Toshio Fukuda, Go Iritani, Fumihito Arai, Koji Yamada
In this research, we address the organization of group behavior on decentralized autonomous robotic systems. Collective group behavior is exhibited in the natural world, such as by ants and fish, in teamwork in sports and by the human society. Therefore, research on group behavior of decentralized autonomous robotic systems can be regarded as one the research fields of Artificial Life. Decentralized autonomous robotic systems refer to multiple robotic systems including many autonomous robots, such as the Cellular Robotic System (CEBOT). The CEBOT, which has been studied by the authors, consists of a number of robotic units called cells. In research on the CEBOT, it is necessary to evolve a cooperative group behavior effectively in the system, since a well-organized group behavior is required to carry out given tasks efficiently and influences its performance ability. In order to organize the behavior in a dynamic environment, we proposed a concept of the self-recognition for the decision making of the behavior in a robotic group. In addition to the proposed concept, this paper will show a construction mechanism of group behavior using the character of the attractor. Based on this idea, we present the behavioral evolution of a group robotic system.
There had been well known claims of unconditionally secure quantum protocols for bit commitment. However, we, and independently Mayers, showed that all proposed quantum bit commitment schemes are, in principle, insecure because the sender, Alice, can almost always cheat successfully by using an Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) type of attack and delaying her measurements. One might wonder if secure quantum bit commitment protocols exist at all. We answer this question by showing that the same type of attack by Alice will, in principle, break any bit commitment scheme. The cheating strategy generally requires a quantum computer. We emphasize the generality of this ``no-go theorem'': Unconditionally secure bit commitment schemes based on quantum mechanics---fully quantum, classical or quantum but with measurements---are all ruled out by this result. Since bit commitment is a useful primitive for building up more sophisticated protocols such as zero-knowledge proofs, our results cast very serious doubt on the security of quantum cryptography in the so-called ``post-cold-war'' applications. We also show that ideal quantum coin tossing is impossible because of the EPR attack. This no-go theorem for ideal quantum coin tossing may help to shed some lights on the possibility of non-ideal protocols.
Robin Boadway, Isao Horiba, Raghbendra Jha, Boadway, Robin · 6 authors
It has realized since Pigou (1947) that if public goods are financed by distortionary taxation, the marginal social cost of providing the public good will exceed the actual resource cost by the marginal deadweight cost of taxation.
We present a 4-move zero-knowledge proof system [21] for any NP language L, which allows showing that x 2 L with error probability less than 2 \\Gammak using communication corresponding to O(jxj c )+O(k) bit commitments, where c is a constant depending only on L. We also present a 4-move perfect zero knowledge interactive argument for any NP-language L. On input x 2 L, the communication complexity is O(jxj c ) \\Delta max(k; l) bits, where l is the security parameter for the prover 1 . The protocols can be based on any bit commitment scheme with a particular set of properties. We suggest efficient implementations based on discrete logarithms or factoring. As a function of the security parameters, our protocols have the smallest known asymptotic communication complexity among general proofs or arguments for NP. Moreover, the constants involved are small enough for the protocols to be practical in a realistic situation: our protocols allows proving/arguing satisfiability of a Boo...
The communication complexity of zero-knowledge proof systems is improved. Let C be a Boolean circuit of size n. Previous zero-knowledge proof systems for the satisfiability of C require the use of Omega (kn) bit commitments in order to achieve a probability of undetected cheating not greater than 2/sup -k/. In the case k=n, the communication complexity of these protocols is therefore Omega (n/sup 2/) bit commitments. A zero-knowledge proof is given for achieving the same goal with only O(n/sup m/+k square root n/sup m/) bit commitments, where m=1+ epsilon /sub n/ and epsilon /sub n/ goes to zero as n goes to infinity. In the case k=n, this is O(n square root n/sup m/). Moreover, only O(k) commitments need ever be opened, which is interesting if committing to a bit is significantly less expensive than opening a commitment.>
The self-organizing diagnosis has been studied by applying the idea of autonomous and decentralized systems extracted from the concept of immune network. The model implements network-level recognition by connecting information from local recognition units by dynamical evaluation chain. The model has been further elaborated for engineering concerns of identifying not only sensor faults but process faults. The sensor faults will be identied by evaluating reliability of data from sensor, while the process faults will be identied by evaluating that of constraints that must be satised among these data. We have demonstrated that the extended sensor network will work against both sensor faults and process faults by an illustrative example.
