Investigation of the ionospheric Faraday rotation for use in orbit corrections

The possibility of mapping the Faraday factors on a worldwide basis was examined as a simple method of representing the conversion factors for any possible user. However, this does not seem feasible. The complex relationship between the true magnetic coordinates and the geographic latitude, longitude, and azimuth angles eliminates the possibility of setting up some simple tables that would yield worldwide results of sufficient accuracy. Tabular results for specific stations can easily be produced or could be represented in graphic form

Is Algorithmic Affirmative Action Legal?

This Article is the first to comprehensively explore whether algorithmic affirmative action is lawful. It concludes that both statutory and constitutional antidiscrimination law leave room for race-aware affirmative action in the design of fair algorithms. Along the way, the Article recommends some clarifications of current doctrine and proposes the pursuit of formally race-neutral methods to achieve the admittedly race-conscious goals of algorithmic affirmative action. The Article proceeds as follows. Part I introduces algorithmic affirmative action. It begins with a brief review of the bias problem in machine learning and then identifies multiple design options for algorithmic fairness. These designs are presented at a theoretical level, rather than in formal mathematical detail. It also highlights some difficult truths that stakeholders, jurists, and legal scholars must understand about accuracy and fairness trade-offs inherent in fairness solutions. Part II turns to the legality of algorithmic affirmative action, beginning with the statutory challenge under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Part II argues that voluntary algorithmic affirmative action ought to survive a disparate treatment challenge under Ricci and under the antirace-norming provision of Title VII. Finally, Part III considers the constitutional challenge to algorithmic affirmative action by state actors. It concludes that at least some forms of algorithmic affirmative action, to the extent they are racial classifications at all, ought to survive strict scrutiny as narrowly tailored solutions designed to mitigate the effects of past discrimination

The Telltale Sign of Discrimination: Probabilities, Information Asymmetries, and the Systemic Disparate Treatment Theory

The systemic disparate treatment theory of employment discrimination is in disarray. Originally formulated in United States v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the systemic disparate treatment theory provides plaintiffs with a method for creating an inference of unlawful discriminatory intent if plaintiffs can first present sufficient statistical evidence establishing that the employer was engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination. While the Court and scholars have recently given substantial attention to the disparate impact theory, they have not adequately analyzed the contours of the systemic disparate treatment theory. For example, there are currently disputes about whether the systemic disparate treatment theory can be utilized by plaintiffs in (1) ADEA cases, (2) ADA cases, (3) hostile work environment cases, and (4) private individual (non-class) discrimination cases brought under any of the antidiscrimination statutes. The development of a coherent approach to systemic disparate treatment law is becoming increasingly important. Since 2006, the EEOC has made pursuit of its Systemic Initiative a top priority in its enforcement strategy. Thus, difficult questions about the application of the systemic disparate treatment theory will continue to surface. This Article takes a first step toward bringing order to the systemic disparate treatment theory. Drawing upon economic models of optimal allocation of burdens of proof in civil litigation and an application of Bayesian probability analysis, this Article argues that the proper extent of the systemic disparate treatment theory depends on three critical considerations: (1) the background prevalence (or prior probability) of the type of discrimination alleged; (2) the relative strength of the evidentiary signal provided by the proffered statistical evidence; and (3) the parties\u27 relative access to evidence on the element of discriminatory intent. Applying the principles developed here, this Article concludes that the Teamsters systemic disparate treatment theory should be available as a method of proof for plaintiffs in ADEA, ADA, and individual (non-class) cases, but not in hostile work environment cases

Unit organization of the topic the international relations of the American people.

Thesis (Ed.M.)--Boston Universit

The Telltale Sign of Discrimination: Probabilities, Information Asymmetries, and the Systemic Disparate Treatment Theory

The systemic disparate treatment theory of employment discrimination is in disarray. Originally formulated in United States v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the systemic disparate treatment theory provides plaintiffs with a method for creating an inference of unlawful discriminatory intent if plaintiffs can first present sufficient statistical evidence establishing that the employer was engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination. While the Court and scholars have recently given substantial attention to the disparate impact theory, they have not adequately analyzed the contours of the systemic disparate treatment theory. For example, there are currently disputes about whether the systemic disparate treatment theory can be utilized by plaintiffs in (1) ADEA cases, (2) ADA cases, (3) hostile work environment cases, and (4) private individual (non-class) discrimination cases brought under any of the antidiscrimination statutes. The development of a coherent approach to systemic disparate treatment law is becoming increasingly important. Since 2006, the EEOC has made pursuit of its Systemic Initiative a top priority in its enforcement strategy. Thus, difficult questions about the application of the systemic disparate treatment theory will continue to surface. This Article takes a first step toward bringing order to the systemic disparate treatment theory. Drawing upon economic models of optimal allocation of burdens of proof in civil litigation and an application of Bayesian probability analysis, this Article argues that the proper extent of the systemic disparate treatment theory depends on three critical considerations: (1) the background prevalence (or prior probability) of the type of discrimination alleged; (2) the relative strength of the evidentiary signal provided by the proffered statistical evidence; and (3) the parties\u27 relative access to evidence on the element of discriminatory intent. Applying the principles developed here, this Article concludes that the Teamsters systemic disparate treatment theory should be available as a method of proof for plaintiffs in ADEA, ADA, and individual (non-class) cases, but not in hostile work environment cases

Ionospheric range-rate effects in satellite-to-satellite tracking

Investigation of ionospheric range and range-rate corrections in satellite-to-satellite tracking were investigated. Major problems were cited and the magnitude of errors that have to be considered for communications between satellites and related experiments was defined. The results point to the need of using a sophisticated modeling approach incorporating daily solar data, and where possible actual ionospheric measurements as update information, as a simple median model cannot possibly account for the complex interaction of the many variables. The findings provide a basis from which the residual errors can be estimated after ionospheric modeling is incorporated in the reduction. Simulations were performed for satellites at various heights: Apollo, Geos, and Nimbus tracked by ATS-6; and in two different geometric configurations: coplanar and perpendicular orbits

Explanation of the computer listings of Faraday factors for INTASAT users

Using a simplified form of the Appleton-Hartree formula for the phase refractive index, a relationship was obtained between the Faraday rotation angle along the angular path and the total electron content along the vertical path, intersecting the angular at the height of maximum electron density. Using the second mean value theorem of integration, the function B cosine theta second chi was removed from under the integral sign and replaced by a 'mean' value. The mean value factors were printed on the computer listing for 39 stations receiving signals from the INTASAT satellite during the specified time period. The data is presented by station and date. Graphs are included to demonstrate the variation of the Faraday factor with local time and season, with magnetic latitude, elevation and azimuth angles. Other topics discussed include a description of the bent ionospheric model, the earth's magnetic field model, and the sample computer listing