The PSE-3D instability analysis methodology for flows depending strongly on two and weakly on the third spatial dimension

The present contribution discusses the development of a PSE-3D instability analysis algorithm, in which a matrix forming and storing approach is followed. Alternatively to the typically used in stability calculations spectral methods, new stable high-order finitedifference-based numerical schemes for spatial discretization 1 are employed. Attention is paid to the issue of efficiency, which is critical for the success of the overall algorithm. To this end, use is made of a parallelizable sparse matrix linear algebra package which takes advantage of the sparsity offered by the finite-difference scheme and, as expected, is shown to perform substantially more efficiently than when spectral collocation methods are used. The building blocks of the algorithm have been implemented and extensively validated, focusing on classic PSE analysis of instability on the flow-plate boundary layer, temporal and spatial BiGlobal EVP solutions (the latter necessary for the initialization of the PSE-3D), as well as standard PSE in a cylindrical coordinates using the nonparallel Batchelor vortex basic flow model, such that comparisons between PSE and PSE-3D be possible; excellent agreement is shown in all aforementioned comparisons. Finally, the linear PSE-3D instability analysis is applied to a fully three-dimensional flow composed of a counter-rotating pair of nonparallel Batchelor vortices.

A Semantic Scraping Model for Web Resources - Applying Linked Data to Web Page Screen Scraping

In spite of the increasing presence of Semantic Web Facilities, only a limited amount of the available resources in the Internet provide a semantic access. Recent initiatives such as the emerging Linked Data Web are providing semantic access to available data by porting existing resources to the semantic web using different technologies, such as database-semantic mapping and scraping. Nevertheless, existing scraping solutions are based on ad-hoc solutions complemented with graphical interfaces for speeding up the scraper development. This article proposes a generic framework for web scraping based on semantic technologies. This framework is structured in three levels: scraping services, semantic scraping model and syntactic scraping. The first level provides an interface to generic applications or intelligent agents for gathering information from the web at a high level. The second level defines a semantic RDF model of the scraping process, in order to provide a declarative approach to the scraping task. Finally, the third level provides an implementation of the RDF scraping model for specific technologies. The work has been validated in a scenario that illustrates its application to mashup technologies

OntoTag - A Linguistic and Ontological Annotation Model Suitable for the Semantic Web

