The selection of the optimum arrangement of a hydrostatic transmission for a general purpose agricultural tractor

1966 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 94
Keyword(s):  
General Purpose ◽  
Hydrostatic Transmission ◽  
Optimum Arrangement ◽  
Agricultural Tractor ◽  
Selection Of

scholarly journals Principled approach to the selection of the embedding dimension of networks

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Weiwei Gu ◽  
Aditya Tandon ◽  
Yong-Yeol Ahn ◽  
Filippo Radicchi
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Structural Information ◽  
General Purpose ◽  
Embedding Dimension ◽  
Network Embedding ◽  
Machine Learning Technique ◽  
Learning Technique ◽  
Low Dimensional ◽  
Large Corpus ◽  
Selection Of

AbstractNetwork embedding is a general-purpose machine learning technique that encodes network structure in vector spaces with tunable dimension. Choosing an appropriate embedding dimension – small enough to be efficient and large enough to be effective – is challenging but necessary to generate embeddings applicable to a multitude of tasks. Existing strategies for the selection of the embedding dimension rely on performance maximization in downstream tasks. Here, we propose a principled method such that all structural information of a network is parsimoniously encoded. The method is validated on various embedding algorithms and a large corpus of real-world networks. The embedding dimension selected by our method in real-world networks suggest that efficient encoding in low-dimensional spaces is usually possible.

Selection of Degrees of Freedom for Dynamic Analysis

1987 ◽  
Vol 109 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. W. Matta
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element ◽  
Dynamic Analysis ◽  
Degrees Of Freedom ◽  
General Purpose ◽  
Component Mode Synthesis ◽  
Complex Structures ◽  
Large Complex ◽  
Static Condensation ◽  
Basis Vectors ◽  
Selection Of

A technique for the selection of dynamic degrees of freedom (DDOF) of large, complex structures for dynamic analysis is described and the formulation of Ritz basis vectors for static condensation and component mode synthesis is presented. Generally, the selection of DDOF is left to the judgment of engineers. For large, complex structures, however, a danger of poor or improper selection of DDOF exists. An improper selection may result in singularity of the eigenvalue problem, or in missing some of the lower frequencies. This technique can be used to select the DDOF to reduce the size of large eigenproblems and to select the DDOF to eliminate the singularities of the assembled eigenproblem of component mode synthesis. The execution of this technique is discussed in this paper. Examples are given for using this technique in conjunction with a general purpose finite element computer program GENSAM[1].

Selection of Component Modes for Craig-Bampton Substructure Representations

1996 ◽  
Vol 118 (2) ◽  
pp. 264-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. C. Kammer ◽  
M. J. Triller
Keyword(s):  
Efficient Method ◽  
Singular Values ◽  
General Purpose ◽  
Mode Shapes ◽  
Frequency Range ◽  
Reduced Representation ◽  
Absolute Measure ◽  
Fixed Interface ◽  
Interface Mode ◽  
Selection Of

Three measures of modal dynamic importance are studied for the purpose of ranking Craig-Bampton substructure fixed interface mode shapes based upon their contribution to forces at the substructure interface, modal velocity, or modal displacement. These measures can be employed to identify mode shapes which are dynamically important and thus should be retained in a reduced analytical representation, or identified during a modal survey of the substructure. The first method considered. Effective Interface Mass, has been studied previously. However, new results are presented showing the relation between Effective Interface Mass and a commonly used control dynamics measure of modal importance called approximate balanced singular values. In contrast to the general case of approximate balanced singular values, Effective Interface Mass always gives an absolute measure of the dynamic importance of mode shapes. The EIM method is extended to consider modal velocity and modal displacement outputs. All three measures are applied to a simple substructure called the General Purpose Spacecraft. It is shown that each of these measures provides an efficient method for ranking the dynamic importance of Craig-Bampton fixed interface modes such that a reduced representation will accurately reproduce the substructure’s response in the frequency range of interest.

Book Reviews

2000 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-165 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
English Language ◽  
Value Added ◽  
General Purpose ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Book Selection ◽  
Economic Association ◽  
Single Well ◽  
Selection Of ◽  
Made In

Editor's Note: Guidelines for Selecting Books to Review Occasionally, we receive questions regarding the selection of books reviewed in the Journal of Economic Literature. A statement of our guidelines for book selection might be useful, therefore. The general purpose of our book reviews is to help keep members of the American Economic Association informed of significant English-language publications in economics research. Annotations are published of all books received. However, we receive many more books than we are able to review so choices must be made in selecting books for review. We try to identify for review scholarly, well-researched books that embody serious and original research on a particular topic. We do not review textbooks. Other things equal, we avoid volumes of collected papers such as festschriften and conference volumes. Often such volumes pose difficult problems for the reviewer who may find himself having to describe and evaluate many different contributions. Among such volumes, we prefer those on a single, well-defined theme that a typical reviewer may develop in his review. A volume that collects together papers from a wide assortment of different topics is not preferred to one devoted exclusively to one topic. We avoid volumes that collect previously published papers unless there is some material value added from bringing the papers together. Also, we refrain from reviewing second or revised editions unless the revisions of the original edition are really substantial. Our policy is not to accept offers to review (and unsolicited reviews of) particular books. We have examined the consequences of an alternative policy and have determined that we lack the resources to deal appropriately with unsolicited reviews. Coauthorship of reviews is not forbidden but discouraged and we ask our invited reviewers to discuss with us first any changes in the authorship or assigned length of a review. [Reprinted from JEL, March 1992, 30(1), p. vi.]

