Uncertain inference was first described by C. J. van Rijsbergen as a way to formally define a query and document relationship in Information retrieval. This formalization is a logical implication with an attached measure of uncertainty. == Definitions == Rijsbergen proposes that the measure of uncertainty of a document d to a query q be the probability of its logical implication, i.e.: P ( d → q ) {\displaystyle P(d\to q)} A user's query can be interpreted as a set of assertions about the desired document. It is the system's task to infer, given a particular document, if the query assertions are true. If they are, the document is retrieved. In many cases the contents of documents are not sufficient to assert the queries. A knowledge base of facts and rules is needed, but some of them may be uncertain because there may be a probability associated to using them for inference. Therefore, we can also refer to this as plausible inference. The plausibility of an inference d → q {\displaystyle d\to q} is a function of the plausibility of each query assertion. Rather than retrieving a document that exactly matches the query we should rank the documents based on their plausibility in regards to that query. Since d and q are both generated by users, they are error prone; thus d → q {\displaystyle d\to q} is uncertain. This will affect the plausibility of a given query. By doing this it accomplishes two things: Separate the processes of revising probabilities from the logic Separate the treatment of relevance from the treatment of requests Multimedia documents, like images or videos, have different inference properties for each datatype. They are also different from text document properties. The framework of plausible inference allows us to measure and combine the probabilities coming from these different properties. Uncertain inference generalizes the notions of autoepistemic logic, where truth values are either known or unknown, and when known, they are true or false. == Example == If we have a query of the form: q = A ∧ B ∧ C {\displaystyle q=A\wedge B\wedge C} where A, B and C are query assertions, then for a document D we want the probability: P ( D → ( A ∧ B ∧ C ) ) {\displaystyle P(D\to (A\wedge B\wedge C))} If we transform this into the conditional probability P ( ( A ∧ B ∧ C ) | D ) {\displaystyle P((A\wedge B\wedge C)|D)} and if the query assertions are independent we can calculate the overall probability of the implication as the product of the individual assertions probabilities. == Further work == Croft and Krovetz applied uncertain inference to an information retrieval system for office documents they called OFFICER. In office documents the independence assumption is valid since the query will focus on their individual attributes. Besides analysing the content of documents one can also query about the author, size, topic or collection for example. They devised methods to compare document and query attributes, infer their plausibility and combine it into an overall rating for each document. Besides that uncertainty of document and query contents also had to be addressed. Probabilistic logic networks is a system for performing uncertain inference; crisp true/false truth values are replaced not only by a probability, but also by a confidence level, indicating the certitude of the probability. Markov logic networks allow uncertain inference to be performed; uncertainties are computed using the maximum entropy principle, in analogy to the way that Markov chains describe the uncertainty of finite-state machines.
Emergent algorithm
An emergent algorithm is an algorithm that exhibits emergent behavior. In essence an emergent algorithm implements a set of simple building block behaviors that when combined exhibit more complex behaviors. One example of this is the implementation of fuzzy motion controllers used to adapt robot movement in response to environmental obstacles. An emergent algorithm has the following characteristics: it achieves predictable global effects it does not require global visibility it does not assume any kind of centralized control it is self-stabilizing Other examples of emergent algorithms and models include cellular automata, artificial neural networks and swarm intelligence systems (ant colony optimization, bees algorithm, etc.).