OntoTag - A Linguistic and Ontological Annotation Model Suitable for the Semantic Web 1. INTRODUCTION. LINGUISTIC TOOLS AND ANNOTATIONS: THEIR LIGHTS AND SHADOWS Computational Linguistics is already a consolidated research area. It builds upon the results of other two major ones, namely Linguistics and Computer Science and Engineering, and it aims at developing computational models of human language (or natural language, as it is termed in this area). Possibly, its most well-known applications are the different tools developed so far for processing human language, such as machine translation systems and speech recognizers or dictation programs. These tools for processing human language are commonly referred to as linguistic tools. Apart from the examples mentioned above, there are also other types of linguistic tools that perhaps are not so well-known, but on which most of the other applications of Computational Linguistics are built. These other types of linguistic tools comprise POS taggers, natural language parsers and semantic taggers, amongst others. All of them can be termed linguistic annotation tools. Linguistic annotation tools are important assets. In fact, POS and semantic taggers (and, to a lesser extent, also natural language parsers) have become critical resources for the computer applications that process natural language. Hence, any computer application that has to analyse a text automatically and ‘intelligently’ will include at least a module for POS tagging. The more an application needs to ‘understand’ the meaning of the text it processes, the more linguistic tools and/or modules it will incorporate and integrate. However, linguistic annotation tools have still some limitations, which can be summarised as follows: 1. Normally, they perform annotations only at a certain linguistic level (that is, Morphology, Syntax, Semantics, etc.). 2. They usually introduce a certain rate of errors and ambiguities when tagging. This error rate ranges from 10 percent up to 50 percent of the units annotated for unrestricted, general texts. 3. Their annotations are most frequently formulated in terms of an annotation schema designed and implemented ad hoc. A priori, it seems that the interoperation and the integration of several linguistic tools into an appropriate software architecture could most likely solve the limitations stated in (1). Besides, integrating several linguistic annotation tools and making them interoperate could also minimise the limitation stated in (2). Nevertheless, in the latter case, all these tools should produce annotations for a common level, which would have to be combined in order to correct their corresponding errors and inaccuracies. Yet, the limitation stated in (3) prevents both types of integration and interoperation from being easily achieved. In addition, most high-level annotation tools rely on other lower-level annotation tools and their outputs to generate their own ones. For example, sense-tagging tools (operating at the semantic level) often use POS taggers (operating at a lower level, i.e., the morphosyntactic) to identify the grammatical category of the word or lexical unit they are annotating. Accordingly, if a faulty or inaccurate low-level annotation tool is to be used by other higher-level one in its process, the errors and inaccuracies of the former should be minimised in advance. Otherwise, these errors and inaccuracies would be transferred to (and even magnified in) the annotations of the high-level annotation tool. Therefore, it would be quite useful to find a way to (i) correct or, at least, reduce the errors and the inaccuracies of lower-level linguistic tools; (ii) unify the annotation schemas of different linguistic annotation tools or, more generally speaking, make these tools (as well as their annotations) interoperate. Clearly, solving (i) and (ii) should ease the automatic annotation of web pages by means of linguistic tools, and their transformation into Semantic Web pages (Berners-Lee, Hendler and Lassila, 2001). Yet, as stated above, (ii) is a type of interoperability problem. There again, ontologies (Gruber, 1993; Borst, 1997) have been successfully applied thus far to solve several interoperability problems. Hence, ontologies should help solve also the problems and limitations of linguistic annotation tools aforementioned. Thus, to summarise, the main aim of the present work was to combine somehow these separated approaches, mechanisms and tools for annotation from Linguistics and Ontological Engineering (and the Semantic Web) in a sort of hybrid (linguistic and ontological) annotation model, suitable for both areas. This hybrid (semantic) annotation model should (a) benefit from the advances, models, techniques, mechanisms and tools of these two areas; (b) minimise (and even solve, when possible) some of the problems found in each of them; and (c) be suitable for the Semantic Web. The concrete goals that helped attain this aim are presented in the following section. 2. GOALS OF THE PRESENT WORK As mentioned above, the main goal of this work was to specify a hybrid (that is, linguistically-motivated and ontology-based) model of annotation suitable for the Semantic Web (i.e. it had to produce a semantic annotation of web page contents). This entailed that the tags included in the annotations of the model had to (1) represent linguistic concepts (or linguistic categories, as they are termed in ISO/DCR (2008)), in order for this model to be linguistically-motivated; (2) be ontological terms (i.e., use an ontological vocabulary), in order for the model to be ontology-based; and (3) be structured (linked) as a collection of ontology-based triples, as in the usual Semantic Web languages (namely RDF(S) and OWL), in order for the model to be considered suitable for the Semantic Web. Besides, to be useful for the Semantic Web, this model should provide a way to automate the annotation of web pages. As for the present work, this requirement involved reusing the linguistic annotation tools purchased by the OEG research group (http://www.oeg-upm.net), but solving beforehand (or, at least, minimising) some of their limitations. Therefore, this model had to minimise these limitations by means of the integration of several linguistic annotation tools into a common architecture. Since this integration required the interoperation of tools and their