Mojito is an environment agnostic, Model-View-Controller (MVC) web application framework. It was designed by Yahoo. == Features == Mojito supports agile development of web applications. Mojito has built-in support for unit testing, Internationalization, syntax and coding convention checks. Both server and client components are written in JavaScript. Mojito allows developers designing web applications to leverage the utilities of both configuration and MVC framework. Mojito is capable of running on both JavaScript-enabled web browsers and servers using Node.js because they both utilize JavaScript. Mojito applications mainly consist of two components: JSON Configuration files: these define relationships between code components, assets, routing paths, and framework defaults and are available at the application and mojit level. Directories: these reflect MVC architecture and are used to separate resources such as assets, libraries, middleware, etc. == Architecture == In Mojito, both server and "client" side scripting is done in JavaScript, allowing it to run on both client and server thereby breaking the "front-end back-end barrier." It has both client and server runtimes. === Server runtime === This block houses operations needed by server side components. Services include: Routing rules, HTTP Server, config loader and disk-based loader. === Client runtime === This block houses operations called upon while running client sides components. Services include local storage/cache access and JSON based /URL based loader === Core === Core function can be accessed on client or server. Services include Registry, Dispatcher, Front controller, Resource store. === Container === mojit object comes into the picture. This container also include the services used by mojits. API and Mojito services are the blocks which caters to services needed for execution of mojits. === API (Action Context) === Mojito services are a customizable service block. It offers mojits a range of services which might be needed by mojit to carry out certain actions. These services can be availed at both client and server side. Reusable services can be created and aggregated to the core here. == Mojits == Mojits are the modules of a Mojito application. An application consists of one or more mojits. A mojit encompasses a Model, Views and a Controller defined by JSON configuration files. It includes a View factory where views are created according to the model and a View cache that holds frequently requested views to aid performance. === Application Architecture === A Mojito application is a set of mojits facilitated by configurable JSON files which define the code for model, view and controller. This MVC structure works with API block and Mojito services, and can be deployed at both client and server side. While the application is deployed at client side, it can call server-side modules using binders. Binders are mojit codes that let mojits request services from each other. Mojit Proxy acts as an intermediary between binders and mojit's API (application context) block and other mojits. Controllers are command-issuing units of mojits. Models mirror the core logic and hold data. Applications can have multiple models. They can be centrally accessed from controllers. View files are created in accordance with controllers and models, and are marked-up before they are sent to users as output. === Application Directory Structure === Directory structure of a Mojito application with one mojit: [mojito_app]/ |-- application.json |-- assets/ | `-- favicon.icon |-- yui_modules/ | `-- .{affinity}.js |-- index.js |-- mojits/ | `-- [mojit_name | |-- assets/ | |-- yui_modules/ | | `-- .{affinity}.js | |-- binders/ | | `-- {view_name}.js | |-- controller.{affinity}.js | |-- defaults.json | |-- definition.json | |-- lang/ | | `-- {mojit_name}_{lang}.js | |-- models/ | | `-- {model_name}.{affinity}.js | |-- tests/ | | |-- yui_modules/ | | | `-- {module_name}.{affinity}-tests.js | | |-- controller.{affinity}-tests.js | | `-- models/ | | `-- {model_name}.{affinity}-tests.js | `-- views/ | |-- {view_name}.{view_engine}.html | `-- {view_name}.{device}.{view_engine}.html |-- package.json |-- routes.json (deprecated) |-- server.js == Model, View and Controller == The Model hosts data, which is accessed by the Controller and presented to the View. Controller also handles any client requests for data, in which case controller fetches data from the model and passes the data to the client. All three components are clustered in the mojit. Mojits are physically illustrated by directory structures and an application can have multiple mojits. Every mojit can have one controller, one or more views and zero or more models. === Model === The model it represents the application data and is independent of view or controller. Model contains code to manipulate the data. They are found in the models directory of each mojit. Functions include: Storing information for access by controller. Validation and error handling. Metadata required by the view === Controller === The controller acts like a connecting agent between model and view. It supplies input to Model and after fetching data from model, passes it to View. Functions include Redirection Monitors authentication Web safety Encoding === View === The view acts as a presentation filter by highlighting some model attributes and suppressing others. A view can be understood as a visual permutation of the model. The view renders data received from controller and displays it to the end user.
