What Makes it Difficult to Understand a Scientific Literature?

In the artificial intelligence area, one of the ultimate goals is to make computers understand human language and offer assistance. In order to achieve this ideal, researchers of computer science have put forward a lot of models and algorithms attempting at enabling the machine to analyze and process human natural language on different levels of semantics. Although recent progress in this field offers much hope, we still have to ask whether current research can provide assistance that people really desire in reading and comprehension. To this end, we conducted a reading comprehension test on two scientific papers which are written in different styles. We use the semantic link models to analyze the understanding obstacles that people will face in the process of reading and figure out what makes it difficult for human to understand a scientific literature. Through such analysis, we summarized some characteristics and problems which are reflected by people with different levels of knowledge on the comprehension of difficult science and technology literature, which can be modeled in semantic link network. We believe that these characteristics and problems will help us re-examine the existing machine models and are helpful in the designing of new one.Comment: Accepted by SKG201

Reading in the Disciplines: The Challenges of Adolescent Literacy

A companion report to Carnegie's Time to Act, focuses on the specific skills and literacy support needed for reading in academic subject areas in higher grades. Outlines strategies for teaching content knowledge and reading strategies together

The Aesthetics of Theory Selection and the Logics of Art

Philosophers of science discuss whether theory selection depends on aesthetic judgments or criteria, and whether these putatively aesthetic features are genuinely extra-epistemic. As examples, judgments involving criteria such as simplicity and symmetry are often cited. However, other theory selection criteria, such as fecundity, coherence, internal consistency, and fertility, more closely match those criteria used in art contexts and by scholars working in aesthetics. Paying closer attention to the way these criteria are used in art contexts allows us to understand some evaluative and developmental practices in scientific theory selection as genuinely aesthetic, enlarging the scope of the goals of science

English for Students of Philology (Англійська мова для студентів-філологів)

Методичні рекомендації містять матеріал, необхідний для проведення практичних занять та організації самостійної роботи з англійської мови студентів-магістрантів ННІ філології та журналістики. Тексти, вправи, тести та рекомендації методичного характеру подані у послідовності, окресленої Програмою (затвердженою у 2013 році), для виконання чотирьох основних змістовних модулів. Матеріал розрахований на поглиблення фахових спеціальних та загальних комунікативних навичок студентів у процесі професійно спрямованого вивчення англійської мови. Для денної та заочної форм навчання

Economics, Biology, and Culture: Hodgson on History

This book addresses what the author claims, with considerable justification, to be the foremost challenge confronting the social and behavioral sciences today: the problem of historical specificity. Hodgson poses the question by asking whether we need different theories to understand social and economic behavior in different societies at different stages of their development. He answers the question in the affirmative, and criticizes the economics profession for suggesting that there is one universal model or theory equally suited to all economies and societies at all times. He faults the profession further for no longer worrying much or conducting serious debate about this issue, a development he attributes to the eclipse and eventual demise of institutionalism and historical economics in England, Germany, and the United States

Creativity and Culture in Copyright Theory

Creativity is universally agreed to be a good that copyright law should seek to promote, yet copyright scholarship and policymaking have proceeded largely on the basis of assumptions about what it actually is. When asked to discuss the source of their inspiration, individual artists describe a process that is intrinsically ineffable. Rights theorists of all varieties have generally subscribed to this understanding, describing creativity in terms of an individual liberty whose form remains largely unspecified. Economic theorists of copyright work from the opposite end of the creative process, seeking to divine the optimal rules for promoting creativity by measuring its marketable byproducts. But these theorists offer no particular reason to think that marketable byproducts are either an appropriate proxy or an effective stimulus for creativity (as opposed to production), and more typically refuse to engage the question. The upshot is that the more we talk about creativity, the more it disappears from view. At the same time, the mainstream of intellectual property scholarship has persistently overlooked a broad array of social science methodologies that provide both descriptive tools for constructing ethnographies of creative processes and theoretical tools for modeling them

The future of human nature: a symposium on the promises and challenges of the revolutions in genomics and computer science, April 10, 11, and 12, 2003

This repository item contains a single issue of the Pardee Conference Series, a publication series that began publishing in 2006 by the Boston University Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future. This was the Center's Symposium on the Promises and Challenges of the Revolutions in Genomics and Computer Science took place during April 10, 11, and 12, 2003. Co-organized by Charles DeLisi and Kenneth Lewes; sponsored by Boston University, the Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future.This conference focused on scientific and technological advances in genetics, computer science, and their convergence during the next 35 to 250 years. In particular, it focused on directed evolution, the futures it allows, the shape of society in those futures, and the robustness of human nature against technological change at the level of individuals, groups, and societies. It is taken as a premise that biotechnology and computer science will mature and will reinforce one another. During the period of interest, human cloning, germ-line genetic engineering, and an array of reproductive technologies will become feasible and safe. Early in this period, we can reasonably expect the processing power of a laptop computer to exceed the collective processing power of every human brain on the planet; later in the period human/machine interfaces will begin to emerge. Whether such technologies will take hold is not known. But if they do, human evolution is likely to proceed at a greatly accelerated rate; human nature as we know it may change markedly, if it does not disappear altogether, and new intelligent species may well be created

Translation theory and practice in the Abbasid era

textThis paper explores the theoretical approaches to translation and the dynamics of language politics during the ʻAbbāsid-era translation movement through the lens of three prominent figures of the ʿAbbāsid era, Ḥunayn ibn Isʹhāq, Mattā bin Yūnus and al-Jāḥiẓ. In conversation with Emily Apter's concept of untranslatability and current concerns about translation into and out of Arabic, this paper examines the cultural implications of claims to translatability and untranslatability. The ʿAbbāsid era presents a particularly useful comparison to the present because rather than being marginal, Arabic was the language of an expanding empire, and also because the ʿAbbāsid era was a kind of 'Golden Age' of translation. The ʿAbbāsid era was an enormously productive period, with translators rendering nearly the entirely corpus of available Greek manuscripts into Arabic. This outpouring of translation activity not only provided an influx of new ideas but provoked a wide-ranging debate among the literati of the time about the possibilities and problems of translation. Examining the figures of al-Jāḥiẓ, Mattā bin Yūnus and Ḥunayn ibn Is'hāq provides a window into this theoretical conversation. Al-Jāḥiẓ, as one of the foremost authorities on Arabic rhetoric, gave voice to more than one view of translation, in part defining Arabic writing as too unique to be translated while elsewhere claiming translations from other languages as the inheritance of the Arab culture. The Aristotelian translator Mattā bin Yūnus provides an example of backlash against translation in which foreign ideas were seen as a threat to Arab identity. Ḥunayn ibn Is'hāq, one of most highly regarded translators of his day, reveals a pragmatic approach to translation which integrated Greek works into Arab society. These three figures reorient the poles of translatability and untranslatability, revealing the potential of both to strengthen hegemony, and show the positive and negative aspects of an Arabocentric and Islamocentric universalism.Middle Eastern Studie