Shader lamps is a computer graphic technique used to change the appearance of physical objects. The still or moving objects are illuminated, using one or more video projectors, by static or animated texture or video stream. The method was invented at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill by Ramesh Raskar, Greg Welch, Kok-lim Low and Deepak Bandyopadhyay in 1999 [1] as a follow on to Spatial Augmented Reality [2] also invented at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 1998 by Ramesh Raskar, Greg Welch and Henry Fuchs. A 3D graphic rendering software is typically used to compute the deformation caused by the non perpendicular, non-planar or even complex projection surface. Complex objects (or aggregation of multiple simple objects) create self shadows that must be compensated by using several projectors. The objects are typically replaced by neutral color ones, the projection giving all its visual properties, thus the name shader lamps. The technique can be used to create a sense of invisibility, by rendering transparency. The object is illuminated not by a replacement of its own visual properties, but by the corresponding visual surface placed behind the object as seen from an arbitrary viewing point.
Outline of brain mapping
The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to brain mapping: Brain mapping – set of neuroscience techniques predicated on the mapping of (biological) quantities or properties onto spatial representations of the (human or non-human) brain resulting in maps. Brain mapping is further defined as the study of the anatomy and function of the brain and spinal cord through the use of imaging (including intra-operative, microscopic, endoscopic and multi-modality imaging), immunohistochemistry, molecular and optogenetics, stem cell and cellular biology, engineering (material, electrical and biomedical), neurophysiology and nanotechnology. == Broad scope == History of neuroscience History of neurology Brain mapping Human brain Neuroscience Nervous system. === The neuron doctrine === Neuron doctrine – A set of carefully constructed elementary set of observations regarding neurons. For more granularity, more current, and more advanced topics, see the cellular level section Asserts that neurons fall under the broader cell theory, which postulates: All living organisms are composed of one or more cells. The cell is the basic unit of structure, function, and organization in all organisms. All cells come from preexisting, living cells. The Neuron doctrine postulates several elementary aspects of neurons: The brain is made up of individual cells (neurons) that contain specialized features such as dendrites, a cell body, and an axon. Neurons are cells differentiable from other tissues in the body. Neurons differ in size, shape, and structure according to their location or functional specialization. Every neuron has a nucleus, which is the trophic center of the cell (The part which must have access to nutrition). If the cell is divided, only the portion containing the nucleus will survive. Nerve fibers are the result of cell processes and the outgrowths of nerve cells. (Several axons are bound together to form one nerve fibril. See also: Neurofilament. Several nerve fibrils then form one large nerve fiber. Myelin, an electrical insulator, forms around selected axons. Neurons are generated by cell division. Neurons are connected by sites of contact and not via cytoplasmic continuity. (A cell membrane isolates the inside of the cell from its environment. Neurons do not communicate via direct cytoplasm to cytoplasm contact.) Law of dynamic polarization. Although the axon can conduct in both directions, in tissue there is a preferred direction of transmission from cell to cell. Elements added later to the initial Neuron doctrine A barrier to transmission exists at the site of contact between two neurons that may permit transmission. (Synapse) Unity of transmission. If a contact is made between two cells, then that contact can be either excitatory or inhibitory, but will always be of the same type. Dale's law, each nerve terminal releases a single type of neurotransmitter. Some of the basic postulates in the Neuron doctrine have been subsequently questioned, refuted, or updated. See the cellular level section topics for additional information. === Map, atlas, and database projects === Brain Activity Map Project – 2013 NIH $3 billion project to map every neuron in the human brain in ten years, based upon the Human Genome Project. NIH Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative [1] Community outreach site for above where the public may comment [2] Human Brain Project (EU) – 1 billion euro, 10-year project to simulate the human brain with supercomputers. BigBrain A high-resolution 3D atlas of the human brain created as part of the HBP. Human Connectome Project – 2009 NIH $30 million project to build a network map of the human brain, including structural (anatomical) and functional elements. Emphasis included research into dyslexia, autism, Alzheimer's