ConclusionsIn Spring, negligence again presents itself as the avenue through which judges reform private law.The emphasis throughout was on negligence, although the speeches of Lords Woolf and Slynn demonstrate that contract could have provided a remedy.It is somewhat surprising that the contractual analysis did not dominate the speeches, especially since Scally indicates that the contractual analysis should be preferred in cases involving harm arising from e m p l ~y m e n t .~~ Yet only Lord Woolf held that the 'primary source of any liability is contractual rather than tortious,' since the relationship with the defendants arose from the previous engagement;55 the other Law Lords did not address the point.We might also ask what would have happened if the plaintiff had brought the action in defamation.Would their Lordships have found a remedy by reforming the law of defamation?For example, would they have held that qualified privilege should not be available to employers or, if available, it should be rebuttable by proof of carelessness rather than malice?Certainly, Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspaperss6 suggests that the House of Lords is willing to take a fresh look at the rules of defamation where political values are at stake; would it do so where more personal or commercial values are at stake?It seems doubtfuls7; perhaps the employer's qualified privilege has stood too long in a tort 'beyond the redemption of the courts'58 for the judiciary to re-examine it.59And perhaps the return of a more liberal view of negligence makes it unnecessary. Agitating for Part-Time Workers' Rights Charlotte Villiers and Fidelma White"In 1994, progress was made for part-timers in the pursuit of their rights at work.In Equal Opportunities Commission v Secretary of State for Employment,' the House of Lords, having recognised the standing of the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC), granted a declaration that provisions of the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978 (EPCA) indirectly discriminate against women and therefore are incompatible with European Community law.This involved reversing the decisions of the Divisional Court and the Court of Appeal.This case is significant for a number of reasons.First, while the case recognises the need to protect part-time workers, the EOC was successful because it was held ~ 54 supra n 48, at pp 302-304 (per Lord Bridge).55 supra n 1, at p 390. Cf South Pacific Manufacturing Co Lid v New Zealand Security Consultants & Investigations Ltd, supra n 18, at p 297 (per Cooke P). 56 [1993] AC 534.57 But see Lord Woolf, supra n 1, at p 400: 'it by no means follows that so far as references are concerned the same view should be taken of public policy as was taken when Whiteley v A d a m was decided.' 58 Slim v Daily Telegraph Lid [1968] 2 QB 157 (per Diplock LJ).59 cf White v Jones, supra n 3, at p 216 (per Lord Mustill), and Hedley, 'Recovering Lost Legacies: White v Jones in the Lords' [1995] 1 Web JCLI: 'if we are truly convinced that the will admitted to probate does not reflect [the testator's] wishes at the time of his death, why admit it to probate at all?'
The Caiden and Wildavsky work of 1974 postulates a model of poverty-uncertainty: the governments of poor countries face disappearing and decremental budgets in financing public programs because of a lack of economic growth or poverty. The core argument is that economic development, as a critical variable, determines increments in budgeting practices. In other words, budgeting is incremental, and incremental budgeting results from the growth of GNP. This model has since become a set of principles with identifiable attributes to explain the budgetary processes in poor nations. \n \nThis study is about application of that model in China's budgeting. China has a unitary budget system. The central government used to draw most of its revenues from provinces and its budget includes those of 31 provinces. Provinces thus play a dual role of collecting revenues from within and remitting them to the center in the name of revenue sharing. In 1978 China decided to open to the world, reform its economy, and decentralize budget to provinces. But the original intent of decentralization was to give incentives so that provinces accumulate more resources for further central extraction. The decentralization, however, has led to fiscal decline not anticipated by the reformers.
The evolution of radiotherapy in Denmark is traced from its early inception in 1896 to the first three radium centres in 1913-1914, the establishment of which caused a roar of protests among the surgeons of that time. Private initiative pioneered the Radium Foundation which raised money for radium and financed erection of new buildings for the three centres in the 1930's. Radiotherapy became a separate speciality in 1950. The early 1960s saw the introduction of megavoltage therapy and the first promising results from chemotherapeutic management of solid tumors. The consequent referral of patients to centres for non-surgical therapy created a need for two new centres (Aalborg and Herlev) and called for a gradual closing down of decentralized low-voltage treatment at county level. However, the decentralization of health care in 1970 partly reversed this trend and some patients were therefore referred for decentralized treatment at major county hospitals. Such treatment mainly consisted of adjuvant or palliative chemotherapy, though in a few countries palliative therapy was supported by low-voltage therapy. In 1987 the medical speciality of radiotherapy was officially renamed oncology.