Over-the-top media services in India
As per Govt of India, there are currently about 57 providers of over-the-top media services (OTT) in India, which distribute streaming media or video on demand over the Internet. == History and growth == The first dependent Indian OTT platform was BIGFlix, launched by Reliance Entertainment in 2008. In 2010 Digivive launched India's first OTT mobile app called nexGTv, which provides access to both live TV and on–demand content. nexGTV was the first app to live–stream Indian Premier League matches on smart phones and did so during 2013 and 2014. The livestream of the IPL since 2015, when rights were won, played an important role in the growth of another OTT platform, Hotstar (now JioHotstar) in India. OTT Platforms gained significant momentum in India when both DittoTV (Zee) and Sony Liv were launched in the Indian market around 2013. Following the initial push of Regional OTT platforms like Aha, Hoichoi, Sun NXT, Planet Marathi, Chaupal & MX Player. The Indian OTT industry saw rapid transformation with the entry of global OTT companies such as Netflix and Amazon Prime Video into the Indian market in 2016. Replacement of this competition with global enterprises caused local rivals to innovate in both region and hyper-regional content. === Hotstar === Hotstar (now JioHotstar) is the most subscribed–to OTT platform in India, owned by JioStar as of February 2025, with around 500 million active users and over 650 million downloads. According to Hotstar's India Watch Report 2018, 96% of watch time on Hotstar comes from videos longer than 20 minutes, while one–third of Hotstar subscribers watch television shows. In 2019, Hotstar began investing ₹120 crore in generating original content such as "Hotstar Specials." 80% of the viewership on Hotstar comes from drama, movies and sports programs. Hotstar has the exclusive streaming rights of IPL in India. === Netflix === American streaming service Netflix entered India in January 2016. In April 2017, it was registered as a limited liability partnership (LLP) and started commissioning content. It earned a net profit of ₹2020,000 (₹2.02 million) for fiscal year 2017. In fiscal year 2018, Netflix earned revenues of ₹580 million. According to Morgan Stanley Research, Netflix had the highest average watch time of more than 120 minutes but viewer counts of around 20 million in July 2018. As of 2018, Netflix has six million subscribers, of which 5–6% are paid members. India was not affected by Netflix's July 2018 increase in subscription rates for the US and Latin America. Netflix has stated its intent to invest ₹600 crore in the production of Indian original programming. In late 2018, Netflix bought 150,000 square feet (14,000 m2) of office space in Bandra–Kurla Complex (BKC) in Mumbai as their head office. As of December 2018, Netflix has more than 40 employees in India. === Other OTT providers === Sun NXT is an Indian video on demand service run by Sun TV Network. It was launched in June 2017, streaming in the Tamil language and six other languages. The platform has more than 4,000 Tamil movies and 200 Tamil shows, as well as regional movies and shows. Sun NXT also streams a large library of its own Sun TV shows and movies. Amazon Prime Video was launched in 2016. The platform has 2,300 titles available including 2,000 movies and about 400 shows. It has announced that it will invest ₹20 billion in creating original content in India. Besides English, Prime Video is available in six Indian languages as of December 2018. Amazon India launched Amazon Prime Music in February 2018. Eros Now, an OTT platform launched by Eros International, has the most content among the OTT providers in India, including over 12,000 films, 100,000 music tracks and albums, and 100 TV shows. Eros Now was named the Best OTT Platform of the Year 2019 at the British Asian Media Awards. It has 211.5 million registered users and 36.2 million paying subscribers as of September 2020. In February 2020, Aha OTT platform was launched, broadcasting exclusively Telugu content. In 2021, Planet Marathi became the first OTT platform dedicated to Marathi content in India, including web-series, films, music, theater, fiction and non-fiction reality shows. It is available for both Android and iOS mobile devices along with Android TV and Amazon Fire TV devices. Bollywood actress Madhuri Dixit helped launch the platform. With rising interest for Korean dramas, Rakuten Viki saw its biggest jump of web traffic from India in 2020 due to the COVID-19 lockdown, which led to ad localization on the platform. The OTT market in fiscal year 2020 was estimated to be worth $1.7 billion. === SonyLIV and ZEE5 === In December 2021, Sony and Zee announced their merger, and announced plans to merge their OTT platforms. The merger was called off. === OTT services launched as Amazon Prime video channels === The list is by alphabetical order, not by rank or popularity. == Content regulation == Due to the absence of any