annotations, ontologies were proposed as the main technological component to make them effectively interoperate. From the very beginning, it seemed that the formalisation of the elements and the knowledge underlying linguistic annotations within an appropriate set of ontologies would be a great step forward towards the formulation of such a model (henceforth referred to as OntoTag). Obviously, first, to combine the results of the linguistic annotation tools that operated at the same level, their annotation schemas had to be unified (or, preferably, standardised) in advance. This entailed the unification (id. standardisation) of their tags (both their representation and their meaning), and their format or syntax. Second, to merge the results of the linguistic annotation tools operating at different levels, their respective annotation schemas had to be (a) made interoperable and (b) integrated. And third, in order for the resulting annotations to suit the Semantic Web, they had to be specified by means of an ontology-based vocabulary, and structured by means of ontology-based triples, as hinted above. Therefore, a new annotation scheme had to be devised, based both on ontologies and on this type of triples, which allowed for the combination and the integration of the annotations of any set of linguistic annotation tools. This annotation scheme was considered a fundamental part of the model proposed here, and its development was, accordingly, another major objective of the present work. All these goals, aims and objectives could be re-stated more clearly as follows: Goal 1: Development of a set of ontologies for the formalisation of the linguistic knowledge relating linguistic annotation. Sub-goal 1.1: Ontological formalisation of the EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) de facto standards for morphosyntactic and syntactic annotation, in a way that helps respect the triple structure recommended for annotations in these works (which is isomorphic to the triple structures used in the context of the Semantic Web). Sub-goal 1.2: Incorporation into this preliminary ontological formalisation of other existing standards and standard proposals relating the levels mentioned above, such as those currently under development within ISO/TC 37 (the ISO Technical Committee dealing with Terminology, which deals also with linguistic resources and annotations). Sub-goal 1.3: Generalisation and extension of the recommendations in EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) and ISO/TC 37 to the semantic level, for which no ISO/TC 37 standards have been developed yet. Sub-goal 1.4: Ontological formalisation of the generalisations and/or extensions obtained in the previous sub-goal as generalisations and/or extensions of the corresponding ontology (or ontologies). Sub-goal 1.5: Ontological formalisation of the knowledge required to link, combine and unite the knowledge represented in the previously developed ontology (or ontologies). Goal 2: Development of OntoTag’s annotation scheme, a standard-based abstract scheme for the hybrid (linguistically-motivated and ontological-based) annotation of texts. Sub-goal 2.1: Development of the standard-based morphosyntactic annotation level of OntoTag’s scheme. This level should include, and possibly extend, the recommendations of EAGLES (1996a) and also the recommendations included in the ISO/MAF (2008) standard draft. Sub-goal 2.2: Development of the standard-based syntactic annotation level of the hybrid abstract scheme. This level should include, and possibly extend, the recommendations of EAGLES (1996b) and the ISO/SynAF (2010) standard draft. Sub-goal 2.3: Development of the standard-based semantic annotation level of OntoTag’s (abstract) scheme. Sub-goal 2.4: Development of the mechanisms for a convenient integration of the three annotation levels already mentioned. These mechanisms should take into account the recommendations included in the ISO/LAF (2009) standard draft. Goal 3: Design of OntoTag’s (abstract) annotation architecture, an abstract architecture for the hybrid (semantic) annotation of texts (i) that facilitates the integration and interoperation of different linguistic annotation tools, and (ii) whose results comply with OntoTag’s annotation scheme. Sub-goal 3.1: Specification of the decanting processes that allow for the classification and separation, according to their corresponding levels, of the results of the linguistic tools annotating at several different levels. Sub-goal 3.2: Specification of the standardisation processes that allow (a) complying with the standardisation requirements of OntoTag’s annotation scheme, as well as (b) combining the results of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation. Sub-goal 3.3: Specification of the merging processes that allow for the combination of the output annotations and the interoperation of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation. Sub-goal 3.4: Specification of the merge processes that allow for the integration of the results and the interoperation of those tools performing their annotations at different levels. Goal 4: Generation of OntoTagger’s schema, a concrete instance of OntoTag’s abstract scheme for a concrete set of linguistic annotations. These linguistic annotations result from the tools and the resources available in the research group, namely • Bitext’s DataLexica (http://www.bitext.com/EN/datalexica.asp), • LACELL’s (POS) tagger (http://www.um.es/grupos/grupo-lacell/quees.php), • Connexor’s FDG (http://www.connexor.eu/technology/machinese/glossary/fdg/), and • EuroWordNet (Vossen et al., 1998). This schema should help evaluate OntoTag’s underlying hypotheses, stated below. Consequently, it should implement, at least, those levels of the abstract scheme dealing with the annotations of the set of tools considered in this implementation. This includes the morphosyntactic, the syntactic and the semantic levels. Goal 5: Implementation of OntoTagger’s configuration, a concrete instance of OntoTag’s abstract architecture for this set of linguistic tools and annotations. This configuration (1) had to use the schema generated in the previous goal; and (2) should help support or refute the hypotheses of this work as well (see the next section). Sub-goal 5.1: Implementation of the decanting processes that facilitate the classification and separation of