What's in a name?

A personal reflection on Live Ar

The Official Student Newspaper of UAS

UAS Answers: Everybody's got one... -- What's the Scoop UAS -- The Deadline for National and International Exchange Applications is Quickly Approaching -- That was a thing! -- What's the Scoop UAS: Why recycle? -- Just One Year -- The Apocalypse is Nigh -- What Happens in New Orleans -- Suddenly, College: Zero to Hero -- Cleaning out the pantry: Tortilla Soup -- Campus calenda

What's in a name?

An exploration of the use of autobiography in the work of Annie Sprinkle and Bobby Baker

What's in a name? The revealing use of noms de plume in women's correspondence to daily newspapers in Edwardian Scotland.

In August 1912, a female correspondent calling herself ‘Fair Play’ wrote to the Aberdeen Free Press to remonstrate at the militant methods used by the Women’s Social and Political Union (the WSPU). She explained that she had chosen to use a pen name rather than reveal her identity for fear of retribution from local suffragettes: “I should prefer to sign my own name to this letter, but having done so some years ago in a letter to a London paper, in which I pointed out the unreason of their violent conduct, I received such vulgarly abusive postcards from some of the suffragette ‘patriots’ and ‘martyrs’ that in these days of hatchet-throwing and petrol-burning I simply dare not do so”. Helen Tollie, a local WSPU member from Ballater, wrote immediately in response; “Dear lady, Fear not our hatchets or implements of war. They will not be directed against you. You are not important enough. If you were, they would find their way to you without your help.

What's in a Name?

Plenty. This paper analyzes two broad questions: Does your first name matter? And how did you get your first name anyway? Using data from the National Opinion Research Center’s (NORC's) General Social Survey, including access to respondent’s first names from the 1994 and 2002 surveys, we extract the important ``first name features'' (FNF), e.g. popularity, number of syllables, phonetic features, Scrabble score, `blackness’ (i.e. the fraction of people with that name who are black), etc ... We then explore whether these first name features are useful explanatory factors of an respondent's exogenous background factors (sex, race, parent's education, etc...) and lifetime outcomes (e.g. financial status, occupational prestige, perceived social class, education, happiness, and whether they became a parent before 25). We find that first name features on their own do have significant predictive power for a number of these lifetime outcomes, even after controlling for a myriad of exogenous background factors. We find evidence that first name features are independent predictors of lifetime outcomes that are likely related to labor productivity such as education, happiness and early fertility. Importantly, however, we also find evidence based on the differential impacts of gender and race on the blackness of a name and its popularity that suggest that discrimination may also be a factor.Names, Identity, Discrimination

Four Essentials for Evaluation

GEO created this guide to help grantmakers get to the next level in their evaluation efforts. The target audience is champions and supporters of evaluation who want to embed these practices more deeply in the work of their organizations.The term "evaluation" can refer to a lot of different activities, including data collection, information gathering and research about grantmaker-supported activities. GEO's emphasis, however, is on "evaluation for learning."Evaluation is about more than ensuring that grantees are doing what they promise, or that a specific program area at a foundation is meeting its goals. Rather, it's about advancing knowledge and understanding among grantmakers, their grantees and their partners about what's working, what's not and how to improve their performance over time.Using evaluation in this way requires grantmakers to transform themselves into learning organizations. Beyond getting smarter about specific evaluation methods and approaches, this means adopting a continuous process, a culture and a commitment to support the capacity of people to see patterns and insights that can lead to ever-improving results

What's in a Name?

Plenty. This paper analyzes two broad questions: Does your first name matter? And how did you get your first name anyway? Using data from the National Opinion Research Center's (NORC's) General Social Survey, including access to respondent's first names from the 1994 and 2002 surveys, we extract the important ``first name features'' (FNF), e.g. popularity, number of syllables, phonetic features, Scrabble score, `blackness' (i.e. the fraction of people with that name who are black), etc ... We then explore whether these first name features are useful explanatory factors of an respondent's exogenous background factors (sex, race, parent's education, etc...) and lifetime outcomes (e.g. financial status, education, occupational prestige, perceived social class, and whether they became a parent before 25). We find that first name features on their own do have significant predictive power for a number of these lifetime outcomes, even after controlling for a myriad of exogenous background factors. We find evidence that first name features are independent predictors of lifetime outcomes that are likely related to labor productivity such as education, happiness and early fertility. Importantly, however, we also find evidence based on the differential impacts of gender and race on the blackness of a name and its popularity that suggest that discrimination may also be a factor

What's in a Message?

8 pagesInternational audienceIn this paper we present the first step in a larger series of experiments for the induction of predicate/ argument structures. The structures that we are inducing are very similar to the conceptual structures that are used in Frame Semantics (such as FrameNet). Those structures are called messages and they were previously used in the context of a multi-document summarization system of evolving events. The series of experiments that we are proposing are essentially composed from two stages. In the first stage we are trying to extract a representative vocabulary of words. This vocabulary is later used in the second stage, during which we apply to it various clustering approaches in order to identify the clusters of predicates and arguments—or frames and semantic roles, to use the jargon of Frame Semantics. This paper presents in detail and evaluates the first stage