Lloyd's_Law_Reports-_BAYVIEW_MOTORS_LTD._v._MITSUI_MARINE_AND_FIRE_INSURANCE_CO._LTD._AND_OTHERS_[20

合集下载

AvailabilityCascadesandRiskRegulation

314. Adam B. Cox and Eric A. Posner, The Second-Order Structure of Immigration Law (November 2006)
315. Lior J. Strahilevitz, Wealth without Markets? (November 2006)
Timur Kuran
Follow this and additional works at:/
public_law_and_legal_theory
Part of the Law Commons
This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Working Papers at Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Public Law and Legal Theory Working Papers by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact
312. Dennis W. Carlton and Randal C. Picker, Antitrust and Regulation (October 2006)
313. Robert Cooter and Ariel Porat, Liability Externalities and Mandatory Choices: Should Doctors Pay Less? (November 2006)
University of Chicago Law School

会计信息质量外文文献及翻译

LNTU …Acc附录A会计信息质量在投资中的决策作用对私人信息和监测的影响安妮比蒂，美国俄亥俄州立大学瓦特史考特廖，多伦多大学约瑟夫韦伯，美国麻省理工学院1简介管理者与外部资本的供应商信息是不对称的在这种情况下企业是如何影响金融资本的投资的呢？越来越多的证据表明，会计质量越好，越可以减少信息的不对称和对融资成本的约束。

与此相一致的可能性是，减少了具有更高敏感性的会计质量的公司的投资对内部产生的现金流量。

威尔第和希拉里发现，对企业投资和与投资相关的会计质量容易不足，是容易引发过度投资的原因。

当投资效率低下时，会计的质量重要性可以减轻外部资本的影响，供应商有可能获得私人信息或可直接监测管理人员。

通过访问个人信息与控制管理行为，外部资本的供应商可以直接影响企业的投资，降低了会计质量的重要性。

符合这个想法的还有比德尔和希拉里的比较会计对不同国家的投资质量效益的影响。

他们发现，会计品质的影响在于美国投资效益，而不是在口本。

他们认为，一个可能的解释是不同的是债务和股权的美国版本的资本结构混合了SUS的日本企业。

我们研究如何通过会计质量灵敏度的重要性来延长不同资金来源对企业的投资现金流量的不同影响。

直接测试如何影响不同的融资来源会计，通过最近获得了债务融资的公司来投资敏感性现金流的质量的效果，债务融资的比较说明了对那些不能够通过他们的能力获得融资的没有影响。

为了缓解这一问题，我们限制我们的样本公司有所有最近获得的债务融资和利用访问的差异信息和监测通过公共私人债务获得连续贷款的建议。

我们承认，投资内部现金流敏感性叮能较低获得债务融资的可能性。

然而，这种町能性偏见拒绝了我们的假设。

具体来说，我们确定的数据样本证券公司有1163个采样公司（议会），通过发行资本公共债务或银团债务。

我们限制我们的样本公司最近获得的债务融资持有该公司不断融资与借款。

然而，在样本最近获得的债务融资的公司，也有可能是信号，在资本提供进入私人信息差异和约束他们放在管理中的行为。

Making the Connection in the Caribbean… to the Rest of the World

(Miss Universe participants at Trinidad and Tobago)
If You’re Not Sure Where to Begin…
Check to see what’s in your own library first Think globally, act locally…first
Making the Connection in the Caribbean…to the Rest of the World Lyonette Louis-Jacques University of Chicago Law Library llou@
ACURIL, San Juan, Puerto Rico, June 4, 2003
Standard Tools (Books)
Reynolds & Flores PIL Nutshell CIA World Factbook Treaty indexes (TIF) Martindale-Hubbell’s Law Digest The Bluebook Encyclopedia of Public International Law International Legal Materials (ILM)
BAILII (British and Irish Legal Information Institute)
Inner Temple Library’s AccessToLaw Page
eagle-i (e-access to global legal information)
Treaties
People Sources (Specialists in FCIL Research)

