Mémoire numérisé par la Direction des bibliothèques de l'Université de Montréal.

Comportement différé, anisotrope à la descenderie de Saint-Martin-la-Porte / Time-dependent, anisotropic behavior of Saint-Martin-la-Porte gallery

Thèse numérisée par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal.

Mémoire numérisé par la Direction des bibliothèques de l'Université de Montréal.

Mémoire numérisé par la Direction des bibliothèques de l'Université de Montréal.

Mémoire numérisé par la Direction des bibliothèques de l'Université de Montréal.

Title: Comparison of the heart rate values and external performance is based on selected field tests determining maximal heart rate in cycling of cyclist and triathletes Objectives: Objective of thesis is to determine the values of maximal heart rate and external performance from selected field tests in cycling and compare them with one another. Methods: Five cyclist were measured in field tests and acquired results were used to create the graphs and tables. Data were obtained by cycling performance meter Powertap and cycle computer Garmin Edge 500. For the analysis of the measured data was used software Garmin Connect. Results: Based on the results of thesis it can be stated, that the measurement turn out as we expected. The difference of maximal heart rate between test-A and test-B is differed by 3-5 beats, which is not decisive. Both tests can be used for determine maximal heart rate. These tests are suitable for measuring the performance of athletes. Maximal heart rate is not in present an important indicator for training of fitness of individual. For training I would suggest to take a test of lactate curve in the laboratory. Keywords: cycling, external performance, heart rate, terrain test, Powertap

Title: Comparison of the heart rate values and external performance is based on selected field tests determining maximal heart rate in cycling of cyclist and triathletes Objectives: Objective of thesis is to determine the values of maximal heart rate and external performance from selected field tests in cycling and compare them with one another. Methods: Three cyclist were measured in field tests and acquired results were used to create the graphs and tables. Data were obtained by cycling performance meter Powertap and cycle computer Garmin Edge 500. For the analysis of the measured data was used software TrainigsPeaks.com Results: Based on the results of thesis it can be stated, that the measurement turn out as we expected. The difference of maximal heart rate between test-A and test-B is differed by 3-5 beats, which is not decisive. Both tests can be used for determine maximal heart rate. These tests are suitable for measuring the performance of athletes. Maximal heart rate is not in present an important indicator for training of fitness of individual. For training I would suggest to take a test of lactate curve in the laboratory. Keywords: cycling, external performance, heart rate, terrain test, Powertap

There is a growing number of virtual agents in today's virtual worlds. This is directly related to the need of coordinating their behavior and movement. In this work we design algorithms to maintain desired formation of agents while moving through difficult terrain. The methods we study should maintain the requirements of the formation as well as traverse along various obstacles. We then use an arbitrary fitness function to compare the performance of these methods on typical scenarios.

