Group concept mapping is a structured methodology for organizing the ideas of a group on any topic of interest and representing those ideas visually in a series of interrelated maps. It is a type of integrative mixed method, combining qualitative and quantitative approaches to data collection and analysis. Group concept mapping allows for a collaborative group process with groups of any size, including a broad and diverse array of participants. Since its development in the late 1980s by William M.K. Trochim at Cornell University, it has been applied to various fields and contexts, including community and public health, social work, health care, human services,, instructional interventions, and biomedical research and evaluation. == Overview == Group concept mapping integrates qualitative group processes with multivariate analysis to help a group organize and visually represent its ideas on any topic of interest through a series of related maps. It combines the ideas of diverse participants to show what the group thinks and values in relation to the specific topic of interest. It is a type of structured conceptualization used by groups to develop a conceptual framework, often to help guide evaluation and planning efforts. Group concept mapping is participatory in nature, allowing participants to have an equal voice and to contribute through various methods. A group concept map visually represents all the ideas of a group and how they relate to each other, and depending on the scale, which ideas are more relevant, important, or feasible. == Process == Group concept mapping involves a structured multi-step process, including brainstorming, sorting and rating, multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis, and the generation and interpretation of multiple maps. The first step requires participants to brainstorm a large set of statements relevant to the topic of interest, usually in response to a focus prompt. Participants are then asked to individually sort those statements into categories based on their perceived similarity and rate each statement on one or more scales, such as importance or feasibility. The data is then analyzed using The Concept System software, which creates a series of interrelated maps using multidimensional scaling (MDS) of the sort data, hierarchical clustering of the MDS coordinates applying Ward's method, and the computation of average ratings for each statement and cluster of statements. The resulting maps display the individual statements in two-dimensional space with more similar statements located closer to each other, and grouped into clusters that partition the space on the map. The Concept System software also creates other maps that show the statements in each cluster rated on one or more scales, and absolute or relative cluster ratings between two cluster sets. As a last step in the process, participants are led through a structured interpretation session to better understand and label all the maps. == History == Group concept mapping was developed as a methodology in the late 1980s by William M.K. Trochim at Cornell University. Trochim is considered to be a leading evaluation expert, and he has taught evaluation and research methods at Cornell since 1980. Originally called "concept mapping", the methodology has evolved since its inception with the maturation of the field and the continued advancement of the software, which is now a Web application. == Uses == Group concept mapping can be used with any group for any topic of interest. It is often used by government agencies, academic institutions, national associations, not-for-profit and community-based organizations, and private businesses to help turn the ideas of the group into measurable actions. This includes in the areas of organizational development, strategic planning, needs assessment, curriculum development, research, and evaluation. Group concept mapping is well-documented, well-established methodology, and it has been used in hundreds of published papers. == Versus concept mapping and mind mapping == More generally, concept mapping is any process used for visually representing relationships between ideas in pictures or diagrams. A concept map is typically a diagram of multiple ideas, often represented as boxes or circles, linked in a graph (network) structure through arrows and words where each idea is connected to another. The technique was originally developed in the 1970s by Joseph D. Novak at Cornell University. Concept mapping may be done by an individual or a group. A mind map is a diagram used to visually represent information, centering on one word or idea with categories and sub-categories radiating off of it in a tree structure. Popularized by Tony Buzan in the 1970s, mind mapping is often a spontaneous exercise done by an individual or group to gather information about what they think around a single topic. Unlike Novak's concept maps and Buzan's mind maps, group concept mapping has a structured mathematical process (sorting and rating, multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis) for organizing and visually representing multiple ideas of a group through a series of specific steps. In other words, in group concept mapping, the resulting visual representations are mathematically generated from mixed (qualitative and quantitative) data collected from a group of research subjects, whereas in Novak's concept maps and Buzan's mind maps the visual representations are drawn directly by the subjects resulting in diagrams that are qualitative data and final product at the same time.
