From Notation to Composition:How in my practice the exploration of notational possibilitieshas led to new compositional opportunities

This paper explores my experiments with computer animated notation. It examines how I turned to
computer animated notation to address issues with static musical notation. In particular looking at
the work of Nancarrow, Cage, Tenney, and how a number of these composers' approaches
presented difficult challenges for traditional musical notation. I then discuss how computer
animated notation can provide some interesting solutions to the notational problems provoked in
these works.
In the second part of the paper I investigate how addressing these notational challenges has led to
new prespectives on the compositional process and has introduced new considerations into my
compositional practice including time as musical material, real-time and multi-nodal interaction
with the score, networked score environments with the possibility of physically distributed
performance, performer feedback and communication, and interaction between notation and other
media including visual media and movement.

Rules and Stereoelectronic Guidelines for the Anionic Nucleophilic Displacement of Furanoside and Furanose O-sulfonates

Rules for predicting anionic S_N2 displacement viability in furanose and furanoside sulfonates are presented

Revision rules in the theory of evidence

Combination rules proposed so far in the Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence, especially Dempster rule, rely on a basic assumption, that is, pieces of evidence being combined are considered to be on a par, i.e. play the same role. When a source of evidence is less reliable than another, it is possible to discount it and then a symmetric combination operation is still used. In the case of revision, the idea is to let prior knowledge of an agent be altered by some input information. The change problem is thus intrinsically asymmetric. Assuming the input information is reliable, it should be retained whilst the prior information should
be changed minimally to that effect. Although belief revision is already an important subfield of artificial intelligence, so far, it has been little addressed in evidence theory. In this paper, we define the notion of revision for the theory of evidence and propose several different revision rules, called the inner and outer
revisions, and a modified adaptive outer revision, which better corresponds to the idea of revision. Properties of these revision rules are also investigated.

Sporting Justice: An Arbitrator's Perspective

Drawing on my experience of a number of sports dispute resolution tribunals in the UK and Ireland (such as Sports Resolutions UK; Just Sport Ireland; the Football Association of Ireland’s Disciplinary Panel and the Gaelic Athletic Association’s Dispute Resolution Authority) I intend to use this paper to review the legal arguments typically made in sports-related arbitrations. These points of interest can be summarised as a series of three questions: the fairness question; the liability question; the penalty question.

In answer to the fairness question, the aim is to give a brief outline on best practice in establishing a "fair" sports disciplinary tribunal. The answer, I believe, is always twofold in nature: first, and to paraphrase Lord Steyn in R v Secretary of State For The Home Department, Ex Parte Daly [2001] UKHL 26 at [28] "in law, context is everything" – translated into the present matter, this means that in sports disciplinary cases, the more serious the charges against the individual (in terms of reputational damage, economic impact and/or length of sanction); the more tightly wrapped the procedural safeguards surrounding any subsequent disciplinary hearing must be. A fair disciplinary system will be discussed in the context of the principles laid down in Article 8 of the World Anti-Doping Code which, in effect, acts as sport’s Article 6 of the ECHR on a right to a fair trial.

Following on from the above, in the 60 or so sports arbitrations that I have heard, there are two further points of interest. First, the claim before the arbitral panel will often be framed in an argument that, for various reasons of substantive and procedural irregularity, the sanction imposed on the appellant should be quashed ("the liability"). Second, and in alternative, that the sanction imposed was wholly disproportionate ("the penalty").

The liability issue usually breaks down into two further questions. First, what is the nature of the legal duty upon a sports body in exercising its disciplinary remit? Second, to what extent does a de novo hearing on appeal cure any apparent defects in a hearing of first instance? The first issue often results in an arbitral panel debating the contra preferentum approach to the interpretation of a contested rule i.e., the sports body’s rules in question are so ambiguous that they should be interpreted in a manner to the detriment of the rule maker and in favour of the appellant. On the second matter, it now appears to be a general principle of sports law, administrative law and even human rights law that even if a violation of the principles of natural justice takes place at the first instance stage of a disciplinary process, they may be cured on de novo appeal. Authority for this approach can be found at the Court of Arbitration for Sport and in particular in CAS 2009/A/1920 FK Pobeda, Aleksandar Zabrcanec, Nikolce Zdraveski v UEFA at para 87.

The question on proportionality asks what, aside from precedent found within the decisions of the sports body in question, are the general legal principles against which a sanction by a sports disciplinary body can be benchmarked in order to ascertain whether it is disproportionate in length or even irrational in nature?