A Hybrid Algorithm for the Vehicle Routing Problem with Time Window

A Hybrid Algorithm for the Vehicle Routing Problem withTime WindowGuilherme Bastos Alvarenga, Ricardo Martins de Abreu Silva, Rudini Menezes SampaioDept. of Computer Science, Federal University of Lavras, Brazil{guilherme, rmas, rudini} @ dcc.ufla.brAbstract.The Vehicle Routing Problem with Time Windows (VRPTW) is a well-known and complex combinatorial problem, which has received considerable attention in recent years. The VRPTW benchmark problems of Solomon (1987) have been most commonly chosen to evaluate and compare all exact and heu-ristic algorithms. A genetic algorithm and a set partitioning two phases approach has obtained competitive results in terms of total travel distance minimization. However, a great number of heuristics has used the number of vehicles as the first objective and travel distance as the second, subject to the first. This paper proposes a three phases approach considering both objectives. Initially, a hierarchical tournament selection genetic algorithm is applied. It can reach all best results in number of vehicles of the 56 Solomon’s prob-lems explored in the literature. After then, the two phase approach, the genetic and the set partitioning, is applied to minimize the travel distance as the second objective.Keywords: vehicle routing, hybrid genetic algorithm, hierarchical tournament selection(Received April, 07, 2005 / Accepted July 15, 2005)1. IntroductionVehicle routing problems (VRP) have received considerable attention in recent years. The usual static version, namely Vehicle Routing Problem with Time Windows (VRPTW) includes capacity and time window constraints. In the VRPTW, a fleet of identical vehicles supplies goods to N customers. All vehicles have the same capacity Q. For each customer i, i = 1,…,N, the demand of goods, q i, the service time s i, and the time window [a i,b i] to meet the demand in i are known. The component s i represents the loading or unloading service time at the customer i, and a i describes the earliest time when it is possible to start the service. If any vehicle arrives at cus-tomer i before a i it must wait. The vehicle must start the customer service before b i. All vehicle routes start and finish at the central depot. Each customer must be visited once. The locations of the central depot and all customers, the minimal distance d ij and the travel time t ij between all locations are given. Different objectives have been proposed in the literature, including the minimal total travel distance, the minimal num-ber of vehicles used, the total wait time, the total time to complete the whole service and combina-tion of these.Alvarenga [1] and [11] has proposed a ge-netic and a set partitioning two phases approach for the VRPTW using travel distance as the unique objective. The tests were produced using both, real numbers and truncated data type, and the results were compared with previous pub-lished heuristic and exact methods. These results show that the heuristic CGH (Column Genera-tion Heuristic) proposed is very competitive in terms of travel distance (TD) minimization. In present paper, an extension of that approach is proposed to minimize the number of vehicles (NV) first and the total travel distance is mini-mized as a second objective.Berger [2] has improved some of the results of Solomon’s benchmark using parallel two-population co-evolution genetic algorithms, Pop1 and Pop2. The first population, Pop1, has the objective to minimize TD to a fixed number of vehicles. On the other hand, Pop2 works to minimize the violated time window, in order to find at least one feasible individual. In Pop2, NV is fixed as the number obtained by Pop1 minus one. The global objective is to minimize NV, and after that to minimize TD, in a second priority. Pop1 works to minimize TD over the population received from Pop2, where at least one feasible solution is known. Each time a feasible individ-ual is found the population Pop1 is substituted by Pop2 and the fixed number of vehicles consid-ered in both populations is decreased by one.Berger has also tested the algorithm in the 56 Solomon’s instances. Berger found 6 new results (for instances R108, R110, RC105, RC106, R210 and R211). Currently, three of them continue to be the best solutions known (R108, RC105 and RC106), considering NV as the first objectiveand TD as the second. One of the most important advantages of his work is the total NV for all 56 instances of Solomon, with 405 vehicles, one of the best results in the literature.Homberger [7] has also presented good re-sults for many Solomon’s benchmark problems using two evolutionary metaheuristic methods in a similar two-stage strategy. Two different heu-ristic methods were proposed, ES1 and ES2. Homberger emphasizes the importance of the evaluation criterion. The travel distance selection does not drive the search in the number of vehi-cles global minimum. Consequently, it is neces-sary to add new evaluation criteria. The first new criterion explored is the number of customers in the shortest route. The second criterion is namely the minimal delay D R . That is the sum of the minimal time violations caused by the forced elimination of the customers from the shortest route R , equation (1).∈=Rk kR DD(1) Where• D k = 0 if the customer k can be eliminated and inserted in any other route R’ R;• D k = ∞ if the insertion of k always results in a capacity violation to any route R’ R ; • D k = the minimal violated time , if the inser-tion of the customer k results in any time window violation. In this case, the minimal sum of time violations for the entirely route which received the customer k is assigned to D k .Both, ES1 and ES2 have considered two phase approach in the search. In the first step, the total travel distance is suppressed. In the second and last step, after the number of vehicle has been minimized, the search is redirected to minimize the total travel distance. The difference between ES1 and ES2 stay on the existence or not of the crossover to produce a new generation. In the ES1 the new generations are produced directly by mutations. These heuristic methods reduced the number of vehicles in two instances from the class R1 (R104 and R112). In the instance R109, the strategy ES1 still produced a new result, maintaining NV and reducing TD. In the same way, ES2 improved the results of TD in R105 and R107. In the class R2, five new results were produced by ES1 and three by ES2. The results in the classes, C1 and C2, were equivalent to the best known for all problems. ES2 still produced two new results for RC1 and two others for RC2, while ES1 produced two other new results for RC2. In summary, 20 new results were produced, where only 2 still continue undefeated.This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 describes the first phase of the search (GA_NV), in order to minimize the number of vehicles. Section 3 describes how CGH is applied to minimize the second objective, travel distance, and the overall algorithm. The sections 4 and 5 describe the results and conclusions, respec-tively.2. Hierarchical Tournament Selection Genetic AlgorithmIn the first phase, an independently genetic algo-rithm is proposed to reduce the number of vehi-cles. Strategies exploring the number of vehicles (NV) and travel distance (TD) objectives in dis-tinguished phases have reached the best results at the moment in the literature. It’s possible to see the best results in [13] and their respective references.Although the number of vehicles is consid-ered as the first objective, the total travel dis-tance minimization continues to be very impor-tant, because it is the differentiate criterion as a second objective, once many algorithms have reached the same number of vehicles for many instances. By one side, the genetic algorithm and set partitioning two phase approach, composing the column generation heuristic CGH proposed by [1] showed to be competitive to minimize TD. Consequently, the main question is if the pro-posed CGH continues to be efficient when the NV is fixed in a minimized solution. However, an additional phase to minimize the NV is nec-essary. This is a second objective of this paper, because it’s very difficult for a robust algorithm to present good NV results to different instances. In this way, the fitness approach of Homberger evolution strategy, summarized in the previous section, was extended adding new criteria to evaluate how easy could be to eliminate one route from the individual solutions. The basic idea of the genetic algorithm GA_NV to mini-mize NV is the same utilized in [1]. However, new operators are necessary to change the search. The main characteristics of the algorithm are described bellow.Chromosome and Individual Representation The individual representation is the same util-ized in [1]. Each customer has a unique integer identifier i, i = 1,..,N, where N is the number of customers. The chromosome is defined as a string of integers, representing the customers to be served by only one vehicle. An individual, that represents a complete solution, and conse-quently many routes, is a set of chromosomes. The central depot is not considered in this repre-sentation, because all routes necessarily start and end on it.Initial PopulationTo start the first generation in the GA, the sto-chastic PFIH (Push Forward Insertion Heuristic) also proposed in [1] is utilized. It can produce quickly diversified individuals. In the original PFIH, see [14], the first customer in each new route is deterministically defined. Customers then are chosen one by one minimizing the travel distance. The original PFIH is determinis-tic, but differently, in the stochastic PFIH a ran-dom choice is used to define the first customer for each new route. That is necessary to produce distinguished individuals in the first GA genera-tion.FitnessThere are basically two main alternatives to evaluate individuals to the VRPTW in order to minimize the number of vehicles. In the first one the search occurs by the unfeasible region, and the evaluation is based on how much the time windows are violated. This option was adopted, for example in the genetic algorithm proposed by [2]. On the other hand, the second one treats only feasible individual solutions. This option needs the identification of characteristics in the individual solutions. They have hints of easiness to reduce routes, once the main objective NV is not sufficient to differentiate individuals and ensure the population evolution.In this paper, a k-way tournament selection method is used in the GA. In a k-way tourna-ment, k individuals are selected randomly. Then, the individual with the highest fitness is the winner. This process is repeated until the neces-sary number of selected individuals to the cross-over phase has been reached. Two individuals are selected for each crossover, which produces only one new offspring. As showed before, [7] propose some criteria of evaluation in a lexicog-raphy order. The first criterion is the number of vehicle by itself, followed by the number of cus-tomers in the shortest route and the minimal delay time D R, previously described. It’s possible to see that the minimal delay time resembles the idea of the search by the unfeasible time win-dows region.The strategy utilized in this paper to expand the fitness idea proposed by [7] evaluates how hard is to eliminate customers from the shortest route. However, it is possible to show that the use of all three criteria of evaluations from Homber-ger is not enough to differentiate the individuals. In other words, it’s possible to find different in-dividuals with the same value in all three crite-ria. Consequently, the idea is to use additional parameters to identify the easiest individual from the current tournament to eliminate a shortest route. Surprisingly, no less than nine additional criteria of evaluation can be useful in order to permit the identification and to eliminate one more route or a customer in the shortest route. These fitness criteria are presented bellow in their respective hierarchical order in the selec-tion algorithm:1st- Number of Routes (Fitness_NV): The main objective of the problem (NV) is the first criterion2nd- The Number of Customers in the Shortest Route (Fitness_NCSR): Naturally, the number of customers in the shortest route is the second criterion to identify the easiest individual solution to eliminate one more route.3rd - Difficulty to Eliminate One Customer from the Shortest Route (Fitness_1CSR): This criterion is very similar with the minimal delay time D k proposed by [7], but only one customer from the shortest route is considered (the mini-mal D k). The other difference is that no delay time is added in D k for subsequent not violated time windows. In contrast, Homberger considers all delay in any customer caused by a previous violated time window.4th- Difficulty to Eliminate All Customers from the Shortest Route (Fitness_AllCSR): This criterion (D R)is the sum of D k to all cus-tomers in the shortest route (equation (1)). This is the main additional criterion utilized by [7]. The difference mentioned above to calculate the delay persists.5th- Difficulty to Eliminate One Customer from the Taker Route(Fitness_1CTR): The taker route presents the minimal time window violation if receives a customer from the shortest route. Sometimes, it’s necessary to eliminate customers from this route, because inserting some customers in another route can make pos-sible the reception of others from the shortest route. Obviously the shortest route cannot be used as destination of these customers.6th- Difficulty to Eliminate All Customers from the Taker Route(Fitness_AllCTR): Again, the sum of the violated time for all cus-tomers from the taker route is considered to cal-culate the Fitness_AllCTR. The idea is the same applied to Fitness_AllCSR, but now the focus is the taker route and not the shortest route.7th- Total Travel Distance (Fitness_TD): The total travel distance (TD) minimization wasmentioned as a concurrent objective to the NV minimization. In fact, this can guide the search to a minimal TD with a bigger NV. However, when applied following all priority criteria above, it is verified to be useful to minimize NV. 8th - The number of customers in the taker route (Fitness_NCTR): This criterion is moti-vated by the fact that a short route has more probability to receive other customers without violated constraints.9th - Sum of Squares of the Number of Cus-tomers (Fitness_SSNC): The sum of squares of the number of customers is as large as the con-centration of customers in few routes. This crite-rion is interesting because has an effect over all routes together.10th - Total load in the Taker Route (Fit-ness_TLTR):Any route with few loads inside has more capacity to receive any other customer from the shortest route. This criterion is useful for instances where the capacity is more critical than the time window constraints.SelectionIn the k-way tournament selection method k in-dividuals are selected randomly. Then, the indi-vidual who presents the highest fitness is the winner and will participate of the crossover. In the hierarchical tournament there is not only one fitness value but many. Each fitness criterion is used to maintain in the tournament process only those individuals which present the highest val-ues. One or more individuals continue in the tournament selection considering the other hier-archical fitness criteria. The hierarchical criteria utilized, as showed in the previous section, can differentiate solution individuals with different number of vehicles, the main objective, but also identify those individuals, with the same number of vehicles, that are easier to eliminate customers in the last route and consequently to eliminate that route.CrossoverThe crossover algorithm is based on the cross-over operator proposed by [1] and [11]. In the first step, the algorithm select a route from each parent individual in turns, in order to inherit routes with maximum number of customers. Af-ter all feasible routes have been inserted in the offspring, the insertion of the remainder custom-ers is tested in the existing routes (second step). If some customers continue to be without any route there is no other option than to insert them in empty vehicles (new routes). In this case, the stochastic PFIH is again applied. MutationMany mutation operators in the GA proposed by [1] are not appropriated to minimize NV. Those operators give directions to minimize the total travel distance which can represent a local minimum in terms of NV. The new set of opera-tors is proposed, as explained below:Random Customer Migration (M_RCM): This operator chooses a vehicle randomly and a ran-dom customer associated to it; a migration of this customer to other non-empty vehicle is tried. If the insertion results a feasible route, then it is accepted independently of the new function cost. Simple Customer Exchange (M_SCE): This operator tries a random customer exchange be-tween two different routes. The unique require-ment to do the exchange is the feasibility of the resulted individual solution.Two Customers Swap (M_TCS): This operator is very similar with M_SCE, but the customers come from the same route.Customer Exchange with Gain in Fit-ness_1CSR, Fitness_AllCSR or Fitness_1CTR (M_CEGF1): Two routes are randomly selected. Every possible pair of customers, one from each route is candidate to exchange. The customer position in the target route is not necessarily the empty position. The exchange is performed only if there is gain in at least one of these fitness criteria: Fitness_1CSR, Fitness_AllCSR or Fit-ness_1CTR.Customer Exchange with Gain in Fit-ness_1CSR, Fitness_AllCSR (M_CEGF2): Two routes are randomly selected. Every possible pair of customers, one from each route is candi-date to exchange. The customer position in the target route have to be the empty position. The exchange is performed only if there is a gain in at least one of these fitness values: Fitness_1CSR or Fitness_AllCSR.Simple Customer Exchange with Travel Dis-tance Gain (M_SCETDG): This operator tries a random customer exchange between two differ-ent routes. Differently of the M_SCE this ex-change is performed only if the resulted solution presents a TD reduction.Customer Exchange with Travel Distance Gain (M_CETDG): This operator tries a ran-dom customer exchange between two different routes. Differently of the M_SCETDG the cus-tomer previous position does not necessarily need to be used. Again the exchange only is per-formed if the resulted solution presents a TDreduction.Taker Route Customer Migration (M_TRCM): This operator chooses a random customer from the taker route; a migration of this customer to another non-empty, different of the shortest route, and a random vehicle is tried. If the insertion results a feasible route, then it is accepted independently of the new function cost. If it is impossible to insert this customer in that vehicle, another one is randomly selected until all available vehicles have been tested. Customer Reinsertion with TD Gain (M_CRTDG):This mutation randomly choses customer in a route and try all position available. If there is another feasible position with travel distance reduction the position is changed.All Customers Reinsertion (M_AllCR): This mutation is very similar with M_CRTDG but this operation is repeated to every customer in a randomly selected route. Every new position with travel distance reduction is performed.Taker Route Elimination (M_TRE): This mu-tation tries to find a new feasible position for every customer of the taker route in another one. Obviously, the shortest route is not considered as destination once the objective is to improve the capacity to receive customers from that one. Last Customer Elimination from the Shortest Route including Customer Removal in the Destination (M_LCE1): This operator gets this last customer and tries to insert into other non-empty route. If necessary, a second customer in the destination route is removal to permit the insertion. In the last case, a new destination to the removed customer is tried, initially, in all nonempty route in the individual solution. If another feasible position to the removed cus-tomer is found, the shortest route has been eliminated. Otherwise the removed customer is inserted in an empty route and stays as the new shortest route.Last Customer Elimination from the Shortest Route including 2 Customers Removal in the Destination (M_LCE2): This operator is very similar to M_LCE1, but includes the possibility to remove 2 customers in order to permit the insertion of the last customer from the shortest route. If other feasible positions to the removed customers are found, the shortest route has been eliminated. Otherwise the remainder customers are inserted in an empty route and a different new shortest route has been established. Shortest Route Elimination (M_SRE): This mutation tries to find a new feasible position for every customer of the shortest route in another one.3. Second Phase and the Complete Algorithm In the previous sections, the new genetic algo-rithm GA_NV is proposed to minimize the num-ber of vehicles. The algorithm is applied for a fixed interval (15 min.) in order to find a solu-tion to the VRPTW with the minimal number of vehicles as possible. After that, the entire final population produced by GA_NV is used as the first population in the Column Generation Heu-ristic (CGH) proposed by [1] to minimize the second optimization criterion , the total travel distance.The result of GA_NV, block 1 in the 0 are 50 solution individuals containing the best solution in terms of NV. The CGH proposed by [1] gets this population many times to produce many local minima, while the TIME_LIMIT (block 3) permits. But now, the objective is to minimize TD after NV. Because there are many individu-als with the same NV and the operators utilized in CGH unlikely can reduce NV, actually TD is the practical objective to be reduced.The complete algorithm CGH_NV, described in Figure 1, is composed by the basic CGH algo-rithm (for details see [1] and [11]) joined with GA_NV. It’s important to emphasize the main aspects of that approach. The loop from the block 4 to 8 produces many different routes or local minima using the GA_TD (genetic algo-rithm wirh the criterion of travel distance mini-mization). The number of solutions, Max_Evol, generated is 10. The set partitioning problem SSP then is solved to obtain the optimal solution over this limited set of routes R, block 9. The solution then is applied to divide the whole prob-lem into many different sub-problems, solved again using the GA_TD, blocks 11 to 16. These 2 cycles are repeated until the TIME_LIMIT (60 min.) is reached. Finally, the SPP is solved over all previous routes generated and included in the set R GLOBAL.4. Computational ResultsThe GA_NV parameters were empirically ad-justed. A fixed period of 15 minutes has been used to run GA_NV. After that, as show the 0, the final population is passed to CGH in order to minimize TD. This phase has an additional pe-riod of 60 minutes to perform the search. In or-der to define the best hierarchical way to evalu-ate the individuals the GA_NV algorithm was tested with different options. The Fitness_NV isalways the first, because this is the main objec-tive. Again the number of customers in the shortest route (Fitness_NCSR) demonstrates clearly as the second fitness to be applied in the selection. Homberger [7] has used the difficulty to eliminate all customer from the shortest route as third criterion (Fitness_AllCSR) or delay time, but there was not information if the author has tried another criterion or comparisons. Also the GA_NV in this work has produced the best results considering the difficult to eliminate all customers in the shortest route (Fitness_AllCSR) in the third priority. The use of Fitness_1CSR has been used in forth priority. The use of Fit-ness_1CSR as the third criterion has produced fast customer elimination in the first phase but has increased the possibility to entrap in the local minima. The Fitness_TD produces better results only in seventh priority, but with substantial relevance in the search.Table 1 shows the main results from the lit-erature and the results from CGH_NV proposed. They are positioned in crescent order of NV, the main objective. The results of the CGH_NV are very expressive in NV, reaching the best known value for 100% of the problems. However, in the second objective TD, the results stay a bit above of the best known, produced by Berger.Figure 1:CGH_NV heuristic proposedNVReference R1 R2 C1 C2 RC1 RC2DT11.92 2.73 10.00 3.00 11.50 3.25 405Berger et al. (2003)1221 975.4 828.5 590 1390 1159 579511.92 2.73 10.00 3.00 11.50 3.25 405CGH_NV (this paper)1224.1012.828.4 590.9 1417.1195.589112.00 2.73 10.00 3.00 11.50 3.25 406Braysy et al. (2004)1220.970.4 828.4 589.9 1398.1139.577911.92 2.73 10.00 3.00 11.63 3.25 406Homberg et al. (1999)1228.970.0 828.4 589.9 1392.1144.578712.08 2.82 10.00 3.00 11.50 3.25 408Homberg et al (in press)1211.950.7 828.5 590.0 1395.1135.574212.08 2.91 10.00 3.00 11.75 3.25 411Liu et al. (1999)1215.953.4 828.4 589.9 1385.1142.574612.25 3.00 10.00 3.00 11.88 3.38 416Taillard et al. (1997)1216.995.4 828.5 590.3 1367.1165.579912.58 3.09 10.00 3.00 12.38 3.62 427Rochat et al. (1995)1197.954.4 828.5 590.3 1369.1139.5712Table 1: Best known results (july/04) GCH_NV5. ConclusionsIn the literature, the main results minimizing NV for Solomon’s test set have been compared with the results produced by CGH_NV. The pro-posed approach has produced the best NV results and a reasonable TD. The GA_NV proposed to minimize NV has produced the best results in NV using only 15 minutes of execution using a Pentium IV 2.4 GHz.The new hierarchical tournament selection proposed has been the main reason to the excel-lent performance of GA_NV in the NV minimi-zation. However the CGH proposed by [1] changed to minimize first NV and then TD as the second criterion seems to have difficulty to perform the search in narrow routes. Once the TD results from CGH without any NV restriction were very significantly [1], it’s interesting to extend this work producing new mutation opera-tors in the GA_TD to work with narrow routes found in the GA_NV.6. References[1] Alvarenga, G.B., Mateus, G.R. and Tomi, G.(2004), “A genetic and set partitioning two-phase approach for the vehicle routing prob-lem with time windows”. Proceedings of Fourth Intenational Conference on Hybrid Intelligent Systems, Kitakyushu, Japan, p.410-415.[2] Berger, J., Barkaoui, M. and Bräysy, O.,(2003), “A route-directed hybrid GA ap-proach for the VRPTW”, Information Sys-tems and Operational Research 41, 179-194. [3] Bräysy, O., Hasle G. and Dullaert W.,(2004), “A multi-start local search algorithm for the vehicle routing problem with time windows”. European Journal of Operational Research, 159, 586-605.[4] Corne, D., Dorigo, M. and Glover, F.,(1999), "New Ideas in Optimization".[5] Gambardella, L.M., Taillard, E. and Agazzi,G. (1999), "MACS-VRPTW: A multipe AntColony System for Vehicle Routing Problems with Time Windows", in Chap. 5 of [4]. [6] Homberger, J. and Gehring, H., (1999),“Two evolutionay metaheuristics for the ve-hicle routing problem with time windows. In-formation Systems and Operational Re-search, 37, 297-318.[7] Homberger, J. and Gehring, H., (2002) "Par-allelization of a two-phase metaheuristic for routing problems with time windows”. Jour-nal of Heuristics, 8, 251-276.[8] Homberger, J. and Gehring, H., (in press) "Atwo-phase hybrid metaheuristic for the vehi-cle routing problems with time windows”.European Journal of Operational Research.[9] Kohl N., Desrosiers J., Madsen O. B. G.,Solomon M. M. and Soumis F. (1997), "K-path Cuts for the Vehicle Routing Problem with Time Windows", Manuscript。

EudraVigilance

agency of the European Union
© European Medicines Agency, 2011. Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
Table of contents
Executive summary ..................................................................................... 3 1. Background ............................................................................................. 4 2. Introduction ............................................................................................ 5 3. Objectives of the EudraVigilance access policy........................................ 5 4. EudraVigilance and medicinal products for human use............................ 5 5. Access to data held in EudraVigilance...................................................... 7
5.1. Stakeholder groups ............................................................................................ 7 5.2. Overview .......................................................................................................... 7 5.3. General principles .............................................................................................. 9 5.3.1. ICSR types ................................................................................................... 10 5.3.2. Primary and secondary report sources .............................................................. 10 5.3.3. Individual cases, ICSRs and classification rules .................................................. 10 5.3.4. Access to EudraVigilance data and access tools.................................................. 11 5.4. Access by stakeholder group.............................................................................. 11 5.4.1. Group I: Medicines regulatory authorities in the EEA, the European Commission and the Agency ............................................................................................................ 11 5.4.2. Group II: Healthcare professionals and the general public ................................... 12 5.4.3. Group III: Marketing authorisation holders and sponsors..................................... 14 5.4.4. Group IV: Research organisations .................................................................... 15

怀念威廉·科恩劳尔的尼瓦达银腾打印目录与检查表

Aladdin on Carpet
Las Vegas
Year Guide
MM .999 Released Price
CC Rim 1994 $22-$28
(V) Ali Baba (3 Dots)
Aladdin on Carpet
CC Rim 1994 $100-150
Sinbad
Aladdin on Carpet
$18.00 $15.60
$17.00
$22.75
Approx
2019
2020 Silver
Auction Auction Weight
$18-$25 $16-$20 .6010 Oz
.4898 Oz
$16.50 $25.00 .4948 Oz
$16-$20 $20.00 .5881 Oz
$15-$25
Monorail
Bally's (3 7s)
GDC Rim 1995 $22-$28
Running 7 (LV Top)
Bally's (3 7s) (LV Top)
GDC Rim 1995 $22-$28
(E) Running 7(WR)(LV NV.Bottom) Bally's (3 7s) (LV Top)
Reno
MM .999
G Rim
Year Guide Released Price
1996 $22-$28
Toucan/Angel Fish
Atlantis Hotel Tower
G Inner 1998 $22-$28
(E) Toucan/Angel Fish(50++)
Atlantis (Many Blds) (WL)

Barry Lloyd：Approaching the World

Germany
Search Engines
Total hold on German Search Market
100 90 Percentage of Total Market (%) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Google t-online Search Engines Yahoo!
Preparing and the 3 Cs
Content
Connections
Compatibility
SEO and 3 Cs
Culture
Compatibility
t
Connections
Searching And Connecting Are Fundamental Human Needs Everywhere
Sources: http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Na vigation/Statistiken/Bevoelkerung/Bevoelkerungsstand/Bevoelkerungss tand.psml /top25.htm http://www.webhits.de/deutsch/index.shtml?webstats.html
Population: 82 million Est. Internet Users: 55.5 million Internet Penetration: 67.7% Language: German
Social Media
© WebCertain Publishing Ltd
Germany is the third largest social networking market in the world, trailing only the US and China. The most popular social network in the country is StudiVz with around 17 million users. Its main target audience is students. Facebook has around 11 million users in Germany, where it has taken longer to take hold than in other countries. Many German users have concerns over privacy on Facebook and German officials have recently begun legal proceedings against Facebook over its use of personal data.

