techniques, non-local means adds "method noise" (i.e. error in the denoising process) which looks more like white noise, which is desirable because it is typically less disturbing in the denoised product. Recently non-local means has been extended to other image processing applications such as deinterlacing, view interpolation, and depth maps regularization. == Definition == Suppose Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } is the area of an image, and p {\displaystyle p} and q {\displaystyle q} are two points within the image. Then, the algorithm is: u ( p ) = 1 C ( p ) ∫ Ω v ( q ) f ( p , q ) d q . {\displaystyle u(p)={1 \over C(p)}\int _{\Omega }v(q)f(p,q)\,\mathrm {d} q.} where u ( p ) {\displaystyle u(p)} is the filtered value of the image at point p {\displaystyle p} , v ( q ) {\displaystyle v(q)} is the unfiltered value of the image at point q {\displaystyle q} , f ( p , q ) {\displaystyle f(p,q)} is the weighting function, and the integral is evaluated ∀ q ∈ Ω {\displaystyle \forall q\in \Omega } . C ( p ) {\displaystyle C(p)} is a normalizing factor, given by C ( p ) = ∫ Ω f ( p , q ) d q . {\displaystyle C(p)=\int _{\Omega }f(p,q)\,\mathrm {d} q.} == Common weighting functions == The purpose of the weighting function, f ( p , q ) {\displaystyle f(p,q)} , is to determine how closely related the image at the point p {\displaystyle p} is to the image at the point q {\displaystyle q} . It can take many forms. === Gaussian === The Gaussian weighting function sets up a normal distribution with a mean, μ = B ( p ) {\displaystyle \mu =B(p)} and a variable standard deviation: f ( p , q ) = e − | B ( q ) − B ( p ) | 2 h 2 {\displaystyle f(p,q)=e^{-{{\left\vert B(q)-B(p)\right\vert ^{2}} \over h^{2}}}} where h {\displaystyle h} is the filtering parameter (i.e., standard deviation) and B ( p ) {\displaystyle B(p)} is the local mean value of the image point values surrounding p {\displaystyle p} . == Discrete algorithm == For an image, Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } , with discrete pixels, a discrete algorithm is required. u ( p ) = 1 C ( p ) ∑ q ∈ Ω v ( q ) f ( p , q ) {\displaystyle u(p)={1 \over C(p)}\sum _{q\in \Omega }v(q)f(p,q)} where, once again, v ( q ) {\displaystyle v(q)} is the unfiltered value of the image at point q {\displaystyle q} . C ( p ) {\displaystyle C(p)} is given by: C ( p ) = ∑ q ∈ Ω f ( p , q ) {\displaystyle C(p)=\sum _{q\in \Omega }f(p,q)} Then, for a Gaussian weighting function, f ( p , q ) = e − | B ( q ) 2 − B ( p ) 2 | h 2 {\displaystyle f(p,q)=e^{-{{\left\vert B(q)^{2}-B(p)^{2}\right\vert } \over h^{2}}}} where B ( p ) {\displaystyle B(p)} is given by: B ( p ) = 1 | R ( p ) | ∑ i ∈ R ( p ) v ( i ) {\displaystyle B(p)={1 \over |R(p)|}\sum _{i\in R(p)}v(i)} where R ( p ) ⊆ Ω {\displaystyle R(p)\subseteq \Omega } and is a square region of pixels surrounding p {\displaystyle p} and | R ( p ) | {\displaystyle |R(p)|} is the number of pixels in the region R {\displaystyle R} . == Efficient implementation == The computational complexity of the non-local means algorithm is quadratic in the number of pixels in the image, making it particularly expensive to apply directly. Several techniques were proposed to speed up execution. One simple variant consists of restricting the computation of the mean for each pixel to a search window centred on the pixel itself, instead of the whole image. Another approximation uses summed-area tables and fast Fourier transform to calculate the similarity window between two pixels, speeding up the algorithm by a factor of 50 while preserving comparable quality of the result.