Wealth Neutral Grants for Public Education

1979 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 259-281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert W. Gilmer ◽  
Daniel C. Morgan
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Education ◽  
State Government ◽  
Local Control ◽  
Fiscal Federalism ◽  
Careful Consideration ◽  
Horizontal Equity ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Power Equalization ◽  
The Individual

This article assesses wealth neutral grants within the traditional framework of the fiscal federalism. Discussions of the concept of fiscal equality or District Power Equalization (DPE) have centered largley on local control, and have defined equity as a problem of the comparison of local jurisdictions. The individual resident and the state government lie on either side of the locality in terms of collective decision-making, yet the perspective of neither of these sides has been adequately considered in past studies. These grants can cause substantial redefinitions of revenue responsibilities among various levels of government; they do far less than is commonly assumed to provide horizontal equity; and they do not relieve problems of location bias. We find that none of these problems, either individually or collectively, constitute an indictment of these grants, but their careful consideration offers a more balanced view of DPE than any yet offered

Entrepreneurial Innovative Network and the Design of Socio-Economic Neural Systems

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Olga Tikhomirova
Keyword(s):  
Neural Network ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Group Dynamics ◽  
Innovation System ◽  
The Other ◽  
Self Organization ◽  
Neural Systems ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
The World ◽  
The Individual

This article aims to establish how an idea becomes an innovation and how creativity, collective dynamics, and information are interconnected. The results of the author's study showed that the emergence of innovations is closely connected with collective collaboration, and that it is impossible outside of group dynamics. The process of self-organization and collective decision-making is realized through a synergistic interaction, which then transforms into the so-called “information laser” and serves as a basis for the emergence of innovation. Both individuals, as persons and as separate entrepreneurs, are the elements of the innovation system and the actors of the artificial neural network, socio-economic neural systems (SENS-systems). These systems act through self-organization and corporate collaboration, and the efforts of each element are amplified through the interaction with the other elements. The model of the SENS-systems can explain how the individual idea transforms into innovation and spreads throughout the world.

Corruption: ‘Culture’ in the Dock

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vineet Sahu
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Life ◽  
Careful Consideration ◽  
Individual Agent ◽  
Individual Agency ◽  
Holistic Perspective ◽  
Cultural Milieu ◽  
The Individual

Corruption in public life1 needs to be examined in greater detail as not only an individual lapse but also a feature of the collective that either does or does not put pressure on the individual to lapse. This paper takes a methodological holistic perspective exceeding the methodological individualistic perspective in understanding corruption. The claim is that the locus of responsibility cannot be restricted to the individual alone and the collective (if there be such an entity) be left scot-free. This claim is premised on the conception that an individual’s act which is in deviation of expected and established norms cannot be faulted only at the level of the individual, and careful consideration needs to be made to assess the role of the collective in precipitating the lapse(s) in the actions of the individual. This paper argues for sharing the liability of corruption in public life between the legally responsible individual as agent and the cultural milieu in which the agent operates. At a foundational level this paper calls for a reconceptualization of individual agency and decision making from being isolated and discrete, to being construed by the collective that the individual agent is a part of.

scholarly journals BOSNIAN MODEL OF DEMOCRATIC AUTHORITY: CONDITION FOR STABILIZATION OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA?

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-69
Author(s):  
Dženeta Omerdić ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
State Government ◽  
State Level ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Democratic Authority ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Fundamental Rights And Freedoms ◽  
The Individual

The principle of non-discrimination in modern legal systems, both at national and at regional and global levels of government, is the primary prerequisite for the realization of all other (fundamental) rights and freedoms. The essence of this principle, which is, in fact, inextricably linked to the principle of equality in rights, is reflected in the requirement to ensure to all persons, without discrimination on any basis, the realization and enjoyment of the fundamental rights and freedoms that are guaranteed by provisions of the national constitutions, Laws and other legal acts. The functionality of the entire state government of Bosnia and Herzegovina is often hindered by the complex decision-making processes at all state levels which lead to obstruction of the entire decision-making process. Such a disfunctional decision-making process on the state level poses a threat and disables the Bosnian plural society to respond to the modern challenges of a democratic functioning state.The Bosnian model of democratic authority is trying to determine the individual primarily as a citizen, to which they bind certain rights and duties, but without neglecting the fact that citizens enjoy certain rights (and obligations) that belong to them based on their affiliation to a particular collectivity. Bosnian society as a community of citizens and a community of communities should not ignore any of the aforementioned sides of human nature.