关于自动驾驶汽车的看法英语作文

关于自动驾驶汽车的看法英语作文全文共3篇示例，供读者参考篇1Self-Driving Cars: A Road to the Future or a Crash Course?As a student trying to navigate the complexities of modern life, I can't help but be intrigued by the concept of self-driving cars. This cutting-edge technology promises to revolutionize the way we think about transportation, offering a tantalizing glimpse into a future where the drudgery of driving is a thing of the past. However, as with any paradigm shift, there are valid concerns and uncertainties that must be addressed. In this essay, I will explore the potential benefits and drawbacks of self-driving vehicles, and ultimately share my stance on whether they represent a road to the future or a crash course waiting to happen.Let's start with the potential advantages of self-driving cars, as there are many compelling reasons why this technology could be a game-changer. Firstly, the elimination of human error could lead to a significant reduction in traffic accidents, injuries, and fatalities. According to the National Highway Traffic SafetyAdministration, human error is responsible for a staggering 94% of all car crashes. With self-driving vehicles relying on advanced sensors, algorithms, and decision-making capabilities, the potential for mitigating these errors is immense. Additionally, self-driving cars could increase mobility for those who are unable to drive due to age, disability, or other factors, providing them with newfound independence and freedom.Another compelling benefit of self-driving cars is their potential to alleviate traffic congestion and improve efficiency on our roads. By communicating with one another and optimizing routes, these vehicles could significantly reduce the stop-and-go patterns that plague our cities, leading to smoother traffic flow and reduced emissions. Furthermore, the ability to summon a self-driving car on demand could potentially reduce the need for personal car ownership, freeing up valuable urban space currently occupied by parking lots and garages.However, despite these potential advantages, there are valid concerns and challenges that must be addressed. One of the most pressing issues is the question of liability in the event of an accident involving a self-driving car. Who would be held responsible – the manufacturer, the software developer, or theowner/operator? This legal quagmire could prove to be a significant hurdle in the widespread adoption of this technology.Furthermore, the issue of cybersecurity cannot be overlooked. As these vehicles become increasingly reliant on complex software and interconnected systems, the potential for hacking and malicious interference increases. A successful cyber attack could potentially wreak havoc, leading to disastrous consequences. Robust security measures and stringent safeguards must be implemented to mitigate these risks.Another concern that cannot be ignored is the potential impact on employment. Self-driving vehicles could potentially displace millions of workers in the transportation industry, from truck drivers to taxi operators. While new job opportunities may arise in fields such as software development and maintenance, the transition could be disruptive and challenging for many workers and their families.Moreover, the issue of public acceptance and trust is a significant barrier to overcome. Despite the potential benefits, many people may feel uneasy about relinquishing control to an autonomous system, particularly in high-risk situations. Building trust and confidence in the technology will be crucial for widespread adoption.As a student, I find myself torn between the excitement of embracing this technological marvel and the valid concerns that must be addressed. On one hand, the potential benefits ofself-driving cars are undeniably appealing. The prospect of safer roads, increased mobility, and reduced congestion and emissions is enticing, particularly in the face of our current transportation challenges. Additionally, the potential forself-driving vehicles to free up valuable time and mental resources, allowing me to study or work while commuting, is incredibly attractive.However, the potential risks and uncertainties cannot be ignored. The legal and ethical quandaries surrounding liability and accountability are complex and must be carefully navigated. The threat of cyber attacks and the potential for widespread job displacement are also valid concerns that require thoughtful solutions.Ultimately, my stance on self-driving cars is one of cautious optimism. I believe that this technology represents a road to the future, but one that must be approached with care and prudence. Rigorous testing, robust safety protocols, and a gradual, regulated rollout are essential to ensure that the transition is smooth and the benefits outweigh the risks.Additionally, I believe that public education and awareness campaigns will be crucial in addressing concerns and building trust in this technology. By openly addressing the challenges and uncertainties, and involving stakeholders from various sectors, we can work towards a future where self-driving cars are seamlessly integrated into our transportation landscape, improving safety, efficiency, and quality of life for all.In conclusion, self-driving cars are a fascinating and promising development that could reshape our relationship with transportation. While the potential benefits are substantial, the challenges and risks must be carefully navigated. As a student, I remain optimistic about the future of this technology, but I also recognize the need for a measured and responsible approach that prioritizes safety, security, and ethical considerations. Only by addressing these concerns head-on can we truly unleash the transformative potential of self-driving cars and pave the way for a safer, more efficient, and sustainable future of mobility.篇2The Future is Self-Driving CarsAs a student living in the modern world, I can't help but be fascinated by the rapid advancements in technology, particularlyin the field of transportation. One innovation that has captured my attention and sparked endless debates among my peers is the concept of self-driving cars, also known as autonomous vehicles.At first glance, the idea of a car that can navigate roads without human input might seem like something straight out of a science fiction movie. However, the reality is that self-driving technology is rapidly evolving, and major companies like Google, Tesla, and Uber are investing heavily in its development. The potential benefits of this technology are vast and could revolutionize the way we think about transportation.One of the most compelling arguments in favor ofself-driving cars is their potential to significantly reduce the number of road accidents caused by human error. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, human error is responsible for a staggering 94% of all traffic accidents. With self-driving cars eliminating the need for human drivers, the roads could become much safer. These vehicles are equipped with advanced sensors, cameras, and algorithms that can detect obstacles, predict potential hazards, and make split-second decisions far more accurately than humans.Moreover, self-driving cars could help alleviate traffic congestion, a major issue in most urban areas. By communicating with each other and optimizing routes, these vehicles could potentially reduce travel times and decrease the amount of time spent idling in traffic jams. This, in turn, would lead to lower greenhouse gas emissions and a more environmentally friendly transportation system.Another significant advantage of self-driving cars is their potential to increase mobility for individuals who are unable to drive due to age, disability, or other reasons. Imagine the freedom and independence that an elderly person or someone with a visual impairment could experience with access to a reliable self-driving vehicle. This technology could revolutionize their lives, allowing them to travel independently and maintain a sense of autonomy.Despite these potential benefits, there are valid concerns and challenges surrounding the implementation of self-driving cars. One of the primary concerns is the ethical dilemma of how these vehicles should be programmed to respond in emergency situations where harm is unavoidable. Should the car prioritize the safety of its occupants or minimize overall casualties? These are complex philosophical questions that require carefulconsideration and input from experts in various fields, including ethics, law, and technology.Another challenge is the potential impact on the job market, particularly for professions like taxi drivers, truckers, and delivery personnel. While some argue that new job opportunities will arise in the development and maintenance of self-driving technology, there is a valid concern about the potential displacement of workers and the need for retraining and transition assistance.Furthermore, there are technical challenges to overcome, such as ensuring the reliability and cybersecurity of these vehicles. As with any technology, self-driving cars could be vulnerable to hacking attempts or software glitches, which could have disastrous consequences. Rigorous testing, robust security measures, and ongoing maintenance will be crucial to ensuring the safe operation of these vehicles.As a student, I find the prospect of self-driving cars both exciting and daunting. On one hand, the potential benefits in terms of safety, efficiency, and accessibility are undeniable. The idea of being able to study or relax during my commute, rather than fighting traffic and navigating busy roads, is incredibly appealing. However, I also recognize the valid concerns andchallenges that need to be addressed before this technology can be fully embraced.Ultimately, I believe that self-driving cars represent the future of transportation, and their widespread adoption is inevitable. However, it is crucial that this technology is developed and implemented responsibly, with a focus on ensuring safety, addressing ethical concerns, and mitigating potential negative impacts on society.As students and future leaders, it is our responsibility to stay informed about these advancements, engage in thoughtful discussions, and contribute our perspectives to the ongoing debates surrounding self-driving cars. We must strive to strike a balance between embracing innovation and addressing legitimate concerns, so that we can shape a future where technology enhances our lives while respecting ethical principles and prioritizing the well-being of society as a whole.篇3The Driverless Revolution: A Student's Perspective on Autonomous VehiclesAs a student living in an era of rapid technological advancements, the concept of self-driving cars captivates myimagination and sparks a myriad of thoughts and emotions. On one hand, the idea of autonomous vehicles promises unprecedented convenience, safety, and efficiency on our roads. On the other hand, it raises concerns about job displacement, ethical dilemmas, and the potential for technology to outpace our ability to regulate it effectively. In this essay, I aim to explore both the potential benefits and drawbacks of self-driving cars, offering a balanced perspective on this groundbreaking innovation.The Promise of ConvenienceOne of the most alluring aspects of self-driving cars is the convenience they offer. Imagine being able to study, read, or even take a nap during your daily commute, while the vehicle navigates traffic and handles the tedious tasks of driving. For students juggling academics, extracurricular activities, and social lives, the ability to reclaim that time spent behind the wheel could be a game-changer. Additionally, self-driving cars could revolutionize transportation for those with disabilities or mobility challenges, providing them with newfound independence and accessibility.Increased Safety and EfficiencyAnother compelling argument in favor of autonomous vehicles is their potential to enhance road safety. Human error is a leading cause of traffic accidents, and self-driving cars, with their advanced sensors and algorithms, could significantly reduce the number of collisions caused by factors such as distracted driving, impaired driving, and poor decision-making. Furthermore, these vehicles could communicate with one another and optimize traffic flow, reducing congestion and improving overall efficiency on our roads.Environmental BenefitsSelf-driving cars also offer potential environmental benefits. By optimizing routes and driving patterns, these vehicles could reduce fuel consumption and emissions, contributing to a more sustainable future. Additionally, the rise of autonomous vehicles could encourage a shift towards shared mobility services, reducing the number of vehicles on the road and further minimizing their environmental impact.Job Displacement ConcernsHowever, the advent of self-driving cars is not without its challenges and drawbacks. One of the most significant concerns revolves around job displacement, particularly in the transportation and logistics sectors. Millions of individualsworldwide are employed as drivers, and the widespread adoption of autonomous vehicles could potentially lead to large-scale job losses. While new job opportunities may arise in the development and maintenance of these technologies, the transition could be disruptive and create economic hardships for many families.Ethical DilemmasSelf-driving cars also raise complex ethical dilemmas that must be addressed. For instance, how should these vehicles be programmed to respond in situations where a collision is unavoidable? Should they prioritize the safety of passengers over pedestrians, or vice versa? What about situations where the vehicle must choose between two suboptimal outcomes? These ethical quandaries highlight the need for robust legal and regulatory frameworks to govern the development and deployment of autonomous vehicles.Privacy and Cybersecurity ConcernsAdditionally, the widespread adoption of self-driving cars raises concerns about privacy and cybersecurity. These vehicles rely on a vast network of sensors and data-gathering technologies, which could potentially be exploited by malicious actors or misused by corporations or governments forsurveillance purposes. Ensuring the security and privacy of the data collected by these vehicles will be a critical challenge that must be addressed.Regulatory ChallengesFinally, the rapid pace of technological advancement in the field of autonomous vehicles presents regulatory challenges. Policymakers and lawmakers must work diligently to keep up with the evolution of these technologies, ensuring that appropriate safety standards, liability frameworks, and consumer protections are in place. The lack of a clear and consistent regulatory environment could hinder the widespread adoption of self-driving cars or lead to unintended consequences.ConclusionAs a student witnessing the dawn of the driverless revolution, I am both excited and apprehensive about the future of autonomous vehicles. While the potential benefits in terms of convenience, safety, and environmental sustainability are undeniable, the challenges posed by job displacement, ethical dilemmas, privacy concerns, and regulatory hurdles cannot be ignored.Ultimately, the successful integration of self-driving cars into our society will require a collaborative effort involving policymakers, industry leaders, ethicists, and the public. We must engage in open and honest dialogues, weighing the risks and rewards, and carefully navigating the complex landscape of this transformative technology.As students and the leaders of tomorrow, it is our responsibility to stay informed, ask critical questions, and actively participate in shaping the future of transportation. By embracing innovation while upholding our ethical principles and prioritizing the well-being of society, we can harness the potential of self-driving cars to create a safer, more efficient, and more sustainable world for generations to come.。