rules and regulation regarding OTT content, many OTT providers were accused of showing nudity, vulgarity and obscenity and hurting Hindu religious sentiments in their shows. Series which were the focus of controversy include Four More Shots Please!, Tandav, Paatal Lok, Sacred Games, Mirzapur Lust stories franchise, Rana Naidu. Thank You for Coming, and Annapoorani (2023). According to media reports, between 2018 and 2024, some OTT platforms emerged which started showing porn in the form of web series. Both the Supreme Court and Delhi High Court say that OTT regulation is necessary. === OTT regulation === On 25 Feb 2021, Indian govt introduced self-regulation rules for OTT platforms to stop obscene content and abusive language. On 19 March 2023, I&B minister Anurag Thakur said that self regulation does not mean that OTT should show obscenity and nudity. On 15 April 2023, I&B Secretary Apurva Chandra has said because of the government's soft-touch regulations on OTT industry have led to the creation of content that is undesirable and vulgar. On 26 April 2023, MIB India said that if nudity and obscenity is seen on any OTT platform, strict action will be taken against it. On 16 May 2023, Don't show obscene content, parliamentary panel told to Netflix and Amazon Prime Video. On 20 June 2023, the government told Netflix, Disney+ Hotstar and all other streaming services that their content should be independently reviewed for obscenity and violence before being shown online. On 27 June 2023, DPCGC took punitive action against Ullu for streaming obscene content and asked them to remove all their explicit shows or remove all adult scenes within 15 days. On 18 July 2023, Anarug Thakur said in a meeting with all OTT stakeholders that demeaning Indian culture will not be tolerated. OTT can't show vulgarity and nudity in the garb of 'creative expression'.The cited sources do not mention vulgarity - they say this was about demeaning Indian culture/society. On 22 August 2023, Indian government assured that it will bring rules and regulation to regulate vulgar and obscene content on social media and OTT platforms. On 10 November 2023, MIB India introduces the 'Broadcasting Service Regulation Bill', which included Programme code with Content Evaluation Committee(CEC) for every OTT platforms. Currently public consultation is ongoing till 15 January 2024. The draft bill mandates that all OTT streaming platforms can only broadcast those web series or content, which will be duly certified by Content Evaluation Committee(CEC). On 14 March 2024, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting banned over 18 OTT apps from Google play store and suspended all of their 57 social media accounts, as well as closed nineteen streaming websites. The banned platforms were MoodX, Prime Play, Hunters, Besharams, Rabbit movies, Voovi, Fugi, Mojflix, Chikooflix, Nuefliks, Xtramood, NeonX VIP, X Prime, Tri Flicks, Uncut Adda, Dreams Films, Hot Shots VIP, and Yessma. On 25 July 2025, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting banned from 25 OTT apps from Google play store and suspended all of their 40 social media accounts, as well as 26 closed streaming websites. The banned platforms were include ALTT, Ullu, Big Shots App, Desiflix, Boomex, NeonX VIP, Navarasa Lite, Gulab App, Kangan App, Bull App, ShowHit, Jalva App, Wow Entertainment, Look Entertainment, Hitprime, Fugi, Feneo, ShowX, Sol Talkies, Adda TV, HotX VIP, Hulchul App, MoodX, Triflicks, and Mojflix. On 24 February 2026, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting banned from 5 OTT apps from Google play store and suspended all of their 5 social media accounts, as well as 5 closed streaming websites. The banned platforms were include Feel App, Digi Movieplex, Jugnu App, MoodX VIP, and Koyal Playpro. === Legal action === Currently OTT is regulated under the IT Rules 2021, which clearly stated that 'No content that is prohibited by law at the time being force can be Publishing or transmitted'. MIB has continuously taking action
Packard Bell Statesman
The Packard Bell Statesman was an economy line of notebook-sized laptops introduced in 1993 by Packard Bell. They were slower in performance and lacked features compared to most competitor products, but they were lower in price. It was created in a collaboration between Packard Bell and Zenith Data Systems. The Statesman series was essentially a rebrand of Zenith Data Systems Z-Star 433 series, with the only notable difference of the logo in the middle and text on the front bezel. == History == In June 1993 Zenith Data Systems announced an alliance with Packard Bell. Zenith acquired about 20% of Packard Bell and they would both now work together to design and build PC's. Zenith would also provide Packard Bell with private-label versions of their portable PC's. The Packard Bell Statesman was a rebrand of the Zenith Z-Star notebook computer series. While the Statesman was being advertised by Packard Bell, the Z-Star series was