An important function of the financial system is to serve as a key source of information that helps coordinate decentralized decision-making in various sectors of the economy. Households and investors use interest rates, futures prices and security prices in making their consumption-saving decisions and portfolio allocation decisions. Interest rates and prices provide important signals to managers of firms in their selection of investment projects and financings. This paper illustrates the role played by financial markets in providing information about the future volatility-that is, the degree of uncertainty-of economic variables such as interest rates, exchange rates, commodity prices, and stock, bond and other security prices. It has two basic goals: (1) to show the importance of volatility for all sorts of policy decisions in the private and public sectors of the economy; and (2) to show how ex ante estimates of future volatility can be extracted from the prices of securities.
Abraham Lincoln, as most antebellum lawyers, believed that lawyers should serve as peacemakers. His slander cases show that he often took advantage of opportunities for mediation and compromise. Lincoln was able to resolve many cases by repairing the damage to the plaintiffs' reputation. In several cases, the defendant attested to the good reputation of the slandered plaintiff, which settled the case. In some cases, the defendant consented to a large judgment, which the plaintiff then agreed to reduce to a much smaller sum. In others, the plaintiff, after a jury had awarded damages, agreed to remit most or all of the award. Lincoln acted as a peacemaker and showed sensitivity to what was actually at stake in those cases.Antebellum lawyers celebrated the 'sober judgements of Courts' as a means to maintain social order.1 At the same time, however, they also believed that they should serve as peacemakers who prevented disputes from going to court. Thus, they reflected a larger ambiguity in American culture about the use of courts to settle disputes. Americans acknowledge law as 'a vital part of culture and of the social order,' but the invocation of formal law often is viewed as an antisocial act and as a 'contravention of established cultural norms.'2 As Noah Webster explained in his American Spelling Book (1823), 'Somebody is always the worse for lawsuits, and of course society is less happy.'3Antebellum lawyers in general, and Lincoln in particular, did not want to resolve all disputes with a formal adjudication. Lawyers were not simply courtroom advocates for their clients; they also served a mediating role. As Robert W. Gordon notes, antebellum lawyers 'who took seriously their status as republican mediators were encouraged to run their office as little chancery courts.'4 That mediating role was particularly important in small communities where lawyers were keenly aware of the social context of purely local disputes.5 One of Lincoln's former law clerks recalled that 'the very character of this simple litigation drew the lawyer into the street and neighborhood, and into close and active intercourse with all classes of his fellow men.'6Lincoln himself described the lawyer's role as peacemaker. In his notes for a law lecture, he wrote: 'Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to compromise whenever you can. Point out to them how the nominal winner is often a real loser—in fees, expenses, and waste of time. As a peacemaker the lawyer has a superior opportunity of being a good man.'7 That was a common conception of the lawyer's role in the nineteenth century.8 After the 1880 death of Stephen Trigg Logan, Lincoln's second law partner, John T. Stuart (Lincoln's first law partner), observed, 'Logan, in his office, was the just, ripe and safe counsellor, grasping with readiness the facts of the cases submitted to him, separating the truth from the coloring given it by the passion of the client, and readily seeing the point in the case, he was able to give sound advice, which his sense of justice directed to the right. He was not a promoter of litigations. He settled more controversies than he brought suits. He was a peace-maker.'9In 1834 Simon Greenleaf, a professor at the Harvard Law School, proclaimed that a lawyer 'concerns himself with the beginnings of controversies, not to inflame them but to extinguish them.... He is a peacemaker;—a composer of dissensions;—a blessing to his neighborhood.'10 In 1845 the New-York Legal Observer stated that 'the respectable attorney... is almost always a peace-maker and a settler of disputes, without litigation, where it is practicable.'11 Kentucky lawyer George W. Robertson similarly described the lawyer's role in his Scrap Book on Law and Politics, Men and Times (1855), a book Lincoln owned: 'He should never advise a suit unless it is the interest of his client to 'go to law' If the case be frivolous, or the right doubtful, he should advise forbearance or compromise. He should never encourage litigation.'12When faced with local disputes, Lincoln often tried to serve as a mediator or peacemaker. In 1850 he wrote client Abram Bale: 'I sincerely hope you will settle it. I think you can if you will, for I have always found Mr. Hickox a fair man in his dealings. If you settle I will charge nothing for what I have done, and thank you to boot. By settling, you will most likely get your money sooner; and with much less trouble & expense.'13In a case representing the