Application enablement is an approach which brings telecommunications network providers and developers together to combine their network and web abilities in creating and delivering high demand advanced services and new intelligent applications. Network providers, in addition to bandwidth, provide abilities such as billing, location, presence, and security, which have allowed them to establish long-term relationships with end-users. By offering these select abilities as application programming interfaces (APIs), providers give developers access to a set of tools to create (mashup) new applications and services to run on provider networks. Unifying the strengths of providers and developers facilitates the creation of mash-up applications, and in turn, a better end user quality of experience (QoE) for improved profit margins. Apple's iOS with App Store, and Google's Android with Android Market exemplify this approach. Both have introduced mobile platforms that are supported by a comprehensive ecosystem in order to perpetuate innovation in product design, content and service offerings, and overall consumer behavior. By the end of April 2010, downloadable applications numbered over 200,000 for iPhone and over 50,000 for Android. == Background == Historically, telecommunication providers primarily based their business models on network performance, emphasizing connectivity, availability, and quality of service (QoS) as key sources of revenue and customer value. With the increasing demand for bandwidth-intensive data and video applications, maintaining service continuity has required substantial infrastructure investments. To address rising operational costs and declining average revenue per user (ARPU), providers have increasingly adopted customer-oriented strategies and diversified business models to expand their roles within the telecommunications value chain. Application enablement supports providers in making this transition by providing an environment, or ecosystem, where providers and developers can collaborate to build, test, manage, and distribute applications across networks including television, broadband, Internet, and mobile. This cooperative effort produces mutually beneficial results for all parties, opening up new revenue streams while enhancing value and rate of return (ROI). The following are some examples of key network abilities which function as application enablers in the telecommunications market: Billing systems Security for private transactions Network-based storage of digital content End-to-end bandwidth for high-quality transmissions Scoring abilities to identify end-user preferences and behaviors Subscriber data to customize the end-user experience Context information, such as location and presence, to localize services. == New business models == As network providers work toward effective collaboration with application and content developers, several new business models are emerging to help facilitate the business relationships: === Vendor-led === A type of business model driven by telecommunications vendors, who assist network providers in building relationships with application and content developers to lower the cost and complexity of managing third parties. Examples of this model include: Forum Nokia IBM Technology Partner Ecosystem Ng Connect Huawei Intouch program === Operator-led === Characterized by network providers who want to maintain a high degree of flexibility and control over applications created for their end-consumers, this model lets them create and manage their own developer program, development platform, and application store. Under this arrangement, independent developers provide their own branding, marketing communications, pricing and customer care. Network providers pursuing this model will often seek to partner with a large number of third parties using standardized on-boarding processes. Examples of this model include: o2 Litmus Orange Partner Joint Innovation Lab === Aggregator === Network providers who choose not to create/manage their own developer relationships will partner with one or multiple aggregators, to administer a portion of or their entire application strategy. Examples of this model include: Ovi Operator Partnership Blackberry Operator Partnership Cellmania Buongiorno === Mass wholesale === Select network providers also participate in wholesale models that exist primarily for applications (BT's Ribbit- an Internet Protocol (IP) based calling and messaging platform) and devices (Verizon's Open Device initiative). This business-to-business approach reduces a large portion of the potential costs of third party application enablement (marketing, acquisition and support). Examples of this model include: BT's Ribbit Verizon Wireless ODI AT&T Synaptic Hosting === The enterprise customer === Some network providers are focusing on enabling applications in the enterprise space. In this model, the network provider establishes a platform for their large enterprise customers who want to blend custom software with enhanced abilities, and will provide standardized processes around mobilizing enterprise applications, and exposing core back-office abilities to allow for dynamic customer interaction. Examples of this model include: Vodafone Applications Service Verizon Private Network Sprint Solution Launchpad === Trusted partner === In this model, the network provider builds one-on-one relationships with trusted third-party developers by exposing customized network abilities, bringing a greater variety of brands to the network provider's portfolio. Network providers using this model tend to only have a few partners (in contrast to the operator led model). Under this scenario, network providers benefit from a pre-established customer base and the developer's marketing resources. Examples of this model include: 3/Skype Partnership (UK) Virgin Media and BBC iPlayer == Network operator developer resources == Operator led model o2 Litmus Orange Partner Joint Innovations Lab Aggregator model Ovi Operator Partnership Cellmania Buongiorno Mass wholesale model BT Ribbit Verizon Wireless ODI AT&T Synaptic Hosting Enterprise customer model Vodafone Applications Service Verizon Private Network Sprint Solution Launchpad == Rerencesfe ==