also still being sold by Zenith. The Statesman was first introduced on October 4, 1993. Prices started at $1,500 for a monochrome or color DSTN model with a 33 MHz Cyrix Cx486SLC, 4 MB of RAM, 200 MB hard disk drive, internal 1.44 MB floppy disk drive, and MS-DOS 6.0 with Windows 3.1 for the included software. A "J mouse" pointing device was included, similar to the TrackPoint. The Statesman was expected to begin shipping within the next few weeks. == Specifications == === Hardware === CPU The first two models, the 200M and 200C, used the Cyrix Cx486SLC. This was Cyrix's first processor, which was a 386SX pin-compatible chip with on-board L1 cache and 486 instructions, being known as a "hybrid chip". The processor was clocked at 33 MHz and had 1 KB of L1 cache. It was a 16-bit processor and was pin compatible with the Intel 80386SX. On the bottom of the unit, the motherboard had an empty socket for a Cyrix FasMath co-processor, which could improve floating-point math performance. The 200M and 200C plus models had a Cyrix Cx486SLC2 clocked at 50 MHz, which was 50% faster than the original 486SLC. The SLC2 similarly had 1 KB of on-board cache and was pin compatible with the previous model. Graphics & Display For video all models used three versions of the Chips & Technologies 655xx, the CT65520, 65525, and 65530. The 65520 was first introduced in early 1992 as the first controller with Super VGA resolution. It supported resolutions up to 1024x768 in 16 colors or shades of gray. If in 800x600 resolution, it can display up to 256 colors. All 3 chips were the same, with the CT65525 identifying as a CT65530. The CT65530 had an ability of 5V and 3.3V mixed operation and linear video memory addressing. All models used a 9.5in 800x600 resolution DSTN LCD. The 200M and 200M Plus had a monochrome display, while the 200C and 200C Plus had a color display. Audio All models had only basic audio available, with just a piezo speaker soldered onto the motherboard and no sound controller. Memory Standard RAM included was 4-8 MB of EDO RAM. The RAM was on a proprietary SIPP package that could only be upgraded to 12 MB maximum if the user had compatible modules. Storage For storage all models used a hard drive with a size of 100 or 200 MB, and all models had an internal 1.44 MB floppy disk drive located on the side of the unit. The maximum capacity hard drive compatible if the user wanted to upgrade was 500 MB.Ports & Expansion For ports all models had 1x serial, 1x parallel, 1x VGA output, and 1x PS/2 keyboard/mouse input. For expansion all models only had one PCMCIA type II slot. Keyboard & Mouse All models used a small-scale keyboard with control keys. One interesting feature of the keyboard is that the J key also acted as a mouse, working similar to IBM's ThinkPad TrackPoint. On some models additional keys such as S, D, F, G and space let you do other mouse actions such as right click, left click, double click, and middle mouse click. === Software === The series shipped with MS-DOS and Windows 3.1 as the included operating system. == Model Comparison == Statesman 200M — The first Statesman model, it came with a DSTN monochrome screen, and a Nickel-cadmium battery pack which could last up to 4 hours. It weighed 7.4 lb and was $1500. Statesman 200C — The second Statesman model, it was the same as the 200M with the only notable differences of a DSTN color display rather than monochrome and a slightly decreased battery life of about 3 hours. It cost $700 more than the 200M at $2200. Statesman 200M/200C Plus — The 200M/200C Plus were both identical to their previous base models, with the only difference of them having a Cx486SLC2 running at 50 MHz. In 1994 it cost around $2,295 for the 200C plus with 4 MB of ram, with 8 MB costing an extra $400. == Reception == The Statesman received fair reception, with most reviewers giving positivity for the low price and high battery life, but mainly criticizing the performance and screen quality of the model line. A review by PC World writer Rex Farrance and Owen Linderholm said the 200M had a good price, being only $1500, and a good battery life which lasted about 4 hours. In benchmarks however, the 200M performed "noticeably below the average". It was noted that the 200M's worst feature was its monochrome display, being "cloudy and a bit dim for our tastes". The J mouse was considered a decent choice, and was said to be "highly usable" after some practice. The 200M was listed as number 3 on PC World's top 20 budget PC list. PC World also reviewed the 200C, saying the color display is only a "marginal, although an improvement on the monochrome version". The 200C placed 9 on the PC World top 20 budget PC list. Compute! Magazine reviewed the 200C Plus in September 1994 stating it "lagged far behind the others, especially the DXs, but then speed isn't everything". It was given pros for low cost and good display, but criticized for its low performance, not having a trackball, and poor external monitor support.
