The Responsibility Quantification (ResQu) Model of Human Interaction with Automation

Intelligent systems and advanced automation are involved in information collection and evaluation, in decision-making and in the implementation of chosen actions. In such systems, human responsibility becomes equivocal. Understanding human casual responsibility is particularly important when intelligent autonomous systems can harm people, as with autonomous vehicles or, most notably, with autonomous weapon systems (AWS). Using Information Theory, we develop a responsibility quantification (ResQu) model of human involvement in intelligent automated systems and demonstrate its applications on decisions regarding AWS. The analysis reveals that human comparative responsibility to outcomes is often low, even when major functions are allocated to the human. Thus, broadly stated policies of keeping humans in the loop and having meaningful human control are misleading and cannot truly direct decisions on how to involve humans in intelligent systems and advanced automation. The current model is an initial step in the complex goal to create a comprehensive responsibility model, that will enable quantification of human causal responsibility. It assumes stationarity, full knowledge regarding the characteristic of the human and automation and ignores temporal aspects. Despite these limitations, it can aid in the analysis of systems designs alternatives and policy decisions regarding human responsibility in intelligent systems and advanced automation

A DEA Model to Optimize Insurance Payment Plans based on PACs

Healthcare industry has evolved dramatically over the time. From being a “cottage industry” to an “organized industry” has brought lot of changes. The changes have been both good and bad. Among the problems that have surfaced in past couple of decades, rising healthcare cost has been one of the most significant. The rising healthcare cost has been documented to be a symptom of several factors. Since the inception of healthcare as an organized industry several payment models for providers and hospitals have been adopted. Current healthcare reforms have proposed new payments models to curb the rising cost and provide consumer oriented healthcare. The proposed payment models such as, bundled, capitation, PROMETHEUS, pay-for-performance and traditional model of fee-for-service, all have their merits and demerits. Some are good for chronic and others for acute conditions, some provide bonuses to physicians for high quality and efficient care where as others pay more for number of services used. Our literature review has highlighted the lack of systemic study to analyze the effect of payment models on reimbursement of physicians and hospitals. This study shows that no “single model” can be implemented to serve all the stakeholders. The proposed optimization model is a strategic tool that aligns dynamic patient population with existing reimbursement models and provides information to providers to help them design favorable contracts with insurers. The model also has a potential to help improve planning and operational activities of hospitals