Aggregation of Information by Binary Voting Rules

2019 ◽  
pp. 126-144
Author(s):  
Shmuel Nitzan ◽  
Jacob Paroush
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
Aggregation Rule ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Main Question ◽  
Relevant Variables ◽  
Aggregation Of Information ◽  
Group Members ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Relationship

A group of individuals faces the choice of an alternative out of a set of alternatives. Each member of the group holds an opinion regarding the most suitable (best) alternative for which he or she votes. In this setting, the individual votes are based on their decisional competencies, which hinge on the information to which they are exposed and on their ability to make use of that information. The main question is how to translate the group members’ voting profile to a single collective choice. This chapter studies different aspects of this question in the context of binary voting where the group faces only two alternatives. The selection of an appropriate aggregation rule is a central issue in the fields of social choice, public choice, voting theory, and collective decision making. Since the votes are based on the individual competencies, the applied aggregation rule should take into account not only the voting profile but also the competency profile. In fact, it should also take into consideration any other relevant environmental information such as the asymmetry between the feasible alternatives, the dependence between individual votes, decision-making costs, and the available past record of the voters’ decisions. The chapter focuses on the clarification of the relationship between the performance of binary aggregation rules and the relevant variables and parameters. This has direct normative implications regarding the desirable mode of collective decision making and, in particular, regarding the desirable aggregation rule and the size and the composition of the decision-making body.

Decision-Making

Diagnosis ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 46-63
Author(s):  
Ashley Graham Kennedy
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Individual Case ◽  
Careful Consideration ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Quantitative Evidence ◽  
Diagnostic Decision ◽  
Post Test ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Diagnostic Decision Making

The process of diagnostic decision-making (DDM) can be very complex, and in all instances, it involves considerations of epistemology, ethics, probability, and economics. Furthermore, the process of DDM is patient-specific both in terms of qualitative evidence toward a diagnosis (e.g., information from the medical history) and in terms of quantitative evidence (e.g., pre- and post-test probabilities). Thus, learning to make diagnostic decisions requires at least a basic understanding of concepts in each of these fields as well as careful consideration on the part of both the physician and the patient as to how these considerations bear on the individual case at hand. In addition, it requires a commitment on the part of each to shared decision-making in the clinical context.

scholarly journals Wisdom of crowds benefits perceptual decision making across difficulty levels

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiasha Saha Roy ◽  
Satyaki Mazumder ◽  
Koel Das
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Error Rates ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
Difficulty Level ◽  
Classification Error ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Perceptual Decision Making ◽  
Group Aggregation ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Random Target

AbstractDecades of research on collective decision making has claimed that aggregated judgment of multiple individuals is more accurate than expert individual judgement. A longstanding problem in this regard has been to determine how decisions of individuals can be combined to form intelligent group decisions. Our study consisted of a random target detection task in natural scenes, where human subjects (18 subjects, 7 female) detected the presence or absence of a random target as indicated by the cue word displayed prior to stimulus display. Concurrently the neural activities (EEG signals) were recorded. A separate behavioural experiment was performed by different subjects (20 subjects, 11 female) on the same set of images to categorize the tasks according to their difficulty levels. We demonstrate that the weighted average of individual decision confidence/neural decision variables produces significantly better performance than the frequently used majority pooling algorithm. Further, the classification error rates from individual judgement were found to increase with increasing task difficulty. This error could be significantly reduced upon combining the individual decisions using group aggregation rules. Using statistical tests, we show that combining all available participants is unnecessary to achieve minimum classification error rate. We also try to explore if group aggregation benefits depend on the correlation between the individual judgements of the group and our results seem to suggest that reduced inter-subject correlation can improve collective decision making for a fixed difficulty level.

scholarly journals Discrete collective estimation in swarm robotics with distributed Bayesian belief sharing

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qihao Shan ◽  
Sanaz Mostaghim
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Communication Complexity ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
Estimation Problem ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Fill Ratio ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Decision Speed