The Reputational Costs of Tax Avoidance

The Reputational Costs of Tax Avoidance*JOHN GALLEMORE,University of ChicagoEDWARD L.MAYDEW,University of North CarolinaJACOB R.THORNOCK,University of Washington1.IntroductionThis study investigates whetherﬁrms and their top executives bear reputational costs from engaging in aggressive tax avoidance activities.At least two decades of empirical tax research has shown thatﬁrms engage in a wide range of strategies for tax avoidance pur-poses.1Recent studies suggest that for manyﬁrms,tax avoidance appears to be highly eﬀective at reducing theﬁrms’tax payments and increasing their after-tax earnings.For example,Dyreng,Hanlon,and Maydew(2008)ﬁnd that more than a quarter of publicly traded U.S.ﬁrms are able to reduce their taxes to less than20percent of their pre-tax earnings,and are able to sustain such low rates of taxation over periods as long as ten years.Tax avoidance strategies are abundant and include a wide variety of activities such as shifting income into tax havens(Dyreng and Lindsey2009),using complex hybrid secu-rities(Engel,Erickson,and Maydew1999),and engaging in other tax shelters(Wilson 2009).While the evidence indicates there is wide variation in tax avoidance acrossﬁrms, the extant literature has a diﬃcult time explaining this variation.What is puzzling is not that someﬁrms engage in tax avoidance,but rather why someﬁrms engage in it enthusiastically while others appear to shun it.For example,while showing that some ﬁrms engage in substantial tax avoidance,Dyreng et al.(2008)alsoﬁnd that approxi-mately one-fourth ofﬁrms pay taxes in excess of35percent of their pre-tax income over a ten-year period.Given a U.S.federal corporate tax rate of35percent,these ﬁrms appear to be engaging in little or no sustainable tax avoidance.The question of why so manyﬁrms do not avail themselves of tax avoidance opportunities has been coined the“under-sheltering puzzle”(Desai and Dharmapala2006;Hanlon and Heitz-man2010;Weisbach2002).*Accepted by Steve Salterio.The authors would like to thank Kathleen Andries,Darren Bernard,Jenny Brown,Nicole Cade,Charles Christian,Lisa De Simone,Katherine Drake,Don Goldman,Susan Gyeszly, Michelle Hanlon,Bradford Hepfer,JeﬀHoopes,Becky Lester,Kevin Markle,Zoe-Vonna Palmrose,Phil Quinn,Steven Savoy,Terry Shevlin,Michelle Shimek,Stephanie Sikes(Oxford discussant),Bridget Stom-berg,Laura Wellman,Brady Williams,Ryan Wilson,participants at the2012Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation annual conference,Vienna University of Economics and Business,and reading groups at Arizona State,Iowa,MIT,and University of Texas-Austin for helpful comments.They espe-cially thank Michelle Hanlon,Joel Slemrod,and Ryan Wilson for sharing tax shelter data and Bob Bo-wen,Andy Call,and Shiva Rajgopal for sharing Fortune Magazine reputation data.John Gallemore gratefully acknowledges theﬁnancial support of the Deloitte Foundation.1.For reviews of the literature on tax avoidance,see Hanlon,and Heitzman(2010),Maydew(2001),andShackelford and Shevlin(2001).Contemporary Accounting Research Vol.31No.4(Winter2014)pp.1103–1133©CAAAdoi:10.1111/1911-3846.120551104Contemporary Accounting ResearchReputational costs are often posited as an important factor that limits tax avoidance activities,particularly the most aggressive tax strategies.2For example,the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service(IRS)asserts that aggressive tax strategies can pose“a sig-niﬁcant risk to corporate reputations”and“the general public has little tolerance for overly aggressive tax planning”(Shulman2009).However,empirical evidence on the repu-tational costs of tax avoidance is scarce.The most compelling evidence to date is Hanlon and Slemrod(2009)and Graham,Hanlon,Shevlin,and Shroﬀ(2012).Hanlon and Slem-rod(2009)examine the stock price responses ofﬁrms accused of engaging in tax shelters. Theyﬁnd evidence thatﬁrms suﬀer stock price declines following public revelation of tax shelter behavior.They are careful to acknowledge that there are many possible determi-nants of the negative returns,of which reputational costs are only one.With the exception of some tests on retailﬁrms,they leave extensive testing of reputational costs for future research.Graham et al.(2012)survey tax executives andﬁnd that more than half agree that potential harm to theirﬁrm’s reputation is an important factor in deciding whether or not to implement a tax planning strategy.This evidence is consistent with managers perceiving that aggressive tax avoidance will subject them or theirﬁrms to reputational costs.Beyond this important initial evidence,we know very little about the reputational costs of tax shelters.In particular,we do not know ifﬁrms that are publicly scrutinized for having engaged in tax shelters actually bear reputational costs,as might have been feared ex ante.In their review of tax research,Hanlon and Heitzman(2010)call for research on the under-sheltering puzzle,speciﬁcally posing the following questions:“Why do some corporations avoid more tax than others?How do investors,creditors,and con-sumers perceive corporate tax avoidance?...These are interesting questions worthy of study”(137,146).This study answers the call for research,focusing on the extent to which tax sheltering results in reputational costs.We analyze a sample ofﬁrms identiﬁed in prior studies as engaging in aggressive tax shelters.Our study combines the samples of several prior studies of tax shelter behavior; namely,Graham and Tucker(2006),Hanlon and Slemrod(2009),and Wilson(2009). After imposing data requirements,our sample constitutes118ﬁrms revealed during the period1995to2005as having engaged in tax shelters.To our knowledge,this is the larg-est sample of publicly identiﬁed corporate tax shelters analyzed to date.We maintain the assumption that managers act rationally in considering costs and beneﬁts of a tax strategy for theﬁrm.When the managers decide to engage in tax avoid-ance,they weigh the expected beneﬁts of tax avoidance against the expected costs and will not engage in tax avoidance unless the net beneﬁts are positive in an expected value sense. Hence,for our sample of tax shelter users,our assumption is that managers expected the tax shelters to yield positive net beneﬁts.However,we distinguish between the ex post cost of getting caught and the ex ante decision to engage in tax avoidance.While the probabil-ity of bearing reputational costs may be low ex ante,those costs will be realized ex post forﬁrms subject to scrutiny.Thus,a manager may rationally engage in tax sheltering even though doing so places theﬁrm at risk of bearing costs if it is later challenged;our objec-tive is to assess those potential ex post reputational costs.Reputation is a multifaceted construct associated with several parties,including the ﬁrm and its management,as well as shareholders,customers,and tax authorities.We begin by examining the reputational eﬀects of tax sheltering exerted by shareholders.To provide some assurance that the sample and research design have suﬃcient power,we replicate Hanlon and Slemrod(2009)using our sample and design to test for capital 2.We deﬁne reputation as a general perception of theﬁrm by all interested stakeholders and further discussthis concept in section2.CAR Vol.31No.4(Winter2014)The Reputational Costs of Tax Avoidance1105 market reactions to tax shelter revelations.In the short window surrounding the revela-tion date,weﬁnd that the stocks publicly revealed to have tax shelters exhibit signiﬁ-cantly negative abnormal returns,consistent with theﬁndings in Hanlon and Slemrod (2009).We then expand the event period to30days past the revelation date to test whether the short-window eﬀects on stock price are permanent or temporary.Weﬁnd evidence that,although the immediate stock price response around the tax shelter is nega-tive,in the days that follow,the stock price systematically reverses back to its pre-event levels.Thus,we conﬁrm that the Hanlon and Slemrod(2009)short-window eﬀect on stock price is a robust result and at the same time,we alsoﬁnd that it is a temporary eﬀect that reverses within30days.3Next,we examine the potential reputational eﬀects on theﬁrms’managers,speciﬁcally those related to their employment.We do notﬁnd evidence of increased chief executive oﬃcer(CEO),chiefﬁnancial oﬃcer(CFO),or auditor turnover in the three years follow-ing tax shelter revelation relative to the turnover rates for matched controlﬁrms.Next,we assess whether customers exert a reputational cost on shelterﬁrms.Weﬁnd no diﬀerential change in sales,sales growth,or advertising expense for revealed shelterﬁrms relative to that of controlﬁrms.We also examine how the revelation of a tax shelter inﬂuences the public media reputation of aﬁrm,as measured by the Fortune magazine list for“Most Admired Companies,”following Bowen,Call,and Rajgopal(2010).Weﬁnd no evidence that being caught in a tax shelter lowers the likelihood of making the Fortune list relative to the matched control sample.Firms also face potential reputational consequences with the tax authorities.When the IRS learns that aﬁrm has engaged in what it considers a tax shelter,its policy allows it to expand the scope of information that it requests from theﬁrm,which can lead to the discovery of other aggressive tax avoidance.Accordingly,we examine whetherﬁrms accused of engaging in tax shelters become more conservative in the future regarding their tax avoidance,perhaps as a result of increased IRS scrutiny.If they do,we would expect to observe the eﬀective tax rate(ETR)of tax shelterﬁrms to increase following scrutiny of their activities.The data,however,show that the ETR of tax shelterﬁrms remains approximately the same before and after discovery,and this is true regardless of whether ETRs are measured on a generally accepted accounting prin-ciples(GAAP)basis or on a cash basis.These results suggest thatﬁrms identiﬁed as tax shelter users may not suﬀer signiﬁcant reputational costs even at the hands of the tax authorities.In summary,across a battery of tests,we do not observe a reputational eﬀect of tax sheltering.We are careful to note,however,that such an eﬀect may indeed exist;but we are simply unable toﬁnd it empirically in our tests,perhaps because shelterﬁrms are peculiar or because we have a small sample and/or low power.For example,it is possi-ble thatﬁrms expecting nonzero reputational costs ex ante avoid tax shelter use com-pletely and that onlyﬁrms that are immune to reputational concerns engage in tax shelters.While we cannot rule out this possibility completely,it appears unlikely given the wide variety ofﬁrms we observe engaging in tax shelters.4Moreover,in logistic regressions of tax shelter usage on proxies for reputation and other factors known to be associated with tax shelter usage(Wilson2009),weﬁnd no evidence that reputation sig-niﬁcantly inﬂuences the likelihood of tax shelter participation.In summary,the absence of ex post reputational costs and the insigniﬁcance of reputation as a determinant of tax 3.By comparison,prior research shows that the stock price declines associated with corporate malfeasance arepermanent.For example,Hennes et al.(2008)show that the stock prices decline by nearly30percent following discovery ofﬁnancial irregularities and stay at reduced levels.4.For example,our sample of shelter users containsﬁrms from15of the17industries in the Fama-French17industry classiﬁcation and has total assets ranging from$13million to$1.3billion.CAR Vol.31No.4(Winter2014)1106Contemporary Accounting Researchshelter use suggest that reputational costs are not likely to be responsible for the signiﬁ-cant variation in tax sheltering.Thus,it appears that under-sheltering is more of a puz-zle than ever.52.Prior literature and research questionPrior literature on tax avoidance and tax sheltersThere is a vast and growing empirical literature on tax avoidance,dating back at least as far as Scholes,Wilson,and Wolfson(1990)and continuing to the present day,that pro-vides ample evidence that tax avoidance is pervasive and adaptable.Research has shown thatﬁrms engage in all manner of tax avoidance strategies,ranging from simple strategies like holding tax-exempt municipal bonds,to complex strategies such as debt–equity hybrid securities(Engel et al.1999),cross-border avoidance strategies(Dyreng and Lindsey 2009),intangible holding companies(Dyreng,Lindsey,and Thornock2013),and corpo-rate-owned life insurance(COLI)tax shelters(Brown2011).While prior research indicates that someﬁrms do not actively engage in tax avoidance (Dyreng et al.2008),the forces that are curtailing more widespread tax avoidance are not well understood.On average,it is reasonable to assume thatﬁrms are engaging in the optimal amount of tax avoidance.A maintained assumption in the literature,and in this paper,is that the presence of costs of tax avoidance at some point outweigh the beneﬁts. However,such costs have been diﬃcult to identify.6The lack of tax avoidance more gen-erally,especially in nonregulated settings and settings with noﬁnancial reporting trade-oﬀ, has been dubbed the“under-sheltering puzzle.”Essentially,the question is:what is hold-ing thoseﬁrms back from taking advantage of known tax avoidance opportunities being used by otherﬁrms?Reputational costs are often conjectured to be an important factor constraining tax avoidance,particularly the more aggressive forms of tax avoidance.COLI shelters are a useful example of a tax avoidance strategy that many viewed as particularly aggressive and that resulted in adverse scrutiny forﬁrms that engaged in them.The COLI shelter involvedﬁrms taking out life insurance policies on their rank-and-ﬁle employees and then receiving the death beneﬁts if the employee died(see Brown[2010]for a more detailed description).The COLI shelter was the subject of unﬂattering coverage in the media,including the Wall Street Journal,which identiﬁed the companies that engaged in COLI alongside pictures of their actual deceased employees(Schultz and Francis 2002).As noted in Hanlon and Slemrod(2009),there is anecdotal evidence that someﬁrms apply a“Wall Street Journal”test to their tax avoidance activities,whereby they forgo activities that would look unsavory if they were linked to theﬁrm on the front page of the Wall Street Journal.There is also anecdotal evidence that companies want to be perceived as being good corporate citizens that pay their“fair share”of taxes,although evidence on this is mixed(Davis,Guenther,Krull,and Williams2013;Watson2011).General Electric, for example,has been criticized by the New York Times for paying no taxes to the U.S. government in2011despite being one of the largest companies in the world by earnings 5.We test the robustness of our results using two diﬀerent matching techniques(i.e.,a propensity scorematched control sample and an industry,size,and eﬀective tax rate matched control sample),multiyear periods(i.e.,one,two,and three years following tax shelter revelation),and subsamples ofﬁrms for which the potential reputational eﬀect of tax shelter involvement is likely to be higher.Throughout all of these dif-ferent speciﬁcations,we do notﬁnd signiﬁcant reputational costs from tax avoidance.6.The costs identiﬁed areﬁnancial reporting costs and regulatory costs,which apply to a subset of tax avoid-ance strategies and a subset ofﬁrms,respectively.See Frank,Lynch,and Rego(2009)and Badertscher,Phi-lips,Pincus,and Rego(2009)for examples ofﬁnancial reporting costs of tax avoidance and Mills,Nutter, and Schwab(2013)for an example of the regulatory costs of tax avoidance.CAR Vol.31No.4(Winter2014)The Reputational Costs of Tax Avoidance1107 and by market capitalization.7GE immediately responded by pointing out its other contri-butions to society,such as being a major employer and exporter,its prior tax payments, as well as tallying up a broader measure of its tax burden including payroll,property,and sales taxes paid.8These examples are consistent with the conjecture thatﬁrms perceive reputational costs from aggressive tax avoidance,especially when subjected to media scrutiny.To date, however,there is little in the way of empirical evidence on the validity of that claim.The closest evidence on the reputational eﬀects of tax shelters is provided by Hanlon and Slemrod(2009),who examine the change inﬁrms’market values following public revela-tion that theﬁrms engaged in tax sheltering,and by Graham et al.(2012),who survey tax executives in regard to their tax planning activities.Hanlon and Slemrod(2009)ﬁnd that when tax shelter participation is revealed in the news media,the tax shelterﬁrms suﬀer a decline in market value.Graham et al.(2012)survey tax executives andﬁnd that nearly 70percent respond that potential harm to theirﬁrm’s reputation is“very important”or “important”when deciding what tax planning strategies to implement.Moreover, responding to a question about tax disclosures,approximately half of executives surveyed responded that risk of adverse media attention was very important or important in reduc-ing theirﬁrm’s willingness to be tax aggressive.Other research examines the role of political costs in determining eﬀective tax rates, where political costs can be viewed as a type of reputational cost or at least related to rep-utational costs.Zimmerman(1983)hypothesizes that accounting choices are often driven by political costs,such as taxation,andﬁnds that largeﬁrms have higher eﬀective taxes, which he asserts are a function of the higher political costs faced by theseﬁls et al.(2013)examine the inﬂuence of political costs on the tax avoidance in a sample of federal contractors.Theyﬁnd that federal contractors that are highly sensitive to political costs have higher eﬀective tax rates,consistent with political costs driving the tax strategy of federal contractors.Prior literature on corporate reputationMost of the prior research on corporate reputation focuses on nontax settings.In account-ing andﬁnance,the extant literature examines the reputational costs of malfeasance on bothﬁrms and their managers.For example,Karpoﬀ,Lee,and Martin(2008a)track the careers of over2,000managers who allegedly engaged inﬁnancial misrepresentation and ﬁnd that93percent of these managers areﬁred and suﬀer a signiﬁcant loss in personal wealth.Desai,Hogan,and Wilkins(2006)examine whether managers ofﬁrms suﬀer repu-tational costs following earnings restatements.Theyﬁnd that top managers ofﬁrms that restate their earnings experience more turnover than managers at a control sample of ﬁrms.Bowen,Call,and Rajgopal(2010)ﬁnd evidence of negative eﬀects from whistle-blowing events,including signiﬁcant negative abnormal returns,restatements,shareholder lawsuits,and negative future operating performance.Prior research has shown thatﬁrms accused of accounting improprieties(Karpoﬀ,Lee,and Martin2008b;Dechow,Sloan, and Sweeney1996),defective products(Jarell and Peltzman1985),and violating environ-mental regulations(Karpoﬀ,Lott,and Wehrly2005)are subject to adverse eﬀects follow-ing revelation of the alleged misdeeds.However,there is also evidence that managers andﬁrms are not always severely pun-ished for improprieties.Beneish(1999)ﬁnds that managers ofﬁrms with extreme earnings overstatements do not have higher employment losses than managers of a matched sample ofﬁrms.Agrawal,Jaﬀe,and Karpoﬀ(1999)ﬁnd no evidence that managers and directors7./2011/03/25/business/economy/25tax.html?_r=1,accessed September30,2011.8./setting-the-record-straight-ge-and-taxes/,accessed September30,2011.CAR Vol.31No.4(Winter2014)1108Contemporary Accounting Researchofﬁrms charged with fraud have higher rates of turnover.Finally,Srinivasan(2005)ﬁnds that outside directors face labor market penalties following accounting restatements but not penalties through regulatory actions or litigation.In sum,there is evidence of signiﬁcant reputational costs accruing to bothﬁrms and managers in a range of nontax settings.This evidence suggests that it is reasonable to expect that tax avoidance can be accompanied by adverse reputational costs if it is discov-ered and subject to outside scrutiny.However,some evidence suggests the opposite is the case,in which managers go unpunished following instances of inappropriate behavior. Moreover,tax avoidance may be viewed in a completely diﬀerent light than other corpo-rate misdeeds because of the positive cashﬂow eﬀects of such activity.Research question:Does tax sheltering aﬀect corporate reputation?The reputation of theﬁrm is a multifaceted construct that results from the impressions and perceptions of numerous interested stakeholders.However,as Walker(2010)notes, the concept of corporate reputation is somewhat diﬃcult to deﬁne because it means diﬀer-ent things in diﬀerent contexts.In this paper,we take a broad view of reputation,in which stakeholders form a perception of the corporation that inﬂuences the interactions between theﬁrm and stakeholders.The stakeholders of theﬁrm include any party with which the ﬁrm has a vested interest in maintaining a relationship,including equity-holders,debt-holders,customers,suppliers,and governments,among others.We follow Fombrun and Shanley(1990)in deﬁning reputation as something that is both created and consumed as part of a corporate strategy.Hence,aﬁrm’s reputation is an integral part of its compara-tive advantage,and as such,theﬁrm and its management will act to protect and grow the reputation of theﬁrm.To do so,it will strategically consider reputation in undergoing strategic initiatives and will make decisions,including tax decisions,based in part on the costs/beneﬁts to its reputation.Accordingly,we are interested in those aspects of theﬁrm’s reputation that have real consequences for theﬁrm.This includes aspects of reputation that aﬀect people’s percep-tions of theﬁrm and its managers for honesty and fair dealing,which could aﬀect the ﬁrm’s brand values and sales,as well as scrutiny by parties theﬁrm deals with such as cus-tomers,suppliers,the IRS,and outside auditors.These costs may manifest as increased advertising costs to counter reputational damage,increased eﬀective tax rates from height-ened IRS scrutiny,and increased auditor turnover.We are also interested in the reputation for competence and the eﬀects on top execu-tives.Tax shelters that ultimately backﬁre and become the subject of intense IRS and media scrutiny may call into question the competence of theﬁrm’s managers.An impor-tant way that managers may internalize the reputational consequences of adverse scrutiny is through increased manager turnover following the tax shelter scrutiny,consistent with prior literature on nontax reputation-damaging events.However,as Hanlon and Slemrod(2009)discuss,some stakeholders may actually react positively to news of tax shelter involvement,or at least they will not react nega-tively.As a result,involvement in a tax shelter may aﬀect aﬁrm’s reputation diﬀerently than the corporate misdeeds listed above,for the following reasons.First,unlike account-ing fraud,corporate tax sheltering is usually legal or at least in an area of the tax law with substantial gray area.Second,tax sheltering can improve theﬁrm’s after-tax cashﬂow if the IRS ultimately agrees with theﬁrm’s interpretation of the tax law.Third,the risk involved in tax sheltering may not be the same(or even rank anywhere near the gravity) as other risk factors that theﬁrm faces,such as liquidity risk,competition,and going con-cern.Thus,the reputational risk of a tax shelter may not be of major importance to the ﬁrm or the parties with whom it does business.CAR Vol.31No.4(Winter2014)The Reputational Costs of Tax Avoidance11093.Data and SampleTo assessﬁrms’reputational costs of aggressive tax avoidance,we concentrate onﬁrms that were subjected to media scrutiny for having participated in a tax shelter.Tax avoid-ance activities range from mundane strategies that are unlikely to attract adverse attention to aggressive strategies that have little economic purpose other than to reduce taxes.Tax shelters tend to be at the extreme end of the tax avoidance spectrum.By focusing on tax shelters that attracted media scrutiny,we give the best chance for the public(including shareholders and governments)to form a negative opinion about theﬁrm.However,if we observe reputational costs in the sample of tax shelterﬁrms,we need to be careful about generalizing the results to less aggressive forms of tax avoidance.Conversely,if we do not observe reputational costs in this extreme sample,then it is unlikely that more mundane forms of tax avoidance result in signiﬁcant reputational costs.Tax shelters are secretive by nature.As a result,it is diﬃcult to identify a comprehen-sive sample ofﬁrms that are engaged in sheltering.Prior research has identiﬁed small sam-ples of public cases of tax sheltering.This research includes Graham and Tucker(2006), 44ﬁrm-year observations;Hanlon and Slemrod(2009),107ﬁrm-year observations;and Wilson(2009),33ﬁrm-year observations.To create a broad sample of tax shelter observa-tions,we combine the samples in these prior studies of tax sheltering with61additional observations of the COLI shelter(Sheppard1995),resulting in245tax shelter observa-tions.To the best of our knowledge,we have the largest public tax shelter database employed in current and past research.9To maximize power,we require the data to meet only minimal conditions to remain in the sample.Panel A of Table1presents the details of our sample composi-tion.From the combined245observations,we remove69observations that are dupli-cated across the databases.10We then remove foreignﬁrms(3observations),those for which the initial date of public scrutiny is unclear or missing(15),pre-1993tax shelters (10),those with insuﬃcient data(17),and those that upon closer inspection are not clearly tax shelters(2).11,12Finally,we remove observations for which we cannot obtain a matched controlﬁrm(1observation),according to the matching process described below.In the end,we are left with118shelter observations from1995–2005.Panel B of Table1shows the number of tax shelter revelations in each year,from which we see that our shelter observations tend to cluster more in some time periods than others (e.g.,tax shelters made public in1995comprise about40percent of our sample).13The distribution of tax shelter revelations across time largely follows prior research that gave rise to the data(Graham and Tucker2006;Hanlon and Slemrod2009;and Wil-son2009).We perform sensitivity tests for the eﬀects of temporal patterns in tax shel-tering in section5below.For the main tests,we match each revealed shelterﬁrm-years(i.e.,the treatment group)to a controlﬁrm from the same industry that is the closest inﬁrm size(i.e.,assets) 9.Other researchers(e.g.,Lisowsky,Robinson,and Schmidt2012)have obtained larger samples of tax shel-ter transactions using conﬁdential IRS data.Although that sample is useful for many research questions, the tax shelters in those studies are unobservable to the public and thus would not be suitable for tests of reputational penalties exerted by outside stakeholders.10.Since this study is conducted at theﬁrm-year level,if there is more than one tax shelter revelation in ayear,we count that as one observation.11.We begin our sample period in1993because SFAS109changed the rules regarding theﬁnancial reportingof taxes,and we want to maintain similar accounting treatment of income taxes for all our observations.12.Both incidents involved transfer pricing,which can be considered an aggressive form of tax planning.However,these observations are likely to be quite diﬀerent from the other tax shelters,and hence we remove them from the sample.13.This time clustering results because the Tax Notes article identifying COLI users was published in1995.CAR Vol.31No.4(Winter2014)。