disease, and schizophrenia. See also Connectome a, comprehensive map of neural connections in the brain. Allen Brain Atlas – 2003 $100 million project funded by Paul Allen (Microsoft) BrainMaps – National Institute of Health (NIH) database including 60 terabytes of image scans of primate and non-primates, integrated with information covering structure and function. NeuroNames – Defines the brain in terms of about 550 primary structures (about 850 unique structures) to which all other structures, names, and synonyms are related. About 15,000 neuroanatomical terms are cross indexed, including many synonyms in seven languages. Coverage includes the brain and spinal cord of the four species most frequently studied by neuroscientists: human, macaque (monkey), rat and mouse. The controlled, standardized vocabulary for each structure is located in an unambiguous, strict physical hierarchy, and these terms are selected based on ease of pronunciation, mnemonic value, and frequency of use in recent neuroscientific publications. Relation of each structure to its superstructures and substructures is included. The controlled vocabulary is suitable for uniquely indexing neuroanatomical information in digital databases. Decade of the Brain 1990–1999 promotion by NIH and the Library of Congress "to enhance public awareness of the benefits to be derived from brain research". Communications targeted Members of Congress, staffs, and the general public to promote funding. Talairach Atlas see Jean Talairach Harvard Whole Brain Atlas see Human brain MNI Template see Medical image computing Blue Brain Project and Artificial brain International Consortium for Brain Mapping see Brain Mapping List of neuroscience databases NIH Toolbox National Institute of Health (USA) toolbox for the assessment of neurological and behavioral function Organization for Human Brain Mapping The Organization for Human Brain Mapping (OHBM) is an international society dedicated to using neuroimaging to discover the organization of the human brain. == Imaging and recording systems == This section covers imaging and recording systems. The general section covers history, neuroimaging, and techniques for mapping specific neural connections. The specific systems section covers the various specific technologies, including experimental and widely deployed imaging and recording systems. === General === Most imaging work to date on individual neurons has been conducted outside the brain, typically on large neurons, and has been most frequently destructive. New techniques are however rapidly emerging. Search on "Single neuron imaging" and see related topics: Biological neuron model, Single-unit recording, Neural oscillation, Computational neuroscience. dMRI (above) is also promising in non-destructive imaging of single neurons inside the brain. History of neuroimaging (redirects from Brain scanner) Neuroimaging (redirects from Brain function map) Connectomics – mapping technique showing neural connections in a nervous system. === Specific systems === Cortical stimulation mapping Diffusion MRI (dMRI) – includes diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and diffusion functional MRI (DfMRI). dMRI is a recent breakthrough in brain mapping allowing the visualization of cross connections between different anatomical parts of the brain. It allows noninvasive imaging of white matter fiber structure and in addition to mapping can be useful in clinical observations of abnormalities, including damage from stroke. Electroencephalography (EEG) – uses electrodes on the scalp and other techniques to detect the electrical flow of currents. Electrocorticography – intracranial EEG, the practice of using electrodes placed directly on the exposed surface of the brain to record electrical activity from the cerebral cortex. Electrophysiological techniques for clinical diagnosis Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) Medical image computing (brain research of leads medical and surgical uses of mapping technology) Neurostimulation (in research stimulation is frequently used in conjunction with imaging) Positron emission tomography (PET) – a nuclear medical imaging technique that produces a three-dimensional image or picture of functional processes in the body. The system detects pairs of gamma rays emitted indirectly by a positron-emitting radionuclide (tracer), which is introduced into the body on a biologically active molecule. Three-dimensional images of tracer concentration within the body are then constructed by computer analysis. In modern scanners, three dimensional imaging is often accomplished with the aid of a CT X-ray scan performed on the patient during the same session, in the same machine. === Imaging and recording componentry === ==== Electrochemical ==== Haemodynamic response – the rapid delivery of blood to active neuronal tissues. Blood Oxygenation Level Dependent signal (BOLD), corresponds to the concentration of deoxyhemoglobin. The BOLD effect is based on the fact that when neuronal activity is increased in one part of the brain, there is also an increased amount of cerebral blood flow to that area. Functional m
