From ALIBI to COLUMBUS. The long march to self-aware, reflective computational models of humor

One thing is (a) to develop a system that handles some task to one's satisfaction, and also has a universally recognized myrthful side to its output. Another thing is (b) to provide an analysis of why you are getting such a byproduct. Yet another thing is (c) to develop a model that incorporates reflection about some phenomenon in humor for its own sake. This paper selects for discussion especially Alibi, going on to describe the preliminaries of Columbus. The former, which fits in (a), is a planner with an explanatory capability. It invents pretexts. It's no legal defense, but it is relevant to evidential thinking in AI & Law. Some of the output pretext are myrthful. Not in the sense they are silly: they are not. A key factor seems to be the very alacrity at explaining out detail after detail of globally damning evidence. I attempt a reanalysis of Alibi in respect of (b). As to Columbus, it fits instead in (c). We introduce here the basics of this (unimplemented) model, developed to account for a sample text in parody.

Identification and doing without it, V: A formal mathematical analysis for a case of mix-up of individuals, and of recovery from failure to attain identification

Identification, when sought, is not necessarily obtained. Operational guidance that is normatively acceptable may be necessary for such cases. We proceed to formalize and illustrate modes of exchanges of individual identity, and provide procedures of recovery strategies in specific prescriptions from an ancient body of law for such situations when, for given types of purposes, individuals of some relevant kind had become intermixed and were undistinguishable. Rules were devised, in a variety of domains, for coping with situations that occur if and when the goal of identification was frustrated. We propose or discuss mathematical representations of such recovery procedures.

From sudoku to DNA in six steps

Tony Valsamidis, senior lecturer in information systems, Greenwich University reviews Genesis Machines: The New Science of Biocomputing by Martyn Amos - Atlantic Books ISBN - 184354 224 2. What do encryption, the double helix and sudoku have in common? They are all bound together by the newish science of biocomputing in rather surprising ways, as Martyn Amos masterfully shows in this compendious volume.

From Lomé to economic partnership agreements in Africa

The development of coherent and effective relations with other regions and countries is one of the most challenging tasks faced by the European Union. This original volume explores the EU’s engagement with the global South, focusing on three controversial policy areas: economic cooperation, development cooperation, and conflict management. A discussion of the EU’s interregional model—which promotes interaction with regions rather than nation-states—provides a backdrop for case studies of EU policies with regard to Africa, Asia, and Latin America. While disclosing the tensions and overlaps between the EU’s foreign policies and those of its member states, the authors also highlight an increasing trend toward successful policy coordination.

Experts on e-learning: insights gained from listening to the student voice!

The Student Experience of e-Learning Laboratory (SEEL) project at the University of Greenwich was designed to explore and then implement a number of approaches to investigate learners’ experiences of using technology to support their learning. In this paper members of the SEEL team present initial findings from a University-wide survey of nearly a 1000 students. A selection of 90 ‘cameos’, drawn from the survey data, offer further insights into personal perceptions of e-learning and illustrate the diversity of students experiences. The cameos provide a more coherent picture of individual student experience based on the totality of each person’s responses to the questionnaire. Finally, extracts from follow-up case studies, based on interviews with a small number of students, allow us to ‘hear’ the student voice more clearly. Issues arising from an analysis of the data include student preferences for communication and social networking tools, views on the ‘smartness’ of their tutors’ uses of technology and perceptions of the value of e-learning. A primary finding and the focus of this paper, is that students effectively arrive at their own individualised selection, configuration and use of technologies and software that meets their perceived needs. This ‘personalisation’ does not imply that such configurations are the most efficient, nor does it automatically suggest that effective learning is occurring. SEEL reminds us that learners are individuals, who approach learning both with and without technology in their own distinctive ways. Hearing, understanding and responding to the student voice is fundamental in maximising learning effectiveness. Institutions should consider actively developing the capacity of academic staff to advise students on the usefulness of particular online tools and resources in support of learning and consider the potential benefits of building on what students already use in their everyday lives. Given the widespread perception that students tend to be ‘digital natives’ and academic staff ‘digital immigrants’ (Prensky, 2001), this could represent a considerable cultural challenge.