A Comparative Study on Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction

Maritime litigation is a special kind of rules of litigation, especially the litigation jurisdiction of which is a rich and complicated subject. In the field of international maritime litigation jurisdiction, the coordination and settlements of the conflicts of jurisdiction is vital to the uniform of the international maritime law. This article, starting from the historical source of maritime litigation jurisdiction, amply introduces the conception, category and legal characteristics of maritime litigation jurisdiction, points out the conflicts and settlements of international maritime litigation jurisdiction, demonstrates the maritime litigation jurisdiction in International Conventions, European Union, China and Korea, and emphatically analyzes rules of jurisdiction clauses of bill of lading and maritime litigation jurisdiction on the ship-owner？s limitation cases which are the specific solutions on maritime litigation jurisdiction in Chinese lawsthen, aiming at defects existing in maritime litigation jurisdiction of China, puts forward corresponding suggestions to improve the rules of maritime litigation jurisdiction for China. Chapter 1 Introduction. This chapter involves the objective, scope and method of the research. The objective is as follows: the rules of maritime litigation are special and important legal rules. But they are rarely referred to in international conventions and are undound in many countries including China. The author, as a judge engaging in maritime trial, decides to research maritime litigation jurisdiction rules due to his confusion of it in judicial practice. This article involves the history, conception, category and legal characteristics of maritime litigation jurisdiction, relative rules concerning jurisdiction of maritime litigation in international conventions and laws all over the world, conflicts and settlements of international maritime litigation jurisdiction and measures for improvement of jurisdiction rules of China. This article, firstly lengthways compares the internal development of rules of maritime litigation jurisdiction system and secondly breadthwise compares the maritime litigation jurisdiction rules of China with relative rules in international conventions and other countries. In addition, as a judge engaging in jurisdictional practice, the author also adopts the way of combination of theory and practice. Chapter 2 General Theory of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction. This chapter firstly demonstrates the overview of maritime litigation jurisdiction. It introduces the definition, origin and historical development, jurisdictional scope of maritime litigation jurisdiction. Then it sets forth the category and legal characteristics of maritime litigation jurisdiction. This chapter secondly discusses maritime litigation jurisdiction involving foreign elements. It analyzes the fact basis and legislative authority of performance of maritime litigation jurisdiction involving foreign elements, the reasons for conflict of maritime litigation jurisdiction involving foreign elements and from aspects of legislation and judicature, points out the principles and ways of solving the conflict of maritime litigation jurisdiction involving foreign elements. Chapter 3 Comparative Analysis of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction. This chapter demonstrates maritime litigation jurisdiction in International Conventions, European Union (hereinafter referred to as ？EU？), China and Korea in detail and compares with each other by combination of their own characteristics. In the rules maritime litigation jurisdiction in International Conventions, it introduces the importance of maritime litigation jurisdiction in procedural justice, International Conventions concerning legal rules of maritime litigation jurisdiction and the application of International Conventions concerning maritime litigation jurisdiction in China. In maritime jurisdiction rules of EU, it demonstrates the concept and characteristics, the legal basis and the legal meaning of research of maritime litigation jurisdiction of EU. As for the introduction of maritime litigation jurisdiction in Korea and China, it analyzes the connective elements for confirmation of domestic maritime jurisdiction by Korea and foundational principles and litigant logos of maritime jurisdiction exercised by Korea, which are all from aspect of the domestic maritime jurisdiction and maritime jurisdiction involving foreign elements, introduces the domestic structure of maritime jurisdiction in China including legal jurisdiction, jurisdiction by order, exclusive jurisdiction and agreed jurisdiction, legal basis and legal system of the maritime jurisdiction involving foreign elements. At last, it conducts a summary of comparative analysis on maritime litigation jurisdiction between International Conventions and China, between European Union and China and between Korea and China. Chapter 4 Specific Solutions on Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction in Chinese Laws？？Rules of Jurisdictional Clauses of Bill of Lading and Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction on the Ship-owner？s Global Limitation Cases. This chapter, with reference to maritime litigation jurisdictional clauses of bill of lading, analyzes the characteristics of it in nomology, sets forth its effectiveness from the aspects of legal rules and formal condition and shows the comprehension and cognizance of America, Japan, Korea and China to it. In demonstration of maritime litigation jurisdiction on the ship-owner？s global limitation cases, it firstly demonstrates the legal meaning of maritime litigation jurisdiction on the ship-owner？s global limitation, maritime litigation jurisdiction on the ship-owner？s global limitation in pollution by ship and collision cases and the relationship of maritime litigation jurisdiction on the ship-owner？s global limitation and Forum Non Conveniens. Then, it analyzes the concept, origin and development, application, comment, and the judicial practice of Forum Non Conveniens in China. Chapter 5 Conclusions and Suggestions. In demonstration of conclusions, this chapter, with combination of the internal characteristics and developmental situation of maritime litigation jurisdiction, points out that the maritime litigation jurisdiction rules of China need further improvement to meet the new demands to maritime litigation jurisdiction. In demonstration of suggestions, this article advises that China should try their best to establish the rules of maritime litigation consistent with international conventions and customs and realize the uniform of maritime litigation jurisdiction through special and centralized jurisdiction to maritime litigation, respect of the agreed jurisdiction of the parties and establishment of the relative rules.Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction----------------------------------------------------------------1 1.1 Purpose of the Study---------------------------------------------------------------------1 1.2 Scope of the Study-----------------------------------------------------------------------3 1.3 Methods of the Study--------------------------------------------------------------------5 Chapter 2 General Theory of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction-----8 2.1 The Overview of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction--------------------------------- 8 2.1.1 The Definition of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction-------------------------------8 2.1.2 The Origin and Historical Development of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction-------------------------------------------------------10 2.1.3 The Jurisdictional Scope of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction------------------11 2.1.4 The Category and Legal Characteristics of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction-------------------------------------------------------16 2.2 Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction Involving Foreign Elements------------------- 27 2.2.1 Fact Basis of Performance of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction Involving Foreign Elements---------------------29 2.2.2 Legislative Authority of Performance of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction Involving Foreign Elements---------------------31 2.2.3 Reasons for Conflict of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction Involving Foreign Elements---------------------31 2.2.4 Principles and Ways of Solving the Conflict of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction Involving Foreign Elements---------------------33 Chapter 3 Comparative Analysis of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction---------------------------------------------37 3.1 Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction in International Conventions-------------------37 3.1.1 The Importance of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction in Procedural Justice---37 3.1.2 International Conventions concerning Legal Rules of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction--------------------------39 3.2 Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction in European Union------------------------------48 3.2.1 The Concept of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction in European Union-------- 48 3.2.2 Characteristics of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction in European Union------49 3.2.3 Legal Basis of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction in European Union----------51 3.3 Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction in Korea-------------------------------------------53 3.3.1 General Aspects of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction in Korea-----------------53 3.3.2 Legal Rules Concerning Domestic Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction in Korea-----------------------------------54 3.3.3 Legal Rules Concerning Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction Involving Foreign Elements in Korea-------------58 3.4 Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction in China-------------------------------------------62 3.4.1 Legal Rules Concerning Domestic Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction in China------------------------------------------------------------------------62 3.4.2 Legal Rules Concerning Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction Involving Foreign Elements in China----------------------------------------------------68 3.5 Summary of Comparative Analysis on Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction-------76 3.5.1 Comparative Analysis on Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction between International Conventions and China------------------------------------------76 3.5.2 Comparative Analysis on Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction between European Union and China----------------------------------------------------- 77 3.5.3 Comparative Analysis on Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction between Korea and China------------------------------------------------------------------79 Chapter 4 Specific Solutions on Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction in Chinese Laws------------------ 82 4.1 Rules of Jurisdiction Clauses of Bill of Lading-------------------------------------82 4.1.1 Analysis of Jurisdiction Clauses of Bill of Lading in Nomology-------------- 82 4.1.2 Analysis of Jurisdiction Clauses of Bill of Lading in Effectiveness-----------84 4.1.3 Attitude Concerning Jurisdiction Clauses of Bill of Lading of America------90 4.1.4 Standpoints Concerning Jurisdiction Clauses of Bill of Lading of Japan---- 93 4.1.5 Cognizance Concerning Jurisdiction Clauses of Bill of Lading of Korea----94 4.1.6 The Specific Solution on Jurisdiction Clauses of Bill of Lading in China---96 4.2 Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction on the Ship-owner？s Global Limitation Cases-----------------------------------------102 4.2.1 Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction on the Ship-owner？s Global Limitation---102 4.2.1.1 The Legal Meaning of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction on the Ship-owner？s Global Limitation------102 4.2.1.2 Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction on the Ship-owner？s Global Limitation in Pollution from Ship Cases-------------105 4.2.1.3 Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction on the Ship-owner？s Global Limitation in Collision Cases--------------------------106 4.2.1.4 Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction on the Ship-owner？s Global Limitation and Forum Non Conveniens-------------- 110 4.2.2 Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens--------------------------------------------- 111 4.2.2.1 The Concept of Forum Non Conveniens---------------------------------------111 4.2.2.2 The Origin and Development of Forum Non Conveniens-------------------112 4.2.2.3 The Application of Forum Non Conveniens-----------------------------------117 4.2.2.4 Comment and Analysis on Forum Non Conveniens------------------------- 128 4.2.2.5 The Judicial Practice of Forum Non Conveniens in China------------------137 Chapter 5 Conclusions and Suggestions-------------------------------------148 5.1 Conclusions---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 148 5.2 Suggestions-----------------------------------------------------------------------------150 5.2.1 Carrying out Special and Centralized Jurisdiction over Maritime Litigation------------------------------- 151 5.2.2 Respect Agreed Jurisdiction of Parties to Maritime Litigation---------------------------------------------------------152 5.2.3 Trying to Realize the Unification of Maritime Litigation Jurisdiction through Establishment of Rules and Regulations--------------------------------------153 References------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 156 Abstract in Korean------------------------------------------------------------------ 162 Appendices------------------------------------------------------------------------------164 Postscript-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20