James F. Allen (computer scientist)
James Frederick Allen (born 1950) is an American computational linguist recognized for his contributions to temporal logic, in particular Allen's interval algebra. He is interested in knowledge representation, commonsense reasoning, and natural language understanding, believing that "deep language understanding can only currently be achieved by significant hand-engineering of semantically-rich formalisms coupled with statistical preferences". He is the John H. Dessaurer Professor of Computer Science at the University of Rochester. == Biography == Allen received his Ph.D. from the University of Toronto in 1979, under the supervision of C. Raymond Perrault, after which he joined the faculty at Rochester. At Rochester, he was department chair from 1987 to 1990, directed the Cognitive Science Program from 1992 to 1996, and co-directed the Center for the Sciences of Language from 1996 to 1998. He served as the Editor-in-Chief of Computational Linguistics from 1983–1993. Since 2006 he has also been associate director of the Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition. == Academic life == === TRIPS project === The TRIPS project is a long-term research to build generic technology for dialogue (both spoken and 'chat') systems, which includes natural language processing, collaborative problem solving, and dynamic context-sensitive language modeling. This is contrast with the data driven approaches by machine learning, which requires to collect and annotate corpora, i.e. training data, firstly. === PLOW agent === PLOW agent is a system that learns executable task models from a single collaborative learning session, which integrates wide AI technologies including deep natural language understanding, knowledge representation and reasoning, dialogue systems, planning/agent-based systems, and machine learning. This paper won the outstanding paper award at AAAI in 2007. == Selected works == === Books === Allen is the author of the textbook Natural Language Understanding (Benjamin-Cummings, 1987; 2nd ed., 1995). He is also the co-author with Henry Kautz, Richard Pelavin, and Josh Tenenberg of Reasoning About Plans (Morgan Kaufmann, 1991). === Articles === 2007. PLOW: A Collaborative Task Learning Agent. (with Nathanael Chambers et al) AAAI'07 won the outstanding paper award at AAAI in 2007. 2006. Chester: Towards a Personal Medication Advisor. (with N. Blaylock, et al) Biomedical informatics 39(5) 1998. TRIPS: An Integrated Intelligent Problem-Solving Assistant. (with George Ferguson) AAAI'98 1983. Maintaining Knowledge about Temporal Intervals. CACM 26, 11, 832-843 == Awards and honors == In 1991 he was elected as a fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (1990, founding fellow). In 1992 he became the Dessaurer Professor at Rochester.
Deep Learning Studio
Deep Learning Studio is a software tool that aims to simplify the creation of deep learning models used in artificial intelligence. It is compatible with a number of open-source programming frameworks popularly used in artificial neural networks, including MXNet and Google's TensorFlow. Prior to the release of Deep Learning Studio in January 2017, proficiency in Python, among other programming languages, was essential in developing effective deep learning models. Deep Learning Studio sought to simplify the model creation process through a visual, drag-and-drop interface and the application of pre-trained learning models on available data. Irving, Texas–based Deep Cognition Inc. is the developer behind Deep Learning Studio. In 2017, the software allowed Deep Cognition to become a finalist for Best Innovation in Deep Learning in the Alconics Awards, which are given annually to the best artificial intelligence software. Deep Cognition launched version 2.0 of Deep Learning Studio at NVIDIA's GTC 2018 Conference in San Jose, California. Fremont, California–based computing products supplier Exxact Corp provides desktop computers specifically built to handle Deep Learning Studio workloads. == Features == Source: Deep Learning Studio is available in two versions: Desktop and Cloud, both of which are free software. The Desktop version is available on Windows and Ubuntu. The Cloud version is available in single-user and multi-user configurations. A Deep Cognition account is needed to access the Cloud version. Account registration is free. Deep Learning Studio can import existing Keras models; it also takes a data set as an input. Deep Learning Studio's AutoML feature allows automatic generation of deep learning models. More advanced users may choose to generate their own models using various types of layers and neural networks. Deep Learning Studio also has a library of loss functions and optimizers for use in hyperparameter tuning, a traditionally complicated area in neural network programming. Generated models can be trained using either CPUs or GPUs. Trained models can then be used for predictive analytics.
