71 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
  2. Nov 2020
    1. This is a page note. I can write overall comments about the pre-print here.

      Tags can also be added below.

  3. Oct 2020
    1. The graphs of ground state confinement energy againstsize (radius) for zinc sulfide nanoparticles in Figure 14 showthe dependence of confinement on the size of quantum dots.The result shows that ground state confinement energy is

      Las graficas de la energía de confinamiento en su estado fundamental en contra del tamaño (radio) por nanopartículas de sulfato de zinc en la Figura 14 muestran la dependencia de confinamiento en el tamaño de los puntos quánticos. El resultado muestra que el estado fundamental de energía en confinamiento es inversamente proporciona al tamaño (radio). Por lo tanto, cuando uno incrementa su radio (tamaño) la energía de confinamiento decrece pero nunca llega a cero. Eso es, el energía mas baja posible para el punto quántica de muestra no es cero. El confinamiento comienza cuando el radio del punto cuántico de muestra es comparable o del orden del radio exciton de Bohr.

    1. We say that uu is ’a utility function for ≿\succsim.

      Does "u is a utility function for \($\succsim$\)" mean that the utility function 'represents' \($\succsim$\)/

    Tags

    Annotators

  4. Sep 2020
  5. Aug 2020
    1. Lednicky, J. A., Lauzardo, M., Fan, Z. H., Jutla, A. S., Tilly, T. B., Gangwar, M., Usmani, M., Shankar, S. N., Mohamed, K., Eiguren-Fernandez, A., Stephenson, C. J., Alam, M. M., Elbadry, M. A., Loeb, J. C., Subramaniam, K., Waltzek, T. B., Cherabuddi, K., Morris, J. G., & Wu, C.-Y. (2020). Viable SARS-CoV-2 in the air of a hospital room with COVID-19 patients. MedRxiv, 2020.08.03.20167395. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.03.20167395

  6. Jul 2020
  7. May 2020
  8. Apr 2020
  9. Mar 2020
    1. The standard error (the standard deviation of the distribution of sample means) has this formula:

      Tex command for the standard deviation of the sample mean

  10. Oct 2019
    1. “Yes, perhaps he has captured it.” A man sitting at a desk

      Annotation to an image? Perhaps for charts/graphs?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK3Tv-dEWjg

    1. I can't make an annotation on Google's documentation ( I think it's a Hypothesis bug ) but I've updated the linked code sample below to work as of 10/04/2019 with Python 3

      https://gist.github.com/technoplato/4d28f4f308ea7c5fe20bd23e751e9e60

  11. Dec 2018
    1. Image Score: How to Select Useful Samples

      提出的 semi-supervised learning 这个概念比较有趣。给数据集每个 sample 打分或许对 interpretability 有点帮助吧。。。。

  12. Oct 2018
  13. May 2018
  14. Aug 2016
    1. Upcoming/Current Projects Papers, Posters & Presentations Recognition & Participation Teaching Coursework History Recent Software Projects Contact

      This is a sample public annotation that I created.

  15. Jun 2015
  16. Feb 2014
    1. The cases on the subject are collected in a footnote to Somerset Bank v. Edmund, 10 Am. & Eng. Ann. Cas. 726; 76 Ohio St. Rep. 396, the head-note to which reads: "Public policy and sound morals alike forbid that a public officer should demand or receive for services performed by him in the discharge of official duty any other or further remuneration or reward than that prescribed or allowed by law." This rule of public policy has been relaxed only in those instances where the legislature for sufficient public reason has seen fit by statute to extend the stimulus of a reward to the public without distinction, as in the case of United States v. Matthews, 173 U.S. 381, where the attorney-general, under an act for "the detection and prosecution of crimes against the United States," made a public offer of reward sufficiently liberal and generic to comprehend the services of a federal deputy marshal. Exceptions of that character upon familiar principles serve to emphasize the correctness of the rule, as one based upon sound public policy.

      1) A public officer cannot demand or receive remuneration or a reward for carrying out the duty of his job as a matter of public policy and morality

      2) However, it is not against public policy for a police officer to receive a reward in performance of his legal duty if the legislature passes a statute giving the reward to the public at large in furtherance of some public policy - such as preventing treason against the US.

    2. MINTURN, J. The plaintiff occupied the position of a special police officer, in Atlantic City, and incidentally was identified with the work of the prosecutor of the pleas of the county. He possessed knowledge concerning the theft of certain diamonds and jewelry from the possession of the defendant, who had advertised a reward for the recovery of the property. In this situation he claims to have entered into a verbal contract with defendant, whereby she agreed to pay him $500 if he could procure for her the names and addresses of the thieves. As a result of his meditation with the police authorities the diamonds and jewelry were recovered, and plaintiff brought this suit to recover the promised reward.
      • Plaintiff makes a verbal contract with defendant. In return for $500, plaintiff will find defendant's stolen jewels.
      • Plaintiff had knowledge of whereabouts of jewels at contract formation.
      • Plaintiff is a special police officer and has dealings with prosecutor's office.
      • Defendant published advertisement for reward.
      • Plaintiff finds stolen goods and arranges return.
    3. The judgment below for that reason must be reversed.

      Court reverses decision of lower court in favor of the plaintiff since he was characterized as a public official.

    4. The testimony makes it manifest that he was a special police officer to some extent identified with the work of the prosecutor's office, and that position, upon well-settled grounds of public policy, required him to assist, at least, in the prosecution of offenders against the law. The services he rendered, in this instance, must be presumed to have been rendered in pursuance of that public duty, and for its performance he was not entitled to receive a special quid pro quo.
      • Court finds sufficient evidence to characterize this fellow as a public official.

      • His interaction with the prosecutor's office weighed in as a factor in suggesting he had a legal duty.

      • Since he is characterized within the rule as a public official, he cannot, as a matter of law, receive a reward for the performance of his duties.

    5. The District Court, sitting without a jury, awarded plaintiff a judgment for the amount of the reward, and hence this appeal.
      • Cop sues for reward money.
      • District court awards money to the cop.
      • Defendant appeals.
    6. Various points are discussed in the briefs, but to us the dominant and conspicuous inquiry in the case is, was the plaintiff, during the period of this transaction, a public officer, charged with the enforcement of the law?
    7. STEPHEN GRAY, RESPONDENT, v. THERESA D. MARTINO, APPELLANT Supreme Court of New Jersey 91 N.J.L. 462; 103 A. 24 February 2, 1918, Decided

      Gray (cop) v. Martino (crime victim)

      type: respondent

      • role: cop
      • abbrev: Gray
      • name: Stephen Gray

      type: appellant

      • role: crime victim
      • abbrev: Martino
      • name: Theresa D. Martino