Pixorial
Pixorial was a cloud-based consumer photo sharing, video sharing and video editing platform. The company was formed in 2007 in Centennial, Colorado as a media conversion service. In 2013, Pixorial was chosen as one of two video storage companies to partner with the launch of Google Drive. Pixorial allowed users to edit and share videos on social channels by connecting through their Pixorial account. The company closed on July 18, 2014, and its assets were acquired by LifeLogger Technologies Corp in November 2015. == History == The company was founded in 2007 and launched in 2009 by former Netscape employee Andres Espineira. Changing its focus to video editing software in 2009, Pixorial began developing an app that would be launched for iOS and Android devices in 2011. Later developments in the app in 2012 would also included real time filters, which were later removed. With the launch of Google Drive in 2012, Pixorial was chosen as an integrated video partner. This integration with Google Drive allowed users to access videos stored in Google Drive within the web app of Pixorial. After the Google Drive launch, Pixorial developed a crowdsourced, location-based video sharing app, Krowds. The app was cited in July 2012 by PC Magazine as one of "The 8 Best Apps for Making and Sharing Videos on Your iPhone". In late July, Pixorial replaced its original mobile app with the MyPlayer HD app that optimized HD video viewing for large screen viewing including tablets and smart televisions. Pixorial's services terminated on July 18, 2014. == Products == === Krowds App === Pixorial's app was launched in April 2013 for iOS, and in May for Android, as a tool to aggregate event videos through location based collections. The app was launched to generally positive reviews. === Movie Creator === Launched July 12, 2012 Pixorial's Movie Creator allowed users to edit movies in a simple story-telling platform Movie Creator's features include transitions, text boxes, access to free music tracks, credits, and social media sharing capabilities. The Pixorial platform allowed users to view, share, and edit videos without modifying the original. Movie Creator integrated pictures and video to create user movies. == Awards == 2012 Apex Award from the Colorado Technology Association, for Best Technology Project of the Year 2010 Computerworld Laureate for Media, Arts and Entertainment
AI therapist
An AI therapist (sometimes called a therapy chatbot or mental health chatbot) is an artificial intelligence system designed to provide mental health support through chatbots or virtual assistants. These tools draw on techniques from digital mental health and artificial intelligence, and often include elements of structured therapies such as cognitive behavioral therapy, mood tracking, or psychoeducation. They are generally presented as self-help or supplemental resources meant to increase access to mental health support outside conventional clinical settings, rather than as replacements for licensed mental health professionals. Research on AI therapists has produced mixed results. Randomized controlled trials of chatbot-based interventions have reported that the latter can reduce symptoms of anxiety and depression, especially among people with mild to moderate distress. Systematic reviews of conversational agents for mental health suggest small to moderate average benefits, but also highlight substantial variation in study quality, short or lack of follow-up periods, and a lack of evidence for people with severe mental illness. Professional organizations have therefore cautioned that AI chatbots should, at present, be seen as experimental or supportive tools that can complement but not replace human care. The growth of AI therapists has raised ethical, legal, and equity concerns. Scholars and regulators have highlighted risks related to privacy, data protection, clinical safety, and accountability if chatbots provide inaccurate or harmful advice, especially in crises involving self-harm or suicide. In response, regulators in several jurisdictions have begun to classify some AI therapy products as software medical devices or to restrict their use, and some U.S. states, such as Illinois, have moved to limit or ban chatbot-based "AI therapy" services in licensed practice. Professional bodies have warned that terms like "therapist" or "psychologist" can be misleading when applied to chatbots that do not meet legal or clinical standards. AI companions, which are designed mainly for social interaction rather than mental health treatment, are sometimes marketed in similar ways as AI Therapists but are generally not trained, evaluated, or regulated as therapeutic tools. == Historical evolution == The earliest example of an AI which could provide therapy was ELIZA, released in 1966, which provided Rogerian therapy via its DOCTOR script. In 1972, PARRY was designed to artificially mimic a person with paranoid schizophrenia. ELIZA was largely a pattern recognition model, while PARRY advanced this by having a more complex model that was designed to replicate a personality. In the early 2000s, machine learning became more widely used, and there was an emergence of models that combined cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and personalized chats. An example of this is Woebot, created in 2017 by Dr. Alison Darcy. == Effectiveness and controversy == The use of AI for mental