Alton and Sangamon Railroad, he advised the railroad to settle with the defendant because 'it is better to get along peaceably if possible.'14 In 1859 he advised client Hay-den Keeling to drop his lawsuit: 'I do not think there is the least use of doing any more with the law suit. I not only do not think you are sure to gain it, but I do think your are sure to lose it. Therefore the sooner it ends the better.'15Lincoln helped to restore peace to the 'neighborhood' through his efforts to mediate and settle slander lawsuits. He handled at least sixty-eight slander lawsuits during the course of his career, representing plaintiffs thirty-four times and defendants thirty-four times.16 A self-educated lawyer, he became well versed in the law of slander.17 Those cases, however, involved much more than the sterile application of the formal law of slander to the facts of each lawsuit. Slander cases, by their very nature, were community-oriented, reg- ulating acceptable forms of behavior in small communities.18 Litigants in slander suits were involved in the 'small politics' of everyday life: reputation, gossip, and insult.19 In small communities, as anthropologist F. G. Bailey notes, there is a 'fund of common knowledge about all the members of the community' and that fund is made up of reputations.20 As one historian has observed, 'A person's standing in a small community depends on his or her reputation, and reputations are sustained or lost primarily through gossip.'21 Lincoln recognized the importance of reputation; he confessed in 1832 that his 'peculiar ambition' was 'being truly esteemed of my fellow men.'22The Illinois law of slander had both statutory and common-law elements. The Illinois General Assembly defined slander as criminal behavior that could be punished with a fine not exceeding $1,000.23 The next year, the legislature made 'certain words actionable' in civil proceedings. The legislature declared that falsely stating that any person had been guilty of adultery or fornication or had sworn falsely were actionable.24 That legislation thus rejected the English common-law rule that required 'an express imputation of some crime liable to punishment, some capital offence, or other infamous crime or misdemeanor.'25 Several other state courts did follow the English rule, which held that an imputation of adultery or fornication was not actionable.26 In Illinois, it was.Many of Lincoln's slander cases involved accusations of adultery or fornication; Lincoln thus was involved heavily in maintaining community reputations and relationships. In fact, he represented plaintiffs or defendants in at least eleven such cases, all of which concerned a woman accused of adultery or fornication.27 Lincoln and Herndon filed a slander lawsuit for Charles Cantrall and Emily Cantrall in 1849. They sued one John Primm for saying that 'William King screwed Charles Cantrall's wife twice while he was gone; and before that he crawled in bed with her and her husband and screwed her.' Lincoln and Herndon requested $1,000 in damages for their clients.28 In an 1845 slander case, Lincoln and Herndon represented the defendants, Jonathan Miller and Susan Miller. The plaintiffs, William Beaty and Martha Ann Beaty, claimed that Susan Miller had said that 'Mrs. Beaty and Dr. Sulivan were seen together in Beaty's stable one morning very early in the very act' and that 'Mrs. Beaty and Dr. Sulivan were seen in the very act.' The jury found Lincoln's client liable and assessed damages at $45.29 In an 1858 Vermilion County case, Lincoln was among lawyers representing Nancy M. Martin in a suit against Achilles M. Underwood. Martin charged that Underwood had boasted of having sex with her and had said that she 'has been fucked more times than I've got fingers and toes.'30 The jury found Underwood guilty and ordered him to pay $237 in damages.31Lincoln represented the plaintiff in a slander case that was first tried in Menard County in 1843 and then retried in Morgan County in 1844. Eliza Cabot sued Francis Regnier for saying that Elijah Taylor was 'after skin and he has got it' with Cabot, that Taylor had 'rogered' Cabot, and that 'the captain has got some skin there as much as he wanted.'32 When the case went to trial in Menard County, Lincoln delivered a 'denunciation' of Regnier that was 'as bitter a Phillippic as ever uttered'; nevertheless, Cabot received a verdict for only $12.33 Lincoln moved for a new trial based on jury misconduct, and the judge set aside the verdict.34 When the case was tried in Morgan County, Cabot received a $1,600 verdict, which was later sustained by the Illinois Supreme Court.35Lincoln also represented Ambrose P. Edwards and his wife in the appeal of their slander suit against William Patterson and his wife. The Edwardses had sued the Pattersons for Mrs. Patterson's remark that 'Mrs. Edwards has raised a family of children by a negro, and I can prove it.' The Edwardses claimed that those words, by innuendo, charged Mrs. Edwards with the crimes of adultery and The jury agreed and awarded in Lincoln represented the Edwardses after the Pattersons The the and the case to the trial that 'the words do not in their and or in common to a charge of fornication and In an 1850 County lawsuit brought by Lincoln represented the John claimed had her a The jury agreed and assessed damages at and Herndon similarly represented local reputations were vital for their community relationships. slander lawsuits