On the matter of (dis)proportionality of sanction, the debate is usually guided by the authority in Bradley v the Jockey Club [2004] EWHC 2164 (QB) and affirmed at [2005] EWCA Civ 1056. The Bradley principles on proportionality of sports-specific sanctions, recently cited with approval at the Court of Arbitration for Sport, will be examined in this presentation.

Finally, an interesting application of many of the above principles (and others such as the appropriate standard of proof in sports disciplinary procedures) can be made to recent match-fixing or corruption related hearings held by the British Horse Racing Authority, the integrity units of snooker and tennis, and at the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

Semantics for possibilistic answer set programs: uncertain rules versus rules with uncertain conclusions

Although Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a powerful framework for declarative problem solving, it cannot in an intuitive way handle situations in which some rules are uncertain, or in which it is more important to satisfy some constraints than others. Possibilistic ASP (PASP) is a natural extension of ASP in which certainty weights are associated with each rule. In this paper we contrast two different views on interpreting the weights attached to rules. Under the first view, weights reflect the certainty with which we can conclude the head of a rule when its body is satisfied. Under the second view, weights reflect the certainty that a given rule restricts the considered epistemic states of an agent in a valid way, i.e. it is the certainty that the rule itself is correct. The first view gives rise to a set of weighted answer sets, whereas the second view gives rise to a weighted set of classical answer sets.

Interpretable and Reconfigurable Clustering of Document Datasets by Deriving Word-based Rules

Clusters of text documents output by clustering algorithms are often hard to interpret. We describe motivating real-world scenarios that necessitate reconfigurability and high interpretability of clusters and outline the problem of generating clusterings with interpretable and reconfigurable cluster models. We develop two clustering algorithms toward the outlined goal of building interpretable and reconfigurable cluster models. They generate clusters with associated rules that are composed of conditions on word occurrences or nonoccurrences. The proposed approaches vary in the complexity of the format of the rules; RGC employs disjunctions and conjunctions in rule generation whereas RGC-D rules are simple disjunctions of conditions signifying presence of various words. In both the cases, each cluster is comprised of precisely the set of documents that satisfy the corresponding rule. Rules of the latter kind are easy to interpret, whereas the former leads to more accurate clustering. We show that our approaches outperform the unsupervised decision tree approach for rule-generating clustering and also an approach we provide for generating interpretable models for general clusterings, both by significant margins. We empirically show that the purity and f-measure losses to achieve interpretability can be as little as 3 and 5%, respectively using the algorithms presented herein.

Answer set programs with optional rules: a possibilistic approach

Many problems in artificial intelligence can be encoded as answer set programs (ASP) in which some rules are uncertain. ASP programs with incorrect rules may have erroneous conclusions, but due to the non-monotonic nature of ASP, omitting a correct rule may also lead to errors. To derive the most certain conclusions from an uncertain ASP program, we thus need to consider all situations in which some, none, or all of the least certain rules are omitted. This corresponds to treating some rules as optional and reasoning about which conclusions remain valid regardless of the inclusion of these optional rules. While a version of possibilistic ASP (PASP) based on this view has recently been introduced, no implementation is currently available. In this paper we propose a simulation of the main reasoning tasks in PASP using (disjunctive) ASP programs, allowing us to take advantage of state-of-the-art ASP solvers. Furthermore, we identify how several interesting AI problems can be naturally seen as special cases of the considered reasoning tasks, including cautious abductive reasoning and conformant planning. As such, the proposed simulation enables us to solve instances of the latter problem types that are more general than what current solvers can handle.

Logic Brightens My Day: Evidence for Implicit Sensitivity to Logical Validity.

A key assumption of dual process theory is that reasoning is an explicit, effortful, deliberative process. The present study offers evidence for an implicit, possibly intuitive component of reasoning. Participants were shown sentences embedded in logically valid or invalid arguments. Participants were not asked to reason but instead rated the sentences for liking (Experiment 1) and physical brightness (Experiments 2-3). Sentences that followed logically from preceding sentences were judged to be more likable and brighter. Two other factors thought to be linked to implicit processing-sentence believability and facial expression-had similar effects on liking and brightness ratings. The authors conclude that sensitivity to logical structure was implicit, occurring potentially automatically and outside of awareness. They discuss the results within a fluency misattribution framework and make reference to the literature on discourse comprehension.