DigitaltMuseum
DigitaltMuseum (lit. 'The Digital Museum') is a website database in Norwegian and Swedish for art, images and cultural history museums. The service was established in 2009 after a trial period. The database is developed and operated by KulturIT. KulturIT ANS was established by the Norwegian Museum of Cultural History and Maihaugen in consultation with the Norwegian Archive, Library and Museum Authority (ABM) in 2007. In 2015, the company underwent a corporate transformation and KulturIT AS was established on 12 February. The website has per 2025 around 2,548,022 images. Many of the images are in the public domain or under Creative Commons licenses and are being imported into Wikimedia Commons. The website's API was developed in 2012. == Institutions == As of 2025, there are 223 collaborating museums. == Mission == DigitaltMuseum aims to make the museums' collections accessible to all interested parties, regardless of time and place. The website aims to facilitate easy use of the collections through various methods including image searches, research, teaching and joint knowledge development. DigitaltMuseum contains collections from several hundred Norwegian and Swedish museums, totalling around five million objects. The website contains both historical images from the areas and themes covered by the museums, as well as images of artefacts from the collections. Parts of the collection have previously only been shown in the museums' exhibitions and books and have therefore rarely or never been shown to the public.
Reward hacking
Reward hacking or specification gaming occurs when an AI trained with reinforcement learning optimizes an objective function—achieving the literal, formal specification of an objective—without actually achieving an outcome that the programmers intended. DeepMind researchers have analogized it to the human behavior of finding a "shortcut" when being evaluated: "In the real world, when rewarded for doing well on a homework assignment, a student might copy another student to get the right answers, rather than learning the material—and thus exploit a loophole in the task specification". This idea is strongly associated with Goodhart's law, which argues that when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure. == Definition and theoretical framework == The concept of reward hacking arises from the intrinsic difficulty of defining a reward function that accurately reflects the true intentions of designers. In 2016, researchers at OpenAI identified reward hacking as one of five major "concrete problems of AI safety", describing it as the possibility that an agent could exploit the reward function to achieve maximum rewards through undesirable behavior. Amodei et al. categorized several distinct sources of reward hacking, including agents that use partially observed goals (such as a cleaning robot that closes its eyes to avoid perceiving messes), metrics that collapse under strong optimization (Goodhart's law), self-reinforcing feedback loops, and agents that interfere with the physical implementation of their reward signal (a failure mode known as "wireheading"). Skalse et al. (2022) propose a formal mathematical definition of reward hacking, which involves a situation where optimizing an imperfect proxy reward function results in poor performance compared to the true reward function. They define a proxy as "unhackable" if any increase in the expected proxy return cannot cause any decrease in the expected true return. A key finding states that, across all stochastic policy distributions (mappings from states to probability distributions over actions), two reward functions are unhackable if and only if one of them is constant, which means that reward hacking is theoretically unavoidable. Similarly, Nayebi (2025) presents general no-free-lunch barriers to AI alignment, arguing that with large task spaces and finite samples, reward hacking is "globally inevitable" since rare high-loss states are systematically under-covered by any oversight scheme. == Examples == Around 1983, Eurisko, an early attempt at evolving general heuristics, unexpectedly assigned the highest possible fitness level to a parasitic mutated heuristic, H59, whose only activity was to artificially maximize its own fitness level by taking unearned partial credit for the accomplishments of other heuristics. The "bug" was fixed by the programmers moving part of the code to a new protected section that could not be modified by the heuristics. In a 2004 paper, a reinforcement learning algorithm was designed to encourage a physical Mindstorms robot to remain on a marked path. Because the three allowed actions were forward, left, and right, the researchers expected the trained robot to move forward and follow the turns of the provided path. However, alternation of two composite actions allowed the robot to slowly zig-zag backwards; thus, the robot learned to maximize its reward by going back and forth on the initial straight portion of the path. Given the limited sensory abilities of the robot, a reward purely based on its position in the environment had to be discarded as infeasible; the reinforcement function had to be patched with an action-based reward for moving forward. The book You Look Like a Thing and I Love You (2019) gives an example of a tic-tac-toe bot (playing the unrestricted n-in-a-row variant) that learned to win by playing a huge coordinate value that would cause other bots to crash when they attempted to expand their model of the board. Among other examples from the book is a bug-fixing evolution-based AI (named GenProg) that, when tasked to prevent a list from containing sorting errors, simply truncated the list. Another of GenProg's misaligned strategies evaded a regression test that compared a target program's output to the expected output stored in a file called "trusted-output.txt". Rather than continue to maintain the target program, GenProg simply deleted the "trusted-output.txt" file globally; this hack tricked the regression test into succeeding. Such problems could be patched by human intervention on a case-by-case basis after they became evident. === In virtual robotics === In Karl Sims' 1994 demonstration of creature