Psychology in cybersecurity
The psychology of cybersecurity (often intersecting with usable security and cyberpsychology) is an interdisciplinary field studying how human behavior, cognitive biases, and social dynamics influence information security. While traditional cybersecurity focuses on hardware and software vulnerabilities, this discipline addresses the "human factor," which is exploited in cyberattacks. Psychology in cybersecurity draws from cognitive psychology and human–computer interaction. == History and evolution == The challenge of human behavior in computing was noted as early as the 1960s with multi-user mainframes like the Compatible Time-Sharing System (CTSS). In 1966, a software error on CTSS caused the system's master password file to be displayed to every user upon login—one of the earliest documented security incidents attributable to a combination of system design and human factors. These behaviors gained broader significance in the 1990s as the Internet became widely accessible. High-profile incidents involving figures like Kevin Mitnick demonstrated how human trust could be exploited through social engineering such as pretexting over the phone. == Cognitive and behavioral factors == Much of the psychology of cybersecurity focuses on decision-making under stress or uncertainty. Researchers apply frameworks like dual process theory to explain why humans fall for phishing or business email compromise. Threat actors design malicious communications to trigger fast, emotional "System 1" thinking—using urgency, authority, or panic, which prompts users to click a link or wire funds before their analytical "System 2" can assess the situation's legitimacy. Industry research has consistently documented the effectiveness of these techniques at scale, pointing to several recurring psychological phenomena that influence daily security practices: Cognitive biases: The optimism bias leads users to believe they are unlikely to be targeted by cybercriminals, resulting in lax password practices or delayed software updates. The availability heuristic causes individuals to focus on highly publicized, sophisticated threats while ignoring common, statistically probable risks like credential reuse. Social influence: Attackers leverage established principles of persuasion, such as those categorized by Robert Cialdini. Impersonating a CEO leverages the psychological trigger of authority, while fake tech support scams use reciprocity (offering to fix a problem before asking for network credentials). == Neurological and pre-cognitive factors == Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies show that neural activation in visual and attentional regions decreases with repeated exposure to the same stimulus, a phenomenon termed repetition suppression. Experiments have confirmed this effect in the context of security warnings: static warning designs produce declines in user attention and adherence. Information processing research on phishing indicates that affective cues, such as artificial urgency or fear, increase cognitive load and elicit automatic heuristic processing, reducing the likelihood of analytical evaluation and facilitating compliance with malicious requests. == Security fatigue and organizational dynamics == Aggressive cybersecurity postures can sometimes lead to mental and emotional exhaustion, a phenomenon known as security fatigue. === Alert fatigue === One example is alert fatigue, which most frequently affects both end-users and security operations center analysts. Continuous exposure to browser warnings or antivirus pop-ups, particularly those that are false positives, conditions users to dismiss alerts automatically due to the volume of notifications rather than their repetitive appearance (see § Neurological and pre-cognitive factors). The scale of this problem is significant in enterprise: SOC teams in large organizations receive thousands of alerts daily, and a survey published in ACM Computer Surveys found that analysts spend over 25% of their time handling false positives, meaning that malicious indicators can be buried in the noise. === Password fatigue === Similarly, password fatigue is the feeling experienced by many people who are required to remember an excessive number of passwords as part of their daily routine, such as to log in to a computer at work. Users cope with the memory burden by making predictable, iterative changes to their passwords (such as updating "Password01!" to "Password02!"), which decreases password security.