the results of those linguistic resources that provide annotations at several different levels (on the one hand, LACELL’s tagger operates at the morphosyntactic level and, minimally, also at the semantic level; on the other hand, FDG operates at the morphosyntactic and the syntactic levels and, minimally, at the semantic level as well). Sub-goal 5.2: Implementation of the standardisation processes that allow (i) specifying the results of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation according to the requirements of OntoTagger’s schema, as well as (ii) combining these shared level results. In particular, all the tools selected perform morphosyntactic annotations and they had to be conveniently combined by means of these processes. Sub-goal 5.3: Implementation of the merging processes that allow for the combination (and possibly the improvement) of the annotations and the interoperation of the tools that share some level of annotation (in particular, those relating the morphosyntactic level, as in the previous sub-goal). Sub-goal 5.4: Implementation of the merging processes that allow for the integration of the different standardised and combined annotations aforementioned, relating all the levels considered. Sub-goal 5.5: Improvement of the semantic level of this configuration by adding a named entity recognition, (sub-)classification and annotation subsystem, which also uses the named entities annotated to populate a domain ontology, in order to provide a concrete application of the present work in the two areas involved (the Semantic Web and Corpus Linguistics). 3. MAIN RESULTS: ASSESSMENT OF ONTOTAG’S UNDERLYING HYPOTHESES The model developed in the present thesis tries to shed some light on (i) whether linguistic annotation tools can effectively interoperate; (ii) whether their results can be combined and integrated; and, if they can, (iii) how they can, respectively, interoperate and be combined and integrated. Accordingly, several hypotheses had to be supported (or rejected) by the development of the OntoTag model and OntoTagger (its implementation). The hypotheses underlying OntoTag are surveyed below. Only one of the hypotheses (H.6) was rejected; the other five could be confirmed. H.1 The annotations of different levels (or layers) can be integrated into a sort of overall, comprehensive, multilayer and multilevel annotation, so that their elements can complement and refer to each other. • CONFIRMED by the development of: o OntoTag’s annotation scheme, o OntoTag’s annotation architecture, o OntoTagger’s (XML, RDF, OWL) annotation schemas, o OntoTagger’s configuration. H.2 Tool-dependent annotations can be mapped onto a sort of tool-independent annotations and, thus, can be standardised. • CONFIRMED by means of the standardisation phase incorporated into OntoTag and OntoTagger for the annotations yielded by the tools. H.3 Standardisation should ease: H.3.1: The interoperation of linguistic tools. H.3.2: The comparison, combination (at the same level and layer) and integration (at different levels or layers) of annotations. • H.3 was CONFIRMED by means of the development of OntoTagger’s ontology-based configuration: o Interoperation, comparison, combination and integration of the annotations of three different linguistic tools (Connexor’s FDG, Bitext’s DataLexica and LACELL’s tagger); o Integration of EuroWordNet-based, domain-ontology-based and named entity annotations at the semantic level. o Integration of morphosyntactic, syntactic and semantic annotations. H.4 Ontologies and Semantic Web technologies (can) play a crucial role in the standardisation of linguistic annotations, by providing consensual vocabularies and standardised formats for annotation (e.g., RDF triples). • CONFIRMED by means of the development of OntoTagger’s RDF-triple-based annotation schemas. H.5 The rate of errors introduced by a linguistic tool at a given level, when annotating, can be reduced automatically by contrasting and combining its results with the ones coming from other tools, operating at the same level. However, these other tools might be built following a different technological (stochastic vs. rule-based, for example) or theoretical (dependency vs. HPS-grammar-based, for instance) approach. • CONFIRMED by the results yielded by the evaluation of OntoTagger. H.6 Each linguistic level can be managed and annotated independently. • REJECTED: OntoTagger’s experiments and the dependencies observed among the morphosyntactic annotations, and between them and the syntactic annotations. In fact, Hypothesis H.6 was already rejected when OntoTag’s ontologies were developed. We observed then that several linguistic units stand on an interface between levels, belonging thereby to both of them (such as morphosyntactic units, which belong to both the morphological level and the syntactic level). Therefore, the annotations of these levels overlap and cannot be handled independently when merged into a unique multileveled annotation. 4. OTHER MAIN RESULTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS First, interoperability is a hot topic for both the linguistic annotation community and the whole Computer Science field. The specification (and implementation) of OntoTag’s architecture for the combination and integration of linguistic (annotation) tools and annotations by means of ontologies shows a way to make these different linguistic annotation tools and annotations interoperate in practice. Second, as mentioned above, the elements involved in linguistic annotation were formalised in a set (or network) of ontologies (OntoTag’s linguistic ontologies). • On the one hand, OntoTag’s network of ontologies consists of − The Linguistic Unit Ontology (LUO), which includes a mostly hierarchical formalisation of the different types of linguistic elements (i.e., units) identifiable in a written text; − The Linguistic Attribute Ontology (LAO), which includes also a mostly hierarchical formalisation of the different types of features that characterise the linguistic units included in the LUO; − The Linguistic Value Ontology (LVO), which includes the corresponding formalisation of the different values that the attributes in the LAO can take; − The OIO (OntoTag’s Integration Ontology), which  Includes the knowledge required to link, combine and unite the knowledge represented in the LUO, the LAO and the LVO;  Can be