Tf–idf
In information retrieval, tf–idf (term frequency–inverse document frequency, TFIDF, TFIDF, TF–IDF, or Tf–idf) is a measure of importance of a word to a document in a collection or corpus, adjusted for the fact that some words appear more frequently in general. Like the bag-of-words model, it models a document as a multiset of words, without word order. It is a refinement over the simple bag-of-words model, by allowing the weight of words to depend on the rest of the corpus. It was often used as a weighting factor in searches of information retrieval, text mining, and user modeling. A survey conducted in 2015 showed that 83% of text-based recommender systems in digital libraries used tf–idf. Variations of the tf–idf weighting scheme were often used by search engines as a central tool in scoring and ranking a document's relevance given a user query. One of the simplest ranking functions is computed by summing the tf–idf for each query term; many more sophisticated ranking functions are variants of this simple model. == Motivations == Karen Spärck Jones (1972) conceived a statistical interpretation of term-specificity called Inverse Document Frequency (idf), which became a cornerstone of term weighting: The specificity of a term can be quantified as an inverse function of the number of documents in which it occurs.For example, the df (document frequency) and idf for some words in Shakespeare's 37 plays might be represented as follows: We see that "Romeo", "Falstaff", and "salad" appears in very few plays, so seeing these words, one could get a good idea as to which play it might be. In contrast, "good" and "sweet" appears in every play and are completely uninformative as to which play it is. == Definition == The tf–idf is the product of two statistics, term frequency and inverse document frequency. There are various ways for determining the exact values of both statistics. A formula that aims to define the importance of a keyword or phrase within a document or a web page. === Term frequency === Term frequency, tf(t,d), is the relative frequency of term t within document d, t f ( t , d ) = f t , d ∑ t ′ ∈ d f t ′ , d {\displaystyle \mathrm {tf} (t,d)={\frac {f_{t,d}}{\sum _{t'\in d}{f_{t',d}}}}} , where ft,d is the raw count of a term in a document, i.e., the number of times that term t occurs in document d. Note the denominator is simply the total number of terms in document d (counting each occurrence of the same term separately). There are various other ways to define term frequency: the raw count itself: tf(t,d) = ft,d Boolean "frequencies": tf(t,d) = 1 if t occurs in d and 0 otherwise; logarithmically scaled frequency: tf(t,d) = log (1 + ft,d); augmented frequency, to prevent a bias towards longer documents, e.g. raw frequency divided by the raw frequency of the most frequently occurring term in the document: t f ( t , d ) = 0.5 + 0.5 ⋅ f t , d max { f t ′ , d : t ′ ∈ d } {\displaystyle \mathrm {tf} (t,d)=0.5+0.5\cdot {\frac {f_{t,d}}{\max\{f_{t',d}:t'\in d\}}}} === Inverse document frequency === The inverse document frequency is a measure of how much information the word provides, i.e., how common or rare it is across all documents. It is the logarithmically scaled inverse fraction of the documents that contain the word (obtained by dividing the total number of documents by the number of documents containing the term, and then taking the logarithm of that quotient): i d f ( t , D ) = log N n t {\displaystyle \mathrm {idf} (t,D)=\log {\frac {N}{n_{t}}}} with D {\displaystyle D} : is the set of all documents in the corpus N = | D | {\displaystyle N={|D|}} : total number of documents in the corpus n t = | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle n_{t}=|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|} : number of documents where the term t {\displaystyle t} appears (i.e., t f ( t , d ) ≠ 0 {\displaystyle \mathrm {tf} (t,d)\neq 0} ). If the term is not in the corpus, this will lead to a division-by-zero. It is therefore common to adjust the numerator to 1 + N {\displaystyle 1+N} and the denominator to 1 + | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle 1+|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|} . === Term frequency–inverse document frequency === Then tf–idf is calculated as t f i d f ( t , d , D ) = t f ( t , d ) ⋅ i d f ( t , D ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {tfidf} (t,d,D)=\mathrm {tf} (t,d)\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t,D)} A high weight in tf–idf is reached by a high term frequency (in the given document) and a low document frequency of the term in the whole collection of documents; the weights hence tend to filter out