Software design
Software design is the process of conceptualizing how a software system will work before it is implemented or modified. Software design also refers to the direct result of the design process – the concepts of how the software will work which may be formally documented or may be maintained less formally, including via oral tradition. The design process enables a designer to model aspects of a software system before it exists with the intent of making the effort of writing the code more efficiently. Creativity, past experience, a sense of what makes "good" software, and a commitment to quality are success factors for a competent design. A software design can be compared to an architected plan for a house. High-level plans represent the totality of the house (e.g., a three-dimensional rendering of the house). Lower-level plans provide guidance for constructing each detail (e.g., the plumbing lay). Similarly, the software design model provides a variety of views of the proposed software solution. == Part of the overall process == In terms of the waterfall development process, software design is the activity that occurs after requirements analysis and before coding. Requirements analysis determines what the system needs to do without determining how it will do it, and thus, multiple designs can be imagined that satisfy the requirements. The design can be created while coding, without a plan or requirements analysis, but for more complex projects this is less feasible. Completing a design prior to coding allows for multidisciplinary designers and subject-matter experts to collaborate with programmers to produce software that is useful and technically sound. Sometimes, a simulation or prototype is created to model the system in an effort to determine a valid and good design. == Code as design == A common point of confusion with the term design in software is that the process applies at multiple levels of abstraction such as a high-level software architecture and lower-level components, functions and algorithms. A relatively formal process may occur at high levels of abstraction but at lower levels, the design process is almost always less formal where the only artifact of design may be the code itself. To the extent that this is true, software design refers to the design of the design. Edsger W. Dijkstra referred to this layering of semantic levels as the "radical novelty" of computer programming, and Donald Knuth used his experience writing TeX to describe the futility of attempting to design a program prior to implementing it: TEX would have been a complete failure if I had merely specified it and not participated fully in its initial implementation. The process of implementation constantly led me to unanticipated questions and to new insights about how the original specifications could be improved. == Artifacts == A design process may include the production of art Software design documentation such as flow chart, use case, Pseudocode, Unified Modeling Language model and other Fundamental modeling concepts. For user centered software, design may involve user experience design yielding a storyboard to help determine those specifications. Documentation may be reviewed to allow constraints, specifications and even requirements to be adjusted prior to coding. == Iterative design == Software systems inherently deal with uncertainties, and the size of software components can significantly influence a system's outcomes, both positively and negatively. Neal Ford and Mark Richards propose an iterative approach to address the challenge of identifying and right-sizing components. This method emphasizes continuous refinement as teams develop a more nuanced understanding of system behavior and requirements. The approach typically involves a cycle with several stages: A high-level partitioning strategy is established, often categorized as technical or domain-based. Guidelines for the smallest meaningful deployable unit, referred to as "quanta," are defined. While these foundational decisions are made early, they may be revisited later in the cycle if necessary. Initial components are identified based on the established strategy. Requirements are assigned to the identified components. The roles and responsibilities of each component are analyzed to ensure clarity and minimize overlap. Architectural characteristics, such as scalability, fault tolerance, and maintainability, are evaluated. Components may be restructured based on feedback from development teams. This cycle serves as a general framework and can be adapted to different domains. == Design principles == Design principles enable a software engineer to navigate the design process. Davis suggested principles which have been refined over time as: The design process should not suffer from "tunnel vision" A good designer should consider alternative approaches, judging each based on the requirements of the problem, the resources available to do the job. The