A minor error in “a practical approach to estimating the true effect of exposure despite imprecise exposure classification”

1991 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 421-421
Author(s):  
James J. Weinkam ◽  
Wilfred L. Rosenbaum ◽  
Theodor D. Sterling
Keyword(s):  
Practical Approach ◽  
Minor Error ◽  
True Effect ◽  
A Minor

Errata for "Unifying consensus and atomic commitment for effective cloud data management"

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. 1166-1166
Author(s):  
Sujaya Maiyya ◽  
Faisal Nawab ◽  
Divyakant Agrawal ◽  
Amr El Abbadi
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Cloud Data ◽  
Minor Error ◽  
Failure Scenario ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Cloud Data Management ◽  
Atomic Commitment

This errata article discusses and corrects a minor error in our work published in VLDB 2019. The discrepancy specifically pertains to Algorithms 3 and 4. The algorithms presented in the paper are biased towards a commit decision in a specific failure scenario. We explain the error using an example before correcting the algorithm.

On the K-theory of the extended power construction

1982 ◽  
Vol 92 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. E. McClure ◽  
V. P. Snaith
Keyword(s):  
Minor Error ◽  
Ring Spectra ◽  
Power Construction ◽  
Complete Treatment ◽  
K Theory ◽  
Image Position ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Extended Power

The construction of Dyer-Lashof operations in K-theory outlined in (6) and refined in (12) depends in an essential way on the descriptions of the mod-p K-theory of EZp, ×ZpXp and EΣ ×σ p Xp given there. Unfortunately, these descriptions are incorrect when p is odd except in the case where the Bockstein β is identically zero in K*(X; Zp), and even in this case the methods of proof used in (6) and (12) are not strong enough to show that the answer given there is correct. In this paper we repair this difficulty, obtaining a complete corrected description of K*(EZp ×ZpXp; Zp) and K*(EΣp) (theorem 3·1 below, which should be compared with ((12); theorems 3·8 and 3·9) and ((6); theorem 3)). Because of the error, the method used in (6) and (12) to construct Dyer-Lashof operations fails to go through for odd primes when non-zero Bocksteins occur, and it is not clear that this method can be repaired. We shall not deal with the construction of Dyer-Lashof operations in this paper. Instead, the first author will give a complete treatment of these operations in (5), using our present results and the theory of H∞-ring spectra to obtain strengthened versions of the results originally claimed in ((12); theorem 5·1). There is also a minor error in the mod-2 results of (12) (namely, the second formula in (12), theorem 3·8 (a) (ii)) should readwhere B2 is the second mod-2 Bockstein, and a similar change is necessary in the second formula of ((12), theorem 3·8(b) (ii)). The correction of this error requires the methods of (5) and will not be dealt with here; fortunately, the mod-2 calculations of ((12), §6–9), (10) and (11) are unaffected and remain true as stated.

Spanish Summaries

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1966 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 387-387
Author(s):  
ALLAN B. COLEMAN
Keyword(s):  
Ion Exchange ◽  
Exchange Resin ◽  
Ion Exchange Resin ◽  
Minor Error ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Problems Of Translation ◽  
Technical Terms

Regarding the summaries in Spanish, I have found them to be an excellent means of expanding my vocabulary of technical terms, since they are usually literal translations of the English summaries at the end of the papers. I was struck by a minor error in the October issue (Pediatrics, 36:592. 1965) which points up the problems of translation and communication troubles of our shrinking world. In the summary of the paper by Scriver and Davies the term ion exchange resin is translated as "resina para el intercambio de hierro," which translated back means resin for the exchange of iron.

A note on the biadjunction between 2-categories of traced monoidal categories and tortile monoidal categories

2009 ◽  
Vol 148 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
MASAHITO HASEGAWA ◽  
SHIN-YA KATSUMATA
Keyword(s):  
Monoidal Categories ◽  
Minor Error ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
A Minor

AbstractWe illustrate a minor error in the biadjointness result for 2-categories of traced monoidal categories and tortile monoidal categories stated by Joyal, Street and Verity. We also show that the biadjointness holds after suitably changing the definition of 2-cells.

A practical approach to estimating the true effect of exposure despite imprecise exposure classification

1991 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 587-601 ◽  
Author(s):  
James J. Weinkam ◽  
Wilfred L. Rosenbaum ◽  
Theodor D. Sterling
Keyword(s):  
Practical Approach ◽  
True Effect

scholarly journals Time, Moment, Eternity: Hieroglyphs and Meditations in Yakov Druskin’s Philosophy

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 252
Author(s):  
Andrey S. Menshikov
Keyword(s):  
Main Part ◽  
Edmund Husserl ◽  
Time Moment ◽  
Henri Bergson ◽  
Franz Rosenzweig ◽  
Philosophical Reflection ◽  
Minor Error ◽  
Philosophical Project ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Existential Problem

In this article, the author explores the interest of the interwar intellectuals in “time, death, God”. This focus on temporality as an existential problem engendered some major philosophical projects, which aimed at complete revision of how philosophy should be done, including Henri Bergson, Edmund Husserl, Franz Rosenzweig. The main part outlines a philosophical project of Yakov Druskin who addressed the problem of temporality in a highly original manner. Druskin combined philosophical reflection on time in its existential meaning with the search for intellectual methods and linguistic techniques to transcend our ordinary reality. Among these methods, in Druskin’s works present at least two major modes—meditation and “hieroglyphs”—can be identified. Both methods, however, aim at “transforming rather than informing” and at enabling us to linger in a “certain equilibrium with a minor error”.