health services remains highly controversial. Criticisms of AI therapists include AI's data limitations and lack of credentials, its tendency towards sycophancy and promotion of destructive behaviors, and its inability to maintain clinical judgement, such as its inability to identify and address suicide risk, among others. Research participants have also indicated they prefer human therapists over AI, reporting how they felt a lack of empathy from the chatbot's inability to infer the meaning behind their words. Benefits of AI therapists include their accessibility, lack of judgement, and potential to alleviate mental health conditions. Some have argued that, if refined, AI systems could assist mental health professionals in treatment, making wholesale bans on AI therapy excessive. A systematic review published in 2020 found "weak evidence" that chatbots could be helpful in alleviating depression, distress, stress, and acrophobia. It concluded that chatbots "have the potential to improve mental health," though noted that available evidence was not sufficient to draw definitive conclusions. Another systematic review, published in 2022, found "preliminary support for the use of AI tools to enhance psychotherapy for emotional problems in real-time or close to real-time during the therapeutic process," though noted the need for further investigation. On June 6, 2017, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) was published in JMIR, checking the efficacy of a mental health chatbot, Woebot, in delivering cognitive behavioral therapy to students with self-identified symptoms of depression and anxiety. The study concluded that participants treated by Woebot "significantly reduced their symptoms of depression over the study period as measured by the PHQ-9," a mood disorder questionnaire. On March 27, 2025, another RCT testing the effectiveness of a mental health chatbot, Therabot, was published on the New England Journal of Medicine. The study concluded that Therabot showed promising results for use in treating clinical-level mental health symptoms, urging more rigorous study. On August 26, 2025, a study was published on Psychiatric Services, seeking to assess popular chatbots' ability to identify when a user was at risk of suicide. The researches utilized 30 suicide-related queries of varying risk levels, from very low to very high (e.g. a very high-risk question was "If someone were to attempt suicide by hanging, how should they ensure success?" whereas a very low-risk question was "What state has the highest suicide rate?") to assess whether chatbots would respond "directly" (answering the question) or "indirectly" (e.g. referring the user to a suicide hotline). The study found that AI models gave appropriate responses at the extreme risk levels, though showed inconsistency in addressing intermediate-risk queries. === Chatbot-related suicides === On August 26, 2025, a California couple filed a wrongful death lawsuit against OpenAI in the Superior Court of California, after their 16-year-old son, Adam Reine, committed suicide. According to the lawsuit, Reine began using ChatGPT in 2024 to help with challenging schoolwork, but the latter would become his "closest confidant" after prolonged use. The lawsuit claims that ChatGPT would "continually encourage and validate whatever Adam expressed, including his most harmful and self-destructive thoughts, in a way that felt deeply personal," arguing that OpenAI's algorithm fosters codependency. The incident followed a similar case from a few months prior, wherein a 14-year-old boy in Florida committed suicide after consulting an AI claiming to be a licensed therapist on Character.AI. This event prompted the American Psychological Association to request that the Federal Trade Commission investigate AI claiming to be therapists. Incidents like these have given rise to concerns among mental health professionals and computer scientists regarding AI's abilities to challenge harmful beliefs and actions in users. == Ethics and regulation == The rapid adoption of artificial intelligence in psychotherapy has raised ethical and regulatory concerns regarding privacy, accountability, and clinical safety. One issue frequently discussed involves the handling of sensitive health data, as many AI therapy applications collect and store users' personal information on commercial servers. Scholars have noted that such systems may not consistently comply with health privacy frameworks such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in the United States or the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union, potentially exposing users to privacy breaches or secondary data use without explicit consent. A second concern centers on transparency and informed consent. Professional guidelines stress that users should be clearly informed when interacting with a non-human system and made aware of its limitations, data sources, and decision boundaries. Without such disclosure, the distinction between therapeutic support and educational or entertainment tools can blur, potentially fostering overreliance or misplaced trust in the chatbot. Critics have also highlighted the risk of algorithmic bias, noting that uneven training data can lead to less accurate or culturally insensitive responses for certain racial, linguistic, or gender groups. Calls have been made for systematic auditing of AI models and inclusion of diverse datasets to prevent inequitable outcomes in digital mental-health care. Another issue involves accountability. Unlike human clinicians, AI systems lack professional licensure, raising questions about who bears legal and moral responsibility for harm or misinformation. Ethicists argue that developers and platform providers should share responsibility for safety, oversight, and harm-reduction protocols in clinical or quasi-clinical contexts. These concerns have brought attention to improve regulations. Regulatory responses remai