viewed as a knowledge representation ontology that describes the most elementary vocabulary used in the area of annotation. • On the other hand, OntoTag’s ontologies incorporate the knowledge included in the different standards and recommendations for linguistic annotation released so far, such as those developed within the EAGLES and the SIMPLE European projects or by the ISO/TC 37 committee: − As far as morphosyntactic annotations are concerned, OntoTag’s ontologies formalise the terms in the EAGLES (1996a) recommendations and their corresponding terms within the ISO Morphosyntactic Annotation Framework (ISO/MAF, 2008) standard; − As for syntactic annotations, OntoTag’s ontologies incorporate the terms in the EAGLES (1996b) recommendations and their corresponding terms within the ISO Syntactic Annotation Framework (ISO/SynAF, 2010) standard draft; − Regarding semantic annotations, OntoTag’s ontologies generalise and extend the recommendations in EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) and, since no stable standards or standard drafts have been released for semantic annotation by ISO/TC 37 yet, they incorporate the terms in SIMPLE (2000) instead; − The terms coming from all these recommendations and standards were supplemented by those within the ISO Data Category Registry (ISO/DCR, 2008) and also of the ISO Linguistic Annotation Framework (ISO/LAF, 2009) standard draft when developing OntoTag’s ontologies. Third, we showed that the combination of the results of tools annotating at the same level can yield better results (both in precision and in recall) than each tool separately. In particular, 1. OntoTagger clearly outperformed two of the tools integrated into its configuration, namely DataLexica and FDG in all the combination sub-phases in which they overlapped (i.e. POS tagging, lemma annotation and morphological feature annotation). As far as the remaining tool is concerned, i.e. LACELL’s tagger, it was also outperformed by OntoTagger in POS tagging and lemma annotation, and it did not behave better than OntoTagger in the morphological feature annotation layer. 2. As an immediate result, this implies that a) This type of combination architecture configurations can be applied in order to improve significantly the accuracy of linguistic annotations; and b) Concerning the morphosyntactic level, this could be regarded as a way of constructing more robust and more accurate POS tagging systems. Fourth, Semantic Web annotations are usually performed by humans or else by machine learning systems. Both of them leave much to be desired: the former, with respect to their annotation rate; the latter, with respect to their (average) precision and recall. In this work, we showed how linguistic tools can be wrapped in order to annotate automatically Semantic Web pages using ontologies. This entails their fast, robust and accurate semantic annotation. As a way of example, as mentioned in Sub-goal 5.5, we developed a particular OntoTagger module for the recognition, classification and labelling of named entities, according to the MUC and ACE tagsets (Chinchor, 1997; Doddington et al., 2004). These tagsets were further specified by means of a domain ontology, namely the Cinema Named Entities Ontology (CNEO). This module was applied to the automatic annotation of ten different web pages containing cinema reviews (that is, around 5000 words). In addition, the named entities annotated with this module were also labelled as instances (or individuals) of the classes included in the CNEO and, then, were used to populate this domain ontology. • The statistical results obtained from the evaluation of this particular module of OntoTagger can be summarised as follows. On the one hand, as far as recall (R) is concerned, (R.1) the lowest value was 76,40% (for file 7); (R.2) the highest value was 97, 50% (for file 3); and (R.3) the average value was 88,73%. On the other hand, as far as the precision rate (P) is concerned, (P.1) its minimum was 93,75% (for file 4); (R.2) its maximum was 100% (for files 1, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10); and (R.3) its average value was 98,99%. • These results, which apply to the tasks of named entity annotation and ontology population, are extraordinary good for both of them. They can be explained on the basis of the high accuracy of the annotations provided by OntoTagger at the lower levels (mainly at the morphosyntactic level). However, they should be conveniently qualified, since they might be too domain- and/or language-dependent. It should be further experimented how our approach works in a different domain or a different language, such as French, English, or German. • In any case, the results of this application of Human Language Technologies to Ontology Population (and, accordingly, to Ontological Engineering) seem very promising and encouraging in order for these two areas to collaborate and complement each other in the area of semantic annotation. Fifth, as shown in the State of the Art of this work, there are different approaches and models for the semantic annotation of texts, but all of them focus on a particular view of the semantic level. Clearly, all these approaches and models should be integrated in order to bear a coherent and joint semantic annotation level. OntoTag shows how (i) these semantic annotation layers could be integrated together; and (ii) they could be integrated with the annotations associated to other annotation levels. Sixth, we identified some recommendations, best practices and lessons learned for annotation standardisation, interoperation and merge. They show how standardisation (via ontologies, in this case) enables the combination, integration and interoperation of different linguistic tools and their annotations into a multilayered (or multileveled) linguistic annotation, which is one of the hot topics in the area of Linguistic Annotation. And last but not least, OntoTag’s annotation scheme and OntoTagger’s annotation schemas show a way to formalise and annotate coherently and uniformly the different units and features associated to the different levels and layers of linguistic annotation. This is a great scientific step ahead towards the global standardisation of this area, which is the aim of ISO/TC 37 (in particular, Subcommittee 4, dealing with the standardisation of linguistic annotations and resources).