L’Union européenne a poursuivi pendant des années sa construction sans rencontrer de véritable obstacle sur sa route. Dans un tel contexte, la communication se réduisait plus ou moins à informer après coup de chaque avancée. Il semblerait que son modèle ne soit plus en adéquation avec le monde dans lequel elle se construit aujourd’hui. A côté de l’euroscepticisme, se dresse un ennemi tout aussi gênant qui grossit et enfle de jour en jour : le désintérêt. Pendant les années 1990, la Commission a élaboré plusieurs stratégies de communication pour tenter d’inverser la tendance, composées de deux volets : d’une part séduire le citoyen, d’autre part informer le public des enjeux et autres décisions. Depuis, l’Union s’est aperçue que cette communication ne suffisait pas à compenser les sérieux handicaps dont souffre l’Europe. Car celle-ci accumule les contradictions, les manques, les « c’est un peu ça mais pas tout à fait ». L’Europe n’est pas une démocratie. Encore moins une nation. Est-elle un Etat ? Certains le pensent, mais ils sont peu nombreux. Sans oublier les autres contraintes : la barrière de la langue, mais aussi des représentations, des cultures propres à chaque pays, etc. Dans un tel contexte, la communication, l’information et la discussion apparaissent comme un moyen pour créer une identité européenne. Mais, pour atteindre cet objectif, encore faudrait-il que la circulation de l’information ne pose pas de problème. Et, pour le moment, ce n’est pas le cas. Pour répondre aux attaques et combler les manques, les institutions construisent un discours autour des valeurs attendues par le public. Et aujourd’hui ce que ce dernier souhaite, c’est que l’Europe devienne plus démocratique, plus proche, plus compréhensible. Les institutions européennes ont bien compris ces nouvelles attentes et les ont progressivement intégrées dans leur discours et leur action au fil des années. Elles se sont emparées de la notion qu’il faut absolument décliner : la proximité. Une notion polysémique qui justifie aujourd’hui toute action publique et la contraint fortement. On ne dit plus intérêt général, mais intérêt général local, on ne dit plus citoyen mais habitant. Il est impossible à présent de gouverner d’en haut, de ne pas aller sur le terrain. Mais comment l’Europe hier si lointaine, peut-elle reprendre à son compte cette notion sans être « décalée » ? Quels peuvent être les bénéfices ? Depuis le début des années 2000, et même avant si on n’y prête attention, pas un jour ne passe, pas une stratégie ne s’élabore, sans en toile de fond ce fameux rapprochement avec le citoyen européen. L’Union personnalise les enjeux, rapproche, écoute, prend en compte les opinions. Bref, utilise une communication de proximité. Et l’impératif d’accorder communication et réalité conduit petit à petit l’Europe à bouleverser son fonctionnement et son modèle. Mais les institutions se heurtent à d’éternels problèmes qu’elles ne peuvent résoudre seules. Leurs moyens financiers dérisoires les empêchent d’assurer une diffusion minimale qui garantirait un minimum de réception. Le discours a changé, l'action aussi, mais pas la fréquence. Or, on ne peut se rapprocher qu'à plein temps, pas par intermittence / For years, the European Union went on with its construction without encountering any real obstacle on its way. In such a context, communication somewhat consisted in providing information after any positive evolution. It seems that now, the fashion in which we design communication is no longer in accordance with nowadays’ world. Apart from euroscepticism, another enemy is appearing. It is equally important and becomes more serious everyday: disinterest. In the 1990’s, the Commission devised several strategies of communication to try and reverse the tendency. Those strategies were made up of two parts: on the one hand, they consist in seducing citizens, and on the other, to inform the public of challenges and other decisions. Since then, the European Union has noticed that its communication wasn’t enough to make up for serious handicaps which Europe suffers from. Because contradictions are piling up, lacks, as well as what we could call approximations or rough guesses: “it’s something like that, but not quite so, in fact”. Europe isn’t a democracy, let alone a nation. Is it a State? Some people think it is, but there aren’t many to think so. Without forgetting other constraints: language barriers, as well as representations and cultures specific to each country… In such a context, communication, information and discussion appear to be means to create a European identity. However, in order to reach this goal, information should circulate without problems. But for the moment this is not the case. So that they can face attacks and fill in gaps, institutions deliver speeches about values expected by the public. And today, what the public wishes for is a more democratic and comprehensible Europe, where people feel closer to each other. European institutions are well aware of new expectations and progressively built them in their speeches and actions over the years. They made theirs a notion with several versions: proximity. A polysemous notion which justifies all public actions today and strongly restrains them. You shouldn’t say general interest anylonger, but rather local general interest; you shouldn’t say citizen anylonger but rather inhabitant. It is impossible today to govern from high up without doing fieldwork. But how can Europe, so far-distant yesterday, take back this notion without any discrepancy? What advantages can there be? Since the beginning of the 2000’s, and even before that if we pay attention, not a day is spent, not a single strategy is devised without this very connection with the European citizen in the background. The Union individualizes issues, brings together, listens, takes into account different views. Altogether, Europe uses a communication of proximity. And the imperative to make communication and reality match slowly leads Europe to disrupt its mechanisms and model. But institutions clash against everlasting problems which they cannot resolve by themselves. Their ridiculous financial means prevent them from guaranteeing even a minimum circulation which could secure a minimum of reception. Speeches have changed, actions too, but not their frequency. And yet, you can only come closer full-time, not part-time