with plaintiffs had been most concerned about accusations about plaintiffs were concerned about their and Lincoln's slander cases for plaintiffs involved accusations of or Lincoln filed his first slander case in on of George W. of Sangamon County, who sued Stephen because had said that he was guilty of also represented plaintiffs who sued because of accusations of In an County Lincoln and Herndon represented William who claimed that had slandered him by an crime against with a had said that my and he fucked her as as he He accused of the who was and will have some Lincoln and Herndon requested $1,000 in The case was with also represented in County lawsuits filed in The defendants in both cases saying that in fact, have intercourse or knowledge with a suit against George W. was tried with the jury both times to a After the second each agreed that the case could be The after the case was William W. the defendant in the second case, his and of an with the In an County Lincoln where their client sued accusations that he had a against with a to a and Lincoln a against the slander law to One explained in 1850 that 'the law is that words not in the case of a common of in to the office he or the or which he Lincoln represented fellow lawyer in a slander suit against Abraham Lincoln's claimed that had charged his of of of of and of that the accused The case went to and Lincoln the to the Those said that if the jury believed that said the words, then had to prove that all the were of will not the charge of of of and both the charge of with The jury also was that 'a of is to prove that the defendant the but that more then a that is a is to prove that the words were The jury awarded in a slander case, a defendant one of the defendant had not the words, or prove that the words were not If a defendant saying the words, then that defendant the of If a defendant claimed that the words were then the defendant had to the of In at least slander cases, Lincoln truth as a to the In cases, Lincoln that the plaintiffs in fact, In other cases, Lincoln to prove that the plaintiff had sworn In cases, Lincoln that the plaintiffs were guilty of In one case, Lincoln that he prove that the plaintiff was guilty of and in he that the plaintiff was guilty of was a the defendant had to the words by the the defendant a in that the charged words were before a jury in Illinois could be that a of the slander if the defendant to the In the Illinois Supreme held that the jury could the a of the slander and only the jury believed that the defendant had without any of The jury each case, the damages be because a is the of the cases that Lincoln the was he jury The other Lincoln's received jury in the cases that Lincoln with the of In cases, the was $1,000 in and in In both cases, however, plaintiffs agreed to remit part of the In other cases that Lincoln the jury awarded and In the cases, the of have helped In County cases that Lincoln his were ordered to pay only and Lincoln had the defendant was sued for the plaintiff a In those cases, Lincoln and filed lawsuits in County, that Robert and had him a and a infamous Lincoln represented both defendants and in both lawsuits that the plaintiff did and and His had the plaintiff a The suit against was tried in with the jury with they found his client not guilty of the second lawsuit in the of after to pay were The of for on a if the plaintiff to one of the Lincoln times but was never in that A defendant also could or damages by that the words were in and was the of a slander case, and if the words were in and then there was In at least cases, Lincoln submitted jury that said if the jury believed the words were but also believed were through of they are to for the In one of those cases, Lincoln submitted an that charged the jury that if they found that the words were much in the of passion as to be from all this is to in of A defendant could also by that he or she had what had said about the plaintiff and had not been by Lincoln that in Beaty Miller. Lincoln's any of the truth of the but claimed that the defendant was what her husband had from one she the said words as she litigation involved not only against slander but also that the damages awarded were In to that the defendant had not the words or that the words were not a lawyer could a of Illinois a defendant in a slander case could damages by the character of the and by any which to but do not to prove the truth of the In a County slander Lincoln's client was sued for saying that the plaintiff had sworn the jury found for the plaintiff, the was only In an Vermilion County case, Lincoln's client, who also was sued for saying the plaintiff had sworn was found guilty but was ordered to pay only in In case, a County jury assessed only in damages against Lincoln's In an 1850 suit in County, Lincoln represented the who had been charged with saying the plaintiff and The jury found for the plaintiff, but awarded That was more against Lincoln and Herndon in an Sangamon County case. Lincoln and Herndon represented the plaintiff, while Lincoln's former partner, Stephen Logan, represented the the jury found client guilty of they awarded one for In a case, Lincoln represented William against for that had said that was of and Lincoln requested in damages, but the jury awarded only in slander cases, Lincoln mediation and compromise. He did not slander he often was able to settle In several the settled the defendant agreed to a large