[pt] Na segurança e Justiça Criminal, os algoritmos tornaram-se prevalentes, utilizados por instituições como agências de inteligência, polícia e tribunais. Essas tecnologias, incluindo software de reconhecimento facial, são empregadas em várias práticas de segurança e vigilância em todo o mundo. Esse uso generalizado levanta questões sobre a autoridade epistêmica e a credibilidade dos algoritmos, particularmente na produção de práticas de (in)segurança e na contestação de evidências dentro do sistema de justiça criminal. Neste contexto, essa tese explora os complexos emaranhados das práticas de profissionais de segurança e do direito e algoritmos, enfatizando como essas tecnologias digitais se materializam, estabilizam e circulam em diversas práticas mesmo em meio a erros e contestações. Primeiro, a tese examina as implicações da razão algorítmica, abordando como essas tecnologias prometem simultaneamente eficiência e objetividade, enquanto recorrentemente erram. Seguidamente, explora como os algoritmos moldam percepções, identificam alvos e influenciam ações de segurança, focando especialmente em dados biométricos e algoritmos de reconhecimento facial, como o uso Clearview AI nos Estados Unidos. Ao analisar esses sistemas, a pesquisa visa entender como os algoritmos criam e legitimam imaginários de melhor justiça/segurança e suas consequências sociais e políticas mais amplas. A tese se situa dentro dos Estudos Críticos de Segurança, Estudos de Ciência e Tecnologia e críticas feministas da tecnociência, compondo com diferentes campos para entender a característica operativa da razão algorítmica na política internacional. Por fim, a pesquisa demonstra como os algoritmos criam condições de possibilidade para práticas de segurança e justiça, organizando uma multitude de elementos e produzindo uma ordem que impacta esses campos e destaca a importância de entender a força política dos discursos em torno dos algoritmos e seu papel na reformulação das condições de possibilidade para pensar e fazer segurança. / [en] In security, algorithms have become prevalent and used by institutions such as intelligence agencies, police, and courts. These technologies, including facial recognition software, are employed in various security and surveillance practices worldwide. This widespread use raises questions about algorithms epistemic authority and credibility, particularly in producing (in)security practices and contesting evidence within the criminal justice system. In this context, this thesis explores the complex entanglements of the practices of security and legal professionals and algorithms, emphasizing how these digital technologies materialize, stabilize, and circulate in diverse practices even amid errors and contestations. First, the thesis examines the implications of algorithmic reason, addressing how these technologies simultaneously promise efficiency and objectivity while repeatedly getting it wrong. It then explores how algorithms shape perceptions, identify targets, and influence security actions, focusing primarily on biometric data and facial recognition algorithms, such as the use of Clearview AI in the United States. By analyzing these systems, the research aims to understand how algorithms create and legitimize better justice/security imaginaries and their broader social and political consequences. The thesis is located within Critical Security Studies, Science and Technology Studies, and feminist critiques of technoscience, crossing different fields to understand the operative characteristic of algorithmic reason in international politics. Finally, the research demonstrates how algorithms create conditions of possibility for security and justice practices, organizing a multitude of elements and producing an order that impacts these fields and highlights the importance of understanding the political force of the discourses surrounding algorithms and their role in reformulating the conditions of possibility for thinking and doing security.

Thesis (D. Min.)--Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2000. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 215-220).