Book Reviews

2005 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 1063-1086
Keyword(s):  
English Language ◽  
Value Added ◽  
General Purpose ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Book Selection ◽  
The Public ◽  
Economic Association ◽  
Single Well ◽  
Selection Of

Occasionally, we receive questions regarding the selection of books reviewed in the Journal of Economic Literature. A statement of our guidelines for book selection might therefore be useful. The general purpose of our book reviews is to help keep members of the American Economic Association informed of significant English-language publications in economics research. We also review significant books in related social sciences that might be of special interest to economists. On occasion, we review books that are written for the public at large if these books speak to issues that are of interest to economists. Finally, we review some reports or publications that have significant policy impact. Annotations are published for all books received. However, we receive many more books than we are able to review so choices must be made in selecting books for review. We try to identify for review scholarly, well-researched books that embody serious and original research on a particular topic. We do not review textbooks. Other things being equal, we avoid volumes of collected papers such as festschriften and conference volumes. Often such volumes pose difficult problems for the reviewer who may find herself having to describe and evaluate many different contributions. Among such volumes, we prefer those on a single, well-defined theme that a typical reviewer may develop in his review. We avoid volumes that collect previously published papers unless there is some material value added from bringing the papers together. Also, we refrain from reviewing second or revised editions unless the revisions of the original edition are really substantial. Our policy is not to accept offers to review (and unsolicited reviews of) particular books. Coauthorship of reviews is not forbidden but it is unusual and we ask our invited reviewers to discuss with us first any changes in the authorship or assigned length of a review.

Book Reviews

2009 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 801-860 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
English Language ◽  
Value Added ◽  
General Purpose ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Book Selection ◽  
The Public ◽  
Economic Association ◽  
Single Well ◽  
Selection Of

Editor's Note: Guidelines for Selecting Books to Review Occasionally, we receive questions regarding the selection of books reviewed in the Journal of Economic Literature. A statement of our guidelines for book selection might therefore be useful. The general purpose of our book reviews is to help keep members of the American Economic Association informed of significant English-language publications in economics research. We also review significant books in related social sciences that might be of special interest to economists. On occasion, we review books that are written for the public at large if these books speak to issues that are of interest to economists. Finally, we review some reports or publications that have significant policy impact. Annotations are published for all books received. However, we receive many more books than we are able to review so choices must be made in selecting books for review. We try to identify for review scholarly, well-researched books that embody serious and original research on a particular topic. We do not review textbooks. Other things being equal, we avoid volumes of collected papers such as festschriften and conference volumes. Often such volumes pose difficult problems for the reviewer who may find herself having to describe and evaluate many different contributions. Among such volumes, we prefer those on a single, well-defined theme that a typical reviewer may develop in his review. We avoid volumes that collect previously published papers unless there is some material value added from bringing the papers together. Also, we refrain from reviewing second or revised editions unless the revisions of the original edition are really substantial. Our policy is not to accept offers to review (and unsolicited reviews of) particular books. Coauthorship of reviews is not forbidden but it is unusual and we ask our invited reviewers to discuss with us first any changes in the authorship or assigned length of a review.

Book Reviews

2004 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 501-557
Keyword(s):  
English Language ◽  
Value Added ◽  
General Purpose ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Book Selection ◽  
Economic Association ◽  
Single Well ◽  
Selection Of ◽  
Made In

Occasionally, we receive questions regarding the selection of books reviewed in the Journal of Economic Literature. A statement of our guidelines for book selection might be useful, therefore. The general purpose of our book reviews is to help keep members of the American Economic Association informed of significant English-language publications in economics research. Annotations are published of all books received. However, we receive many more books than we are able to review so choices must be made in selecting books for review. We try to identify for review scholarly, well-researched books that embody serious and original research on a particular topic. We do not review textbooks. Other things being equal, we avoid volumes of collected papers such as festschriften and conference volumes. Often such volumes pose difficult problems for the reviewer who may find himself having to describe and evaluate many different contributions. Among such volumes, we prefer those on a single, well-defined theme that a typical reviewer may develop in his review. A volume that collects together papers from a wide assortment of different topics is not preferred to one devoted exclusively to one topic. We avoid volumes that collect previously published papers unless there is some material value added from bringing the papers together. Also, we refrain from reviewing second or revised editions unless the revisions of the original edition are really substantial. Our policy is not to accept offers to review (and unsolicited reviews of) particular books. We have examined the consequences of an alternative policy and have determined that we lack the resources to deal appropriately with unsolicited reviews. Coauthorship of reviews is not forbidden but discouraged and we ask our invited reviewers to discuss with us first any changes in the authorship or assigned length of a review.

Coding for Language Complexity: The Interplay Among Methodological Commitments, Tools, and Workflow in Writing Research

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheryl Geisler
Keyword(s):  
General Purpose ◽  
Methodological Pluralism ◽  
Language Complexity ◽  
Coding Scheme ◽  
Writing Research ◽  
Selection Of

Coding, the analytic task of assigning codes to nonnumeric data, is foundational to writing research. A rich discussion of methodological pluralism has established the foundational importance of systematicity in the task of coding, but less attention has been paid to the equally important commitment to language complexity. Addressing the interplay among a commitment to language complexity, the selection of tools, and the construction of workflow, this article offers a framework of analytic tasks in coding. Three general purpose coding tools are explored: Excel, MAXQDA, and Dedoose. This exploration suggests that how four aspects of analysis should be supported in order to manage language complexity: code restructuring, segmentation in advance of coding, use of a full coding scheme, and retrieval of full context by code. This analysis is intended to help writing researchers choose tools and design workflow to support coding work consistent with our commitment to language in its full complexity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document