scholarly journals Construction of all tournament matrices with prescribed row sum vector

2014 ◽  
Vol 171 ◽  
pp. 147-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilhan Hacioglu ◽  
Burak Kurkcu
Author(s):  
Вячеслав Иванович Моисеев

В статье даётся краткий очерк антиномической природы биоэтического дискурса и возможностей его геометрической визуализации. Рассматриваются два варианта визуализации. Первый связан с представлением той или иной ситуации как системы полярностей, которая в свою очередь моделируется в рамках векторной модели. В простейшем случае тезис и антитезис рассматриваются как два перпендикулярных вектора, а синтез – как их векторная сумма. В этом случае можно ввести и более количественную оценку «меры многомерности» полярной системы – как величины проекции её векторного представления на суммарный вектор. С использованием этих конструкций разбирается один пример из биоэтики, связанный со столкновением принципов милосердия и правдивости (проблема «лжи во спасение»). Деяние (действие или бездействие) интерпретируется как своеобразный оператор на событиях, который переводит одни события в другие. Предполагается, что субъект в своих деяниях рассматривает различные возможности и выбирает те из них, которые максимизируют ту или иную ценностную меру субъекта, в данном случае – меру векторной проекции полярного вектора ситуации на суммарный вектор – вектор синтеза базисных полярностей. Второй вариант визуализации связан с понятием антиномий в биоэтике – таких противоречий, которые не являются формально-логическими ошибками. В отличие от последних, в антиномиях как тезис, так и антитезис имеют свой момент оправдания в рамках тех или иных условий. Используется также понятие «антинома» – логического субъекта антиномии, который предицируется тезисом и антитезисом антиномии. Редукции антиномии соответствуют двум крайним аспектам антинома, которые называются его «редуктами» – по аналогии с редукцией волновой функции в квантовой механике. Приводятся различные примеры антиномов: биоэты, глоболоки, холомеры. В биоэтах один редукт выражает в большей мере биологические (биоредукт), второй – этические (эторедукт) определения антинома. В глоболоках выделяются глобальный (глоборедукт) и локальный (локоредукт) виды редуктов: первый выражает более глобальные (универсальные) этические определения, второй – более локальные, связанные с ценностями и нормами того или иного сообщества. Наконец, холомеры – вид антиномов, где антиномически соединяются определения целого (холоредукт) и части (мероредукт). Даётся их интерпретация как многомерных ментальных объектов в некотором обобщённом пространстве, так что крайние их аспекты (редукции антиномии) можно представить как проекции более многомерного состояния. В заключении делается предположение о связи биоэтических проблем с идеей ментальной многомерности, что составляет основу возможной визуализации как интерпретации ментальной многомерности на векторном её представлении. The article provides a brief outline of the antinomic nature of bioethical discourse and the possibilities of its geometric visualization. Two visualization options are considered. The first is associated with the representation of a particular situation as a system of polarities, which in turn is modeled in the framework of a vector model. In the simplest case, the thesis and the antithesis are considered as two orthogonal vectors P1 and P2, and the synthesis is considered as their vector sum S = P1+P2. In this case, we can also introduce a more quantitative estimate of the “measure of multidimensionality” M(P) of the polar system – as the magnitude of the projection of its vector representation P on the sum vector S, i.e. M(P) = (P,es), where es = S/|S| is the unit vector of the vector S, and (P,es) is the scalar product of the vectors P and es. Using these constructs, the author analyzes one example from bioethics related to the clash of the principles of mercy and truthfulness (the problem of “lying for salvation”). An act (action or omission) is interpreted as a kind of an operator on events that transforms some events into others. It is assumed that the subject considers various possibilities in their actions and chooses those that maximize a particular value measure of the subject, in our case, the measure M(P) of the vector projection of the polar vector P of the situation on the sum vector S – the vector of synthesis of basic polarities. The second version of visualization is related to the concept of antinomies – such contradictions that are not formal logical errors – in bioethics. In contrast to errors, in antinomies, both the thesis and the antithesis have their moment of justification within the framework of certain conditions. The concept “antinome” is also used; it is the logical subject of antinomy, which is predicated by the thesis and the antithesis of antinomy. Antinomy reductions correspond to two extreme aspects of the antinome, which are called its “reducts” – by analogy with the reduction of the wave function in quantum mechanics. Various examples of antinomes are given: bioets, globolocs, and holomers. In bioets, one reduct expresses the biological (bioreduct) definition of the antinome, another the ethical (ethoreduct) one. In globolocs, global (globoreduct) and local (locoreduct) types of reducts are distinguished: the former expresses more global (universal) ethical definitions, the latter more local ones, related to the values and norms of a particular local community. Finally, holomers are a kind of antinomes in which the definitions of the whole (holoreduct) and the part (meroreduct) are antinomically connected. They are interpreted as multidimensional mental objects in some generalized space, so that their extreme aspects (antinomy reductions) can be represented as generalized projections of a more multidimensional state within certain constricted conditions (reduction intervals). In this case, it is possible to geometrically visualize such states as, for example, three-dimensional objects in space, through which antinomes can be modeled, and their reducts as two-dimensional projections of a three-dimensional body on certain projection planes (intervals of reducts). In this case, one of the central tasks of bioethics is to determine the boundaries of the demarcation of some intervals from others. For example, in solving the problem of abortion and the status of the human embryo, such a demarcation is expressed in the search for a time point that would separate the phase of a more biological definition (bioreduct) of the embryo from its more ethical state (ethoreduct). In conclusion, the author suggests that bioethical problems are connected with the idea of mental multidimensionality, which forms the basis of a possible visualization as an interpretation of mental multidimensionality in its vector representation.