AbstractMulti-option collective decision-making is a challenging task in the context of swarm intelligence. In this paper, we extend the problem of collective perception from simple binary decision-making of choosing the color in majority to estimating the most likely fill ratio from a series of discrete fill ratio hypotheses. We have applied direct comparison (DC) and direct modulation of voter-based decisions (DMVD) to this scenario to observe their performances in a discrete collective estimation problem. We have also compared their performances against an Individual Exploration baseline. Additionally, we propose a novel collective decision-making strategy called distributed Bayesian belief sharing (DBBS) and apply it to the above discrete collective estimation problem. In the experiments, we explore the performances of considered collective decision-making algorithms in various parameter settings to determine the trade-off among accuracy, speed, message transfer and reliability in the decision-making process. Our results show that both DC and DMVD outperform the Individual Exploration baseline, but both algorithms exhibit different trade-offs with respect to accuracy and decision speed. On the other hand, DBBS exceeds the performances of all other considered algorithms in all four metrics, at the cost of higher communication complexity.

scholarly journals Explainable Artificial Intelligence: What Do You Need to Know?

2020 ◽  
pp. 266-275
Author(s):  
Sam Hepenstal ◽  
David McNeish
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Careful Consideration ◽  
Individual System ◽  
System Components ◽  
Explainable Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Explainable Ai ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
The Individual

Abstract In domains which require high risk and high consequence decision making, such as defence and security, there is a clear requirement for artificial intelligence (AI) systems to be able to explain their reasoning. In this paper we examine what it means to provide explainable AI. We report on research findings to propose that explanations should be tailored, depending upon the role of the human interacting with the system and the individual system components, to reflect different needs. We demonstrate that a ‘one-size-fits-all’ explanation is insufficient to capture the complexity of needs. Thus, designing explainable AI systems involves careful consideration of context, and within that the nature of both the human and AI components.

scholarly journals Jean-Jacques Rousseau on the Separation of Powers in Federal Polity and “Wills of Nation”

2021 ◽  
Vol V (4) ◽  
pp. 201-226
Author(s):  
Anton Shablinsky
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Citizen Participation ◽  
Collective Identity ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Popular Participation ◽  
The People ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Democracy Theory

The problem of this article is built around the tension between the concept of organ sovereignty and democracy theory. First of all, this vision of sovereignty fails to describe the diverse forms of popular participation in collective decision-making. It speaks very sparingly of the people as a political actor. Moreover, the concept of organ sovereignty does not provide the theoretical resources to describe the intermediary bodies in the space between the state and the individual. The tradition of liberal democracy emphasises the importance of such bodies for maintaining popular control over state. Also, the idea of organ sovereignty, by reducing all power to a single legislature, ignores the demand for self-government coming from communities located within the same state and yet united by a certain collective identity. Today, democracy theorists are turning to the concepts of federalism in order to overcome the above-mentioned limitations set by the concept of organ sovereignty. So far, however, the concepts of federalism have not been very convincing in describing the various forms of popular participation in collective decision-making. Above all, they have failed to consistently justify the existence of multiple decision-making centres within a single polity. The article argues that the model of the federal polity proposed by Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his later work “Considerations on the mode of government in Poland” explains how within one polity multiple centres of collective decision-making can coexist. The model also provides an understanding of how citizen participation in multiple decision-making centres can be organised.

Psychology and aggregation in International Relations

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 166-183
Author(s):  
Ross James Gildea
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Unresolved Issue ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Political Behaviour ◽  
Interdisciplinary Work ◽  
Dramatic Rise ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Behavioural Sciences

Theories of decision-making grounded in political psychology have experienced a dramatic rise in the study of International Relations. There is widespread recognition of the benefits of incorporating insights from the behavioural sciences into analyses of political behaviour. However, some scholars have argued that the theoretical and empirical scope of these perspectives remains hampered by an unresolved issue: aggregation. While the fundamental unit of interest in psychology is the individual, most International Relations models concern patterns of collective decision-making in aggregate units such as states, bureaucracies, armed groups, transnational networks and institutions. This article contributes to the aggregation debate by providing a more optimistic portrait of its implications for interdisciplinary work. I argue that aggregation may be an overstated problem in International Relations and that a disciplinary preoccupation with it may hinder rather than pave the way for interdisciplinary theorizing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document