Algorithmic amplification
Algorithmic amplification is the process by which automated ranking and recommendation systems on digital platforms increase the visibility of certain content beyond its initial audience. Major platforms including Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, and X (formerly Twitter) use such systems to determine what appears in users' feeds and search results. The term is used in research on social media and digital media regulation to describe how platform design choices influence the distribution of online information. Unlike chronological feeds, algorithmic systems evaluate content using signals such as engagement rates, viewing duration, and predicted relevance to individual users. Content that performs strongly on these metrics may be promoted to progressively larger audiences through feeds, search rankings, or autoplay systems. The process is distinct from content moderation, which involves removing, labelling, or restricting content under platform rules, although the two can interact in practice. The concept is closely connected to the attention economy. Research has linked algorithmic amplification to the spread of misinformation and the circulation of political content, as well as to effects on young users' mental health. The scale and direction of those effects remain debated, in part because independent researchers have limited access to the internal workings of platform recommendation systems. Governments in the European Union, United Kingdom, United States, and China have pursued differing regulatory approaches to recommendation algorithms. The EU's Digital Services Act and the UK's Online Safety Act 2023 impose obligations on large platforms related to recommendation system transparency and risk, while China became the first country to enact binding legislation specifically targeting such systems. Internal documents and whistleblower testimony reported by the BBC in 2026 described how competitive pressure between Meta and TikTok led to trade-offs between engagement and user safety in the design of their recommendation systems. == Terminology == The term algorithmic amplification is used in media studies, platform governance scholarship and regulatory literature to describe how automated systems influence the distribution of content beyond what organic user sharing alone would produce. It is distinct from viral spread, which refers primarily to user-driven sharing behaviour, and from algorithmic bias, which describes systematic errors or unfairness in algorithmic outputs. The related term algorithmic curation is used for the broader process of selecting and ordering content, of which amplification is one possible outcome. The phrase also appears in regulatory and legislative discussion of recommendation systems. The European Union's Digital Services Act (DSA) identifies recommendation systems as a potential source of systemic risk, and the term appears frequently in academic and policy commentary on the regulation. In the United States, proposals including the Filter Bubble Transparency Act and the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) have used it to frame requirements around recommendation system transparency. In the United Kingdom, the House of Commons Science, Innovation and Technology Committee used the term in a 2025 report on how recommendation algorithms contributed to the spread of misinformation during the 2024 Southport riots. A Joint Declaration on AI and Freedom of Expression adopted in October 2025 by four international freedom of expression mandate holders, including the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression and the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, stated that recommender systems and other AI-powered curation tools exert "a large hidden influence and gatekeeper role" over what information people access and consume. == Background == Early internet platforms typically displayed content in reverse-chronological order or through keyword-based search systems. Although the term is most often applied to social media, the underlying logic predates social media itself. A 2021 overview traced the origins of modern recommendation systems to the early 1990s, when they were first used experimentally for personal email and information filtering. The 1992 Tapestry mail system and the 1994 GroupLens news filtering system were early milestones before recommendation systems spread into e-commerce and other online services. As user bases and content volumes grew during the 2000s, major platforms including Google, YouTube, and Facebook developed machine-learning systems to personalise content delivery and prioritise material predicted to generate engagement. Facebook introduced its News Feed in 2006, which gradually shifted from