evolution in a virtual environment, a fitness function that was expected to encourage the evolution of creatures that would learn to walk or crawl to a target resulted instead in the evolution of tall, rigid creatures that reached the target by falling over. This was patched by changing the environment so that taller creatures were forced to start farther from the target. Researchers from the Niels Bohr Institute stated in 1998 that their cycle-bot's reinforcement functions had "to be designed with great care." In their first experiments, "we rewarded the agent for driving towards the goal but did not punish it for driving away from it. Cconsequently, the agent drove in circles with a radius of 20–50 meters around the starting point. Such behavior was actually rewarded by the reinforcement function, furthermore circles with a certain radius are physically very stable when driving a bicycle". While setting up a 2011 experiment to test "survival of the flattest", experimenters attempted to ban mutations that altered the base reproduction rate. Every time a mutation occurred, the system would pause the simulation to test the new mutation in a test environment and would veto any mutations that resulted in a higher base reproduction rate. However, this resulted in mutated organisms that could recognize and suppress reproduction ("play dead") within the test environment. An initial patch, which removed cues that identified the test environment, failed to completely prevent runaway reproduction; new mutated organisms would "play dead" at random as a strategy to sometimes, by chance, outwit the mutation veto system. A 2017 DeepMind paper noted that "great care must be taken when defining the reward function," citing an unexpected failure when an agent flipped a brick because it received "a grasping reward calculated with the wrong reference point on the brick". OpenAI stated in 2017 that in some domains their semi-supervised system could result in agents "adopting policies that tricked evaluators," and that in one environment "a robot that was supposed to grasp items instead positioned its manipulator between the camera and the object so that it only appeared to be grasping it." A 2018 bug in OpenAI Gym could cause a robot expected to quietly move a block sitting on top of a table to instead opt to move the table. A 2020 collection of similar anecdotes posits that "evolution has its own 'agenda' distinct from the programmer's" and that "the first rule of directed evolution is 'you get what you select for'". === In video game bots === In 2013, programmer Tom Murphy VII published an AI designed to learn NES games. When the AI was about to lose at Tetris, it learned to indefinitely pause the game. Murphy later analogized it to the fictional WarGames computer, which concluded that "The only winning move is not to play". AI programmed to learn video games will sometimes fail to progress through the entire game as expected, instead opting to repeat content. A 2016 OpenAI algorithm trained on the CoastRunners racing game unexpectedly learned to attain a higher score by looping through three targets rather than ever finishing the race. Some evolutionary algorithms that were evolved to play QBert in 2018 declined to clear levels, instead finding two distinct novel ways to farm a single level indefinitely. Multiple researchers have observed that AI learning to play Road Runner gravitates to a "score exploit" in which the AI deliberately gets itself killed near the end of level one so that it can repeat the level. A 2017 experiment deployed an "oversight" convolutional neural network trained on human examples to block such actions, but the agent learned to exploit oversight failures in the top right corner of the screen, where it was still able to get killed. == Reward hacking in modern language models == With the rise of large language models (LLMs) and reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) as a primary technique for AI alignment, reward hacking has become a major concern for the development of artificial intelligence. In RLHF, a reward model trained on data that best captures human preferences is used as a proxy for human judgment, with the language model being fine-tuned to optimize this reward proxy. However, since the rewar
John Schulman
John Schulman (born 1987 or 1988) is an American artificial intelligence researcher and co-founder of OpenAI. In August 2024, he announced he would be joining Anthropic. In February 2025, he announced he was leaving to join Thinking Machines Lab, where he is chief scientist. == Early life and education == Schulman had an interest in science and math from a young age. He enjoyed science fiction, especially the work of Isaac Asimov. When he was in seventh grade, he became deeply interested in the television program BattleBots, which featured combat between remote-controlled robots. In what he said was his first self-directed study, he read extensively in subject areas that would help him design a superior robot, but the robot he and his friends worked on was never built. He attended Great Neck South High School. He was a member of the US Physics olympiad Team in 2005. In 2010, he graduated from Caltech with a degree in physics. He has a PhD in electrical engineering and computer sciences from the University of California, Berkeley, where he was advised by Pieter Abbeel. == Career == In December 2015, shortly before finishing his PhD, Schulman co-founded OpenAI with Sam Altman, Elon Musk, Ilya Sutskever, Greg Brockman, Trevor Blackwell, Vicki Cheung, Andrej Karpathy, Durk Kingma, Pamela Vagata, and Wojciech Zaremba, with Sam Altman and Elon Musk as the co-chairs. There, he led the reinforcement learning team that created ChatGPT. He has been referred to as the "architect" of ChatGPT. In August 2024, Schulman announced he would be joining Anthropic. He stated his move was to allow him to deepen his focus on AI alignment and return to more hands-on technical work. In February 2025, he announced he was leaving to join Thinking Machines Lab, where he is chief scientist. == Awards and honors == In 2025, Schulman received the Mark Bingham Award for Excellence in Achievement by Young Alumni from his alma mater, UC Berkeley.