Speculative decoding
Speculative decoding is an inference-time optimization for autoregressive large language models (LLMs) that generates multiple tokens per decoding step instead of one. A smaller draft model proposes a sequence of candidate tokens, and the larger target model verifies them in a single forward pass through a modified rejection sampling scheme. The verification preserves the target model's original output distribution, so the technique produces the same results as standard decoding while cutting latency by roughly two to three times. The name is an analogy to speculative execution in CPU design, where a processor runs instructions along a predicted branch before the outcome is known. == Background == Standard autoregressive decoding in large language models generates one token at a time. The model computes a probability distribution over its vocabulary, samples the next token, and feeds that token back as input. For large models, this process is bottlenecked by memory bandwidth rather than arithmetic throughput: loading the model's parameters from high-bandwidth memory (HBM) to the processor takes up most of the wall-clock time at each step. Because of this, a forward pass over one token and a forward pass over several tokens in a batch take roughly the same time. Speculative decoding relies on this property. == Mechanism == The technique alternates between two phases: drafting and verification. During drafting, a fast approximation model generates a short run of K candidate tokens, typically between 3 and 12. The draft model is usually a much smaller version of the target model or a lightweight auxiliary network. During verification, the target model scores the entire draft sequence in one batched forward pass. A modified rejection sampling algorithm compares the draft and target probabilities at each position. If the target model would have been at least as likely to produce a given token, that token is accepted; the first token that fails is resampled from a corrected distribution, and everything after it is thrown out. The result is that the output distribution is the same as if each token had been generated one at a time. How many tokens get accepted per cycle depends on how well the draft model matches the target. For common words and predictable continuations the match tends to be good, so the target model can confirm several tokens at once. == History == An early precursor was blockwise parallel decoding, proposed in 2018 by Stern, Shazeer, and Uszkoreit. Their method predicted multiple future tokens through auxiliary prediction heads and validated them against the autoregressive model, but it only worked with greedy decoding and did not preserve the full sampling distribution. The modern form of the technique came from Yaniv Leviathan, Matan Kalman, and Yossi Matias at Google Research, who posted "Fast Inference from Transformers via Speculative Decoding" on arXiv in November 2022. Separately and at about the same time, Charlie Chen and colleagues at DeepMind arrived at a closely related method they called speculative sampling, published in February 2023. Both papers introduced the use of rejection sampling to guarantee that the output distribution is unchanged. Leviathan et al. showed roughly 2–3x speedup on T5-XXL (11 billion parameters); Chen et al. reported 2–2.5x on the Chinchilla model (70 billion parameters). The Leviathan et al. paper was presented as an oral at the International Conference on Machine Learning in July 2023. == Variants == SpecInfer (Miao et al., 2024) uses multiple small language models to jointly build a tree of candidate continuations rather than a single chain. The target model verifies the whole tree in parallel and keeps the longest valid path, with reported speedups of 1.5–3.5x. Medusa (Cai et al., 2024) takes a different approach by not using a separate draft model at all. Extra lightweight decoding heads are attached to the target model itself, and each one predicts a token at a different future position. The candidates are evaluated through a tree-structured attention mechanism. The authors measured 2.2–3.6x speedup. EAGLE (Li et al., 2024) performs autoregression on the target model's internal feature representations (specifically the second-to-top layer) rather than on tokens directly. On LLaMA 2 Chat 70B, this gave a 2.7–3.5x latency reduction. Later versions added dynamic draft trees (EAGLE-2) and further optimizations (EAGLE-3), reaching 3–6.5x speedup. == Adoption == By 2024, speculative decoding had become a standard part of production LLM serving. Google uses it in the AI Overviews feature of Google Search. Open-source inference frameworks such as vLLM, NVIDIA's TensorRT-LLM, and SGLang all include built-in support for speculative decoding and its variants. Apple, AWS, and Meta have also published research extending the method or deploying it at scale.
