Flaws in agist arguments

نویسندگان

چکیده

برای دانلود باید عضویت طلایی داشته باشید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

3 Serious Flaws in

Understanding the effect of a heuristic on the time complexity of the well-known A∗ search algorithm has been a subject of a large research body in AI. Among those researches is Korf et al.’s analysis (Korf & Reid, 1998; Korf et al., 2001; Korf, 2000a; Korf, 2000b), which concluded that the effect of a heuristic is to reduce the effective depth rather than effective branching factor. Since this...

متن کامل

Design flaws in EuroSCORE II.

We recently read with great interest and anticipation the development of the EuroSCORE II. However, we have methodological concerns relating to how EuroSCORE II was developed and evaluated [1] and subsequent comments made in an editorial by the authors responding to recent criticisms [2]. We focus on the strategy and study design used to derive and evaluate the model. The authors randomly split...

متن کامل

Flaws in the Efficiency Gap

Gerrymandering is returning to the Supreme Court. For the first time in three decades, a federal court invalidated redistricting legislation on the grounds that it constituted a partisan gerrymander in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. That court relied, in part, on a new tool—the efficiency gap—which some have touted as the means to “end gerrymandering once and for all.” We evaluate this ...

متن کامل

Diagonal arguments and fixed points

‎A universal schema for diagonalization was popularized by N.S‎. ‎Yanofsky (2003)‎, ‎based on a pioneering work of F.W‎. ‎Lawvere (1969)‎, ‎in which the existence of a (diagonolized-out and contradictory) object implies the existence of a fixed-point for a certain function‎. ‎It was shown that many self-referential paradoxes and diagonally proved theorems can fit in that schema‎. ‎Here‎, ‎we fi...

متن کامل

Real Arguments Are Approximate Arguments

There are a number of frameworks for modelling argumentation in logic. They incorporate a formal representation of individual arguments and techniques for comparing conflicting arguments. A common assumption for logic-based argumentation is that an argument is a pair 〈Φ, α〉 where Φ is minimal subset of the knowledgebase such that Φ is consistent and Φ entails the claim α. However, real argument...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

ژورنال

عنوان ژورنال: BMJ

سال: 1995

ISSN: 0959-8138,1468-5833

DOI: 10.1136/bmj.311.7007.752a