Logic Theorist
Logic Theorist is a computer program completed in 1956 by Allen Newell, Herbert A. Simon, and Cliff Shaw. It was the first program deliberately engineered to perform automated reasoning, and has been described as "the first artificial intelligence program". Logic Theorist proved 38 of the first 52 theorems in chapter two of Whitehead and Bertrand Russell's Principia Mathematica, and found new and shorter proofs for some of them. == History == In 1955, when Newell and Simon began to work on the Logic Theorist, the field of artificial intelligence did not yet exist; the term "artificial intelligence" would not be coined until the following summer. Simon was a political scientist who had previously studied the way bureaucracies function as well as developing his theory of bounded rationality (for which he would later win the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 1978). He believed the study of business organizations requires, like artificial intelligence, an insight into the nature of human problem solving and decision making. Simon has stated that when consulting at RAND Corporation in the early 1950s, he saw a printer typing out a map, using ordinary letters and punctuation as symbols. This led him to think that a machine that could manipulate symbols could simulate decision making and possibly even the process of human thought. The program that printed the map had been written by Newell, a RAND scientist studying logistics and organization theory. For Newell, the decisive moment was in 1954 when Oliver Selfridge came to RAND to describe his work on pattern matching. Watching the presentation, Newell suddenly understood how the interaction of simple, programmable units could accomplish complex behavior, including the intelligent behavior of human beings. "It all happened in one afternoon," he would later say. It was a rare moment of scientific epiphany. "I had such a sense of clarity that this was a new path, and one I was going to go down. I haven't had that sensation very many times. I'm pretty skeptical, and so I don't normally go off on a toot, but I did on that one. Completely absorbed in it—without existing with the two or three levels consciousness so that you're working, and aware that you're working, and aware of the consequences and implications, the normal mode of thought. No. Completely absorbed for ten to twelve hours." Newell and Simon began to talk about the possibility of teaching machines to think. Their first project was a program that could prove mathematical theorems like the ones used in Bertrand Russell and Alfred North Whitehead's Principia Mathematica. They enlisted the help of computer programmer Cliff Shaw, also from RAND, to develop the program. (Newell says "Cliff was the genuine computer scientist of the three".) The first version was hand-simulated: they wrote the program onto 3x5 cards and, as Simon recalled:In January 1956, we assembled my wife and three children together with some graduate students. To each member of the group, we gave one of the cards, so that each one became, in effect, a component of the computer program ... Here was nature imitating art imitating nature. They succeeded in showing that the program could successfully prove theorems as well as a talented mathematician. Eventually Shaw was able to run the program on the computer at RAND's Santa Monica facility. In the summer of 1956, John McCarthy, Marvin Minsky, Claude Shannon and Nathan Rochester organized a conference on the subject of what they called "artificial intelligence" (a term coined by McCarthy for the occasion). Newell and Simon proudly presented the group with the Logic Theorist. It was met with a lukewarm reception. Pamela McCorduck writes "the evidence is that nobody save Newell and Simon themselves sensed the long-range significance of what they were doing." Simon confides that "we were probably fairly arrogant about it all" and adds: They didn't want to hear from us, and we sure didn't want to hear from them: we had something to show them! ... In a way it was ironic because we already had done the first example of what they were after; and second, they didn't pay much attention to it. Logic Theorist soon proved 38 of the first 52 theorems in chapter 2 of the Principia Mathematica. The proof of theorem 2.85 was actually more elegant than the proof produced laboriously by hand by Russell and Whitehead (2026-03-20: What is called here Theorem 2.85 is, in fact, numbered as 2.53 in the page 107 of the 1963 Cambridge University Press edition (https://www.uhu.es/francisco.moreno/gii_mac/docs/Principia_Mathematica_vol1.pdf) and which appears, under the same 2.53 number, on page 112 of the 1910 CUP Edition, according to