This paper discusses the systematic use of product feedback information to support life-cycle design approaches and provides guidelines for developing a design at both the product and the system levels. Design activities are surveyed in the light of the product life cycle, and the design information flow is interpreted from a semiotic perspective. The natural evolution of a design is considered, the notion of design expectations is introduced, and the importance of evaluation of these expectations in dynamic environments is argued. Possible strategies for reconciliation of the expectations and environmental factors are described. An Internet-enabled technology is proposed to monitor product functionality, usage, and operational environment and supply the designer with relevant information. A pilot study of assessing design expectations of a refrigerator is outlined, and conclusions are drawn.

We propose a new definition of actual cause, using structural equations to model counterfactuals. We show that the definition yields a plausible and elegant account of causation that handles well examples which have caused problems for other definitions and resolves major difficulties in the traditional account.

In conventional supervised pattern recognition tasks, model selection is typically accomplished by minimizing the classification error rate on a set of so-called development data, subject to ground-truth labeling by human experts or some other means. In the context of speech processing systems and other large-scale practical applications, however, such labeled development data are typically costly and difficult to obtain. This article proposes an alternative semi-supervised framework for likelihood-based model selection that leverages unlabeled data by using trained classifiers representing each model to automatically generate putative labels. The errors that result from this automatic labeling are shown to be amenable to results from robust statistics, which in turn provide for minimax-optimal censored likelihood ratio tests that recover the nonparametric sign test as a limiting case. This approach is then validated experimentally using a state-of-the-art automatic speech recognition system to select between candidate word pronunciations using unlabeled speech data that only potentially contain instances of the words under test. Results provide supporting evidence for the utility of this approach, and suggest that it may also find use in other applications of machine learning.

Formal and computational models of argument are ideally suited for education in ill-defined domains such as law, public policy, and science.  Open-ended arguments play a central role in these areas but students of the domains may not have been taught an explicit model of argument.  Computational models of argument may be ideally suited to act as argument tutors guiding students in the formation of arguments and argument analysis according to an explicit model.  In order to achieve this it is important to establish that the models can be understood and evaluated reliably, an empirical question.  In this paper we report ongoing work on the diagnostic utility of argument diagrams produced in the LARGO tutoring system.

A state is not alive, yet it performs many of the central enjoys few bonds of kinship: and residence depends upon functions of life like replication and adaptation to new conditions occupational specialization rather than blood relations. A to balance social protection and opportunity. As a modern state can declare war on behalf of the entire collectivity, lifelike system the rise of the modern state raises four sets reserving the right to declare mandatory participation of fundamental questions about its evolutionary design. A and to contract the area of private vengeance. They proclaim first set concerns how it became a sustainable, autonomously a monopoly of force and of law, while requiring citizens to replicating system, capable of evolution. All non-state agglomerations forgo violence; vengeance is not the responsibility of the offended such as empires or chiefdoms eventually stagnate party. Almost any crime against one member is a because they are closed systems that break down over crime against the state. Subgroups seeking vengeance are time (Weber). A state is an open system that must able to viewed as threatening to the order of the state.

International law is a singular exception to the top-down systems of law within nations. It presents the puzzle of how the law can be created or changed in the absence of authoritative rule-making institutions. The present paper is part of a work in progress that locates the law-making apparatus of international law in a complex adaptive system. Herein the focus is on thresholds. The first and most detailed threshold describes the emergence of the complex adaptive system. The second threshold consists of the transformation of international law from the voluntary to the automatic. The third threshold is here but has not yet been crossed: actualizing human rights as enforceable claims by individuals against States.

As machines become more intelligent and take on more responsibilities, their decision-making capabilities must be informed and constrained by a coherent, integrated moral/ethical structure with no internal inconsistencies for everyone’s safety and well-being. Unfortunately, no such structure is currently agreed upon to exist. We propose to solve this problem by a) drawing upon experimental evidence and lessons learned from evolution and economics to show that morality is actually objective and derivable from first principles; b) presenting a coherent, integrated, platonic ethical system with no internal inconsistencies that flows naturally from a single high-level logically-derived Kantian imperative to low-level reflexive "rules of thumb" that match current human sensibilities; and c) suggesting a biologically-inspired architecture which supports and enforces this system which can be relatively easily implemented.

Recently, Argumentation Mechanism Design (ArgMD) was introduced as a new paradigm for studying argumentation among self-interested agents using game-theoretic techniques. Preliminary results showed a condition under which a direct mechanism based on Dung's grounded semantics is strategy-proof (i.e. truth enforcing). But these early results dealt with a highly restricted form of agent preferences, and assumed agents can only hide, but not lie about, arguments. In this paper, we characterise strategy-proofness under grounded semantics for a more realistic preference class (namely, focal arguments). We also provide the first analysis of the case where agents can lie.

We propose an approach for automatically ranking structured documents applied to patent prior art search. Our model, SVM Patent Ranking (SVM_PR) incorporates margin constraints that directly capture the specificities of patent citation ranking. Our approach combines patent domain knowledge features with meta-score features from several different general Information Retrieval methods. The training algorithm is an extension of the Pegasos algorithm with performance guarantees, effectively handling hundreds of thousands of patent-pair judgements in a high dimensional feature space. Experiments on a homogeneous essential wireless patent dataset show that SVM_PR performs on average 30%-40% better than many other state-of-the-art general-purpose Information Retrieval methods in terms of the NDCG measure at different cut-off positions.

We present an unified methodology for representation and development of dialectical proof procedures in both abstract and assumption-based argumentation based on the notions of legal environments and dispute derivation. A legal environment specifies the legal moves of the dispute parties while a dispute derivation describes the procedure structure. A key insight of this paper is that the opponent moves determine the soundness of a dispute while its completeness depends on the proponent moves.