design should be traceable to the analysis model Because a single element of the design model can often be traced back to multiple requirements, it is necessary to have a means for tracking how requirements have been satisfied by the design model. The design should not reinvent the wheel Systems are constructed using a set of design patterns, many of which have likely been encountered before. These patterns should always be chosen as an alternative to reinvention. Time is short and resources are limited; design time should be invested in representing (truly new) ideas by integrating patterns that already exist (when applicable). The design should "minimize the intellectual distance" between the software and the problem as it exists in the real world That is, the structure of the software design should, whenever possible, mimic the structure of the problem domain. The design should exhibit uniformity and integration A design is uniform if it appears fully coherent. In order to achieve this outcome, rules of style and format should be defined for a design team before design work begins. A design is integrated if care is taken in defining interfaces between design components. The design should be structured to accommodate change The design concepts discussed in the next section enable a design to achieve this principle. The design should be structured to degrade gently, even when aberrant data, events, or operating conditions are encountered Well-designed software should never "bomb"; it should be designed to accommodate unusual circumstances, and if it must terminate processing, it should do so in a graceful manner. Design is not coding, coding is not design Even when detailed procedural designs are created for program components, the level of abstraction of the design model is higher than the source code. The only design decisions made at the coding level should address the small implementation details that enable the procedural design to be coded. The design should be assessed for quality as it is being created, not after the fact A variety of design concepts and design measures are available to assist the designer in assessing quality throughout the development process. The design should be reviewed to minimize conceptual (semantic) errors There is sometimes a tendency to focus on minutiae when the design is reviewed, missing the forest for the trees. A design team should ensure that major conceptual elements of the design (omissions, ambiguity, inconsistency) have been addressed before worrying about the syntax of the design model. == Design concepts == Design concepts provide a designer with a foundation from which more sophisticated methods can be applied. Design concepts include: Abstraction Reducing the information content of a concept or an observable phenomenon, typically to retain only information that is relevant for a particular purpose. It is an act of Representing essential features without including the background details or explanations. Architecture The overall structure of the software and the ways in which that structure provides conceptual integrity for a system. Good software architecture will yield a good return on investment with respect to the desired outcome of the project, e.g. in terms of performance, quality, schedule and cost. Control hierarchy A program structure that represents the organization of a program component and implies a hierarchy of control. Data structure Representing the logical relationship between elements of data. Design pattern A designer may identify a design aspect of the system that has solved in the past. The reuse of such patterns can increase software development velocity. Information hiding Modules should be specified and designed so that information contained within a module is inaccessible to other modules that have no need for such information. Modularity Dividing the solution into parts (modules). Refinement The process of elaboration. A hierarchy is developed by decomposing a macrosco
Color layout descriptor
In digital image and video processing, a color layout descriptor (CLD) is designed to capture the spatial distribution of color in an image. The feature extraction process consists of two parts: grid based representative color selection and discrete cosine transform with quantization. Color is the most basic quality of the visual contents, therefore it is possible to use colors to describe and represent an image. The MPEG-7 standard has tested the most efficient procedure to describe the color and has selected those that have provided more satisfactory results. This standard proposes different methods to obtain these descriptors, and one tool defined to describe the color is the CLD, that permits describing the color relation between sequences or group of images. The CLD captures the spatial layout of the representative colors on a grid superimposed on a region or image. Representation is based on coefficients of the discrete cosine transform (DCT). This