Search


PDF Archive search engine
Last database update: 17 May at 11:24 - Around 76000 files indexed.


Show results per page

Results for «ingenious»:


Total: 40 results - 0.022 seconds

Press pack 2016 100%

virtuosic Mauricio Velasierra on traditional flutes from the Andes, and pioneering soprano Heidi Heidelberg on vocals and electric guitar, producing music which The Guardian called "ingenious...you'll spend a while trying to classify them but they know how to write melodies".

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/11/10/press-pack-2016/

10/11/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

F.U. Money 86%

Dan, you are the man!” - Shane Goldberg, CEO of PhotoshopZoo.com “Dan Lok is, without a doubt, one of the most ingenious and innovative marketers I’ve ever come across...

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/04/18/f-u-money/

18/04/2018 www.pdf-archive.com

Backup Software is Dead 81%

 While  a  daily  backup  of  all   ingenious   d esign.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2011/12/23/backup-software-is-dead/

23/12/2011 www.pdf-archive.com

My Perfect Soulmate 79%

The greatest of all the gods, Zeus, developed an ingenious solution by dividing each of them, creating one pair of legs, one pair of arms and one face on each body, leaving them to spend the remainder of their lives looking for their other half, their Soulmate.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/01/20/my-perfect-soulmate/

20/01/2018 www.pdf-archive.com

CHAS - Prof. Chiriano - English 78%

Liz Poore THE COMPROMISE In 1691 the German organist Andreas Werckmeister discovered an ingenious way of tuning instruments, the closest ever achieved to an equal temperament [1], that is to say, to a tone system where the distance between semitones (two successive notes in the chromatic scale) is constant.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2013/04/10/chas-prof-chiriano-english/

10/04/2013 www.pdf-archive.com

Crusher Holds Handout 3.5mb 72%

Where and how to position your board There are many ideas and variations for mounting a fingerboard from the obvious to the ingenious and a quick search online will reveal a wealth of information and forum discussions on how climbers have already done so.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2011/08/04/crusher-holds-handout-3-5mb/

04/08/2011 www.pdf-archive.com

B&W AM-1 Brochure 72%

ABR  With AM-1, we’ve come up with an ingenious solution to the problem of producing powerful bass from a weatherproof speaker.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/12/07/b-w-am-1-brochure/

07/12/2017 www.pdf-archive.com

FundThmAlgebraGalois 71%

There are many ways to prove the fundamental theorem of algebra, using often ingenious geometric constructions (see ([Spi06] §26, Thm.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/07/14/fundthmalgebragalois/

14/07/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

Roderick Heath 2019 Film Writing 67%

Hyde (1931), and Love Me Tonight (1932), with his readiness to strain against the technical limitations of the fledging format and gild his movies with real formal creativity and lustre, from the aggressively mobile camerawork he deployed in Applause to the ingenious and endlessly influential use of choreographed sound and motion in Love Me Tonight, and the coded sexuality and pictorial force of Queen Christina (1933).

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2019/12/25/roderick-heath-2019-film-writing/

25/12/2019 www.pdf-archive.com

UPDATED JANUARY Cool Hunter 2018 65%

With surprising combinations and ingenious gastro-formulas, expect an electric flavour-fusion to ignite the senses.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/01/16/updated-january-cool-hunter-2018/

16/01/2018 www.pdf-archive.com

Jan VIP List 63%

Aragon successfully operates due to the ingenious work of Luis Cuende, Jorge Izquierdo, Maria Gomez, Tatu Karki, Luke Duncan, Oliver Nordbjerg, Brett Sun, and Pierre Bertet, all of whom have extensive backgrounds in technology and engineering.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/01/04/jan-vip-list/

04/01/2018 www.pdf-archive.com

Box Man 61%

To be ingenious with simple things.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/11/07/box-man/

07/11/2017 www.pdf-archive.com

An intro to the Tarot - 1920 61%

He who knows this has found the key to understand everything, and all at once.” Its rich symbolism and ingenious construction make the Tarot the best of all instruments for true occult education, i.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/07/05/an-intro-to-the-tarot---1920/