the digitalization on wikibooks (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Russell_%26_Whitehead%27s_Principia_Mathematica/Part_1/Section_A#Discussion_2)). Simon was able to show the new proof to Russell himself who "responded with delight". They attempted to publish the new proof in The Journal of Symbolic Logic, but it was rejected on the grounds that a new proof of an elementary mathematical theorem was not notable, apparently overlooking the fact that one of the authors was a computer program. Newell and Simon formed a lasting partnership, founding one of the first AI laboratories at the Carnegie Institute of Technology and developing a series of influential artificial intelligence programs and ideas, including the General Problem Solver, Soar, and their unified theory of cognition. == Architecture == The Logic Theorist is a program that performs logical processes on logical expressions. The Logic Theorist operates on the following principles: === Expressions === An expression is made of elements. There are two kinds of memories: working and storage. Each working memory contains a single element. The Logic Theorist usually uses 1 to 3 working memories. Each storage memory is a list representing a full expression or a set of elements. In particular, it contains all the axioms and proven logical theorems. An expression is an abstract syntax tree, each node being an element with up to 11 attributes. For example, the logical expression ¬ P → ( Q ∧ ¬ P ) {\displaystyle \neg P\to (Q\wedge \neg P)} is represented as a tree with a root element representing → {\displaystyle \to } . Among the attributes of the root element are pointers to the two elements representing the subexpressions ¬ P {\displaystyle \neg P} and Q ∧ ¬ P {\displaystyle Q\wedge \neg P} . === Processes === There are four kinds of processes, from the lowest to the highest level. Instruction: These are similar to assembly code. They may either perform a primitive operation on an expression in working memory, or perform a conditional jump to another instruction. An example is "put the right sub-element of working-memory 1 to working-memory 2" Elementary process: These are similar to subroutines. A sequence of instructions that can be called. Method: A sequence of elementary processes. There are 4 methods: substitution: given an expression, it attempts to transform it to a proven theorem or axiom by substitutions of variables and logical connectives. detachment: given expression B {\displaystyle B} , it attempts to find a proven theorem or axiom of form A → B ′ {\displaystyle A\to B'} , where B ′ {\displaystyle B'} yields B {\displaystyle B} after substitution, then attempts to prove A {\displaystyle A} by substitution. chaining forward: given expression A → C {\displaystyle A\to C} , it attempts to find for a proven theorem or axiom of form A → B {\displaystyle A\to B} , then attempt to prove B → C {\displaystyle B\to C} by substitution. chaining backward: given expression A → C {\displaystyle A\to C} , it attempts to find for a proven theorem or axiom of form B → C {\displaystyle B\to C} , then attempt to prove A → B {\displaystyle A\to B} by substitution. executive control method: This method applies each of the 4 methods in sequence to each theorem to be proved. == Logic Theorist's influence on AI == Logic Theorist introduced several concepts that would be central to AI research: Reasoning as search Logic Theorist explored a search tree: the root was the initial hypothesis, each branch was a deduction based on the rules of logic. Somewhere in the tree was the goal: the proposition the program intended to prove. The pathway along the branches that led to the goal was a proof – a series of statements, each deduced using the rules of logic, that led from the hypothesis to the proposition to be proved. Heuristics Newell and Simon realized that the search tree would grow exponentially and that they needed to "trim" some branches, using "rules of thumb" to determine which pathways were unlikely to lead to a solution. They called these ad hoc rules "heuristics", using a term introduced by George Pólya in his classic book on mathematical proof, How to Solve It. (Newell had taken courses from Pólya at Stanford). Heuristics would become an important area o
Joseph Stanislaus Ostoja-Kotkowski