common terms. Since the ratio inside the idf's log function is always greater than or equal to 1, the value of idf (and tf–idf) is greater than or equal to 0. As a term appears in more documents, the ratio inside the logarithm approaches 1, bringing the idf and tf–idf closer to 0. == Justification of idf == Idf was introduced as "term specificity" by Karen Spärck Jones in a 1972 paper. Although it has worked well as a heuristic, its theoretical foundations have been troublesome for at least three decades afterward, with many researchers trying to find information theoretic justifications for it. Spärck Jones's own explanation did not propose much theory, aside from a connection to Zipf's law. Attempts have been made to put idf on a probabilistic footing, by estimating the probability that a given document d contains a term t as the relative document frequency, P ( t | D ) = | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | N , {\displaystyle P(t|D)={\frac {|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}{N}},} so that we can define idf as i d f = − log P ( t | D ) = log 1 P ( t | D ) = log N | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}\mathrm {idf} &=-\log P(t|D)\\&=\log {\frac {1}{P(t|D)}}\\&=\log {\frac {N}{|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}}\end{aligned}}} Namely, the inverse document frequency is the logarithm of "inverse" relative document frequency. This probabilistic interpretation in turn takes the same form as that of self-information. However, applying such information-theoretic notions to problems in information retrieval leads to problems when trying to define the appropriate event spaces for the required probability distributions: not only documents need to be taken into account, but also queries and terms. == Link with information theory == Both term frequency and inverse document frequency can be formulated in terms of information theory; it helps to understand why their product has a meaning in terms of joint informational content of a document. A characteristic assumption about the distribution p ( d , t ) {\displaystyle p(d,t)} is that: p ( d | t ) = 1 | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle p(d|t)={\frac {1}{|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}}} This assumption and its implications, according to Aizawa: "represent the heuristic that tf–idf employs." The conditional entropy of a "randomly chosen" document in the corpus D {\displaystyle D} , conditional to the fact it contains a specific term t {\displaystyle t} (and assuming that all documents have equal probability to be chosen) is: H ( D | T = t ) = − ∑ d p d | t log p d | t = − log 1 | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | = log | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | | D | + log | D | = − i d f ( t ) + log | D | {\displaystyle H({\cal {D}}|{\cal {T}}=t)=-\sum _{d}p_{d|t}\log p_{d|t}=-\log {\frac {1}{|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}}=\log {\frac {|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}{|D|}}+\log |D|=-\mathrm {idf} (t)+\log |D|} In terms of notation, D {\displaystyle {\cal {D}}} and T {\displaystyle {\cal {T}}} are "random variables" corresponding to respectively draw a document or a term. The mutual information can be expressed as M ( T ; D ) = H ( D ) − H ( D | T ) = ∑ t p t ⋅ ( H ( D ) − H ( D | W = t ) ) = ∑ t p t ⋅ i d f ( t ) {\displaystyle M({\cal {T}};{\cal {D}})=H({\cal {D}})-H({\cal {D}}|{\cal {T}})=\sum _{t}p_{t}\cdot (H({\cal {D}})-H({\cal {D}}|W=t))=\sum _{t}p_{t}\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t)} The last step is to expand p t {\displaystyle p_{t}} , the unconditional probability to draw a term, with respect to the (random) choice of a document, to obtain: M ( T ; D ) = ∑ t , d p t | d ⋅ p d ⋅ i d f ( t ) = ∑ t , d t f ( t , d ) ⋅ 1 | D | ⋅ i d f ( t ) = 1 | D | ∑ t , d t f ( t , d ) ⋅ i d f ( t ) . {\displaystyle M({\cal {T}};{\cal {D}})=\sum _{t,d}p_{t|d}\cdot p_{d}\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t)=\sum _{t,d}\mathrm {tf} (t,d)\cdot {\frac {1}{|D|}}\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t)={\frac {1}{|D|}}\sum _{t,d}\mathrm {tf} (t,d)\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t).} This expression shows that summing the Tf–idf of all possible terms and documents recovers the mutual information between documents and term taking into account all the specificities of their joint distribution. Each Tf–idf hence carries the "bit of information" attached to a term x document pair. == Link with statistical theory == Tf–idf is closely related to the negative logarithmically transformed p-value from a one-tailed formulation of Fisher's exact test when the underlying corpus documents satisfy certain idealized assumptions. More recently, tf–idf variants were shown to arise as components in the test st