第5册--英国海上保险条款详论-第二版--Case table

Bennett steamship co. v Hull mutual Steamship Protection & Indemnity Association-(1914)18 com Ca74-V1/C2-P73
Bensaude V Thames & Mersey Marine Insurance Co. Ltd(1897)46 WR78- AC609--V1/C6-P196; C7-P298 Berk V Style(1955)2 Lloyd's Rep382---V2/C9-P460; P472; V2/C13-P603 Birrell v. Dryer (1884) 9 App Cas 345, HL---V1/C7-P274 Blackett V Royal Exchange Assurance(1832)---V1/C1-P12 Blyth V Birmingham waterworks Co. Ltd(1856)11 Ex784,4 W.R.294-P59 Boag V standard Marine Insurance Co. Ltd(1937)57 L1. Lloyd's Rep83---V2/C9-P501 Booth V Gair(1863)33 L.J.C.P.99 9LT---V1/C2-P95; V2/c9-P498 Bottomley v Bovill (1826) 5 B&C 210---V1/C7-P236 Boulton v Houlder Bros [1904] 1 KB 784---V1/C7-P403 Brandies, Goldschmidt & co. V Economic Insurance Co. Ltd(1992)11 L1 Lloyd's Rep42---V1/C2-P585 Britain Steamship Co. V The King (1921)a A.C.99---V1/C5-P160 British & Foreign Marine Insurance Co. V Wilson shipping Co. Ltd(1919)4 L1 Lloyd's Rep371---V1/C2-P105 British and Foreign Marine insurance Co.Ltd V Gauet(1912)2 AC41---V2/C13-P594 British&Foreign Marine Insurance Co. V Gaunt(1921)7 L1 Lloyd's Rep62 per Lort summer---V2/C9-P474 British&Foreign Marine Insurance co. V Sanday(1916)21 Com Cas154---V1/C5-P171; V2/C12-P573 Britton v. Royal Insurance Company (1866) 4 F & F 905---V1/C7-P407;P414 Brooks v MacDonnell (1835) 1 Y&C EX 500---V1/C7-P309;P317 Brough V Whitmore(1791)4 TR 206---V2/C13-P620 Brown V Fleming (1902)7 Com Cas245---V2/C9-P460 Bucks Printing Press Ltd v Prudential Assurance Co (1994) 3 Re Lr 219---V1/C7-P414 Burnand v Rodocanachi (1882) 7 App Cas 333---V1/C7-P443 Canada Rice Mills Ltd v Union Marine & General Insurance Co Ltd (1941) AC 55---V1/C7-P233 Car International V Ernst Komrowski(1996)HK High Court, Mar 5th---V2/C9-P474 Carras V London&Scottish Assurance Co.(1936)52 L1.Lloyd's Rep34; 54 L1 L.rep131---V1/C6-P196 Carter v Boehm (1766) 3 Burr 1905---V1/C7-P407 Case v Davison (1816) 5 M&S 79---V1/C7-P318 Castellain v Preston (1883) 11 QBD 380---V1/C7-P437;P443 Central Bank of India Ltd v. Guardian Assurance Co Ltd (1936) 54 Lloyd’s Rep. 247---V1/C7-P416 Chandler v Blogg (1898) 1 QB 32,8Asp MLC349, 3 Com Ca8---V1/C2-P73; C7-P247;P370 Chandris V Argo Insurance Co. Ltd (1963)1 Lloyd's Rep665 Q.B.D.---V1/C2-P85 Chapman (JA) & Co Ltd v Kadirga Demizcilik ve Ticaret (1998) Lloyd’s Rep IR 377---V1/C7-P330;P360 Charming Peggy(Green V Brown (1743)2 str 1199, See P303)--V1/C5-P156 Cheshire and Co. V Vaughan brothes and Co(1920)3 L1. Lloyd's Rep213---V2/C9-P502 Cho Yang Shipping V Coral(1997)2 Lloyd's Rep641---V2/C13-P607 Christin v Ditchell (1797) Peake Add Cas 141---V1/C7-P325 Colledge v. Harty (1851) 6 Exch 205---V1/C7-P274 Colonia v Amoco (1997) 1 Lloyd’s Rep 261---V1/C7-P444 Commercial Union Assurance Co v Lister (1874) LR 9 Ch App 483---V1/C7-P439;441 rd Commonwealth Construction Co Ltd v Imperial Oil Co Ltd 69 DLR 3 558 (1977)---V1/C7-P339 Commonwealth Smelting Ltd V Guardian Royal Exchange Assurance(1984)2 Lloyd's Rep608---V1/C2-P55 Compania Maritima Astra S.A.V Archdale 1954 AMC 1674 (1954)2 Lloyd's Rep958---V1/C2-P105 Conohan v Cooperators 2002 FCA 60, 2004 AMC 1661 (Federal Court of Appeal)---V1/C7-P249

