On a Degenerate Parabolic Problem in Holder Spaces

In this paper, we study some degenerate parabolic equation with Cauchy-Dirichlet boundary conditions. This problem is considered in little Holder spaces. The optimal regularity of the solution v is obtained and is specified in terms of those of the second member when some conditions upon the Holder exponent with respect to the degeneracy are satisfied. The proofs mainly use the sum theory of linear operators with or without density of domains and the results of smoothness obtained in the study of some abstract linear differential equations of elliptic type.

基于安全多方计算的数字作品所有权证明

数字作品的所有权证明允许在不泄漏任何秘密信息和防止所有者欺骗的前提下，对版权声明进行验证,提出一种基于Proactive可验证秘密共享和安全多方计算的数字作品所有权证明方案．在该方案中，可验证秘密共享，保证了所有权秘密的正确性，并防止对协议参与者的欺骗逼过Proactive安全提供自动恢复功能来保证协议生存周期内秘密的完整性和安全性．使用安全多方计算和同态承诺的零知识证明，实现了所有权验证，在不假设可信方存在的前提下，所提出方案能够在没有太多成员合谋的情况下，完成有效计算并发现不忠实成员．

指定验证方的门限验证签名方案及安全性证明

Laih提出了指定验证方的签名方案设计问题，并给出一种解决方案．首先分析指出该方案存在严重安全缺陷，然后提出了签名方案SV-EDL，解决了如上密码学问题.同时，把可证明安全理论引入这类方案的分析设计，并在RO（random oracle）模型中证明：SV-EDL的抗伪造安全性和计算Diffie-Hellman（computational Diffie-HeUman,简称CDH）问题紧密关联，亦即伪造SV-EDL签名几乎和解决CDH问题一样困难；除指定方以外，任何人验证签名的能力都与决策Difile-Hellman（decisional Diffie-Hellman,简称DDH）问题密切相关。由于CDH问题和DDH问题的困难性与离散对数（discrete logarithm，简称DL）问题紧密相关已成为广泛共识，因此与当前同类方案比较，该签名方案提供了更好的安全性保证．此外，上述签名方案还以非常简明、直接的方式满足不可否认要求最后提出并构造了验证服务器系统的门限验证协议，并在标准模型中给出了安全性证明．该方案不要求可信中心的存在．

黄土高原土壤元素含量地域分异规律

利用趋势面分析法 ,对黄土高原土壤中 3 9个元素含量的区域分布进行了研究。结果表明 ,黄土高原土壤中的大多数元素含量和黄土母质接近 ,且具有粒度相关型的地域分异规律。土壤发生过程和生物气候环境是影响土壤元素含量地域分异的主要因素。元素的地域分布为黄土高原的风成学说提供了土壤地球化学方面的佐证

多对一供应链零售商驱动型收入共享契约下的生产决策

针对多对一供应链结构中零售商具有较强议价能力的特点,建立了零售商为主方、制造商为从方的Stackelberg主从对策模型;给出在零售商提供契约条款的对称博弈中,制造商生产产品策略存在唯一最优解的证明;分析了零售商契约参数变量的决策问题;讨论了收入共享契约下分散供应链同集中供应链决策的关系.通过仿真实验,分析验证了契约参数及产品的可替代性对供应链绩效的影响。

相同知识背景下技能之间迁移机制的研究

Since the middle of 1980's, the mechanisms of transfer of training between cognitive subskills rest on the same body of declarative knowledge has been highly concerned. The dominant theory is theory of common element (Singley & Anderson, 1989) which predict that there will be little or no transfer between subskills within the same domain when knowledge is used in different ways, even though the subskills might rest on a common body of declarative knowledge. This idea is termed as "principle of use specificity of knowledge" (Anderson, 1987). Although this principle has gained some empirical evidence from different domains such as elementary geometry (Neves & Anderson, 1981) and computer programming (McKendree & Anderson, 1987), it is challenged by some research (Pennington et al., 1991; 1995) in which substantially larger amounts of transfer of training was found between substills that rest on a shared declarative knowledge but share little procedures (production rules). Pennington et al. (1995) provided evidence that this larger amounts of transfer are due to the elaboration of declarative knowledge. Our research provide a test of these two different explanation, by considering transfer between two subskills within the domain of elementary geometry and elementary algebra respectively, and the inference of learning method ("learning from examples" and "learning from declarative-text") and subject ability (high, middle, low) on the amounts of transfer. Within the domain of elementary geometry, the two subskills of generating proofs" (GP) and "explaining proofs" (EP) which are rest on the declarative knowledge of "theorems on the characters of parallelogram" share little procedures. Within the domain of elementary algebra, the two subskills of "calculation" (C) and "simplification" (S) which are rest on the declarative knowledge of "multiplication of radical" share some more procedures. The results demonstrate that: 1. Within the domain of elementary geometry, although little transfer was found between the two subskills of GP and EP within the total subjects, different results occurred when considering the factor of subject's ability. Within the high level subjects, significant positive transfer was found from EP to GP, while little transfer was found on the opposite direction (i. e. from GP to EP). Within the low level subjects, significant positive transfer was found from EP to GP, while significant negative transfer was found on the opposite direction. For the middle level subject, little transfer was found between the two subskills. 2. Within the domain of elementary algebra, significant positive transfer was found from S to C, while significant negative transfer was found on the opposite direction (i. e. from C to S), when considering the total subjects. The same pattern of transfer occurred within the middle level subjects and low level subject. Within the high level subjects, no transfer was found between the two subskills. 3. Within theses two domains, different learning methods yield little influence on transfer of training between subskills. Apparently, these results can not be attributed to either common procedures or elaboration of declarative knowledge. A kind of synthetic inspection is essential to construct a reasonable explanation of these results which should take into account the following three elements: (1) relations between the procedures of subskills; (2) elaboration of declarative knowledge; (3) elaboration of procedural knowledge. 排Excluding the factor of subject, transfer of training between subskills can be predicted and explained by analyzing the relations between the procedures of two subskills. However, when considering some certain subjects, the explanation of transfer of training between subskills must include subjects' elaboration of declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge, especially the influence of the elaboration on performing the other subskill. The fact that different learning methods yield little influence on transfer of training between subskills can be explained by the fact that these two methods did not effect the level of declarative knowledge. Protocol analysis provided evidence to support these hypothesis. From this research, we conclude that in order to expound the mechanisms of transfer of training between cognitive subskills rest on the same body of declarative knowledge, three elements must be considered synthetically which include: (1) relations between the procedures of subskills; (2) elaboration of declarative knowledge; (3) elaboration of procedural knowledge.