1995 ◽  
Vol 102 (7) ◽  
pp. 637 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. S. Michael
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Vol 171 ◽  
pp. 403-409
Author(s):  
Sagar S Babu ◽  
Chaitanya Nutakki ◽  
Shyam Diwakar

1994 ◽  
Vol 196 ◽  
pp. 1-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen J. Kirkland ◽  
Bryan L. Shader

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 ◽  
pp. 692-697
Author(s):  
LeRoy Beasley

 Let $m$ and $n$ be positive integers, and let $R =(r_1, \ldots, r_m)$ and $S =(s_1,\ldots, s_n)$ be nonnegative integral vectors. Let $A(R,S)$ be the set of all $m \times n$ $(0,1)$-matrices with row sum vector $R$ and column vector $S$. Let $R$ and $S$ be nonincreasing, and let $F(R)$ be the $m \times n$ $(0,1)$-matrix where for each $i$, the $i^{th}$ row of $F(R,S)$ consists of $r_i$ 1's followed by $n-r_i$ 0's. Let $A\in A(R,S)$. The discrepancy of A, $disc(A)$, is the number of positions in which $F(R)$ has a 1 and $A$ has a 0. In this paper, we investigate the possible discrepancy of $A^t$ versus the discrepancy of $A$. We show that if the discrepancy of $A$ is $\ell$, then the discrepancy of the transpose of $A$ is at least $\frac{\ell}{2}$ and at most $2\ell$. These bounds are tight.


1960 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 463-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. J. Ryser

This paper continues the study appearing in (9) and (10) of the combinatorial properties of a matrix A of m rows and n columns, all of whose entries are 0's and l's. Let the sum of row i of A be denoted by ri and let the sum of column j of A be denoted by Sj. We call R = (r1, … , rm) the row sum vector and S = (s1 . . , sn) the column sum vector of A. The vectors R and S determine a class1.1consisting of all (0, 1)-matrices of m rows and n columns, with row sum vector R and column sum vector S. The majorization concept yields simple necessary and sufficient conditions on R and S in order that the class 21 be non-empty (4; 9). Generalizations of this result and a critical survey of a wide variety of related problems are available in (6).


2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 205-221
Author(s):  
Chuanlong Wang ◽  
Xuerong Yong

AbstractA tournament matrix and its corresponding directed graph both arise as a record of the outcomes of a round robin competition. An n × n complex matrix A is called h-pseudo-tournament if there exists a complex or real nonzero column vector h such that A + A* = hh* − I. This class of matrices is a generalisation of well-studied tournament-like matrices such as h-hypertournament matrices, generalised tournament matrices, tournament matrices, and elliptic matrices. We discuss the eigen-properties of an h-pseudo-tournament matrix, and obtain new results when the matrix specialises to one of these tournament-like matrices. Further, several results derived in previous articles prove to be corollaries of those reached here.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document