Foreign key
A foreign key is a set of attributes in a table that refers to the primary key of another table, linking these two tables. In the context of relational databases, a foreign key is subject to an inclusion dependency constraint that the tuples consisting of the foreign key attributes in one relation, R, must also exist in some other (not necessarily distinct) relation, S; furthermore that those attributes must also be a candidate key in S. In other words, a foreign key is a set of attributes that references a candidate key. For example, a table called TEAM may have an attribute, MEMBER_NAME, which is a foreign key referencing a candidate key, PERSON_NAME, in the PERSON table. Since MEMBER_NAME is a foreign key, any value existing as the name of a member in TEAM must also exist as a person's name in the PERSON table; in other words, every member of a TEAM is also a PERSON. == Summary == The table containing the foreign key is called the child table, and the table containing the candidate key is called the referenced or parent table. In database relational modeling and implementation, a candidate key is a set of zero or more attributes, the values of which are guaranteed to be unique for each tuple (row) in a relation. The value or combination of values of candidate key attributes for any tuple cannot be duplicated for any other tuple in that relation. Since the purpose of the foreign key is to identify a particular row of referenced table, it is generally required that the foreign key is equal to the candidate key in some row of the primary table, or else have no value (the NULL value.). This rule is called a referential integrity constraint between the two tables. Because violations of these constraints can be the source of many database problems, most database management systems provide mechanisms to ensure that every non-null foreign key corresponds to a row of the referenced table. For example, consider a database with two tables: a CUSTOMER table that includes all customer data and an ORDER table that includes all customer orders. Suppose the business requires that each order must refer to a single customer. To reflect this in the database, a foreign key column is added to the ORDER table (e.g., CUSTOMERID), which references the primary key of CUSTOMER (e.g. ID). Because the primary key of a table must be unique, and because CUSTOMERID only contains values from that primary key field, we may assume that, when it has a value, CUSTOMERID will identify the particular customer which placed the order. However, this can no longer be assumed if the ORDER table is not kept up to date when rows of the CUSTOMER table are deleted or the ID column altered, and working with these tables may become more difficult. Many real world databases work around this problem by 'inactivating' rather than physically deleting master table foreign keys, or by complex update programs that modify all references to a foreign key when a change is needed. Foreign keys play an essential role in database design. One important part of database design is making sure that relationships between real-world entities are reflected in the database by references, using foreign keys to refer from one table to another. Another important part of database design is database normalization, in which tables are broken apart and foreign keys make it possible for them to be reconstructed. Multiple rows in the referencing (or child) table may refer to the same row in the referenced (or parent) table. In this case, the relationship between the two tables is called a one to many relationship between the referencing table and the referenced table. In addition, the child and parent table may, in fact, be the same table, i.e. the foreign key refers back to the same table. Such a foreign key is known in SQL:2003 as a self-referencing or recursive foreign key. In database management systems, this is often accomplished by linking a first and second reference to the same table. A table may have multiple foreign keys, and each foreign key can have a different parent table. Each foreign key is enforced independently by the database system. Therefore, cascading relationships between tables can be established using foreign keys. A foreign key is defined as an attribute or set of attributes in a relation whose values match a primary key in another relation. The syntax to add such a constraint to an existing table is defined in SQL:2003 as shown below. Omitting the column list in the REFERENCES