05/07/2018 www.pdf-archive.com

CanIndifferenceVindicateInduction 58%

    Fool Me Once: Can Indifference Vindicate Induction?  Roger White (2015) sketches an ingenious new solution to the problem of induction. It argues on  a priori ​  grounds that the world is more likely to be induction­friendly than induction­unfriendly.  The argument relies primarily on the principle of indifference, and, somewhat surprisingly,  assumes little else. If inductive methods could be vindicated in anything like this way, it would  be quite a groundbreaking result. But there are grounds for pessimism about the envisaged  approach. This paper shows that in the crucial test cases White concentrates on, the principle of  indifference actually renders induction no more accurate than random guessing. It then diagnoses  why the indifference­based argument seems so intuitively compelling, despite being ultimately  unsound.  1 An Indifference­Based Strategy  White begins by imagining that we are “apprentice demons” tasked with devising an  induction­unfriendly world ​  – a world where inductive methods tend to be unreliable. To  simplify, we imagine that there is a single binary variable that we control (such as whether the  sun rises over a series of consecutive days). So, in essence, the task is to construct a binary  sequence such that – if the sequence were revealed one bit at a time – an inductive reasoner  would fare poorly at predicting its future bits. This task, it turns out, is surprisingly difficult. To  see this, it will be instructive to consider several possible strategies for constructing a sequence  that would frustrate an ideal inductive predictor.  Immediately, it is clear that we should avoid uniformly patterned sequences, such as:   00000000000000000000000000000000   or  01010101010101010101010101010101.  ­1­      Sequences like these are quite kind to induction. Our inductive reasoner would quickly latch onto  the obvious patterns these sequences exhibit. A more promising approach, it might seem, is to  build an apparently patternless sequence:  00101010011111000011100010010100  ​ But, importantly, while induction will not be particularly ​ ​ reliable at predicting the terms of this  sequence, it will not be particularly ​unreliable here either. Induction would simply be silent  about what a sequence like this contains. As White puts it, “ In order for... induction to be  applied, our data must contain a salient regularity of a reasonable length” (p. 285). When no  pattern whatsoever can be discerned, presumably, induction is silent. (We will assume that the  inductive predictor is permitted to suspend judgment whenever she wishes.) The original aim  was not to produce an induction­neutral sequence, but to produce a sequence that elicits errors  from induction. So an entirely patternless sequence will not suffice. Instead, the  induction­unfriendly sequence will have to be more devious, building up seeming patterns and  then violating them. As a first pass, we can try this:  00000000000000000000000000000001  Of course, this precise sequence is relatively friendly to induction. While our inductive predictor  will undoubtedly botch her prediction of the final bit, it is clear that she will be able to amass a  long string of successes prior to that point. So, on balance, the above sequence is quite kind to  induction – though not maximally so.   In order to render induction unreliable, we will need to elicit more errors than correct  predictions. We might try to achieve this as follows:  00001111000011110000111100001111  ­2­      The idea here is to offer up just enough of a pattern to warrant an inductive prediction, before  pulling the rug out – and then to repeat the same trick again and again. Of course, this precise  sequence would not necessarily be the way to render induction unreliable: For, even if we did  manage to elicit an error or two from our inductive predictor early on, it seems clear that she  would eventually catch on to the exceptionless higher­order pattern governing the behavior of  the sequence.  The upshot of these observations is not that constructing an induction­unfriendly sequence is  impossible. As White points out, constructing such a sequence should be possible, given any  complete description of how exactly induction works (p. 287). Nonetheless, even if there are a  few special sequences that can frustrate induction, it seems clear that such sequences are fairly  few and far between. In contrast, it is obviously very easy to ​corroborate induction (i.e. to  construct a sequence rendering it thoroughly reliable). So induction is relatively  un­frustrate­able. And it is worth noting that this property is fairly specific to induction. For  example, consider an inferential method based on the gambler’s fallacy, which advises one to  predict whichever outcome has occurred less often, overall. It would be quite easy to frustrate  this method thoroughly (e.g. ​00000000…​).   So far, we have identified a highly suggestive feature of induction. To put things roughly, it  can seem that:   * Over a large number of sequences, induction is thoroughly reliable.   * Over a large number of sequences, induction is silent (and hence, neither reliable nor unreliable).  * Over a very small number of sequences (i.e. those specifically designed to thwart induction),  induction is unreliable (though, even in these cases, induction is still silent much of the time).  ­3­      Viewed from this angle, it can seem reasonable to conclude that there are ​a priori grounds for  confidence that an arbitrary sequence is not induction­unfriendly. After all, there seem to be far  more induction­friendly sequences than induction­unfriendly ones. If we assign equal probability  to every possible sequence, then the probability that an arbitrary sequence will be  induction­friendly is going to be significantly higher than the probability that it will be  induction­unfriendly. So a simple appeal to the principle of indifference seems to generate the  happy verdict that induction can be expected to be more reliable than not, at least in the case of  binary sequences.   Moreover, as White points out, the general strategy is not limited to binary sequences. If we  can show ​a priori that induction over a binary sequence is unlikely to be induction­unfriendly,  then it’s plausible that a similar kind of argument can be used to show that we are justified in  assuming that an arbitrary ​world is not induction­unfriendly. If true, this would serve to fully  vindicate induction.  2 Given Indifference, Induction Is not Reliable   However, there are grounds for pessimism about whether the strategy is successful even in the  simple case of binary sequences. Suppose that, as a special promotion, a casino decided to offer  Fair Roulette. The game involves betting $1 on a particular color – black or red – and then  spinning a wheel, which is entirely half red and half black. If wrong, you lose your dollar; if  right, you get your dollar back and gain another. If it were really true that induction can be  expected to be more reliable than not over binary sequences, it would seem to follow that  induction can serve as a winning strategy, over the long term, in Fair Roulette. After all, multiple  spins of the wheel produce a binary sequence of reds and blacks. And all possible sequences are  ­4­      equally probable. Of course, induction cannot be used to win at Fair Roulette – past occurrences  of red, for example, are not evidence that the next spin is more likely to be red. This suggests that  something is amiss. Indeed, it turns out that no inferential method – whether inductive or  otherwise – can possibly be expected to be reliable at predicting unseen bits of a binary  sequence, if the principle of indifference is assumed. This can be shown as follows.  Let ​S be an unknown binary sequence of length ​n. ​S is to be revealed one bit at a time,  starting with the first.   S: ​? ? ? ? ? ? … ?​ ​:​S    n bits  Let ​f be an arbitrary predictive function that takes as input any initial subsequence of ​S and  outputs a prediction for the next bit: ‘0’, ‘1’, or ‘suspend judgment’.   A  predictive  function’s  accuracy  is measured as follows: +1 for each correct prediction; ­1 for  each  incorrect  prediction;  0  each  time ‘suspend judgment’ occurs. (So the maximum accuracy of  a  function  is  ​n;  the  minimum  score  is  –​n.)  Given  a  probability  distribution  over  all  possible  sequences,  the  ​expected  accuracy  of  a  predictive  function  is  the  average  of  its  possible  scores  weighted by their respective probabilities.  Claim: ​If we assume indifference (i.e. if we assign equal probability to every possible sequence), then  – no matter what ​S is – each of​ f’s predictions​ will be expected to contribute 0 to ​f’s accuracy. And, as  a consequence of this, ​f has 0 expected accuracy more generally.  Proof: ​For some initial subsequences, ​f will output ‘suspend judgment’. The contribution of such  predictions will inevitably be 0. So we need consider only those cases where ​f makes a firm  prediction (i.e. ‘0’ or ‘1’; not ‘suspend judgment’).  Let ​K be a ​k­length initial subsequence for which ​f makes a firm prediction about the bit in   ­5­ 