Providing 30Mbit/s to Spain’s final third. -A techno-economic assessment.

Since the Digital Agenda for Europe released the Europe2020 flagship, Member States are looking for ways of fulfilling their agreed commitments to fast and ultrafast internet deployment. However, Europe is not a homogenous reality. The economic, geographic, social and demographic features of each country make it a highly diverse region to develop best practices over Next Generation Access Networks (NGAN) deployments. There are special concerns about NGAN deployments for “the final third”, as referred to the last 25% of the country’s population who, usually, live in rural areas. This paper assesses, through a techno-economic analysis, the access cost of providing over 30 Mbps broadband for the final third of Spain`s population in municipalities, which are classified into area types, referred to as geotypes. Fixed and mobile technologies are compared in order to determine which is the most cost-effective technology for each geotype. The demographic limit for fixed networks (cable, fibre and copper) is also discussed. The assessment focuses on the supply side and the results show the access network cost only. The research completes a previous published assessment (Techno-economic analysis of next generation access networks roll-out. The case of platform competition, regulation and public policy in Spain) by including the LTE scenario. The LTE scenario is dimensioned to provide 30 Mbps (best effort) broadband, considering a network take-up of 25%. The Rocket techno-economic model is used to assess a ten-year study period deployment. Nevertheless, the deployment must start in 2014 and be completed by 2020, in order to fulfil the Digital Agenda’s goals. The feasibility of the deployment is defined as the ability to recoup the investment at the end of the study period. This ability is highly related to network take-up and, therefore, to service adoption. Network deployment in each geotype is compared with the cost of the deployment in the Urban geotype and broadband expected penetration rates for clarity and simplicity. Debating the cost-effective deployments for each geotype, while addressing the Digital Agenda’s goals regarding fast and ultrafast internet, is the main purpose of this paper. At the end of the last year, the independent Spanish regulation agency released the Spain broadband coverage report at the first half of 2013. This document claimed that 59% and 52% of Spain’s population was already covered by NGAN capable of providing 30 Mbps and 100 Mbps broadband respectively. HFC, with 47% of population coverage, and FTTH, with 14%, were considered as a 100 Mbps capable NGAN. Meanwhile VDSL, with 12% of the population covered, was the only NGAN network considered for the 30 Mbps segment. Despite not being an NGAN, the 99% population coverage of HSPA networks was also noted in the report. Since mobile operators are also required to provide 30 Mbps broadband to 90% of the population in rural areas by the end of 2020, mobile networks will play a significant role on the achievement of the 30 Mbps goal in Spain’s final third. The assessment indicates the cost of the deployment per cumulative households coverage with 4 different NGANs: FTTH, HFC, VDSL and LTE. Research shows that an investment ranging from €2,700 (VDSL) to €5,400 (HFC) million will be needed to cover the first half of the population with any fixed technology assessed. The results state that at least €3,000 million will be required to cover these areas with the least expensive technology (LTE). However, if we consider the throughput that fixed networks could provide and achievement of the Digital Agenda’s objectives, fixed network deployments are recommended for up to 90% of the population. Fibre and cable deployments could cover up to a maximum of 88% of the Spanish population cost efficiently. As there are some concerns about the service adoption, we recommend VDSL and mobile network deployments for the final third of the population. Despite LTE being able to provide the most economical roll-out, VDSL could also provide 50 Mbps from 75% to 90% of the Spanish population cost efficiently. For this population gap, facility based competition between VDSL providers and LTE providers must be encouraged. Regarding 90% to 98.5% of the Spanish population, LTE deployment is the most appropriate. Since costumers in less populated the municipalities are more sensitive to the cost of the service, we consider that a single network deployment could be most appropriate. Finally, it has become clear that it is not possible to deliver 30Mbps to the final 1.5% of the population cost-efficiently and adoption predictions are not optimistic either. As there are other broadband alternatives able to deliver up to 20 Mbps, in the authors’ opinion, it is not necessary to cover the extreme rural areas, where public financing would be required.