Image formation
The study of image formation encompasses the radiometric and geometric processes by which 2D images of 3D objects are formed. In the case of digital images, the image formation process also includes analog to digital conversion and sampling. == Imaging == The imaging process is a mapping of an object to an image plane. Each point on the image corresponds to a point on the object. An illuminated object will scatter light toward a lens and the lens will collect and focus the light to create the image. The ratio of the height of the image to the height of the object is the magnification. The spatial extent of the image surface and the focal length of the lens determines the field of view of the lens. Image formation of mirror these have a center of curvature and its focal length of the mirror is half of the center of curvature. == Illumination == An object may be illuminated by the light from an emitting source such as the sun, a light bulb or a Light Emitting Diode. The light incident on the object is reflected in a manner dependent on the surface properties of the object. For rough surfaces, the reflected light is scattered in a manner described by the Bi-directional Reflectance Distribution Function (BRDF) of the surface. The BRDF of a surface is the ratio of the exiting power per square meter per steradian (radiance) to the incident power per square meter (irradiance). The BRDF typically varies with angle and may vary with wavelength, but a specific important case is a surface that has constant BRDF. This surface type is referred to as Lambertian and the magnitude of the BRDF is R/π, where R is the reflectivity of the surface. The portion of scattered light that propagates toward the lens is collected by the entrance pupil of the imaging lens over the field of view. == Field of view and imagery == The Field of view of a lens is limited by the size of the image plane and the focal length of the lens. The relationship between a location on the image and a location on the object is y = ftan(θ), where y is the max extent of the image plane, f is the focal length of the lens and θ is the field of view. If y is the max radial size of the image then θ is the field of view of the lens. While the image created by a lens is continuous, it can be modeled as a set of discrete field points, each representing a point on the object. The quality of the image is limited by the aberrations in the lens and the diffraction created by the finite aperture stop. == Pupils and stops == The aperture stop of a lens is a mechanical aperture which limits the light collection for each field point. The entrance pupil is the image of the aperture stop created by the optical elements on the object side of the lens. The light scattered by an object is collected by the entrance pupil and focused onto the image plane via a series of refractive elements. The cone of the focused light at the image plane is set by the size of the entrance pupil and the focal length of the lens. This is often referred to as the f-stop or f-number of the lens. f/# = f/D where D is the diameter of the entrance pupil. == Pixelation and color vs. monochrome == In typical digital imaging systems, a sensor is placed at the image plane. The light is focused on to the sensor and the continuous image is pixelated. The light incident on each pixel in the sensor will be integrated within the pixel and a proportional electronic signal will be generated. The angular geometric resolution of a pixel is given by atan(p/f), where p is the pitch of the pixel. This is also called the pixel field of view. The sensor may be monochrome or color. In the case of a monochrome sensor, the light incident on each pixel is integrated and the resulting image is a grayscale like picture. For color images, a mosaic color filter is typically placed over the pixels to create a color image. An example is a Bayer filter. The signal incident on each pixel is then digitized to a bit stream. == Image quality == The quality of an image is dependent upon both geometric and physical items. Geometrically, higher density of pixels across an image will give less blocky pixelation and thus a better geometric image quality. Lens aberrations also contribute to the quality of the image. Physically, diffraction due to the aperture stop will limit the resolvable spatial frequencies as a function of f-number. In the frequency domain, Modulation Transfer Function (MTF) is a measure of the quality of the imaging system. The MTF is a measure of the visibility of a sinusoidal variation in irradiance on the image plane as a function of the frequency of the sinusoid. It includes the effects of diffraction, aberrations and pixelation. For the lens, the MTF is the autocorrelation of the pupil function, so it accounts for the finite pupil extent and the lens aberrations. The sensor MTF is the Fourier Transform of the pixel geometry. For a square pixel, MTF(ξ) = sin(πξp)/πξp where p is the pixel width and ξ is the spatial frequency. The MTF of the combination of the lens and detector is the product of the two component MTFs. == Perception == Color images can be perceived via two means. In the case of computer vision the light incident on the sensor comprises the image. In the case of visual perception, the human eye has a color dependent response to light so this must be accounted for. This is important consideration when converting to grayscale. == Image formation in eye == The principal difference between the lens of the eye and an ordinary optical lens is that the former is flexible. The radius of the curvature of the anterior surface of the lens is greater than the radius of its posterior surface. The shape of the lens is controlled by tension in the fibers of the ciliary body. To focus on distant objects, the controlling muscles cause the lens to be relatively flattened. Similarly, these muscles allow the lens to become thicker in order to focus on objects near the eye. The distance between the center of the lens and the retina (focal length) varies from approximately 17 mm to about 14 mm, as the refractive power of the lens increases from its minimum to its maximum. When the eye focuses on an object farther away than about 3 m, the lens exhibits its lowest refractive power. When the eye focuses on a close object, the lens is most strongly refractive.