Joseph Stanislaus Ostoja-Kotkowski AM, FRSA (also known as J. S. Ostoja-Kotkowski, Ostoja and Stan Ostoja-Kotkowski; 28 December 1922 – 2 April 1994) was best known for his ground-breaking work in chromasonics, laser kinetics and 'sound and image' productions. He earned recognition in Australia and overseas for his pioneering work in laser sound and image technology. His work included painting (instrumental in developing geometric art in Australia), photography, film-making, theatre design, fabric design, murals, kinetic and static sculpture, stained glass, vitreous enamel murals, op-collages, computer graphics, and laser art. Ostoja flourished between 1940 and 1994. Ostoja's films are still being exhibited. == Biography == Joseph Stanislaus Ostoja-Kotkowski was born in Golub, Poland, on 28 December 1922, descending from an old noble family that was part of the Clan of Ostoja. He studied drawing under Olgierd Vetesco in Przasnysz from 1940-1945. After winning a scholarship, he completed his studies at the Düsseldorf Academy of Fine Arts in Germany in 1949. In 1950 Ostoja migrated to Australia, arriving in Melbourne where he supported himself with work as a labourer. He enrolled at the Victorian School of Fine Arts National Gallery School under Alan Sumner and William Dargie 1950-1955 and there introduced the new abstract expression of Europe both to lecturers and students. He settled in the Adelaide Hills, South Australia, on the Booth estate at Stirling, living under the patronage of the Booth family for over 40 years (Freya Booth, the wife of Edward Stirling Booth, was a daughter of the artist Sir Hans Heysen). His first one-man exhibition was also in South Australia at the Royal Society of Arts, Adelaide. In 1956 Ostoja met and collaborated with Ian Davidson in the production of the short film Five South Australian Artists, and became involved in stage and theatre set design. He co-produced several experimental films again with Ian Davidson, including The Quest of Time in 1957 Ostoja's work in abstract expression began to receive accolades. He won the Cornell Prize for the canvas Form in Landscape. He started to design sets for theatre and dance including for Six Characters in Search of an Author by Luigi Pirandello (1957); the South Australian production of Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot (1958); Gaetano Donizetti's Elixir of Love, with novel light settings and modulations, for the Elder Conservatorium of the University of Adelaide which used his techniques for their Opera Workshops (1959); for The Egg; and for two performances of the South Australian Ballet Theatre with light/colour abstract presentations (1959). 1960 This year he designed sets for a new opera group which would eventually grow into the South Australian Opera Company. Among other theatrical events, he designed and executed the scenery for Moon on a Rainbow Shawl by Errol John, and The Teahouse of the August Moon by John Patrick, (a production by the University of Adelaide Theatre Guild). He received artistic satisfaction but little financial reward for these efforts. In this year also, he staged a visual production on the theme of Orpheus, using dance, music and voice with several projectors. This was the first attempt at quadraphonic sound in Australia, working in collaboration with Derek Jolly, who provided the sound and projection equipment. It was also the first demonstration of "Chromasonics" - the science of translating sound into visual images. Ostoja then designed innovative "abstracted" scenery for a production of The Marriage of Figaro and Benjamin Britten's The Turn of the Screw. 1961 Ostoja designed the sets for the controversial South Australian production of Patrick White's The Ham Funeral - also Alan Seymour's Swamp Creatures, both performed by the University of Adelaide Theatre Guild. He designed and constructed six stained glass windows for the Refectory at the University of Adelaide. In this period Ostoja designed special lights and gauzes for difficult effects required in an ambitious production of the opera Don Carlos by the Opera Workshop, for the Elder Conservatorium. 1962 Ostoja designed and built sets for the production of J.B, by Archibald MacLeish, for the second Adelaide Festival of Arts. He exhibited vitreous enamel works in Melbourne's Argus Gallery. Max Harris, in The Bulletin of 20 October 1962, praised Ostoja's sets for My Cousin from Fiji in Union Theatre, Adelaide, and his technique of rear screen projections as later adopted throughout Australia. 1963 Ostoja continued to develop Multi-Image projections, demonstrating for the first time in Australia the concept later to be known as 'audio-visuals!'. Ostoja gave Sir Herbert Read, the art critic, a personal viewing of one of his visual presentations. At Christmas, in the Elder Conservatorium, collaborating again with Derek Jolly, Ostoja gave what was probably the world's first "visual concert", using special projectors and incorporating music, colours and shapes. 