mARC: Memory by Association and Reinforcement of Contexts

This paper introduces the memory by Association and Reinforcement of Contexts (mARC). mARC is a novel data modeling technology rooted in the second quantization formulation of quantum mechanics. It is an all-purpose incremental and unsupervised data storage and retrieval system which can be applied to all types of signal or data, structured or unstructured, textual or not. mARC can be applied to a wide range of information clas-sification and retrieval problems like e-Discovery or contextual navigation. It can also for-mulated in the artificial life framework a.k.a Conway "Game Of Life" Theory. In contrast to Conway approach, the objects evolve in a massively multidimensional space. In order to start evaluating the potential of mARC we have built a mARC-based Internet search en-gine demonstrator with contextual functionality. We compare the behavior of the mARC demonstrator with Google search both in terms of performance and relevance. In the study we find that the mARC search engine demonstrator outperforms Google search by an order of magnitude in response time while providing more relevant results for some classes of queries

Perspective Scaling and Trait Detection on Social Media Data

abstract: This research start utilizing an efficient sparse inverse covariance matrix (precision matrix) estimation technique to identify a set of highly correlated discriminative perspectives between radical and counter-radical groups. A ranking system has been developed that utilizes ranked perspectives to map Islamic organizations on a set of socio-cultural, political and behavioral scales based on their web site corpus. Simultaneously, a gold standard ranking of these organizations was created through domain experts and compute expert-to-expert agreements and present experimental results comparing the performance of the QUIC based scaling system to another baseline method for organizations. The QUIC based algorithm not only outperforms the baseline methods, but it is also the only system that consistently performs at area expert-level accuracies for all scales. Also, a multi-scale ideological model has been developed and it investigates the correlates of Islamic extremism in Indonesia, Nigeria and UK. This analysis demonstrate that violence does not correlate strongly with broad Muslim theological or sectarian orientations; it shows that religious diversity intolerance is the only consistent and statistically significant ideological correlate of Islamic extremism in these countries, alongside desire for political change in UK and Indonesia, and social change in Nigeria. Next, dynamic issues and communities tracking system based on NMF(Non-negative Matrix Factorization) co-clustering algorithm has been built to better understand the dynamics of virtual communities. The system used between Iran and Saudi Arabia to build and apply a multi-party agent-based model that can demonstrate the role of wedges and spoilers in a complex environment where coalitions are dynamic. Lastly, a visual intelligence platform for tracking the diffusion of online social movements has been developed called LookingGlass to track the geographical footprint, shifting positions and flows of individuals, topics and perspectives between groups. The algorithm utilize large amounts of text collected from a wide variety of organizations’ media outlets to discover their hotly debated topics, and their discriminative perspectives voiced by opposing camps organized into multiple scales. Discriminating perspectives is utilized to classify and map individual Tweeter’s message content to social movements based on the perspectives expressed in their tweets.Dissertation/ThesisDoctoral Dissertation Computer Science 201

Identifying Critical Knowledge For KM Implementation Readiness In PT. Petrokimia Gresik

Dewasa ini pengetahuan menjadi hal mendasar untuk kehidupan perusahaan, baik perusahaan nasional maupun internasional. Menilik pada beberapa penelitian, pengetahuan menjadi hal yang penting bagi perusahaan karena pengetahuan mengandung aset perusahaan yang tidak mudah untuk ditacitkan. Beberapa perusahaan mencoba untuk membangun sistem manajemen pengetahuan mereka sebaik mungkin. Salah satu kegiatan penting dalam sistem manajemen pengetahuan adalah dengan mengidentifikasi pengetahuan kritis yang muncul di perusahaan terkait. PT. Petrokimia Gresik memiliki divisi yang dinamakan Divisi KM (Knowledge Management). Ada 5 tahap penting yang menjadi dasar untuk kegiatan divisi ini. Salah satunya adalah memetakan pengetahuan kritis. Oleh karena itu, untuk menentukan pengetahuan kritis, aktivitas yang terjadi di perusahaan tersebut harus bisa diidentifikasi. Untuk mengetahui aktivitas yang ada, penulis melakukan beberapa wawancara dan brainstorming dengan para ahli dalam unit terkait. Setelah semua pengetahuan teridentifikasi, langkah berikutnya adalah melakukan penilaian terhadap pengetahuan tersebut dengan menggunakan beberapa kriteria terpilih. Dengan demikian semua pengetahuan kritis dapat divalidasi menggunakan OMAX. ========== Nowadays, knowledge becomes fundamental to organizational life, both national and international companies. Related to many studies, knowledge becomes important for company because knowledge contain an assest of company which is not easily to be captured. Many organization try to build the knowledge management system as well as the company can. One of the knowledge management system building activity is by identifying the critical knowledge appear in related company. PT. Petrokimia Gresik has a part of division called as Divisi KM (Knowledge Management). There are 5 important phases which became the basic for KM activity in PT. Petrokimia Gresik. One of the important ones is map the critical knowledge. Therefore, to determine the critical knowledge, the activity happens has to be identified. To capture the activity, author do some interview and brainstorming with the expert in the related unit focus. After all knowledge captured, the next step is assessment activity using some selected criteria. Thus all the critical knowledge ide ntified has to be validate using OMAX

Making Retail Supply Chains Sustainable: Upgrading Opportunities for Developing Country Suppliers under Voluntary Quality Standards

This paper examines the sustainability claims of private quality standards, voluntary adopted by supermarket to improve the quality of products in respect of food safety, and environmental and social sustainability. The concept of ‘sustainability’ is defined as the opportunity for upgrading by developing country suppliers in the retail supply chains. The paper reports of an explorative analysis on the perceived effects of 36 quality standards in the retail on upgrading. Data was collected through a survey of a wide variety of relevant media: websites, scientific articles and reports, policy reports, and online newspaper articles. The overall conclusion is that the majority of the 36 standards are perceived to facilitate trading opportunities for developing country producers, but only for those suppliers who can meet the criteria of quality standards. The study found interesting differences between various categories of standards. Standards initiated by NGOs and partnerships are perceived to offer better upgrading opportunities to suppliers than do standards initiated by (inter-) governmental authorities, by individual firms, or by business associations. Standards with an explicit social and social/environmental focus have a more positive influence on process and product upgrading in developing countries compared to voluntary food safety standards. Product-specific standards offer better upgrading opportunities than do generic quality standards