is a very compact descriptor being highly efficient in fast browsing and search applications. It can be applied to still images as well as to video segments. == Definition == The CLD is a very compact and resolution-invariant representation of color for high-speed image retrieval and it has been designed to efficiently represent the spatial distribution of colors. This feature can be used for a wide variety of similarity-based retrieval, content filtering and visualization. It is especially useful for spatial structure-based retrieval applications. This descriptor is obtained by applying the DCT transformation on a 2-D array of local representative colors in Y or Cb or Cr color space. The functionalities of the CLD are basically the matching: – Image-to-image matching – Video clip-to-video clip matching Remark that the CLD is one of the most precise and fast color descriptor. == Extraction == The extraction process of this color descriptor consists of four stages: Image partitioning Representative color selection DCT transformation Zigzag scanning The standard MPEG-7 recommends using the YCbCr color space for the CLD. === Image partitioning === In the image partitioning stage, the input picture (on RGB color space) is divided into 64 blocks to guarantee the invariance to resolution or scale. The inputs and outputs of this step are summarized in the following table: === Representative color selection === After the image partitioning stage, a single representative color is selected from each block. Any method to select the representative color can be applied, but the standard recommends the use of the average of the pixel colors in a block as the corresponding representative color, since it is simpler and the description accuracy is sufficient in general. The selection results in a tiny image icon of size 8x8. The next figure shows this process. Note that in the image of the figure, the resolution of the original image has been maintained only in order to facilitate its representation. The inputs and outputs of this stage are summarized in the next table: Once the tiny image icon is obtained, the color space conversion between RGB and YCbCr is applied. === DCT transformation === In the fourth stage, the luminance (Y) and the blue and red chrominance (Cb and Cr) are transformed by 8x8 DCT, so three sets of 64 DCT coefficients are obtained. To calculate the DCT in a 2D array, the formulas below are used. B p q = α p α q ∑ m = 0 M − 1 ∑ n = 0 N − 1 A m n cos π ( 2 m + 1 ) p 2 M cos π ( 2 n + 1 ) q 2 N , 0 ≤ p ≤ M − 1 , 0 ≤ q ≤ N − 1 {\displaystyle B_{pq}=\alpha _{p}\alpha _{q}\sum _{m=0}^{M-1}\sum _{n=0}^{N-1}A_{mn}\cos {\frac {\pi (2m+1)p}{2M}}\cos {\frac {\pi (2n+1)q}{2N}},\qquad 0\leq p\leq M-1,\;0\leq q\leq N-1} α p = { 1 M , p = 0 2 M , 1 ≤ p ≤ M − 1 α q = { 1 N , q = 0 2 N , 1 ≤ q ≤ N − 1 {\displaystyle \alpha _{p}={\begin{cases}{\frac {1}{\sqrt {M}}},&p=0\\{\sqrt {\frac {2}{M}}},&1\leq p\leq M-1\end{cases}}\qquad \alpha _{q}={\begin{cases}{\frac {1}{\sqrt {N}}},&q=0\\{\sqrt {\frac {2}{N}}},&1\leq q\leq N-1\end{cases}}} The inputs and outputs of this stage are summarized in the next table: === Zigzag scanning === A zigzag scanning is performed with these three sets of 64 DCT coefficients, following the schema presented in the figure. The purpose of the zigzag scan is to group the low frequency coefficients of the 8x8 matrix into a vector. The inputs and outputs of this stage are summarized in the next table: Finally, these three set of matrices correspond to the CLD of the input image. == Matching == The matching process helps to evaluate if two elements are equal comparing both elements and calculating the distance between them. In the case of color descriptors the matching process helps to evaluate if two images are similar. Its procedure is the following: – Given an image as an input, the application attempts to find an image with a similar descriptor in a data base of images. If we consider two CLDs: {DY, DCb, DCr} { DY‟, DCb‟, DCr‟ }, The distance between the two descriptors can be computed as: D = ∑ i w y i ( D Y i − D Y i ′ ) 2 + ∑ i w b i ( D C b i − D C b i ′ ) 2 + ∑ i w r i ( D C r i − D C r i ′ ) 2 {\displaystyle D={\sqrt {\sum _{i}w_{yi}(DY_{i}-DY_{i}')^{2}}}+{\sqrt {\sum _{i}w_{bi}(DCb_{i}-DCb_{i}')^{2}}}+{\sqrt {\sum _{i}w_{ri}(DCr_{i}-DCr_{i}')^{2}}}} The subscript i represents the zigzag-scanning order of the coefficients. Furthermore, notice that is possible to weight the coefficients (w) in order to adjust the performance of the matching process. These weights let us give to some components of the descriptor more importance than others. Observing the formula, it can be extracted that: – 2 images are the same if the distance is 0 – 2 images are similar if the distance is near to 0 Therefore, this matching process will let to identify images with similar color descriptors. Since the complexity of the similarity matching process shown above is low, high-speed image matching can be achieved.