A management model for closed-loop supply chains of reusable articles

This PhD dissertation is framed in the emergent fields of Reverse Logistics and ClosedLoop Supply Chain (CLSC) management. This subarea of supply chain management has gained researchers and practitioners' attention over the last 15 years to become a fully recognized subdiscipline of the Operations Management field. More specifically, among all the activities that are included within the CLSC area, the focus of this dissertation is centered in direct reuse aspects. The main contribution of this dissertation to current knowledge is twofold. First, a framework for the so-called reuse CLSC is developed. This conceptual model is grounded in a set of six case studies conducted by the author in real industrial settings. The model has also been contrasted with existing literature and with academic and professional experts on the topic as well. The framework encompasses four building blocks. In the first block, a typology for reusable articles is put forward, distinguishing between Returnable Transport Items (RTI), Reusable Packaging Materials (RPM), and Reusable Products (RP). In the second block, the common characteristics that render reuse CLSC difficult to manage from a logistical standpoint are identified, namely: fleet shrinkage, significant investment and limited visibility. In the third block, the main problems arising in the management of reuse CLSC are analyzed, such as: (1) define fleet size dimension, (2) control cycle time and promote articles rotation, (3) control return rate and prevent shrinkage, (4) define purchase policies for new articles, (5) plan and control reconditioning activities, and (6) balance inventory between depots. Finally, in the fourth block some solutions to those issues are developed. Firstly, problems (2) and (3) are addressed through the comparative analysis of alternative strategies for controlling cycle time and return rate. Secondly, a methodology for calculating the required fleet size is elaborated (problem (1)). This methodology is valid for different configurations of the physical flows in the reuse CLSC. Likewise, some directions are pointed out for further development of a similar method for defining purchase policies for new articles (problem (4)). The second main contribution of this dissertation is embedded in the solutions part (block 4) of the conceptual framework and comprises a two-level decision problem integrating two mixed integer linear programming (MILP) models that have been formulated and solved to optimality using AIMMS as modeling language, CPLEX as solver and Excel spreadsheet for data introduction and output presentation. The results obtained are analyzed in order to measure in a client-supplier system the economic impact of two alternative control strategies (recovery policies) in the context of reuse. In addition, the models support decision-making regarding the selection of the appropriate recovery policy against the characteristics of demand pattern and the structure of the relevant costs in the system. The triangulation of methods used in this thesis has enabled to address the same research topic with different approaches and thus, the robustness of the results obtained is strengthened.

A numerical model for shoaling and refraction of second-order cnoidal waves over an irregular bottom /

Mode of access: Internet.

Parliamentary law and rules of procedure : a manual of practical information concerning deliberative bodies; motions and their purpose and relation; voting; elections; committees; officers and debate; together with model forms and reference charts; in accordance with Robert's rules of order, revised 1915 /

Mode of access: Internet.

Operator, organizational, direct support, general support, and depot maintenance manual : theodolite, directional, 2/10 sec graduation, first-order, with accessories, trivet, tripod, and cases (Kern model DKM3M) FSN 6675-455-9200.

Includes index.

In the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, March term, 1936 : National Labor Relations Board, petitioner v. Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, Inc., Greyhound Management Company, corporations, respondents, on application for enforcement of an order of the National Labor Relations Board : brief for petitioner.

At head of title: No. 6007.