A correction to Lewis and Langford's Symbolic logic

1940 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 149-149
Author(s):  
J. C. C. McKinsey
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Symbolic Logic ◽  
Minor Error ◽  
Counter Example ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Image Position ◽  
A Minor

The purpose of this note is to call attention to a minor error in Lewis and Langford's Symbolic logic. On page 221, in discussing the Tarski-Łukasiewicz three-valued logic, the authors make the following assertion: “Let T(p) be any proposition, involving only one element, whose analogue holds in the two-valued system; if T(p) does not hold in the Three-valued Calculus, then pC.T(p) and Np.C.T(p) both hold.”I shall show, by means of a counter-example, that this assertion is not true. Let T(p) be the sentence:It is then easily verified that T(0) = T(1) = 1, and that T(½) = 0. Thus T(p) holds in the two-valued calculus, but not in the three-valued calculus. On the other hand, pC.T(p) does not hold, since ½.CT(½) = ½C0 = ½; similarly, Np.C.T(p) does not hold, since N½.C.T(½) = ½C0 = ½.

Some representations of Diophantine sets

1972 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 572-578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raphael M. Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Universal Quantifier ◽  
Natural Numbers ◽  
Recursively Enumerable Set ◽  
Minor Error ◽  
Integer Coefficients ◽  
Recursively Enumerable ◽  
Recursively Enumerable Sets ◽  
Image Position ◽  
A Minor

A set D of natural numbers is called Diophantine if it can be defined in the formwhere P is a polynomial with integer coefficients. Recently, Ju. V. Matijasevič [2], [3] has shown that all recursively enumerable sets are Diophantine. From this, it follows that a bound for n may be given.We use throughout the logical symbols ∧ (and), ∨ (or), → (if … then …), ↔ (if and only if), ⋀ (for every), and ⋁ (there exists); negation does not occur explicitly. The variables range over the natural numbers 0,1,2,3, …, except as otherwise noted.It is the purpose of this paper to show that if we do not insist on prenex form, then every Diophantine set can be defined existentially by a formula in which not more than five existential quantifiers are nested. Besides existential quantifiers, only conjunctions are needed. By Matijasevič [2], [3], the representation extends to all recursively enumerable sets. Using this, we can find a bound for the number of conjuncts needed.Davis [1] proved that every recursively enumerable set of natural numbers can be represented in the formwhere P is a polynomial with integer coefficients. I showed in [5] that we can take λ = 4. (A minor error is corrected in an Appendix to this paper.) By the methods of the present paper, we can again obtain this result, and indeed in a stronger form, with the universal quantifier replaced by a conjunction.

FUNCTIONAL PEARL. Proof-directed debugging – Corrigendum

2009 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-262
Author(s):  
Robert Harper
Keyword(s):  
Minor Error ◽  
A Minor

There is a minor error in Section 3 wherein it is stated that ∖acc 0_ _ k loops in_nitely, even if k succeeds on input _.” This statement is not correct, and should be replaced by ∖If k returns false on input cs, then acc 1_ cs k loops in_nitely.”The author is grateful to Derek Dreyer for pointing out this mistake, and suggesting the above-mentioned correction.

scholarly journals Power, Dominance, and Constraint: A Note on the Appeal of Different Design Traditions

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Rouder ◽  
Julia M. Haaf
Keyword(s):  
Stochastic Dominance ◽  
Stroop Effect ◽  
Small Degree ◽  
Limiting Factor ◽  
Theoretical Argument ◽  
Cognitive Effects ◽  
True Effect ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Cognitive Design

The recent field-wide emphasis on power has brought the number of participants used in experiments into focus. Cognitive psychologists follow a design tradition where few participants perform many trials each. We ask if one wishes to increase power, is it better to add trials or to add participants. The answer is straightforward---greatest power is achieved by using more people, and the gain from adding people is greater than the gain from adding trials. In light of these results, the cognitive design tradition seems less than ideal. Yet, there are conditions where one may trade people for trials with only a minor decrement in power. Under these conditions, the limiting factor is the trial variability rather than variability across people in the population. These conditions are highly plausible, and we present a stochastic-dominance theoretical argument as to why. We think dominance holds in most cognitive effects, for example, in the Stroop effect. Dominance here is the statement that all people truly identify congruent colors faster than incongruent ones. Under this dominance assumption where everyone's true effect is in the same direction, small mean effects imply a small degree of variability across the population. It is this degree of homogeneity, the consequence of dominance, that licenses the cognitive and psychophysical design traditions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document