1,722,051 research outputs found
The Decalogue Society of Lawyers -- 1966-69 -- Correspondence, Individual -- letter, 1966-05-10
No full textLetter from Levin, Michael to Sabin, Albert B. dated 1966-05-10.Sabin Collection Fair Use Policy</a
The Decalogue Society of Lawyers -- 1966-69 -- Correspondence, Individual -- letter, 1966-05-02
No full textLetter from Levin, Michael to Sabin, Albert B. dated 1966-05-02.Sabin Collection Fair Use Policy</a
Correspondence
Full text linkExchange between Shane and Levin regarding Levin's review of Feminism Unmodified in Constitutional Commentary 5.1; appears in the But cf. ... editorial section.Shane, Peter M.; Levin, Michael. (1988). Correspondence. Retrieved from the University Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/170690
The collective intelligence of evolution and development
No full textCollective intelligence and individual intelligence are usually considered to be fundamentally different. Individual intelligence is uncontroversial. It occurs in organisms with special neural machinery, evolved by natural selection to enable cognitive and learning functions that serve the fitness benefit of the organism, and then trained through lifetime experience to maximise individual rewards. Whilst the mechanisms of individual intelligence are not fully understood, good models exist for many aspects of individual cognition and learning. Collective intelligence, in contrast, is a much more ambiguous idea. What exactly constitutes collective intelligence is often vague, and the mechanisms that might enable it are frequently domain-specific. These cannot be mechanisms selected specifically for the purpose of collective intelligence because collectives are not (except in special circumstances) evolutionary units, and it is not clear that collectives can learn the way individual intelligences do since they are not a singular locus of rewards and benefits. Here, we use examples from evolution and developmental morphogenesis to argue that these apparent distinctions are not as categorical as they appear. Breaking down such distinctions enables us to borrow from and expand existing models of individual cognition and learning as a framework for collective intelligence, in particular connectionist models familiar in the context of neural networks. We discuss how specific features of these models inform the necessary and sufficient conditions for collective intelligence, and identify current knowledge gaps as opportunities for future research.<br/
Meningococcal infections
No full textBackgroundThe gram-negative diplococcus Neisseria meningitides is a major infectious cause of childhood death in developed countries. The mortality rate remains around 10%; however, in some specialist centers, it has decreased to less than 5%.1 Only meningitis is present in 30-50% of cases of invasive meningococcal disease, whereas 7-10% of cases have only features of septicemia, and 40% have meningitis with septicemia. The clinical difference between septicemia and meningitis is important because patients who present with shock are treated differently than patients who present primarily with increased intracranial pressure (ICP).<br/
Design for an individual: connectionist approaches to the evolutionary transitions in individuality
No full textThe truly surprising thing about evolution is not how it makes individuals better adapted to their environment, but how it makes individuals. All individuals are made of parts that used to be individuals themselves, e.g., multicellular organisms from unicellular organisms. In such evolutionary transitions in individuality, the organised structure of relationships between component parts causes them to work together, creating a new organismic entity and a new evolutionary unit on which selection can act. However, the principles of these transitions remain poorly understood. In particular, the process of transition must be explained by “bottom-up” selection, i.e., on the existing lower-level evolutionary units, without presupposing the higher-level evolutionary unit we are trying to explain. In this hypothesis and theory manuscript we address the conditions for evolutionary transitions in individuality by exploiting adaptive principles already known in learning systems. Connectionist learning models, well-studied in neural networks, demonstrate how networks of organised functional relationships between components, sufficient to exhibit information integration and collective action, can be produced via fully-distributed and unsupervised learning principles, i.e., without centralised control or an external teacher. Evolutionary connectionism translates these distributed learning principles into the domain of natural selection, and suggests how relationships among evolutionary units could become adaptively organised by selection from below without presupposing genetic relatedness or selection on collectives. In this manuscript, we address how connectionist models with a particular interaction structure might explain transitions in individuality. We explore the relationship between the interaction structures necessary for (a) evolutionary individuality (where the evolution of the whole is a non-decomposable function of the evolution of the parts), (b) organismic individuality (where the development and behaviour of the whole is a non-decomposable function of the behaviour of component parts) and (c) non-linearly separable functions, familiar in connectionist models (where the output of the network is a non-decomposable function of the inputs). Specifically, we hypothesise that the conditions necessary to evolve a new level of individuality are described by the conditions necessary to learn non-decomposable functions of this type (or deep model induction) familiar in connectionist models of cognition and learning.<br/
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
- …