Bayesian and Frequentist Two-Sample Predictions of the Inverse Weibull Model Based on Generalized Order Statistics

2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: 62E16,62F15, 62H12, 62M20.

Jury decision making and the Story Model: How do deliberation style and evidence order influence the story that juries create?

This study investigated the utility of the Story Model for decision making at the jury level by examining the influence of evidence order and deliberation style on story consistency and guilt. Participants were shown a video-taped trial stimulus and then provided case perceptions including a guilt judgment and a narrative about what occurred during the incident. Participants then deliberated for approximately thirty minutes using either an evidence-driven or verdict-driven deliberation style before again providing case perceptions, including a guilt determination, a narrative about what happened during the incident, and an evidence recognition test. Multi-level regression analyses revealed that evidence order, deliberation style and sample interacted to influence both story consistency measures and guilt. Among students, participants in the verdict-driven deliberation condition formed more consistent pro-prosecution stories when the prosecution presented their case in story-order, while participants in the evidence-driven deliberation condition formed more consistent pro-prosecution stories when the defense's case was presented in story-order. Findings were the opposite among community members, with participants in the verdict-driven deliberation condition forming more consistent pro-prosecution stories when the defense's case was presented in story-order, and participants in the evidence-driven deliberation condition forming more consistent pro-prosecution stories when the prosecution's case was presented in story-order. Additionally several story consistency measures influenced guilt decisions. Thus there is some support for the hypothesis that story consistency mediates the influence of evidence order and deliberation style on guilt decisions.

Effects of sex, third grade reading achievement and motivation as predictors of fourth grade reading achievement of Hispanic students: A path analysis

This study explored the topic of motivation for intermediate students combining both an objective criterion measure (i.e., standardized test scores) and the self-report of students on self-concept and value of reading. The purpose of this study was to examine how third grade reading achievement correlated with the motivation of fourth grade boys and girls, and, in turn, how motivation related to fourth grade reading achievement. The participants were fourth grade students (n=207) attending two public, elementary schools in Miami-Dade County who were of primarily Hispanic origin or descent. Data were collected using the Reading Survey portion of the Motivation to Read Profile (1996) which measures self-concept and value of reading in order to measure motivation and the Third and Fourth Grade Reading Florida Comprehensive Assessment Tests 2.0 (FCAT 2.0) to assess achievement. First, a one way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was conducted to determine whether motivation differed significantly between fourth grade boys and girls. Second, a path analysis was used to determine whether motivation mediated or moderated the association between FCAT 2.0 third and fourth grade scores. Results of the ANOVA indicated that motivation, as measured by the Motivation to Read Profile did not differ significantly by sex. Results from the path analysis indicated that the model was significant and that third grade FCAT 2.0 scores accounted for a significant amount of the variance in fourth grade FCAT 2.0 scores once motivation was entered. Results of the study demonstrated that motivation partially mediates, but does not moderate the relationship between FCAT 2.0 third and fourth grade scores. In conclusion, it can be determined that past student achievement for fourth grade students plays a role in current student achievement when motivation is also considered. It is therefore important in order to improve the quality of fourth grade student's current performance to take into account a student's motivation and past achievement. An effort must be made to address students' motivational needs whether through school wide programs or at the classroom level in addition or in conjunction with cognition. Future research on the effect of self-concept in reading achievement is recommended.

Converging evidence that common timing processes underlie temporal-order and simultaneity judgments: a model-based analysis

Perception of simultaneity and temporal order is studied with simultaneity judgment (SJ) and temporal-order judgment (TOJ) tasks. In the former, observers report whether presentation of two stimuli was subjectively simultaneous; in the latter, they report which stimulus was subjectively presented first. SJ and TOJ tasks typically give discrepant results, which has prompted the view that performance is mediated by different processes in each task. We looked at these discrepancies from a model that yields psychometric functions whose parameters characterize the timing, decisional, and response processes involved in SJ and TOJ tasks. We analyzed 12 data sets from published studies in which both tasks had been used in within-subjects designs, all of which had reported differences in performance across tasks. Fitting the model jointly to data from both tasks, we tested the hypothesis that common timing processes sustain simultaneity and temporal order judgments, with differences in performance arising from task-dependent decisional and response processes. The results supported this hypothesis, also showing that model psychometric functions account for aspects of SJ and TOJ data that classical analyses overlook. Implications for research on perception of simultaneity and temporal order are discussed.