VIAVI Solutions CellAdvisor 5G平台用户指南说明书

VIAVI SolutionsFeaturesy Auto file naming that eliminates manual inputs in file name y Trace overlay that detects signal degradation over time y Dual display and multiple tabs that allow fast and efficient measurements y Intuitive pass/fail analysis that instantly notifies a problem y Integrated RF CW sourcey EZ-Cal™ that calibrates faster and easier y CAA Check and Job Manager that enable test process automation and consolidated reportsMeasurementsy Reflection – Return Loss and VSWRy Distance to Fault – Return Loss, VSWR, and Delayy 1-Port Cable Loss y 1-Port Phase y Smith Chart y 2-Port Transmission y RF Source y CAA CheckMost problems in mobile networks occur in cell-site infrastructure, consisting of antennas, cables, amplifiers, filters, connectors, combiners, jumpers, etc. VIAVI CAA06M CAA Modules’ optimal functionality , combined with the testing features of the CellAdvisor 5G platform, ensures that cell-site technicians complete comprehensive cell sites installation verification and maintenance in a super professional way.The CAA Modules make it easy and effective to characterize and verify feed line systems and verify antenna or sector-to-sector isolation.CA5000 CellAdvisor 5GCAA06M 6 GHz CAA ModuleData SheetVIAVICable and Antenna Analyzer ModulesCAA06M 6 GHz Modules for CellAdvisor 5G and OneAdvisor 800VIAVI CAA06M CAA Modules are the industry’s first compact-sized modular cable and antenna analyzers that enable fast, reliable, and effective characterization and verification of cell site installation.OneAdvisor 800SpecificationsSpecifications in this document are applicable to CAA06M CAA modules under the following conditions, unless otherwise stated: y With warm-up time of 10 minutes.y When a measurement is performed after calibrating to OSL standards.y When a CAA06M module is within its valid calibration period. y Data without tolerance considered to be typical values.y A typical value is defined as expected performance under operating temperature of 20 to 30°C for 15 minutes sustainment whereas a nominal value as general, descriptive term or parameters.Technical DataCAA06M on OneAdvisor 800MeasurementsOrdering InformationCAA Modules and DMCCAA06MA CAA06M 6 GHz cable and antenna analyzer module- Requires CA5000-DMC for CA5000 CellAdvisor 5G users- Auto detectable by main instrument when mounted to dual module carrierCAA06MB CAA06M 6 GHz cable and antenna analyzer module with bias power and external bias-tee- Required CA5000-DMC for CA5000 CellAdvisor 5G users- Includes G700050653 external bias-tee device and cable- Auto detectable by main instrument when mounted to dual module carrierCA5000-DMC Dual Module Carrier with Dummy Module for CellAdvisor 5G- Includes C10-DMC and C2K-EMPTYMODCAA module calibration report CAA06M-CRCAA module calibration report per ISO 17025 CAA06M-CRISOCalibration AccessoriesJD78050507 Dual port Type-N 6 GHz calibration kit- Includes JD78050509 Y-calibration kit (1), G700050530 RF Cable (2),and G700050575 RF Adapter (2)JD78050508 Dual port DIN 6 GHz calibration kit- Includes JD78050510 Y-calibration kit (1), G710050536 RF Cable (2),and G700050572 RF Adapter (2)JD78050509 Y-Calibration kit, Type-N(m), DC to 6 GHz, 50 Ω- Included in JD78050507Y-Calibration kit, DIN(m), DC to 6 GHz, 50 ΩJD78050510 - Included in JD78050508EZ-Cal kit, Type-N(m), DC to 6 GHz, 50 ΩJD70050509 RF CablesG700050530 RF cable DC to 8 GHz Type-N(m) to Type-N(m), 1.0 m- Included in JD78050507RF cable DC to 8 GHz Type-N(m) to Type-N(f), 1.5 m G700050531 RF cable DC to 8 GHz Type-N(m) to Type-N(f), 3.0 m G700050532G710050536 RF cable DC to 6 GHz Type-N(m) to DIN(f), 1.5 m- Included in JD78050508Phase-stable RF cable w grip DC to 6 GHz Type-N(m) to Type-N(f), 1.5 m G700050540 Phase-stable RF cable w grip DC to 6 GHz Type-N(m) to DIN(f), 1.5 m G700050541 RF AdaptersAdapter Type-N(m) to DIN(f), DC to 7.5 GHz, 50 ΩG700050571G700050572 Adapter DIN(m) to DIN(m), DC to 7.5 GHz, 50 Ω-Included in JD78050508Adapter Type-N(m) to SMA(f) DC to 18 GHz, 50 ΩG700050573 Adapter Type-N(m) to BNC(f), DC to 4 GHz, 50 ΩG700050574G700050575 Adapter Type-N(f) to Type-N(f), DC to 18 GHz 50 Ω- Included in JD78050507Adapter Type-N(m) to DIN(m), DC to 7.5 GHz, 50 ΩG700050576 Adapter Type-N(f) to DIN(f), DC to 7.5 GHz, 50 ΩG700050577 Adapter Type-N(f) to DIN(m), DC to 7.5 GHz, 50 ΩG700050578 Adapter DIN(f) to DIN(f), DC to 7.5 GHz, 50 ΩG700050579 Adapter Type-N(m) to Type-N(m), DC to 11 GHz 50 ΩG700050580 Adapter N(m) to QMA(f), DC to 6.0 GHz, 50 ΩG700050581 Adapter N(m) to QMA(m), DC to 6.0 GHz, 50 ΩG700050582 Adapter N(m) to 4.1/9.5 MINI DIN(f), DC to 6.0 GHz, 50 ΩG700050583 Adapter N(m) to 4.1/9.5 MINI DIN(m), DC to 6.0 GHz, 50 ΩG700050584© 2022 VIAVI Solutions Inc.Product specifications and descriptions in this document are subject to change without notice.Patented as described at /patentscaa-ca5g-ds-nsd-nse-ae 30190807 907 0322Contact Us+1 844 GO VIAVI (+1 844 468 4284)To reach the VIAVI office nearest you, visit /contactVIAVI Solutions。

black’s law dictionary欧路词典

black’s law dictionary欧路词典Black's Law Dictionary, also known as the EuLaw Dictionary, is a comprehensive legal reference book that provides definitions and explanations of legal terms. It is widely regarded as one of the most authoritative and reliable legal dictionaries available. In this article, we will explore the importance and usefulness of Black's Law Dictionary, as well as its key features and benefits.I. IntroductionBlack's Law Dictionary, first published in 1891 by Henry Campbell Black, is a renowned legal dictionary used by legal professionals, law students, and researchers worldwide. It is an indispensable tool for understanding and interpreting legal terminology. The dictionary covers a wide range of legal concepts, principles, and terms, making it an essential resource for anyone involved in the field of law.II. Key Features and Benefits1. Comprehensive DefinitionsBlack's Law Dictionary provides comprehensive definitions of legal terms, ensuring that users have a clear understanding of the terminology. The dictionary covers various areas of law, including contract law, criminal law, constitutional law, and more. Each definition is carefully crafted to provide accurate and concise explanations, making it easy for readers to grasp the meaning of complex legal terms.1.1 In-depth ExplanationsIn addition to definitions, Black's Law Dictionary offers in-depth explanations of legal concepts. These explanations help readers gain a deeper understanding of the principles and theories behind the terms. The dictionary often includes historical and contextual information, allowing users to appreciate the evolution of legal language and its implications.1.2 Legal Citations and ReferencesBlack's Law Dictionary includes citations and references to legal authorities, such as court cases and statutes, to support the definitions and explanations provided. This feature enhances the credibility and reliability of the dictionary, making it a trustworthy source for legal research and analysis.1.3 Cross-referencingThe dictionary utilizes cross-referencing to connect related terms and concepts. This enables users to explore interconnected legal principles and navigate through the dictionary with ease. Cross-referencing helps readers develop a comprehensive understanding of the legal landscape and how different terms relate to each other.III. Importance in Legal Practice and Education2.1 Legal Research and WritingBlack's Law Dictionary is an invaluable resource for legal research and writing. It provides legal professionals with accurate definitions and explanations, ensuring the use of precise terminology in legal documents, briefs, and opinions. The dictionary's extensive coverage of legal concepts helps lawyers and researchers delve deeper into legal issues and make informed arguments.2.2 Law School EducationLaw students heavily rely on Black's Law Dictionary throughout their academic journey. It serves as a guide to understanding legal concepts and terms encountered in textbooks, lectures, and case studies. The dictionary aids students in comprehending complex legal theories and prepares them for exams, moot court competitions, and legal writing assignments.2.3 International Legal PracticeBlack's Law Dictionary is widely recognized and used in international legal practice. Its definitions and explanations are applicable to various legal systems, making it a valuable tool for lawyers working on cross-border cases or dealing with foreign legalconcepts. The dictionary's international relevance enhances communication and understanding among legal professionals from different jurisdictions.IV. ConclusionIn conclusion, Black's Law Dictionary, also known as the EuLaw Dictionary, is a highly regarded legal reference book that plays a crucial role in legal practice, education, and research. Its comprehensive definitions, in-depth explanations, legal citations, and cross-referencing make it an indispensable resource for legal professionals, law students, and researchers. By providing accurate and reliable information, Black's Law Dictionary helps to ensure clarity and precision in the language of the law.。

frequent lawsuit filers can be a public -回复

frequent lawsuit filers can be a public -回复Frequent Lawsuit Filers Can Be a Public ConcernIntroduction:Lawsuits are an essential part of our legal system, allowing individuals or organizations to seek justice when they believe their rights have been violated. However, there is a growing concern regarding frequent lawsuit filers, who file lawsuits with significant frequency, often against the same defendants or for trivial matters. This article aims to explore the impact of frequent lawsuit filers on the public and discuss the steps that can be taken to address this issue comprehensively.Body:1. Understanding Frequent Lawsuit Filers:- Definition: Frequent lawsuit filers refer to individuals or organizations that frequently initiate legal actions in court, often without substantial merit.- Motivations: Frequent lawsuit filers may be driven by various motivations, including seeking financial gain, harassment, revenge,or publicity.- Characteristics: Often, frequent lawsuit filers target specific defendants repeatedly or file lawsuits for trivial matters, causing unnecessary burden on the court system and defendants.2. Negative impact on the Court System:- Overburdened Judicial System: Frequent lawsuit filers contribute to the backlog of cases, impeding the efficient functioning of the court system and delaying justice for genuine litigants.- Limited Judicial Resources: Courts have finite resources, such as judges, support staff, and infrastructure. Frequent lawsuits can strain these resources, affecting the overall quality and timeliness of the judicial process.- Increased Legal Costs: Frequent lawsuits create financial burdens for defendants and taxpayers alike. Defendants often need to hire legal representation and spend significant amounts on legal fees, even when the lawsuits lack merit.3. Negative impact on Defendants:- Financial Strain: Frequent lawsuits can impose significant financial burdens on defendants, especially when they mustrepeatedly defend themselves against baseless claims.- Emotional Distress: Frequent lawsuits can cause emotional distress to defendants who may feel targeted, harassed, or emotionally drained due to the repetitive nature of the litigation.- Reputation Damage: Publicly filed lawsuits can tarnish the reputation of defendants, impacting their personal and professional lives, regardless of the lawsuit's merit.4. Addressing the Issue:- Stricter Filing Requirements: Implementing stricter filing requirements can deter frivolous lawsuits as potential filers may think twice before proceeding. These requirements might involve providing detailed evidence of claim validity or proof of attempted resolution before initiating legal action.- Counterclaim Provision: Introducing counterclaim provisions can allow defendants to counter sue for damages or legal costs incurred due to frivolous lawsuits, acting as a deterrent for frequent lawsuit filers.- Expedited Dismissal Process: Establishing an expedited dismissal process for cases lacking substance can help swiftly dismiss frivolous lawsuits, reducing the burden on the court system and defendants.- Judicial Education: Providing education and training to judges about identifying and addressing frequent lawsuit filers can help streamline the judicial process and prevent unnecessary litigation.Conclusion:Frequent lawsuit filers pose significant challenges to the court system, defendants, and the public. The impact of these filings can strain judicial resources, burden defendants financially and emotionally, and even tarnish their reputation. To address this concern, stricter filing requirements, counterclaim provisions, expedited dismissal processes, and increased judicial education are essential steps. By implementing these measures, authorities can strike a balance between providing access to justice and curbing the abuse of the legal system, ultimately benefiting the public and ensuring a fair and efficient judicial process.。

the depositional record

the depositional recordThe depositional record refers to the accumulation of sediment or other organic material over time in various environments, such as rivers, lakes, oceans, and even glaciers. It provides valuable information about past environmental conditions and geological processes.Different types of sediments and materials may be deposited depending on the specific environment. For example, in a river, the depositional record may consist of sand, mud, and gravel carried by the flow of water. In a lake, the record may include layers of sediment derived from the surrounding land or microbial mats formed from organic matter. In marine environments, the record may contain the remains of marine organisms, such as shells, coral reefs, or the skeletons of plankton.The depositional record is often studied by geologists and paleontologists to reconstruct past environments, climate change, and evolutionary history. By examining the types of sediments, fossils, and geochemical signatures preserved in the record, scientists can infer information about the processes that occurred at the time of deposition. This can include the presence of ancient rivers, the movement of glaciers, the development of coral reefs, or the composition of ancient ecosystems.Furthermore, the depositional record can provide insights into human history, as it may preserve evidence of past human activity. Archaeological artifacts, such as tools, pottery, or even ancient graves, can become part of the depositional record and help reconstruct past cultures and societies.Overall, the depositional record serves as a valuable archive of Earth's history, allowing scientists to unravel the story of the planet's geological and biological evolution over millions of years.。