judgment, which the plaintiff then agreed to remit in part or in one County for Stuart and Lincoln represented a plaintiff who sued because of an of The case was settled the defendant confessed to a and Lincoln's client agreed to remit the In an 1845 County case, the defendant agreed to a and the plaintiff then and agreed not to on the for That same year, Lincoln and Herndon represented the plaintiff in a Sangamon County slander suit. The case was settled the agreed to a judgment, which the plaintiff agreed to remit for Lincoln settled an Vermilion County case by having the defendant her and to a and having the plaintiff remit all but Lincoln an he represented Dr. in an 1859 County lawsuit. sued for The case was settled agreed in to a against him and agreed to remit all but and to for an lawyer who was often with Lincoln on the recalled one slander case in which Lincoln, one of the lawyers, most and efforts to compromise the case, which was by of his The case in County and involved a the community of and a from the community of In a accused of and to after the suit was were made for a to the not only the but the as for all became involved as or When the case was to County, their lawyers and and an of to The were and a large The case was tried twice and in a At the next of to and and the that their have to be Lincoln then that Lincoln that of litigation, in which was and he his with all and a After the to Lincoln the of which the and the defendant that he has ever or believed the plaintiff to be guilty of that he has said from which such a charge could be he said on the of others, his in the and that he any in the truth of such charge against said The agreed to and to the of cases that Lincoln settled before or after trial that slander suits were more to restore or reputation than to Lincoln settled at least slander cases by having his client the good reputation of the plaintiff, thus repairing the reputation in the As Lincoln later is the against In an case in County, Ann sued and for claimed that had said Ann is a and Ann her fine by Lincoln, who represented the defendants, settled the case by having his in that or of them ever made any charge against the of the and that of them has ever had any or or any want of on the part of the The then the case by slander case, the plaintiff agreed to the lawsuit Lincoln filed into the the by his this case, the defendant that he has never the words in the that he always has and the plaintiff to be an that he never has and not that the plaintiff ever or in any to his any of and that he this to be the as the most and that he can of the reputation, against such a a case, Lincoln wrote a in which the defendant said that he had not any accused the plaintiff of and not him guilty of such Lincoln's client had of a by the plaintiff 'as being but that he has not said a as from a Lincoln's client agreed to pay and the plaintiff agreed to the Lincoln thus showed sensitivity to what was actually at stake in those he settled each cases by repairing the damage to the was the of other In an case brought in County, John M. and claimed that had slandered by saying she a that she been of fornication with a and had a of an intercourse with a Lincoln represented the The case was later by of the with the plaintiffs not to for same of In an 1845 case, Robert G. sued Lincoln's client John in on the case in Sangamon moved for a of and the case was to Menard then a of that had said that he was a and a The case later was by the with each a of Lincoln acted as a peacemaker in slander he a role of Illinois and at least slander lawsuits were filed in Sangamon County, only went to a was involved in of the cases and of the the settled of the cases without a cases were by the or from the while were settled by agreed the cases, the want of and for to for sustained a to a to and a in the to before Lincoln was involved in at least cases where plaintiffs settled after the had against the were not an by the Illinois Supreme the jury on the of plaintiffs most or all of the that the of slander suits was to restore or reputations in the In cases, plaintiffs all of the for In an slander case in County, for Lincoln was able to settle the case after the jury a verdict against his Emily had sued Lincoln's client, for that had said that had sworn had run with a and had in a The jury agreed that had slandered and assessed $1,000 in The judgment, however, that the of said In an 1843 County case, Lincoln's client was accused of saying that the plaintiff had into a with his his and a from a while he was The jury awarded the plaintiff but the into and the for other cases the plaintiff most of the In a County slander case Elijah and wife sued that had a and had said 'the have her in the of the many a The plaintiffs in Lincoln and represented the defendant Lincoln the which stated that his client was not only not guilty but prove at trial that guilty of fornication with said Elijah before they were When the case was tried in the jury awarded in damages, of which the plaintiffs Lincoln represented the who received an of John claimed that Abram had said that he had before a Lincoln in his claimed that had had and before the jury he that and had together without being The jury found for but Lincoln an of the and the of and of said Thus, Lincoln was able to mediate and settle some cases after had in of Lincoln the of an appeal to reduce an jury In the County the plaintiff claimed that Lincoln's client