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/19/canindifferencevindicateinduction/

19/02/2017 www.pdf-archive.com

FoolMeOnce 57%

Roger White (2015) sketches an ingenious new solution to the problem of induction.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/19/foolmeonce/

19/02/2017 www.pdf-archive.com

Regular Totally Separable Sphere Packings arXiv 55%

Szalkai proved the above upper bound on c(n, d) with an ingenious argument involving box-polytopes and the isoperimetric inequality [11].

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2015/06/06/regular-totally-separable-sphere-packings-arxiv/

06/06/2015 www.pdf-archive.com

(Print) Kitchen+Rescue+Pak+Bundle 55%

KITCHEN RESCUE INFOGRAPHIC BUNDLE 01 HOW TO CREATE THE PERFECT MEAL 02 HOW TO MASTER MEAL PREP 03 THE SUPER SHAKE GUIDE HOW TO CREATE THE PERFECT MEAL HUNDREDS OF EASY, DELICIOUS, HEALTHY DINNERS FROM PRECISION NUTRITION'S INGENIOUS CHEF.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/04/01/print-kitchen-rescue-pak-bundle/

01/04/2017 www.pdf-archive.com

ELEMENTS the PSYCHOPHYSICS-01-English-Gustav Theodor Fechner 52%

The willingness of this ingenious and fine researcher to respond to the interests of this investigation, which, by the way, has led him far beyond the demands first made by it, and the growth which has grown into the experiential documents of this document, obliges me in the In fact, thank you.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2019/02/06/elements-the-psychophysics-01-english-gustav-theodor-fechner/

06/02/2019 www.pdf-archive.com

illuminati 1 49%

We must be ingenious in dispensing the poisons for they can see far.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/12/20/illuminati-1/

20/12/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

impugnacion 49%

Buenos Aires, 28 de Agosto de 2013 Sres.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2014/11/18/impugnacion/

18/11/2014 www.pdf-archive.com