Bandwidth control of forbidden transmission gaps in compound structures with subwavelength slits

Phase resonances in transmission compound structures with subwavelength slits produce sharp dips in the transmission response. For all equal slits, the wavelengths of these sharp transmission minima can be varied by changing the width or the length of all the slits. In this paper we show that the width of the dip, i.e., the frequency range of minimum transmittance, can be controlled by making at least one slit different from the rest within a compound unit cell. In particular, we investigate the effect that a change in the dielectric filling, or in the length of a single slit produces in the transmission response. We also analyze the scan angle behavior of these structures by means of band diagrams, and compare them with previous results for all-equal slit structures.Comment: 16 pages, 5 figures, submitted to Phys. Rev.

Stand By Me: The Effects of a Police Anti-Bullying Presentation on South Korean High School Students\u27 Attitudes About Bullying and Willingness to Intervene

Upon assuming the presidency of the Republic of Korea in 2013, Park Geun-hye announced her administration’s priority to address the country’s “Four Social Evils”—sexual violence, domestic violence, school bullying, and unsafe food products. As part of this initiative, the ROK national government urged police officers to implement anti-bullying campaigns and curb school violence. This study examined the effects of Stand By Me: Bullying Prevention and Bystander Empowerment, an anti-bullying presentation conducted by a ROK police officer for an audience of South Korean high school students in spring 2016. The study employed a nonequivalent groups design with a designated treatment group and comparison group, but was limited to a posttest survey only. The focus of the study was whether a police-administered bullying prevention presentation had an effect on Korean high school students’ attitudes toward bullying and their willingness to intervene to stop bullying, and was examined using independent-samples t tests and Mann-Whitney U tests. The relationship between moral approval of bullying and bystander intervention willingness was also examined, as well as the relationships between other key variables and bystander intervention willingness. These relationships were examined via regression analysis. The study yielded statistically significant findings indicating that students who were administered the Stand By Me presentation were less likely to support bullying and more likely to be willing to intervene in bullying incidents compared to students who did not participate in the presentation. Moral approval of bullying had only a minor impact on bystander intervention willingness, whereas perceived peer support, self-esteem, and informal social control had a greater influence on students’ inclination to intervene. Due to the limited scope of this project, it is recommended that future studies and evaluations conducted on Stand By Me and other anti-bullying programs in South Korea utilize more rigorous research designs that incorporate pretesting and random assignment. Nevertheless, given the paucity of empirical research on police anti-bullying initiatives in the ROK, one of the overarching goals of this study is to encourage further dialogue on preventing bullying, one of the endemic ‘social evils’ plaguing today’s youth, in South Korea and around the world, and the appropriate role of law enforcement in this arena

Cardinal\u27s Blues: Implementation of a School-based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Program for Jefferson County Public Schools in Louisville, Kentucky

With the increasing rate of adolescent depression and anxiety1 2, developing mental health interventions is necessary. Many adolescents’ times spent in schools increased compared to 20 years ago5, which makes school-based intervention programs suitable for reaching adolescent population effectively. Though there are numerous treatment providers available in Jefferson County, Kentucky, the school-based prevention programs addressing adolescent’s negative mental health outcomes have never been implemented. The Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development developed a program called the Blues Program24. The Blues Program provides an adapted version of group Cognitive Behavioral Therapy sessions to train and educate adolescents coping skills and cognitive restructuring24. With weekly activities dedicated to train youth population to prepare for emotionally stressful events that they are experiencing currently as well as for future, Cardinal’s Blues program will use the strategy that is based on the evidence-based program. Cardinal’s Blues Program is based on the Blues Program developed according to the Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF)’s recommendation. The Specific Aims of the program are: 1. Establish community partnerships for a Community Advisory Board and necessary referral systems; 2. Train and certify a diverse and culturally competent facilitators; 3. Deliver the program to various schools within the Jefferson County Public Schools district; 4. Evaluate the process and outcome of the program on the rate of adolescent depressive symptoms and depression in Louisville, Kentucky

Defeasible Decisions: What the Proposal Is and Isn\u27t

In two recent papers, I have proposed a description of decision analysis that differs from the Bayesian picture painted by Savage, Jeffrey and other classic authors. Response to this view have been either overly enthusiastic or unduly pessimistic. In this paper I try to place the idea in its proper place, which must be somewhere in between. Looking at decision analysis as defeasible reasoning produces a framework in which planning and decision theory can be integrated, but work on the details has barely begun. It also produces a framework in which the meta-decision regress can be stopped in a reasonable way, but it does not allow us to ignore meta-level decisions. The heuristics for producing arguments that I have presented are only supposed to be suggestive; but they are not open to the egregious errors about which some have worried. And though the idea is familiar to those who have studied heuristic search, it is somewhat richer because the control of dialectic is more interesting than the deepening of the search

Ampliative Inference, Computation, and Dialectic

There are three theses here: • Non-computationally conceived inference merely expands notation. This includes induction as well as deduction, and thus both deserve the adjective non-ampliative. Deriving entailments merely expands shorthand. All of the familiar formalisms for reasoning do just this. • There now exist examples of formalism for reasoning that do something else. They are deliberative, and to say in what way they are deliberative requires reference to the process through which they compute their entailments. • The original ampliative/non-ampliative terminology best survives as referring to this new distinction. Viewed formally, all other attempted distinctions either presume deduction to be privileged, or else fail to separate inference that actually tells us something new from inference that simple rehashes what has already been represented

Hart\u27s Critics on Defeasible Concepts and Ascriptivism

Hart\u27s Ascription of Responsibility and Rights is where we find perhaps the first clear pronouncement of defeasibility and the technical introduction of the term. The paper has been criticised, disavowed, and never quite fully redeemed. Its lurid history is now being used as an excuse for dismissing the importance of defeasibility. Quite to the contrary, Hart\u27s introduction of defeasibility has uniformly been regarded as the most agreeable part of the paper. The critics\u27 wish that defeasibility could be better expounded along the lines of a Wittgensteinian game-theoretic semantics has largely been fulfilled. Even the most contentious part of the paper, Hart\u27s claim that the ascription of acts implies responsibility, is not as mistaken as some have taken it to be. The paper remains a paragon of clarity in the important and active scholarly area that crosses legal reasoning, language, and logic

Defeat Among Arguments II

This technical report consists of three chapters from a larger manuscript that was a finalist in the 1988 Journal of Philosophy Johnsonian competition. These three chapters together represent a revised version of a paper that has been circulating under the title Defeat Among Arguments II since January 1988. Defeat Among Arguments updates my Computational Intelligence paper of 1987, which represented a novel way of formalizing defeasible reasoning, based on resolving competing arguments. The Yale Shooting Problem updates my Cognitive Science paper of 1987, and attempts a rebuttal of Hanks and McDermott\u27s evaluation in their 1987 Artificial Intelligence paper. The last section, Conventionalism and Non-Monotonicity, is a brief consideration of Touretzky, Thomason, and Horty\u27s Clash of Intuitions, and the prospects for choosing among languages for representing defeasible knowledge