chronological presentation towards algorithmically ranked content. YouTube altered its recommendation system in 2012 to prioritise watch time rather than clicks, a change the platform said was prompted by concerns that click-based metrics encouraged misleading thumbnails and low-quality videos. TikTok, launched internationally in 2018, adopted a model in which its primary content surface, the For You feed, is driven almost entirely by algorithmic recommendation rather than by a user's social graph. An internal document obtained by The New York Times in 2021 showed that the platform's algorithm optimised for retention and time spent, using signals such as watch duration, replays, likes, and comments to score and rank videos. Algorithmic recommendation also became central to platforms outside social media. Spotify's personalised features, including Discover Weekly, Release Radar, and Home recommendations, use behavioural signals and inferred "taste profiles" to surface tracks and artists beyond a listener's existing library. An ethnographic study of music curators at streaming platforms described this blend of algorithmic and human editorial selection as an "algo-torial" model of gatekeeping. Amazon adopted item-based collaborative filtering for product recommendations in 1998, and its recommendation engine has been described as one of the earliest large-scale deployments of recommendation technology in e-commerce. The same dynamics operate on adult content platforms. Law professor Amy Adler has argued that from 2007 onwards the pornography industry migrated to algorithm-driven streaming platforms, most of which are controlled by a single near-monopoly company, Aylo (formerly MindGeek). These platforms use algorithmic search engines, suggestions, rigid categorisation of content, and AI-driven search term optimisation in ways that produce the same distorting effects found on mainstream speech platforms, including filter bubbles, feedback loops, and the tendency of algorithmic recommendations to alter individual preferences. == Mechanisms == Recommendation systems commonly combine collaborative filtering, which predicts a user's preferences from the behaviour of similar users, with machine-learning models that predict which content a user is likely to engage with from their prior activity. In a common two-stage design, a platform first generates a set of candidate items from a large content pool and then ranks them using a scoring model with objectives such as predicted engagement or user satisfaction. Small changes in ranking criteria can shift exposure at scale, particularly when applied repeatedly across multiple browsing sessions. These systems typically rely on signals including engagement rates, viewing duration, click-through rates, and network relationships between users. Modern recommendation pipelines continuously update predictions as new behavioural data arrives, allowing platforms to adjust rankings in near real time. Users' revealed preferences, expressed through behaviour such as clicks and viewing time, do not always align with their stated preferences, expressed through explicit feedback such as surveys or content controls. Popularity signals can create feedback dynamics in which early engagement increases the likelihood that content will be shown to additional users. Experimental research on online cultural markets has demonstrated how such feedback processes can produce unequal visibility outcomes even when initial differences in content quality are small. == Beneficial and public-interest uses == Recommendation systems can help users navigate large volumes of content by surfacing material predicted to match their interests or needs, which can improve discoverability on platforms with large content libraries. In public health communication, platforms can help health authorities distribute timely information at scale, though the same recommendation systems also risk amplifying misinformation alongside official guidance. Sociologist Zeynep Tufekci has argued that the shift from independent blogs to large centralised platforms transferred gatekeeping power from traditional media to corporate algorithms. In the case of the Egyptian uprising of 2011, she noted that ordinary users
Vote Compass