特斯拉蓝电判决书

特斯拉蓝电判决书Tesla Blue JudgmentTesla Blue Judgment is a judgment rendered by a US district court in a case involving Tesla Motors. The case began when Tesla accused a former Tesla employee of stealing intellectual property from the company and using it to create an imitation of one of Tesla's electric car models. The court found that the former employee had indeed stolen the company's intellectual property and had engaged in copyright infringement.The court declared that the former employee acted in willful and malicious disregard of the copyright holder's rights and that his conduct had caused substantial damage to Tesla. The court awarded Tesla $20 million in damages, to be paid by the former employee. The court also issued a permanent injunction prohibiting the former employee from reproducing or distributing any further works derived from the company's copyright.The judgment serves as a good example of how intellectual property laws are used to protect companies from those who would seek to steal the fruits of their hard work. The judgment also serves as a warning to those who would seek to engage in the kind of conduct which the court found to be unlawful.The court's judgment was granted in large part because of the extensive evidence presented by Tesla, which included copies of the stolen copyrighted works as well as testimony from Tesla's employees. The legal team behind the ruling was able to utilize various copyright laws, including the Copyright Act of 1976, in order to effectively provide relief to Tesla and punish the former employee for his actions.As a result of the Tesla Blue Judgment, the company was able to recoup the profits which it had lost due to the copyright infringement. In addition, its legal team was able to secure a permanent injunctionwhich would prevent the former employee from reproducing or distributing works derived from Tesla's copyrighted materials. This ruling serves as a reminder to those who would seek to take advantage of the company's hard work and innovation; such acts will not be tolerated, and any violations of intellectual property rights will be treated with serious consequences.。

我国行踪轨迹信息保护范围认定困境与出路

我国行踪轨迹信息保护范围认定困境与出路*文进宝，肖冬梅摘要行踪轨迹信息是十分重要的敏感个人信息，科学界定其范围能为其司法保护提供切实可行的依据。

考察我国现行制度，《个人信息保护法》未界定“行踪轨迹信息”，《网络安全标准实践指南——网络数据分类分级指引》《汽车采集数据处理安全指南》虽分别对“行踪轨迹”“位置轨迹”进行界定，但适用范围和对象受限，使得司法机关在行踪轨迹信息保护范围认定、义务主体进行合规时面临困境。

考察欧盟、英国、美国和韩国立法例发现，“定义+列举+排除”的界定方式，以及“时间”“物理位置”“技术手段”“直接识别”四要素对我国界定行踪轨迹信息具有可鉴性。

建议我国尽快出台有关“行踪轨迹信息”的司法解释，以“四要素”为核心界定行踪轨迹信息，以技术手段为分类依据进行列举，排除需结合其他信息才能识别个人位置的信息。

关键词行踪轨迹信息信息保护个人信息引用本文格式文进宝，肖冬梅.我国行踪轨迹信息保护范围认定困境与出路[J].图书馆论坛，2022，42（7）：55-64.Definition of Personal Whereabouts Information in China：Dilemma and Way-outWEN Jinbao&XIAO DongmeiAbstract Whereabouts information is a kind of sensitive personal information.It is necessary to define the scope of personal whereabouts information scientifically，so as to provide practical judicial protection for it.In China，Personal Information Protection Law has not defined the whereabouts information；and Guidance for Network Security Standard Practice-Classification Guidelines for Network Data and Safety Guidelines for Vehicle Data Processing contain the definitions of“whereabouts information”and“location information”respectively，but the scope and to whom they are applied are restricted，resulting in difficulties for the judicial authorities to identify the scope of whereabouts information protection and for the entity subjects to fulfil their compliance obligations. With an examination of the legislations in the EU，United Kingdom，United States and Republic of Korea，it is found that the approach of“define+enumerate+exclude”and the four elements such as“time”“physical location”“technical means”and“direct identification”can serve as references.This study suggests that China issue the judicial interpretation of personal whereabouts information as soon as possible，giving a precise definition of personal whereabouts information with its focus on“four elements”，enumerating such information on the basis of technologies，and screening out the information that needs to be combined with other information to identify individuals’locations.Keywords personal whereabouts information；information protection；personal information*本文系国家社科基金项目“个人数据保护影响评估制度研究”（项目编号：21BTQ062）研究成果。