had slandered him by an of and The jury agreed and awarded Lincoln then filed a for new that the jury had a in verdict and that his client had not received a fair When the plaintiff of the judgment, the for new trial was also a after the verdict in an slander case in In that case, Lincoln represented the plaintiff William who that his had said that he was 'a that 'it was the of the that was and in The however, found that had slandered and awarded in one of later recalled that Lincoln said that his client did not want to money out of the the he could do be to get to remit some of the damage and be Lincoln and his client agreed to of the verdict in for the defendant which in the many slander cases, Lincoln was able to his neighbors to In some cases he settled cases by repairing the damage to the plaintiffs' reputation in for to the good reputation of the In other cases, the defendant consented to a large judgment, which the plaintiff agreed to reduce to a much smaller sum. That also the damage to reputation and settled the case. In others, the plaintiff agreed to remit most or all of the award. Lincoln advised that 'as a peacemaker the lawyer has a superior opportunity of being a good His slander cases show that he often took advantage of such the Lincoln Legal in Illinois, I acknowledge the of William and I also to F. Illinois state Illinois Robert and of the of of the of of and of of on and
This paper deals with the self-organization of a group of multiple robotic systems consisting of several or a number of autonomous robots, such as the Cellular Robotic System (CEBOT). In paticular, in this paper, we will present the self-organization of the hierarchical structure of the CEBOT as one of the decentralized autonomous robotic systems. The structural organization is simulated based on the idea of interdependence between autonomous robots, which is derived from the model of group organization of human beings. That is, groups are organized and leaders emerge from the interdependence of the individuals. Additionaley, an evaluation method for the hierarchical architecture is also discussed to evaluate the structure of the whole system. This paper will represent simulation results of self-organization of hierarchical structure on the basis of a given task model. The sensitivity of the organization of the decentralized autonomous robotic systems is also discussed in the simulation.
In this research, we address the organization of group behavior on decentralized autonomous robotic systems. Collective group behavior is exhibied in the natural world, such as by ants and fish, in teamwork in sports and by the human society. Therefore, research on group behavior of decentralized autonomous robotic systems can be regarded as one of the research fields of Artificial Life. Decentralized autonomous robotic systems refer to multiple robotic systems including many autonomous robots, such as the Cellular Robotic System (CEBOT). The CEBOT, which has been studied by the authors, consists of a number of robotic units called "cells". In the research on the CEBOT, it is necessary to evolve a cooperative group behavior effectively in the system, since a well-organized group behavior is required to carry out given tasks efficiently and influences its perfor-mance ability. In order to organize the behavior in a dynamic environment, we proposed a concept of "self-recognition" for decision making of the behavior in a robotic group. In this paper, in addition to the proposed concept, we will show the organization and adaptation of group behavior with the coordination of intention, and represent some simulation results with the coordination of intention.
A proof is whatever convinces me. Shimon Even (1935–2004) The glory attached to the creativity involved in finding proofs makes us forget that it is the less glorified process of verification that gives proofs their value. Conceptually speaking, proofs are secondary to the verification process, whereas technically speaking, proof systems are defined in terms of their verification procedures. The notion of a verification procedure presumes the notion of computation and furthermore the notion of efficient computation. This implicit stipulation is made explicit in the definition of NP , where efficient computation is associated with deterministic polynomial-time algorithms. However, as argued next, we can gain a lot if we are willing to take a somewhat non-traditional step and allow probabilistic verification procedures. In this chapter, we shall study three types of probabilistic proof systems, called interactive proofs, zero-knowledge proofs , and probabilistic checkable proofs . In each of these three cases, we shall present fascinating results that cannot be obtained when considering the analogous deterministic proof systems. Summary: The association of efficient procedures with deterministic polynomial-time procedures is the basis for viewing NP-proof systems as the canonical formulation of proof systems (with efficient verification procedures). Allowing probabilistic verification procedures and, moreover, ruling by statistical evidence gives rise to various types of probabilistic proof systems. Indeed, these probabilistic proof systems carry a probability of error (which is explicitly bounded and can be reduced by successive applications of the proof system), yet they offer various advantages over the traditional (deterministic and errorless) proof systems. […]