clause implies that the foreign key shall reference the primary key of the referenced table. Likewise, foreign keys can be defined as part of the CREATE TABLE SQL statement. If the foreign key is a single column only, the column can be marked as such using the following syntax: Foreign keys can be defined with a stored procedure statement. child_table: the name of the table or view that contains the foreign key to be defined. parent_table: the name of the table or view that has the primary key to which the foreign key applies. The primary key must already be defined. col3 and col4: the name of the columns that make up the foreign key. The foreign key must have at least one column and at most eight columns. == Referential actions == Because the database management system enforces referential constraints, it must ensure data integrity if rows in a referenced table are to be deleted (or updated). If dependent rows in referencing tables still exist, those references have to be considered. SQL:2003 specifies 5 different referential actions that shall take place in such occurrences: CASCADE RESTRICT NO ACTION SET NULL SET DEFAULT === CASCADE === Whenever rows in the parent (referenced) table are deleted (or updated), the respective rows of the child (referencing) table with a matching foreign key column will be deleted (or updated) as well. This is called a cascade delete (or update). === RESTRICT === A value cannot be updated or deleted when a row exists in a referencing or child table that references the value in the referenced table. Similarly, a row cannot be deleted as long as there is a reference to it from a referencing or child table. To understand RESTRICT (and CASCADE) better, it may be helpful to notice the following difference, which might not be immediately clear. The referential action CASCADE modifies the "behavior" of the (child) table itself where the word CASCADE is used. For example, ON DELETE CASCADE effectively says "When the referenced row is deleted from the other table (master table), then delete also from me". However, the referential action RESTRICT modifies the "behavior" of the master table, not the child table, although the word RESTRICT appears in the child table and not in the master table! So, ON DELETE RESTRICT effectively says: "When someone tries to delete the row from the other table (master table), prevent deletion from that other table (and of course, also don't delete from me, but that's not the main point here)." RESTRICT is not supported by Microsoft SQL 2012 and earlier. === NO ACTION === NO ACTION and RESTRICT are very much alike. The main difference between NO ACTION and RESTRICT is that with NO ACTION the referential integrity check is done after trying to alter the table. RESTRICT does the check before trying to execute the UPDATE or DELETE statement. Both referential actions act the same if the referential integrity check fails: the UPDATE or DELETE statement will result in an error. In other words, when an UPDATE or DELETE statement is executed on the referenced table using the referential action NO ACTION, the DBMS verifies at the end of the statement execution that none of the referential relationships are violated. This is different from RESTRICT, which assumes at the outset that the operation will violate the constraint. Using NO ACTION, the triggers or the semantics of the statement itself may yield an end state in which no foreign key relationships are violated by the time the constraint is finally checked, thus allowing the statement to complete successfully. === SET NULL, SET DEFAULT === In general, the action taken by the DBMS for SET NULL or SET DEFAULT is the same for both ON DELETE or ON UPDATE: the value of the affected referencing attributes is changed to NULL for SET NULL, and to the specified default value for SET DEFAULT. === Triggers === Referential actions are generally implemented as implied triggers (i.e. triggers with system-generated names, often hidden.) As such, they are subject to the same limitations as user-defined triggers, and their order of execution relative to other triggers may need to be considered; in some cases it may become necessary to replace the referential action with its equivalent user-defined trigger to ensure proper execution order, or to work around mutating-table limitations. Another important limitation appears with transaction isolation: your changes to a row may not be able to fully cascade because the row is ref
Best AI Pair Programmers in 2026
Shopping for the best AI pair programmer? An AI pair programmer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI pair programmer slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.