1964 With fellow Adelaide artist John Dallwitz, Ostoja co-designed the first of several experimental dance and stage productions in the Adelaide Festival of Arts Sound and Image. The production featured Adelaide dancer Elizabeth_Cameron_Dalman. Also for the Adelaide Festival of Arts of that year, he designed the largest light mosaic ever staged up to that time, upon the facade of an 11-storey building. Ostoja was invited to New Zealand, and exhibited the first electronically generated images in Australia in Melbourne, at the Argus Gallery. His design for the 50-foot (15 m) bas-relief mural for the new B.P. building in Melbourne was the subject of a film which won the "Blue Ribbon" Award in the American Film Festival in New York. 1965 Ostoja designed and made the first light kinetic mural in Australia, and continued to evolve theatrical works using multi-screen and Multi-projector techniques. The Production of Jean Genet's The Balcony was very controversial. With Elizabeth Dalman, Ostoja produced new dance forms for Melbourne Television. He introduced Op Art to Australia, both at South Yarra Gallery in Melbourne, and Gallery A in Sydney. 1966 With John Dallwitz, Ostoja was invited by the Adelaide Festival of Arts to present more experimental theatre, Sound and image 1966. This highly acclaimed production incorporated Australian poetry into the sound, electronic music, and visual images and featured the dancer Antonio Rodrigues. The architect Robin Boyd commissioned Ostoja to design two large Op murals for the Australian Pavilion entrance at the Expo 67. Ostoja was awarded a Churchill Fellowship, which enabled him to have extensive world travel, comparing art and technology in many countries. He began to work with language, contemporary poetry and prose, and computers. 1967 John Dallwitz and Ostoja presented Sound and Image at the Festival of Perth. In Berne, Switzerland, Ostoja received the "Excellence F.I.A.P." Award for innovative photography. 1968 At the Adelaide Festival of Arts, Ostoja and John Dallwitz collaborated again to stage Sound and Image. This was the first theatre production in the world to use a laser beam. It also included the first science fiction play (The Veldt by Ray Bradbury) performed in Australia. Ostoja's theatre methods were increasingly attracting the attention of critics to how plays were staged. "Chromasonics", developed and introduced by Ostoja, was now being used extensively in the entertainment industry. 1969 Ostoja staged Krzysztof Penderecki's St. Luke Passion, a controversial, contemporary religious work. The South Australian The Advertiser wrote an extensive critique of Ostoja's work. Robin Boyd commissioned Ostoja to build a "Chromasonic" exhibit located in the Space Tube at the Australian Pavilion for Expo '70 in Osaka. 1970 Ostoja presented an Australian Aboriginal Dreamtime theme in his "Sound and Image" theatre, working with leading contemporary figures in poetry, music and dance. This was the first production of its kind in Australia, and appeared after the Festival in Melbourne, Sydney, Canberra and Perth. Ostoja's Space Scape mural, sixty feet long by ten feet high, won the Australia-wide competition for a mural for Adelaide Airport. His 120 feet (37 m) high 'light and sound' structure for the Adelaide Festival was the first of its kind in the world. 1971 Ostoja awarded a Creative Arts Fellowship at the Australian National University, Canberra. His 18-month stay resulted in the design and building of a "Chromasonics unit-laser", a 100 feet (30 m) Chromasonic tower, and a world premiere of a Synchronos concert. 1972 With Don Burrows and Don Banks, Ostoja presented Synchronos 72, where one could "hear the colours and see the sounds". Ostoja added Cymatics, developed during the Fellowship, to his workshop repertoire. He was invited to exhibit his photography in the National Gallery, Melbourne. 1973 Ostoja received a Fellowship from the Australian American Education Associatio
GPT-5.3-Codex
GPT-5.3-Codex (Generative Pre-trained Transformer 5.3 Codex) is a large language model (LLM) announced and released by OpenAI on February 5, 2026. It is made as a competitor to Claude's Opus 4.6, focusing on code generation, speed and the ability to search repositories, run terminal commands and at the same time, debug code. In technical benchmarks, it is reported that GPT-5.3 Codex is 25% faster than Opus 4.6. GPT-5.3 Codex is available in the Codex app and on the web; access via API is also planned. According to OpenAI, GPT-5.3-Codex is the company's "first model that was instrumental in creating itself." On February 12, 2026, GPT-5.3-Codex-Spark was released in a research preview, which is a smaller version of GPT-5.3-Codex which supports text-only input. As of February 2026, GPT-5.3-Codex is only available for ChatGPT Pro ($200/month) subscribers.