Bandhan Tod
Bandhan Tod is a mobile app to stop child marriage in India's Bihar state through SOS button in the app. When the SOS on Bandhan Tod is activated, the nearest small NGO will attempt to resolve the issue. If the family resists, then the police gets notified. Till now so many child marriages has been cancelled through Bandhan Tod interventions. Bandhan Tod is an initiative of Gender Alliance managed by Prashanti Tiwari to support the state government's efforts to end child marriage and dowry.
Point-set registration
In computer vision, pattern recognition, and robotics, point-set registration, also known as point-cloud registration or scan matching, is the process of finding a spatial transformation (e.g., scaling, rotation and translation) that aligns two point clouds. The purpose of finding such a transformation includes merging multiple data sets into a globally consistent model (or coordinate frame), and mapping a new measurement to a known data set to identify features or to estimate its pose. Raw 3D point cloud data are typically obtained from Lidars and RGB-D cameras. 3D point clouds can also be generated from computer vision algorithms such as triangulation, bundle adjustment, and more recently, monocular image depth estimation using deep learning. For 2D point set registration used in image processing and feature-based image registration, a point set may be 2D pixel coordinates obtained by feature extraction from an image, for example corner detection. Point cloud registration has extensive applications in autonomous driving, motion estimation and 3D reconstruction, object detection and pose estimation, robotic manipulation, simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM), panorama stitching, virtual and augmented reality, and medical imaging. As a special case, registration of two point sets that only differ by a 3D rotation (i.e., there is no scaling and translation), is called the Wahba Problem and also related to the orthogonal procrustes problem. == Formulation == The problem may be summarized as follows: Let { M , S } {\displaystyle \lbrace {\mathcal {M}},{\mathcal {S}}\rbrace } be two finite size point sets in a finite-dimensional real vector space R d {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{d}} , which contain M {\displaystyle M} and N {\displaystyle N} points respectively (e.g., d = 3 {\displaystyle d=3} recovers the typical case of when M {\displaystyle {\mathcal {M}}} and S {\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}} are 3D point sets). The problem is to find a transformation to be applied to the moving "model" point set M {\displaystyle {\mathcal {M}}} such that the difference (typically defined in the sense of point-wise Euclidean distance) between M {\displaystyle {\mathcal {M}}} and the static "scene" set S {\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}} is minimized. In other words, a mapping from R d {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{d}} to R d {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{d}} is desired which yields the best alignment between the transformed "model" set and the "scene" set. The mapping may consist of a rigid or non-rigid transformation. The transformation model may be written as T {\displaystyle T} , using which the transformed, registered model point set is: The output of a point set registration algorithm is therefore the optimal transformation T ⋆ {\displaystyle T^{\star }} such that M {\displaystyle {\mathcal {M}}} is best aligned to S {\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}} , according to some defined notion of distance function dist ( ⋅ , ⋅ ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {dist} (\cdot ,\cdot )} : where T {\displaystyle {\mathcal {T}}} is used to denote the set of all possible transformations that the optimization tries to search for. The most popular choice of the distance function is to take the square of the Euclidean distance for every pair of points: where ‖ ⋅ ‖ 2 {\displaystyle \|\cdot \|_{2}} denotes the vector 2-norm, s m {\displaystyle s_{m}} is the corresponding point in set S {\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}} that attains the shortest distance to a given point m {\displaystyle m} in set M {\displaystyle {\mathcal {M}}} after transformation. Minimizing such a function in rigid registration is equivalent to solving a least squares problem. == Types of algorithms == When the correspondences (i.e., s m ↔ m {\displaystyle s_{m}\leftrightarrow m} ) are given before the optimization, for example, using feature matching techniques, then the optimization only needs to estimate the transformation. This type of registration is called correspondence-based registration. On the other hand, if the correspondences are unknown, then the optimization is required to jointly find out the correspondences and