No description available.

So far, the distributed computing community has either assumed that all the processes of a distributed system have distinct identifiers or, more rarely, that the processes are anonymous and have no identifiers. These are two extremes of the same general model: namely, n processes use l different identifiers, where 1 l n. We call this model homonymous model. To determine the power of homonymous model as well as the importance of identifiers in distributed computing, this thesis studies the consensus problem, one of the most famous distributed computing problem. We give necessary and sufficient conditions on the number of identifiers for solving consensus in a distributed system with t faulty processes in the synchronous case. We show that in crash, send omission and general omission failures model, the uniform consensus is solvable even if processes are anonymous. Thus, identifiers are not useful in that case. However identifiers become important in Byzantine failures model: 3t + 1 identifiers is necessary and sufficient for Byzantine agreement. Surprisingly the number of identifiers must be greater than n+3t 2 in presence of three facets of uncertainty: partial synchrony, Byzantine failures and homonyms. This demonstrates two differences from the classical model (which has l = n): there are situations where relaxing synchrony to partial synchrony renders agreement impossible, and, in the partially synchronous case, increasing the number of correct processes can actually make it harder to reach agreement.

In this study, I undertake a discourse analysis of struggles over representation as they were manifested in the Charlottetown referendum campaign. I utilize transcripts taken during the campaign derived from the CBC news programs The National, The Journal, and Sunday Report as well as from The CTV News. The issue of (im-)partiality provides the analytical focus for this study. Who can legitimately speak on behalf of whom, or, to what extent do individuals have a particular voice which places limitations on whom they can represent? On the one hand, underlying what I call the ‘universalistic’ discourse is the premise that human beings can act in an impartial manner so that all individuals have the capacity to speak or act in the interests of all other individuals regardless of the group(s) to which they belong. On the other hand, a competing discourse based on group-difference’ maintains that all representatives express partial voices depending on their group-based characteristics. I argue that the universalistic discourse was hegemonic in the transcripts but, at the same time, the group-difference discourse was successful at articulating powerful counter-hegemonic resistance. Ironically, the universalistic discourse was hegemonic despite widespread assumptions of partiality on the basis of province, region, language, and Aboriginality. This was possible because the universalistic discourse subsumed territorial notions of partiality within itself. In contrast, I argue that assumptions of Aboriginal partiality will likely diffuse themselves to other categories, beginning with gender, in the future. I also describe the strategies used by the competing discourses to undermine one another. The universalistic discourse successfully portrayed the group-difference discourse as an inversion to a dangerous apartheid-style society where individuals were forced to exist within group-based categories. The group-difference discourse used the strategy of anomaly to demonstrate that individuals were inevitably categorized in the universalistic discourse; impartiality was a facade for a highly-partial ruling class. In examining these strategies, I demonstrate that the group-difference discourse justified its own position by making assumptions about the operation of power and dominance in society. Thus, impartiality was impossible not for the post-modern reason that inherent differences make representation highly problematic, but because power relations hinder the ability of representatives to act in a truly impartial manner.

Governing agencies increasingly employ collaborative forms of decision-making in fisheries management to improve decision quality and legitimacy. However, crafting fair and effective collaborative processes which will achieve these benefits is often difficult. In an effort to identify keys and obstacles to success, this research evaluated the Commercial Groundfish Initiative, a collaborative planning process tasked with reforming the management of Canada's Pacific groundfish fisheries. Using semi-structured interviews, I gathered the perspectives of participants from the two committees within the process: a consensus-based committee of commercial representatives and a committee broadly representative of other interest groups for which consensus was encouraged but not mandated. Control over the design of a proposal for management reform was asymmetrically divided between the two committees, giving the commercial committee the primary role. Participants from the commercial committee expressed high levels of support for their consensus process. Keys to this committee’s success in reaching a high quality agreement were (i) a strong incentive to cooperate, (ii) consensus decision-making, and (iii) independent process facilitation. The latter two functioned as security measures against the potential for process manipulation by participants or governing agencies. Results from an examination of the broader committee indicate non-commercial respondents were largely accepting of an “oversight” role provided that the scope for their input remained sufficient, which it did not. Early involvement in tasks such as designing the process and defining objectives were particularly critical to non-commercial respondents’ perceptions of procedural fairness and their ability to participate effectively. Several participants also raised concerns that the process was not appropriately representative of groups with an interest in groundfish management. The poor performance of the process in these respects overshadowed positive aspects of broadening participation beyond commercial users. Consensus approaches have gained currency among commercial participants as a result of their positive experience and made some of them more willing to consider meaningful collaboration with a broader range of interest groups. The ineffectiveness of the broader committee suggests there is still work to do in designing processes that will actually achieve this meaningful, broad collaboration.

