A mathematical model of how people solve most variants of the number-line task

Current understanding of the development of quantity representations is based primarily on performance in the number line task. We posit that the data from number line tasks reflect the observer’s underlying representation of quantity, together with the cognitive strategies and skills required to equate line length and quantity. Here, we specify a unified theory linking the underlying psychological representation of quantity and the associated strategies in four variations of the number-line task: the production and estimation variations of the bounded and unbounded number-line tasks. Comparison of performance in the bounded and unbounded number-line tasks provides a unique and direct way to assess the role of strategy in number-line completion. Each task produces a distinct pattern of data, yet each pattern is hypothesized to arise, at least in part, from the same underlying psychological representation of quantity. Our model predicts that the estimated biases from each task should be equivalent if the different completion strategies are modelled appropriately and no other influences are at play. We test this equivalence hypothesis in two experiments. The data reveal all variations of the number-line task produce equivalent biases except for one: the estimation variation of the bounded number-line task. We discuss the important implications of these findings

Computational Complexity for Physicists

These lecture notes are an informal introduction to the theory of computational complexity and its links to quantum computing and statistical mechanics.Comment: references updated, reprint available from http://itp.nat.uni-magdeburg.de/~mertens/papers/complexity.shtm

Dagstuhl Reports : Volume 1, Issue 2, February 2011

Online Privacy: Towards Informational Self-Determination on the Internet (Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop 11061) : Simone Fischer-Hübner, Chris Hoofnagle, Kai Rannenberg, Michael Waidner, Ioannis Krontiris and Michael Marhöfer Self-Repairing Programs (Dagstuhl Seminar 11062) : Mauro Pezzé, Martin C. Rinard, Westley Weimer and Andreas Zeller Theory and Applications of Graph Searching Problems (Dagstuhl Seminar 11071) : Fedor V. Fomin, Pierre Fraigniaud, Stephan Kreutzer and Dimitrios M. Thilikos Combinatorial and Algorithmic Aspects of Sequence Processing (Dagstuhl Seminar 11081) : Maxime Crochemore, Lila Kari, Mehryar Mohri and Dirk Nowotka Packing and Scheduling Algorithms for Information and Communication Services (Dagstuhl Seminar 11091) Klaus Jansen, Claire Mathieu, Hadas Shachnai and Neal E. Youn

Engineering Art Galleries

The Art Gallery Problem is one of the most well-known problems in Computational Geometry, with a rich history in the study of algorithms, complexity, and variants. Recently there has been a surge in experimental work on the problem. In this survey, we describe this work, show the chronology of developments, and compare current algorithms, including two unpublished versions, in an exhaustive experiment. Furthermore, we show what core algorithmic ingredients have led to recent successes

Analytical assessment of mine water rebound. Case study Ruhr coal basin

This study aims to assess key factors that influence mine water rebound on the example of a large amount of hard coal mines flooded or being flooded in Europe. Three German mines have been selected for a detailed study. A mathematical model based on analytical formulae of seepage theory has been employed to calculate time-dependent radial inflow to the shaft simulated as a big well in vertically heterogeneous rocks. The results of modelling showed good conformity with measurements for all studied mines. Besides, we evaluated the sensitivity of the model output to parameter variations for mine water level and initial inflow to the mine

ACE Models of Endogenous Interactions

Various approaches used in Agent-based Computational Economics (ACE) to model endogenously determined interactions between agents are discussed. This concerns models in which agents not only (learn how to) play some (market or other) game, but also (learn to) decide with whom to do that (or not).Endogenous interaction, Agent-based Computational Economics (ACE)

Behavioural Economics: Classical and Modern

In this paper, the origins and development of behavioural economics, beginning with the pioneering works of Herbert Simon (1953) and Ward Edwards (1954), is traced, described and (critically) discussed, in some detail. Two kinds of behavioural economics – classical and modern – are attributed, respectively, to the two pioneers. The mathematical foundations of classical behavioural economics is identified, largely, to be in the theory of computation and computational complexity; the corresponding mathematical basis for modern behavioural economics is, on the other hand, claimed to be a notion of subjective probability (at least at its origins in the works of Ward Edwards). The economic theories of behavior, challenging various aspects of 'orthodox' theory, were decisively influenced by these two mathematical underpinnings of the two theoriesClassical Behavioural Economics, Modern Behavioural Economics, Subjective Probability, Model of Computation, Computational Complexity. Subjective Expected Utility

The AutoProof Verifier: Usability by Non-Experts and on Standard Code

Formal verification tools are often developed by experts for experts; as a result, their usability by programmers with little formal methods experience may be severely limited. In this paper, we discuss this general phenomenon with reference to AutoProof: a tool that can verify the full functional correctness of object-oriented software. In particular, we present our experiences of using AutoProof in two contrasting contexts representative of non-expert usage. First, we discuss its usability by students in a graduate course on software verification, who were tasked with verifying implementations of various sorting algorithms. Second, we evaluate its usability in verifying code developed for programming assignments of an undergraduate course. The first scenario represents usability by serious non-experts; the second represents usability on "standard code", developed without full functional verification in mind. We report our experiences and lessons learnt, from which we derive some general suggestions for furthering the development of verification tools with respect to improving their usability.Comment: In Proceedings F-IDE 2015, arXiv:1508.0338