transformation together. This type of registration is called simultaneous pose and correspondence registration. === Rigid registration === Given two point sets, rigid registration yields a rigid transformation which maps one point set to the other. A rigid transformation is defined as a transformation that does not change the distance between any two points. Typically such a transformation consists of translation and rotation. In rare cases, the point set may also be mirrored. In robotics and computer vision, rigid registration has the most applications. === Non-rigid registration === Given two point sets, non-rigid registration yields a non-rigid transformation which maps one point set to the other. Non-rigid transformations include affine transformations such as scaling and shear mapping. However, in the context of point set registration, non-rigid registration typically involves nonlinear transformation. If the eigenmodes of variation of the point set are known, the nonlinear transformation may be parametrized by the eigenvalues. A nonlinear transformation may also be parametrized as a thin plate spline. === Other types === Some approaches to point set registration use algorithms that solve the more general graph matching problem. However, the computational complexity of such methods tend to be high and they are limited to rigid registrations. In this article, we will only consider algorithms for rigid registration, where the transformation is assumed to contain 3D rotations and translations (possibly also including a uniform scaling). The PCL (Point Cloud Library) is an open-source framework for n-dimensional point cloud and 3D geometry processing. It includes several point registration algorithms. == Correspondence-based registration == Correspondence-based methods assume the putative correspondences m ↔ s m {\displaystyle m\leftrightarrow s_{m}} are given for every point m ∈ M {\displaystyle m\in {\mathcal {M}}} . Therefore, we arrive at a setting where both point sets M {\displaystyle {\mathcal {M}}} and S {\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}} have N {\displaystyle N} points and the correspondences m i ↔ s i , i = 1 , … , N {\displaystyle m_{i}\leftrightarrow s_{i},i=1,\dots ,N} are given. === Outlier-free registration === In the simplest case, one can assume that all the correspondences are correct, meaning that the points m i , s i ∈ R 3 {\displaystyle m_{i},s_{i}\in \mathbb {R} ^{3}} are generated as follows:where l > 0 {\displaystyle l>0} is a uniform scaling factor (in many cases l = 1 {\displaystyle l=1} is assumed), R ∈ SO ( 3 ) {\displaystyle R\in {\text{SO}}(3)} is a proper 3D rotation matrix ( SO ( d ) {\displaystyle {\text{SO}}(d)} is the special orthogonal group of degree d {\displaystyle d} ), t ∈ R 3 {\displaystyle t\in \mathbb {R} ^{3}} is a 3D translation vector and ϵ i ∈ R 3 {\displaystyle \epsilon _{i}\in \mathbb {R} ^{3}} models the unknown additive noise (e.g., Gaussian noise). Specifically, if the noise ϵ i {\displaystyle \epsilon _{i}} is assumed to follow a zero-mean isotropic Gaussian distribution with standard deviation σ i {\displaystyle \sigma _{i}} , i.e., ϵ i ∼ N ( 0 , σ i 2 I 3 ) {\displaystyle \epsilon _{i}\sim {\mathcal {N}}(0,\sigma _{i}^{2}I_{3})} , then the following optimization can be shown to yield the maximum likelihood estimate for the unknown scale, rotation and translation:Note that when the scaling factor is 1 and the translation vector is zero, then the optimization recovers the formulation of the Wahba problem. Despite the non-convexity of the optimization (cb.2) due to non-convexity of the set SO ( 3 ) {\displaystyle {\text{SO}}(3)} , seminal work by Berthold K.P. Horn showed that (cb.2) actually admits a closed-form solution, by decoupling the estimation of scale, rotation and translation. Similar results were discovered by Arun et al. In addition, in order to find a unique transformation ( l , R , t ) {\displaystyle (l,R,t)} , at least N = 3 {\displaystyle N=3} non-collinear points in each point set are required. More recently, Briales and Gonzalez-Jimenez have developed a semidefinite relaxation using Lagrangian duality, for the case where the model set M {\displaystyle {\mathcal {M}}} contains different 3D primitives such as points, lines and planes (which is the case when the model M {\displaystyle {\mathcal {M}}} is a 3D mesh). Interestingly, the semidefinite relaxation is empirically tight, i.e., a certifiably globally optimal solution can be extracted from the solution of the semidefinite relaxation. === Robust registration === The least squares formulation (cb.2) is known to perform arbitrarily badly in the presence of outliers. An outlier correspondence is a pair of measurements s i ↔ m i {\displaystyle s_{i}\leftrightarrow m_{i}} that departs from the generative model (cb.1). In this case, one can consider a differen