SIMPLE AND ROBUST RULES FOR MONETARY POLICY_w15908

NBER WORKING PAPER SERIESSIMPLE AND ROBUST RULES FOR MONETARY POLICYJohn B. TaylorJohn C. WilliamsWorking Paper 15908/papers/w15908NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH1050 Massachusetts AvenueCambridge, MA 02138April 2010We thank Andy Levin, Mike Woodford, and other participants at the Handbook of Monetary Economics Conference for helpful comments and suggestions. We also thank Justin Weidner for excellent research assistance. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the management of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, or the National Bureau of Economic Research.NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.© 2010 by John B. Taylor and John C. Williams. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, includingSimple and Robust Rules for Monetary PolicyJohn B. Taylor and John C. WilliamsNBER Working Paper No. 15908April 2010JEL No. E5ABSTRACTThis paper focuses on simple rules for monetary policy which central banks have used in various ways to guide their interest rate decisions. Such rules, which can be evaluated using simulation and optimization techniques, were first derived from research on empirical monetary models with rational expectations and sticky prices built in the 1970s and 1980s. During the past two decades substantial progress has been made in establishing that such rules are robust. They perform well with a variety of newer and more rigorous models and policy evaluation methods. Simple rules are also frequently more robust than fully optimal rules. Important progress has also been made in understanding how to adjust simple rules to deal with measurement error and expectations. Moreover, historical experience has shown that simple rules can work well in the real world in that macroeconomic performance has been better when central bank decisions were described by such rules. The recent financial crisis has not changed these conclusions, but it has stimulated important research on how policy rules should deal with asset bubbles and the zero bound on interest rates. Going forward the crisis has drawn attention to the importance of research on international monetary issues and on the implications of discretionary deviations from policy rules.John B. TaylorHerbert Hoover Memorial BuildingStanford UniversityStanford, CA 94305-6010and NBERJohn.Taylor@John C. WilliamsFederal Reserve Bank of San FranciscoEconomic Research Department, MS 1130101 Market St.San Francisco, CA 94105john.c.williams@Economists have been interested in monetary policy rules since the advent of economics. In this review paper we concentrate on more recent developments, but we begin with a brief historical summary to motivate the theme and purpose of our paper. We then describe the development of the modern approach to policy rules and evaluate the approach using experiences before, during, and after the Great Moderation. We then contrast in detail this policy rule approach with optimal control methods and discretion. Finally we go on to consider several key policy issues, including the zero bound on interest rates and issue of bursting bubbles, using the lens of policy rules.1. Historical BackgroundAdam Smith first delved into the subject monetary policy rules in the Wealth of Nations arguing that “a well-regulated paper-money” could have significant advantages in improving economic growth and stability compared to a pure commodity standard. By the start of the 19th century Henry Thornton and then David Ricardo were stressing the importance of rule-guided monetary policy after they saw the monetary-induced financial crises related to the Napoleonic Wars. Early in the 20th century Irving Fisher and Knut Wicksell were again proposing monetary policy rules to avoid monetary excesses of the kinds that led to hyperinflation following World War I or seemed to be causing the Great Depression. And later, after studying the severe monetary mistakes of the Great Depression, Milton Friedman proposed his constant growth rate rule with the aim of avoiding a repeat of those mistakes. Finally, modern-day policy rules, such as the Taylor (1993a) Rule, were aimed at ending the severe price and output instability during the Great Inflation of the late 1960s and 1970s (see also Asso, Kahn, and Leeson, 2007, for a detailed review).As the history of economic thought makes clear, a common purpose of these reform proposals was a simple, stable monetary policy that would both avoid creating monetary shocks and cushion the economy from other disturbances, and thereby reduce the chances of recession, depression, crisis, deflation, inflation, and hyperinflation. There was a presumption in this work that some such simple rule could improve policy by avoiding monetary excesses, whether related to money finance of deficits, commodity discoveries, gold outflows, or mistakes by central bankers with too many objectives. In this context, the choice between a monetary standard where the money supply jumped around randomly versus a simple policy rule with a smoothly growing money and credit seemed obvious. The choice was both broader and simpler than “rules versus discretion.” It was “rules versus chaotic monetary policy” whether the chaos was caused by discretion or unpredictable exogenous events like gold discoveries or shortages.A significant change in economists’ search for simple monetary policy rules occurred in the 1970s, however, as a new type of macroeconomic model appeared on the scene. The new models were dynamic, stochastic, and empirically estimated. But more important, these empirical models incorporated both rational expectations and sticky prices, and they therefore were sophisticated enough to serve as a laboratory to examine how monetary policy rules would work in practice. These were the models that were used to find new policy rules, such as the Taylor Rule, to compare the new rules with earlier constant growth rate rules or with actual policy, and to check the rules for robustness. Examples of empirical modes with rational expectations and sticky prices include the simple three equation econometric model of the United States in Taylor (1979), the multi-equation international models in the comparative studies by Bryant, Hooper, and Mann (1993), and the econometric models in robustness analyses of Levin, Wieland, and Williams (1999). More or less simultaneously, practical experience wasconfirming the model simulation results as the instability of the Great Inflation of the 1970s gave way to the Great Moderation around the same time that actual monetary policy began to resemble the simple policy rules that were proposed.While the new rational expectations models with sticky prices further supported the use of policy rules—in keeping with the Lucas (1976) critique and time inconsistency (Kydland and Prescott, 1977)—there was no fundamental reason why the same models could not be used to study more complex discretionary monetary policy actions which went well beyond simple rules and used optimal control theory. Indeed, before long optimal control theory was being applied to the new models, refined with specific micro-foundations as in Rotemberg and Woodford (1997), Woodford (2003), and others. The result was complex paths for the instruments of policy which had the appearances of “fine tuning” as distinct from simple policy rules.The idea that optimal policy conducted in real time without the constraint of simple rules could do better than simple rules thus emerged within the context of the modern modeling approach. The papers by Mishkin (2007) and Walsh (2009) at recent Jackson Hole Conferences are illustrative. Mishkin (2007) uses optimal control to compute paths for the federal funds rate and contrasts the results with simple policy rules, stating that in the optimal discretionary policy “the federal funds rate is lowered more aggressively and substantially faster than with the Taylor-rule….This difference is exactly what we would expect because the monetary authority would not wait to react until output had already fallen.” The implicit recommendation of this statement is that simple policy rules are inadequate for real world policy situations and that policymakers should therefore deviate from them as needed.The differences in these approaches are profound and have important policy implications. At the same Jackson Hole conference that Mishkin (2007) emphasized the advantages ofdeviating from policy rules, Taylor (2007) showed that one such deviation added fuel to the housing boom and thereby helped bring on the severe financial crisis, the deep recession, and perhaps the end of the Great Moderation. For these reasons we focus on the differences between these two approaches in this paper. Like all previous studies of monetary policy rules by economists, our goal is to find ways to avoid such economic maladies.We start in the next section with a review of the development of optimal simple monetary policy rules using quantitative models. We then consider the robustness of policy rules using comparative model simulations and show that simple rules are more robust than fully optimal rules. The most recent paper in the Elsevier Handbook in Economics series on monetary policy rules is the comprehensive and widely-cited survey published by Ben McCallum (1999) in the Handbook of Macroeconomics (Taylor and Woodford, 1999). Our paper and McCallum’s are similar in scope in that they focus on policy rules which have been designed for normative purposes rather than on policy reaction functions which have been estimated for positive or descriptive purposes. In other words, the rules we study have been derived from economic theory or models and are designed to deliver good economic performance, rather than to fit statistically the decisions of central banks. Of course, such normative policy rules can also be descriptive if central bank decisions follow the recommendations of the rules which they have in many cases. Research of an explicitly descriptive nature, which focuses more on estimating reaction functions for central banks, goes back to Dewald and Johnson (1963), Fair (1978), and McNees (1986), and includes, more recently, work by Meyer (2009) on estimating policy rules for the Federal Reserve.McCallum’sHandbook of Macroeconomics paper stressed the importance of robustness of policy rules and explored the distinction between rules and discretion using the timeinconsistency principles. His survey also clarified important theoretical issues such as uniqueness and determinacy and he reviewed research on alternative targets and instruments, including both money supply and interest rate instruments. Like McCallum we focus on the robustness of policy rules. We focus on policy rules where the interest rate rather than the money supply is the policy instrument, and we place more emphasis on the historical performance of policy rules reflecting the experience of the dozen years since McCallum wrote. We also examine issues that have been major topics of research in academic and policy circles since then, including policy inertia, learning, and measurement errors. We also delve into the issues that arose in the recent financial crisis including the zero lower bound on interest rates and dealing with asset price bubbles. In this sense, our paper is complementary to McCallum’s useful Handbook of Macroeconomics paper on monetary policy rules.2. Using Models to Evaluate Simple Policy RulesThe starting point for our review of monetary policy rules is the research that began in the mid 1970s, took off in the 1980s and 1990s, and is still expanding. As mentioned above, this research is conceptually different from previous work by economists in that it is based on quantitative macroeconomic models with rational expectations and frictions/rigidities, usually in wage and price setting.We focus on the research based on such models because it seems to have led to an explosion of practical as well as academic interest in policy rules. As evidence consider, Don Patinkin’s (1956) Money, Interest, and Prices, which was the textbook in monetary theory in many graduate school in the early 1970s. It has very few references to monetary policy rules. In contrast, the modern day equivalent, Michael Woodford’s (2003) book, Interest and Prices, ispacked with discussions about monetary policy rules. In the meantime, thousands of papers have been written on monetary policy rules since the mid 1970s. The staffs of central banks around the world regularly use policy rules in their research and policy evaluation (see for example, Orphanides, 2008) as do practitioners in the financial markets.Such models were originally designed to answer questions about policy rules. The rational expectations assumption brought attention to the importance of consistency over time and to predictability, whether about inflation or policy rule responses, and to a host of policy issues including how to affect long term interest rates and what to do about asset bubbles. The price and wage rigidity assumption gave a role for monetary policy that was not evident in pure rational expectations models without price or wage rigidities; the monetary policy rule mattered in these models even if everyone knew what it was.The list of such models is now way too long to even tabulate, let alone discuss, in this review paper, but they include the rational expectations models in the Bryant, Hooper, Mann (1993) volume, the Taylor (1999a) volume, the Woodford (2003) volume, and many more models now in the growing database maintained by Volker Wieland (see Taylor and Wieland, 2009). Many of these models go under the name “new Keynesian” or “new neoclassical synthesis” or sometimes “dynamic stochastic general equilibrium.” Some are estimated and others are calibrated. Some are based on explicit utility maximization foundations, others more ad hoc. Some are illustrative three-equation models, which consist of an IS or Euler equation, a staggered price setting equation, and a monetary policy rule. Others consist of more than 100 equations and include term structure equations, exchange rates and other asset prices.Dynamic Stochastic Simulations of Simple Policy RulesThe general way that policy rule research originally began in these models was to experiment with different policy rules, trying them out in the model economies, and seeing how economic performance was affected The criteria for performance was usually the size of the deviations of inflation or real GDP or unemployment from some target or natural values. At a basic level a monetary policy rule is a contingency plan that lays out how monetary policy decisions should be made. For research with models, the rules have to be written down mathematically. Policy researchers would try out policy rules with different functional forms, different instruments, and different variables for the instrument to respond to. They would then search for the ones that worked well when simulating the model stochastically with a series of realistic shocks. To find better rules, researchers searched over a range of possible functional forms or parameters looking for policy rules that improved economic performance. In simple models, such as Taylor (1979), optimization methods could be used to assist in the search.A concrete example of this approach to simulating alternative policy rules was the model comparison project started in the 1980s at the Brookings Institution and organized by Ralph Bryant and others. After the model comparison project had gone on for several years, several participants decided it would be useful to try out monetary policy rules in these models. The important book by Bryant, Hooper and Mann (1993) was one output of the resulting policy rules part of the model comparison project. It brought together many rational expectations models, including the multicountry model later published in Taylor (1993b).No one clear “best” policy rule emerged from this work and, indeed, the contributions to the Bryant, Hooper, and Mann (1993) volume did not recommend any single policy rule. See Henderson and McKibbin (1993) for analysis of the types of rules in this volume. Indeed, as is sooften the case in economic research, critics complained about apparent disagreement about what was the best monetary policy rule. Nevertheless, if one looked carefully through the simulation results from the different models, one could see that the better policy rules had three general characteristics: (1) an interest rate instrument performed better than a money supply instrument, (2) interest rate rules that reacted to both inflation and real output worked better than rules which focused on either one, and (3) interest rate rules which reacted to the exchange rate were inferior to those that did not.One specific rule that was derived from this type of simulation research with monetary models is the Taylor Rule. . The Taylor Rule says that the short-term interest rate, i t, should be set according to the formula:0.5 0.5 ,(1) where r* denotes the equilibrium real interest rate, πt denotes the inflation rate in period t, π* is the desired long-run, or “target,” inflation rate, and y denotes the output gap(the percent deviation of real GDP from its potential level). Taylor (1993a) set the equilibrium interest rate r* equal to 2 and the target inflation rate π* equal to2. Thus, rearranging terms, the Taylor Rule says that the short term interest rate should equal one-and-a-half times the inflation rate plus one-half times the output gap plus one. Taylor focused on quarterly observations and suggested measuring the inflation rate as a moving average of inflation over four quarters. Simulations suggested that response coefficients on inflation and the output gap in the neighborhood of ½ would work well. Note that when the economy is in steady state with the inflation rate equaling its target and the output gap equaling zero, the real interest rate (the nominal rate minus the expected inflation rate) equals the equilibrium real interest rate.This rule embodies two important characteristics of monetary policy rules that are effective at stabilizing inflation and the output gap in model simulations. First, it dictates that the nominal interest rate react by more than one-for-one to movements in the inflation rate. This characteristic has been termed the Taylor principle (Woodford 2001). In most existing macroeconomic models, this condition (or some close variant of it) must be met for a unique stable rational expectations to exist (see Woodford, 2003, for a complete discussion). The basic logic behind this principle is clear: when inflation rises, monetary policy needs to raise the real interest rate in order to slow the economy and reduce inflationary pressures. The second important characteristic is that monetary policy “leans against the wind,” that is, it reacts by increasing the interest rate by a particular amount when real GDP rises above potential GDP and by decreasing the interest rate by the same amount when real GDP falls below potential GDP. In this way, monetary policy speeds the economy’s progress back to the target rate of inflation and the potential level of output.Optimal Simple RulesMuch of the more recent research on monetary policy rules has tended to follow a similar approach except that the models have been formalized to include more explicit micro-foundations and the quantitative evaluation methodology has focused on specific issues related to the optimal specification and parameterization of simple policy rules like the Taylor Rule. To review this research, it is useful to consider the following quadratic central bank loss function:(2) where E denotes the mathematical unconditional expectation and λ, υ≥ 0 are parameters describing the central bank’s preferences. The first two terms represent the welfare costsassociated from nominal and real fluctuations from desired levels. The third term stands in forthe welfare costs associated with large swings in interest rates (and presumably other asset prices). The quadratic terms, especially those involving inflation and output, represent thecommon sense view that business cycle fluctuations and high or variable inflation and interestrates are undesirable, but these can also be derived as approximations of welfare functions of representative agents. In some studies these costs are modeled explicitly.1The central bank’s problem is to choose the parameters of a policy rule to minimize the expected central bank loss subject to the constraints imposed by the model and where themonetary policy instrument—generally assumed to be the short-term interest rate in recent research—follows the stipulated policy rule. Williams (2003) describes numerical methods usedto compute the model-generated unconditional moments and optimized parameter values of thepolicy rule in the context of a linear rational expectations model. Early research--see, forexample the contributions in Taylor (1999a) and Fuhrer (1997)--focused on rules of a form that generalized the original Taylor Rule2:1 . (3) This rule incorporates inertia in the behavior of the interest rate through a positive value of the parameter ρ. It also allows for the possibility that policy responds to expected future (or lagged) values of inflation and the output gap.A useful way to portray macroeconomic performance under alternative specifications ofthe policy rule is the policy frontier, which describes the best achievable combinations of1 See Woodford (2003) for a discussion of the relationship between the central bank loss function and the thewelfare function of households. See Rudebusch (2006) for analyses of this topic of interest rate variability in thecentral bank’s loss function. In the policy evaluation literature, the loss is frequently specified in terms of thesquared first-difference of the interest rate, rather than in terms of the squared difference between the interest rateand the natural rate of interest.2 An alternative approach is followed by Fair and Howrey (1996), who do not use unconditional moments toevaluate policies, but instead compute the optimal policy setting of based on counterfactual simulations of the U.S. economy during the postwar period. .variability in the objective variables obtainable in a class of policy rule. In the case of two objectives of inflation and the output gap that was originally studied by Taylor (1979), this can be represented by a two-dimensional curve plotting the unconditional variances (or standard deviations) of these variables. In the case of three objective variables, the frontier is a three-dimensional surface, which can be difficult to see clearly on the printed page. The solid line in Figure 1 plots a cross section of the policy frontier, corresponding to a fixed variance of the interest rate, for a particular specification of the policy rule.3 The optimal parameters of the policy rules that underlie these frontiers depend on the relative weights placed on the stabilization of the variables in the central bank loss. These are constructed using the Federal Reserve Board’s FRB/US large-scale rational expectations model (Williams, 2003).One key issue for simple policy rules is the appropriate measure of inflation to include in the rule. In many models (see, for example, Levin, Wieland, and Williams, 1999, 2003), simple rules that respond to smoothed inflation rates such as the one-year rate typically perform better than those that respond to the one-quarter inflation rate, even though the objective is to stabilize the one-quarter rate. In the FRB/US model, the rule that responds to the three-year average inflation rate performs the best and it is this specification that is used in the results reported for FRB/US in this paper. Evidently, rules that respond to a smoothed measure of inflation avoid sharp swings in interest rates in response to transitory swings in the inflation rate.Indeed, the simple policy rules that respond to the percent difference between the price level and a deterministic trend performs nearly as well as those that respond to the difference between the inflation rate and its target rate (see Svensson 1999 or further discussion on this topic). In the case of a price level target, the policy rule is specified as:3 The variance of the short-term interest rate is set to 16 for the FRB/US results reported in this paper. Note that in this model, the optimal simple rule absent any penalty on interest rate variability yields a variance of the interest rate far in excess of 16.1 . (4) where p t is the log of the price level and p* is the log of the target prices level, which is assumedto increase at a deterministic rate. The policy frontier for this type of price-targeting policy ruleis shown in Figure 1. We will return to the topic of rules that respond to price-levels versusinflation later.A second key issue regarding the specification of simple rules is to what extent theyshould respond to expectations of future inflation and output gaps. Batini and Haldane (1999)argue that the presence of lags in the monetary transmission mechanism argues for policy to be forward looking. However, Rudebusch and Svensson (1999), Levin, Wieland, and Williams (2003), and Orphanides and Williams (2007a) investigate the optimal choice of lead structure inthe policy rule in various models and do not find a significant benefit from responding to expectations out further than one year for inflation or beyond the current quarter for the outputgap. Indeed, Levin, Wieland, and Williams (2003) show that rules that respond to inflationforecasts further into the future are prone to generating indeterminacy in rational expectations models.A third key issue is policy inertia or “interest rate smoothing.” A significant degree ofinertia can significantly help improve performance in forward-looking models like FRB/US.Figure 2 compares the policy frontier for the optimized three-parameter rules to that for “level”rules with no inertia (ρ = 0). As seen in the figure, except for the case where the loss puts all the weight on inflation stabilization, the inertial rule performs better than the level rule. In fact, inthese types of models the optimal value of ρtends to be close to unity and in some models can be greatly in excess of one, as discussed later. As discussed in Levin, Wieland, and Williams(1999) and Woodford (1999, 2003), inertial rules take advantage of the expectations of futurepolicy and economic developments in influencing outcomes. For example, in many forward-looking models of inflation, a policy rule that generates a sustained small negative output gap has as much effect on current inflation as a policy that generates a short-lived large negative gap. But, the former policy accomplishes this with a small sum of squared output gaps. As discussed later, in purely backward-looking models, however, this channel is entirely absent and highly inertial policies perform poorly.The analysis of optimal simple rules described up to this point has abstracted from several important limitations of monetary policy in practice. One issue is the measurement of variables in the policy rule, especially the output gap. The second, which has gained increased attention because of the experiences of Japan since the 1990s and several other major economies starting in 2008, is the presence of the zero lower bound on nominal interest rates. The third is the potential role of other variables in the policy rule, including asset prices. We take up each of these in turn.Measurement issues and the output gapOne practical issue that affects the implementation of monetary policy is the measurement of variables of interest such as the inflation rate and the output gap (Orphanides 2001). Many macroeconomic data series such as GDP and price deflators are subject to measurement errors and revisions. In addition, both the equilibrium real interest rate and the output gap are unobserved variables. Potential errors in measuring the equilibrium real interest rate and the output gap result from estimating latent variables as well as uncertainty regarding the processes determining them (Orphanides and van Norden, 2002, Laubach and Williams 2003, and Edge, Laubach, and Williams, 2010). Similar problems plague estimation of related。

信封法盲法英语

信封法盲法英语Envelope Illiteracy in EnglishIntroductionEnvelope illiteracy refers to the inability to understand or interpret the information written on an envelope in the English language. It is a significant issue that affects individuals from various backgrounds, including immigrants, non-native English speakers, and those with limited education. This article aims to explore the causes, consequences, and potential solutions to envelope illiteracy in English.Causes of Envelope Illiteracy1. Limited English Proficiency: One of the primary causes of envelope illiteracy is limited English proficiency. Individuals who are not fluent in the English language may struggle to understand the written content on envelopes, including the recipient's name, address, and postal codes.2. Lack of Education: Another significant cause of envelope illiteracy is a lack of formal education. Many individuals who have not received formal schooling may struggle to read and understand the English language, making it difficult for them to comprehend the information on envelopes.3. Cultural Differences: Cultural differences can also contribute to envelope illiteracy. Some individuals may come from cultures where envelopes are not commonly used or where the addressing format differs from the English standard. This can lead to confusion and difficulty in understanding the information written on envelopes.Consequences of Envelope Illiteracy1. Missed Opportunities: Envelope illiteracy can result in missed opportunities, such as job offers, important documents, or invitations. Individuals who cannot understand the information on envelopes may overlook or ignore important correspondences, leading to negative consequences in their personal and professional lives.2. Delayed or Lost Mail: Envelope illiteracy can also lead to delayed or lost mail. If individuals cannot accurately read the recipient's address, the mail may be misdirected or returned to the sender. This can cause frustration, inconvenience, and even financial losses.3. Social Isolation: Envelope illiteracy can contribute to social isolation. Individuals who struggle with understanding the information on envelopes may avoid social interactions, fearing embarrassment or misunderstanding. This can lead to a lack of engagement with the community and limited access to essential services.Solutions to Envelope Illiteracy1. English Language Education: Offering English language education programs can significantly reduce envelope illiteracy. Providing classes or resources that focus on reading and understanding written English can empower individuals to overcome their difficulties and gain the necessary skills to interpret envelope information accurately.2. Simplified Addressing Formats: Simplifying the addressing format on envelopes can help individuals with envelope illiteracy. The use of clear, standardized formats with easy-to-understand instructions can make it easier for individuals to comprehend and interpret the recipient's address.3. Visual Aids and Translations: Incorporating visual aids and translations on envelopes can assist individuals with envelope illiteracy. Using symbols or pictures alongside written information can provide additional context and make it easier for individuals to understand the envelope's content.4. Community Support and Awareness: Creating a supportive community and raising awareness about envelope illiteracy can also be effective. Encouraging open dialogue, providing resources, and offering assistance can help individuals with envelope illiteracy feel more comfortable seeking help and support.ConclusionEnvelope illiteracy in the English language poses significant challenges for individuals from various backgrounds. Limited English proficiency, lack of education, and cultural differences contribute to this issue. The consequences of envelope illiteracy range from missed opportunities to social isolation. Implementing solutions such as English language education, simplified addressing formats, visual aids, and community support can help alleviate envelope illiteracy and empower individuals to understand and interpret envelope information accurately. By addressing this issue, we can ensure equal access to essential services and opportunities for all individuals, regardless of their envelope literacy level.。