The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) set Standard Highway Alphabet, or Highway Gothic, as the standard font for all American roadway signs in 1966. Since then, that standard has not changed, with all signs following the norm. In the 1980s, new retro-reflective sheeting introduced on American roadways caused Highway Gothic to be more difficult to read, due to the light "halo" effect caused around the letters, or halation. Recently, more studies have been conducted to improve the overall legibility of Highway Gothic. One study found that its legibility could greatly improve if it's size was increased by 20%. This, however, is extremely unlikely, since increasing the font size would also entail an increase in the physical signs lining roadways. In the 1990s, a new font was created, Clearview, to help combat the negative effects of Standard Highway Alphabet. This font received interim approval in 2004, which was removed in 2016 due to ambiguous results from studies as to whether it was more beneficial than Highway Gothic. It was reinstated two years later, in 2018. Legibility has five different components: retro-reflectivity, irradiation, luminance, contrast, and font design. Understanding these five components, and the benefits of each, can lead to the betterment of the font design on highway signs. This study consisted of two web-based tests. In the first test, the "Letters Test", participants would see a character slowly increasing in size on the screen. Once they could decipher the character, they would click the screen and input the character shown. On the second test, the "Words Test", participants would follow the same instructions, albeit with words in place of characters. There were four fonts tested, on both a positive and negative contrasts. The positive contrast consisted of a green background with a white font, and the negative contrast was a white background with a black font. The four tested fonts were E Modified Base, Alpha Two FHWA E Narrow, Alpha Two FHWA D, and Alpha Two FHWA C, named Base, Narrow, D-Altered, and C-Altered respectively. Forty-two participants participated in both tests. For the "Letters Test", the smallest average font size was the narrow font, followed by the base and D-altered. For the "Words Test", the smallest average font size was the base font, followed by the narrow, D-altered, and C-altered fonts. Overall, the base and narrow fonts took up more space than the D-altered and C-altered fonts. It is recommended that field tests are conducted with these fonts, taking into account the space that they take up, not the font size. This analysis could help to determine whether or not the altered fonts are as legible, or even more legible, than the base and narrow fonts when occupying the same space. / Master of Science / The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) set Standard Highway Alphabet, or Highway Gothic, as the standard font for all American roadway signs in 1966. Since then, that standard has not changed, with all signs following the norm. In the 1980s, new retro-reflective sheeting introduced on American roadways caused Highway Gothic to be more difficult to read, due to the light "halo" effect caused around the letters, or halation. Recently, more studies have been conducted to improve the overall legibility of Highway Gothic. One study found that its legibility could greatly improve if it's size was increased by 20%. This, however, is extremely unlikely, since increasing the font size would also entail an increase in the physical signs lining roadways. In the 1990s, a new font was created, Clearview, to help combat the negative effects of Standard Highway Alphabet. This font received interim approval in 2004, which was removed in 2016 due to ambiguous results from studies as to whether it was more beneficial than Highway Gothic. It was reinstated two years later, in 2018. Legibility has five different components: retro-reflectivity, irradiation, luminance, contrast, and font design. Understanding these five components, and the benefits of each, can lead to the betterment of the font design on highway signs. This study consisted of two web-based tests. In the first test, the "Letters Test", participants would see a character slowly increasing in size on the screen. Once they could decipher the character, they would click the screen and input the character shown. On the second test, the "Words Test", participants would follow the same instructions, albeit with words in place of characters. There were four fonts tested, on both a positive and negative contrasts. The positive contrast consisted of a green background with a white font, and the negative contrast was a white background with a black font. The four tested fonts were E Modified Base, Alpha Two FHWA E Narrow, Alpha Two FHWA D, and Alpha Two FHWA C, named Base, Narrow, D-Altered, and C-Altered respectively. Forty-two participants participated in both tests. For the "Letters Test", the smallest average font size was the narrow font, followed by the base and D-altered. For the "Words Test", the smallest average font size was the base font, followed by the narrow, D-altered, and C-altered fonts. Overall, the base and narrow fonts took up more space than the D-altered and C-altered fonts. It is recommended that field tests are conducted with these fonts, taking into account the space that they take up, not the font size. This analysis could help to determine whether or not the altered fonts are as legible, or even more legible, than the base and narrow fonts when occupying the same space.

No description available.

Master of Science / Department of Industrial & Manufacturing Systems Engineering / Malgorzata J. Rys / During the last several decades, the number of drivers and the number of senior citizens driving on U.S highways has increased significantly along with the number of traffic signs. The median age of the drivers has also increased due to the aging population. Traffic signs provide a plethora of necessary information - directions, guidance, warnings, regulations, and recreation. With today's congestion and higher speed, it's very important to recognize the need for brighter and easier to read signs to increase safety among drivers. In the recent years, there has been innovation in the field of traffic engineering, giving rise to numerous innovations in retro-reflective sheeting materials and fonts. It is important to identify the combination of font and retro-reflective sheeting material, which performs best by increasing the legibility distance between the driver and the sign during both day and night time conditions. The objective of the research was to determine the combination of font (among Clearview 5-W, Series E-Modified and Clearview 5-W-R) and retro-reflective sheeting materials (DG3, Type 4 and Type 1) that produces maximum legibility distance. The objective was also to study the safety benefits of the Clearview font. Both field and computer based tests were carried out to find out which combination of font and retro-reflective material produced maximum legibility distance. From field tests it was found that the Clearview 5-W-R font along with Type 1 reflective material produced the maximum legibility distance in day time conditions, whereas Clearview 5-W-R along with Type 4 reflective material produced the maximum legibility distance at night conditions. It was also seen that while the Type 1 sheeting material performed well during day time, it failed to produce good results during night time. In fact it ended up as the worst performing sheeting material during night time. Based on these observations, it is recommended to use the Clearview 5-W-R in combination with Type 4 retro-reflective sheeting as it showed the most consistent performance compared to all other combinations of fonts and DG3 or Type 1 retro-reflective material.