Vote Compass is an interactive, online voting advice application developed by political scientists and run during election campaigns. It surveys users about their political views and, based on their responses, calculates the individual alignment of each user with the parties or candidates running in a given election contest. It is operated by a social enterprise called Vox Pop Labs in partnership with locale-specific news organizations, including the Wall Street Journal, Vox Media, the Canadian and Australian Broadcasting Corporations, Television New Zealand, France24, RTL Group, and Grupo Globo. Vote Compass also operates under the trademarks Boussole électorale and Wahl-Navi for French- and German-language iterations, respectively. == Background == Vote Compass was developed by Clifton van der Linden, a professor in the Department of Political Science at McMaster University. It is run by van der Linden along with a team of social and statistical scientists from Vox Pop Labs. Although inspired by European Voting Advice Applications, van der Linden explicitly rejects this terminology, arguing that Vote Compass was "never intended to account for every variable that influences voter choice and its results should not be interpreted as voting advice." == Methodology == Using a Likert scale, users indicate their responses to a series of policy propositions designed to discriminate between candidates' policies on prominent issues relevant to the election. Propositions are crafted in collaboration with political scientists local to each jurisdiction in which Vote Compass is run. Based on a candidate or political party's public disclosures (i.e. party manifestos, policy proposals, official websites, speeches, media releases, statements made in the legislature, etc.) they are calibrated on the same propositions and scales as are users. A series of aggregation algorithms calculate the overall distance between the user and the candidates or parties. There have been claims that Vote Compass surveys have the potential to become push polling, if the survey questions posed are poorly designed.
Line splice
In electrical engineering and telecommunications, a line splice is a joint directly connecting lengths of electrical cables (electrical splice) or optical fibers (optical splice). The splices are often protected by sleeves. == Splicing of copper wires == The splicing of copper wires happens in the following steps: The cores are laid one above the other at the junction. The core insulation is removed. The wires are wrapped two to three times around each other (twisting). The bare veins on a length of about 3 cm "strangle" or "twist". In some cases, the strangulation is soldered. To isolate the splice, an insulating sleeve made of paper or plastic is pushed over it. The splicing of copper wires is mainly used on paper insulated wires. LSA techniques (LSA: soldering, screwing and stripping free) are used to connect copper wires, making the copper wires faster and easier to connect. LSA techniques include: Wire connection sleeves (AVH = Adernverbindungshülsen) and other crimp connectors. The two wires to be connected are inserted into the AVH without being stripped, which is then compressed with special pliers. The about 2 cm long AVH consist of contact, pressure and insulation. For wire connection strips (AVL = Adernverbindungsleisten) several pairs of wires (10 = AVL10 or 20 = AVL20) are inserted, the strip is then closed with a lid and pressed together with a hydraulic press, which ensures the connection. == Splicing of glass fibers == Fiber-optic cables are spliced using a special arc-splicer, with installation cables connected at their ends to respective "pigtails" - short individual fibers with fiber-optic connectors at one end. The splicer precisely adjusts the light-guiding cores of the two ends of the glass fibers to be spliced. The adjustment is done fully automatically in modern devices, whereas in older models this is carried out manually by means of micrometer screws and microscope. An experienced splicer can precisely position the fiber ends within a few seconds. Subsequently, the fibers are fused together (welded) with an electric arc. Since no additional material is added, such as gas welding or soldering, this is called a "fusion splice". Depending on the quality of the splicing process, attenuation values at the splice points are achieved by 0.3 dB, with good splices also below 0.02 dB. For newer generation devices, alignment is done automatically by motors. Here one differentiates core and jacket centering. At core centering (usually single-mode fibers), the fiber cores are aligned. A possible core offset with respect to the jacket is corrected. In the jacket centering (usually in multimode fibers), the fibers are adjusted to each other by means of electronic image processing in front of the splice. When working with good equipment, the damping value is according to experience at max. 0.1 dB. Measurements are made by means of special measuring devices including optical time-domain reflectometry (OTDR). A good splice should have an attenuation of less than 0.3 dB over the entire distance. Finished fiber optic splices are housed in splice boxes. One differentiates: Fusion splice Adhesive splicing Crimp splice or NENP (no-epoxy no-polish), mechanical splice