Software diagnosis
Software diagnosis (also: software diagnostics) refers to concepts, techniques, and tools that allow for obtaining findings, conclusions, and evaluations about software systems and their implementation, composition, behaviour, and evolution. It serves as means to monitor, steer, observe and optimize software development, software maintenance, and software re-engineering in the sense of a business intelligence approach specific to software systems. It is generally based on the automatic extraction, analysis, and visualization of corresponding information sources of the software system. It can also be manually done and not automatic. == Applications == Software diagnosis supports all branches of software engineering, in particular project management, quality management, risk management as well as implementation and test. Its main strength is to support all stakeholders of software projects (in particular during software maintenance and for software re-engineering tasks) and to provide effective communication means for software development projects. For example, software diagnosis facilitates "bridging an essential information gap between management and development, improve awareness, and serve as early risk detection instrument". Software diagnosis includes assessment methods for "perfective maintenance" that, for example, apply "visual analysis techniques to combine multiple indicators for low maintainability, including code complexity and entanglement with other parts of the system, and recent changes applied to the code". == Characteristics == In contrast to manifold approaches and techniques in software engineering, software diagnosis does not depend on programming languages, modeling techniques, software development processes or the specific techniques used in the various stages of the software development process. Instead, software diagnosis aims at analyzing and evaluating the software system in its as-is state and based on system-generated information to bypass any subjective or potentially outdated information sources (e.g., initial software models). For it, software diagnosis combines and relates sources of information that are typically not directly linked. Examples: Source-code metrics are related with software developer activity to gain insight into developer-specific effects on software code quality. System structure and run-time execution traces are correlated to facilitate program comprehension through dynamic analysis in software maintenance tasks. == Principles == The core principle of software diagnosis is to automatically extract information from all available information sources of a given software projects such as source code base, project repository, code metrics, execution traces, test results, etc. To combine information, software-specific data mining, analysis, and visualization techniques are applied. Its strength results, among various reasons, from integrating decoupled information spaces in the scope of a typical software project, for example development and developer activities (recorded by the repository) and code and quality metrics (derived by analyzing source code) or key performance indicators (KPIs). == Examples == Examples of software diagnosis tools include software maps and software metrics. == Critics == Software diagnosis—in contrast to many approaches in software engineering—does not assume that developer capabilities, development methods, programming or modeling languages are right or wrong (or better or worse compared to each other): Software diagnosis aims at giving insight into a given software system and its status regardless of the methods, languages, or models used to create and maintain the system. === Related subjects === Cost estimation in software engineering Programming productivity Rapid application development Software design Software development Software documentation Software map Software release life cycle Systems design Systems Development Life Cycle
Pyramid (image processing)
Pyramid, or pyramid representation, is a type of multi-scale signal representation developed by the computer vision, image processing and signal processing communities, in which a signal or an image is subject to repeated smoothing and subsampling. Pyramid representation is a predecessor to scale-space representation and multiresolution analysis. == Pyramid generation == There are two main types of pyramids: lowpass and bandpass. A lowpass pyramid is made by smoothing the image with an appropriate smoothing filter and then subsampling the smoothed image, usually by a factor of 2 along each coordinate direction. The resulting image is then subjected to the same procedure, and the cycle is repeated multiple times. Each cycle of this process results in a smaller image with increased smoothing, but with decreased spatial sampling density (that is, decreased image resolution). If illustrated graphically, the entire multi-scale representation will look like a pyramid, with the original image on the bottom and each cycle's resulting smaller image stacked one atop the other. A bandpass pyramid is made by forming the difference between images at adjacent levels in the pyramid and performing image interpolation between adjacent levels of resolution, to enable computation of pixelwise differences. == Pyramid generation kernels == A variety of different smoothing kernels have been proposed for generating pyramids. Among the suggestions that have been given, the binomial kernels arising from the binomial coefficients stand out as a particularly useful and theoretically well-founded class. Thus, given a two-dimensional image, we may apply the (normalized) binomial filter (1/4, 1/2, 1/4) typically twice or more along each spatial dimension and then subsample the image by a factor of two. This operation may then proceed as many times as desired, leading to a compact and efficient multi-scale representation. If motivated by specific requirements, intermediate scale levels may also be generated where the subsampling stage is sometimes left out, leading to an oversampled or hybrid pyramid. With the increasing computational efficiency of CPUs available today, it is in some situations also feasible to use wider supported Gaussian filters as smoothing kernels in the pyramid generation steps. === Gaussian pyramid === In a Gaussian pyramid, subsequent images are weighted down using a Gaussian average (Gaussian blur) and scaled down. Each pixel containing a local average corresponds to a neighborhood pixel on a lower level of the pyramid. This technique is used especially in texture synthesis. === Laplacian pyramid === A Laplacian pyramid is very similar to a Gaussian pyramid but saves the difference image of the blurred versions between each levels. Only the smallest level is not a difference image to enable reconstruction of the high resolution image using the difference images on higher levels. This technique can be used in image compression. === Steerable pyramid === A steerable pyramid, developed by Simoncelli and others, is an implementation of a multi-scale, multi-orientation band-pass filter bank used for applications including image compression, texture synthesis, and object recognition. It can be thought of as an orientation selective version of a Laplacian pyramid, in which a bank of steerable filters are used at each level of the pyramid instead of a single Laplacian or Gaussian filter. == Applications of pyramids == === Alternative representation === In the early days of computer vision, pyramids were used as the main type of multi-scale representation for computing multi-scale image features from real-world image data. More recent techniques include scale-space representation, which has been popular among some researchers due to its theoretical foundation, the ability to decouple the subsampling stage from the multi-scale representation, the more powerful tools for theoretical analysis as well as the ability to compute a representation at any desired scale, thus avoiding the algorithmic problems of relating image representations at different resolution. Nevertheless, pyramids are still frequently used for expressing computationally efficient approximations to scale-space representation. === Detail manipulation === Levels of a Laplacian pyramid can be added to or removed from the original image to amplify or reduce detail at different scales. However, detail manipulation of this form is known to produce halo artifacts in many cases, leading to the development of alternatives such as the bilateral filter. Some image compression file formats use the Adam7 algorithm or some other interlacing technique. These can be seen as a kind of image pyramid. Because those file format store the "large-scale" features first, and fine-grain details later in the file, a particular viewer displaying a small "thumbnail" or on a small screen can quickly download just enough of the image to display it in the available pixels—so one file can support many viewer resolutions, rather than having to store or generate a different file for each resolution.
AirPair
AirPair is a service and eponymous company that connects people who need help with programming issues (usually, programmers at small technology companies or at finance companies that use technology products) and people who can help them. Unlike services such as oDesk and Elance, AirPair is not a service for outsourcing programming tasks, but rather a service that facilitates one-off knowledge transfers from people with highly specialized knowledge of particular technology stacks or programming issues to people who are in need of specialized help. == History == AirPair launched in March 2013, with founder Jonathon Kresner, who hails from Australia, working full-time, and it soon hired three other part-time developers to work alongside him. Kresner had previously founded two other startups: Preparty, a social invitation and event-booking service based in Australia, and ClimbFind, an online rock-climbing community that reached a million users. Kresner was inspired to work on AirPair because he saw the need for outside expert assistance with programming issues arise regularly at these startups. In November 2013, founder Kresner describes the company's initial success at bootstrapping itself to "Ramen profitability" in a blog post. In December 2013, AirPair was accepted into the Winter 2014 Y Combinator batch. In March 2014, AirPair announced it would launch partnerships with Stripe, Twilio, and other companies that had their own application programming interfaces, allowing developers having trouble with the APIs to seek help over AirPair from experts on the APIs. AirPair presented at the Y Combinator Winter 2014 Demo Day on March 25, 2014, and successfully raised over $1 million within the next 48 hours. == Reception == A review of AirPair by Will Lam stressed that because payment was based on time rather than results, it was important to use it for clearly thought-out questions where one had high confidence that the session would help. Dennis Beatty, who met AirPair founder Jonathon Kresner in March 2014, wrote in April 2014 a glowing review of AirPair's vision of connecting people and its business success. AirPair has been compared with other peer-to-peer coding help sites such as Codementor and HackHands.