This thesis addresses the potential for third parties to apply or make use of International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law to protect civilians caught in the midst of civil war. A case study is presented of El Salvador, where conflict in the 1970s and 1980s took the lives of an estimated 75,000 people and caused immense human suffering. Of particular interest is how organizations under the aegis of the Salvadoran Catholic Church provided data on human rights violations, gathered with credible precision, to the international community. The Canadian public responded to the situation in El Salvador in a markedly different way than the Canadian government, whose pronouncements were at first ill-informed and uncritically pro-American. The question thus arises: do counter-consensus or public-pressure groups exert any influence over a state’s foreign policy and, if so, does this phenomenon contribute to conflict resolution? While there is disagreement over the actual success that public groups and interested parties have over government decision-making, this thesis demonstrates that, in fact, the counter-consensus in Canada did have a discernable impact on foreign policy during the Salvadoran conflict. These actions have potential contributions to make to conflict resolution and the search for a negotiated end to civil strife, which in the case of El Salvador was generated in the first place not by an alleged international communist conspiracy but by crippling geographies of inequality. / Thesis (Master, Geography) -- Queen's University, 2007-09-26 11:52:47.301

<p>This research examines the effectiveness of these dispute resolution mechanisms in environmental disputes and what improvements should be made in order to make those mechanisms suitable for these types of disputes.</p>

Mémoire numérisé par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal

This paper introduces a model framework for dynamic credit rating processes. Our framework aggregates ordinal rating information stemming from a variety of rating sources. The dynamic of the consensus rating captures systematic as well as idiosyncratic changes. In addition, our framework allows to validate the different rating sources by analyzing the mean/variance structure of the rating errors. In an empirical study for the iTraxx Europe companies rated by the big three external rating agencies we use Bayesian techniques to estimate the consensus ratings for these companies. The advantages are illustrated by comparing our dynamic rating model to a benchmark model. (author´s abstract) / Series: Research Report Series / Department of Statistics and Mathematics

Uppsatsens utgångspunkt är samverkansarbete mellan det offentliga och civilsamhället inom ramenför den nationella Överenskommelsen inom sociala frågor. Kontexten är den samhälleligaomvandling och de välfärdsförändringar som skett sedan 1970-talet. Tidigare forskning inom ämnethar visat att konfliktperspektivet saknats inom forskningen av samverkan mellan det offentliga ochcivilsamhället. Uppsatsen bygger på det emancipatoriska kunskapsintresset vars strävan är att identifiera orsakertill missförhållanden och missförståelse som ligger bakom vissa fenomen, i det här falletkonsensusbegreppet. Uppsatsen lyfter fram maktasymmetri som en begränsande faktor inomramen för samverkansarbete mellan det offentliga och civilsamhället. Uppsatsen visar att det råderen oklar rollfördelning inom samverkansarbetet och de idéburna organisationerna vet inte huruvidaman är en röstbärare eller en serviceutförare. De idéburna organisationerna är även rädda för attframstå som kritiska gentemot det offentliga eftersom man då riskerar att tappa ekonomiskt stöd. Uppsatsen lyfter det trilaterala sanningsbegreppet för att uppdaga dold mening, hur dennakorresponderar med verkligheten och slutligen hur detta kan komma till praktisk användning.Resultatet kan ses som både teorigenererande och kunskapsproducerande med anledning avambitionen att integrera den kritiska teorins metaperspektiv med konkret empiriskt material, dvs.den nationella Överenskommelsen inom sociala frågor.

La multiplication des sources d'information et le développement de nouvelles technologies ont engendré des bases données complexes, souvent caractérisées par un nombre de variables relativement élevé par rapport aux individus. En particulier, dans les études environnementales sur la pollution de l'air intérieur, la collecte des informations sur les individus se fait au regard de plusieurs thématiques, engendrant ainsi des données de grande dimension avec une structure multi-blocs définie par les thématiques. L'objectif de ce travail a été de développer des méthodes de classification adaptées à ces jeux de données de grande dimension et structurées en blocs de variables. La première partie de ce travail présente un état de l'art des méthodes de classification en général et dans le cas de la grande dimension. Dans la deuxième partie, trois nouvelles approches de classification d'individus décrits par des variables structurées en blocs ont été proposées. La méthode 2S-SOM (Soft Subspace-Self Organizing Map), une approche de type subspace clustering basée sur une modification de la fonction de coût de l'algorithme des cartes topologiques à travers un double système de poids adaptatifs défini sur les blocs et sur les variables. Nous proposons ensuite des approches CSOM (Consensus SOM) et Rv-CSOM de recherche de consensus de cartes auto-organisées basées sur un système de poids déterminés à partir des partitions initiales. Enfin, la troisième partie présente une application de ces méthodes sur le jeu de données réelles de la campagne nationale logement (CNL) menée par l'OQAI afin de définir une typologie des logements au regard des thématiques : qualité de l'air intérieur, structure du bâtiment, composition des ménages et habitudes des occupants.