In this doctoral thesis we consider various property testing problems for structured distributions. A distribution is said to be structured if it belongs to a certain class which can be simply described in approximation terms. Such distributions often arise in practice, e.g. log-concave distributions, easily approximated by polynomials (see [Bir87a]), often appear in econometric research. For structured distributions, testing a property often requires far less samples than for general unrestricted distributions. In this thesis we prove that this is indeed the case for several distance-related properties. Namely, we give explicit sub-linear time algorithms for L1 and L2 distance testing between two structured distributions for the cases when either one or both of them are available as a “black box”. We also prove that the given algorithms have the best possible asymptotic complexity by proving matching lower bounds in the form of explicit problem instances (albeit constructed using randomized techniques) demanding at least a specified amount of data to be tested successfully. As the main numerical result, we prove that testing that total variation distance to an explicitly given distribution is at least e requires O(√k/e²) samples, where k is an approximation parameter, dependent on the class of distribution being tested and independent of the support size. Testing that the total variation distance between two “black box” distributions is at least e requires O(k⁴/⁵e⁶/⁵). In some cases, when k ~ n, this result may be worse than using an unrestricted testing algorithm (which requires O( n²/3/e² ) samples where n is the domain size). To address this issue, we develop a third algorithm, which requires O(k²/³e⁴/³ log⁴/³(n/k) log log(n/k)) and serves as a bridge between the cases of small and large domain sizes.

Aims: The main aims of this research are to provide more empirical evidences for theory of property rights and public choice theory and to test these theories in a new environment i.e. banking sector of Pakistan. This research compares performance of public and private banks in Pakistan on the basis of four performance measures, profitability, liquidity, solvency and efficiency. It also studies the effect of politics on public banks. Method: Mainly quantitative approach is utilized in this thesis to compare performance of public and private banks in Pakistan in terms of profitability, liquidity, solvency and efficiency. Ratio analysis is used for this purpose. Qualitative analysis is based on qualitative study of empirical findings of quantitative analysis with respect to elections and observing lending behavior of public and private banks along with study of net interest margin during election years. Major Findings: The theory of property rights and public choice literature support private ownership for superior performance as compared to public ownership. From empirical findings, very weak support is found for both theories. Out of twelve ratios used in ratio analysis, ten ratios support public ownership for superior performance as compared to private ownership and only two ratios quote that private ownership is superior in performance than public ownership. From empirical findings it can be concluded that performance of public banks is superior to private banks in Pakistan in terms of profitability, liquidity, solvency and efficiency. Similarly, out of twelve ratios, only six ratios provided evidence of effect of elections on performance of public ownership which is a weak support for public choice theory. Moreover, lending behavior of public and private banks along with study of net interest margin has totally ruled out the presence of political influence on public banks. It can be concluded from these empirical findings that either political influence on public banks is minimized or political influence is affecting both sectors of banks in Pakistan. As banking sector in Pakistan is highly competitive now due to introduction of financial reforms in Pakistan, it can be concluded that theory of property rights and public choice theory do not work well in competitive markets especially Pakistan. It can also be concluded from empirical findings that privatization is not the only solution to poor performance of public ownership. The introduction of competition can substantially improve performance of public ownership. / mobile: +92-333-8102302

Thesis (M. Phil.)--University of Hong Kong, 1994. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves i-xx).

Thesis (M.Phil.)--University of Hong Kong, 1994. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves i-xx) Also available in print.

Les présomptions interviennent pour corriger les lacunes du raisonnement juridique. Elles sont traditionnellement définies comme « des conséquences que la loi ou le magistrat tire d’un fait connu à un fait inconnu ». Les présomptions occupent un rôle important en droit de la propriété intellectuelle car la recherche de la vérité ainsi que le traitement du doute en constituent l’essence. Qu’il s’agisse d’appréhender les objets (œuvre de l’esprit, invention, marque, etc.), de désigner les acteurs (titulaires ou contrefacteurs) ou de délimiter le contenu des droits de propriété intellectuelle, l’usage des présomptions est incontournable. Cependant, les nouveaux défis (numérique, mondialisation de l’économie, communautarisation du droit, etc.) auxquels sont confrontées les créations immatérielles conduisent le législateur et le juge à galvauder les présomptions. On assiste à une inflation voire une densification de la « norme présomptive » en droit de la propriété intellectuelle : il y a une présomption pour presque tout, sur presque tout et presque partout. Cela fragilise le système de protection des créations immatérielles et, fatalement, engendre une insécurité juridique en droit de la propriété intellectuelle. L’objectif de notre thèse est d’analyser ce que recouvre réellement l’idée de présomptions en droit de la propriété intellectuelle et de délimiter concrètement leur champ d’action (première partie). Cette démarche envisage à terme de proposer une théorie générale des présomptions à partir de laquelle les présomptions applicables en propriété intellectuelle pourraient s’identifier et tirer leur légitimité (deuxième partie). Une telle approche permettra de fournir une grille de lecture plus pertinente tant aux théoriciens qu’aux praticiens de la matière pour aborder efficacement les problématiques inhérentes à ce domaine dont la complexité n’est plus à présenter. / Presumptions in intellectual property law, analysis in the light of general lawPresumptions intervene to correct shortcomings in legal reasoning. They are traditionally defined as "consequences that the law or the magistrate draws from a known fact to an unknown fact". Presumptions play an important role in intellectual property law because the search for truth and the treatment of doubt are its essence. Whether it is to apprehend the objects (intellectual work, invention, trademark, etc.), to designate the actors (owners or counterfeiters) or to delimit the content of the intellectual property rights, the use of presumptions is unavoidable. However, the new challenges (digital, globalization of the economy, communalization of the law, etc.) faced by intangible creations force the legislator and the judge to squander the presumptions. We are witnessing inflation and even densification of the "presumptive norm" in intellectual property law: there is a presumption for almost everything, on almost everything and almost everywhere. This weakens the system of protection of intangible creations and, inevitably, creates unprecedented legal uncertainty in intellectual property law. The aim of our thesis is to analyze what the idea of presumptions in intellectual property law really covers and to concretely define their field of action. This approach ultimately aims to propose a general theory of presumptions from which the presumptions applicable in intellectual property could identify and draw their legitimacy. Such an approach that will provide a reading grid more relevant to both theorists and practitioners of the subject to effectively address the issues inherent in this area whose complexity is more to present.

The justification of property ownership based on individual subjective rights is tightly bound to humanist moral perspectives. God is left out as irrelevant to the just grounds of ownership, which is established primarily on the basis of human self-referential, moral capacity. This thesis aims at developing an alternative justification, both for property as an institution and as a private holding, with a view to bringing God back into the centre stage and thereby placing property ownership on the objective concept of right. A tradition hitherto generally left unnoticed, yet uncovered here as the source of inspiration, vests the whole project with a moral-teleological tone. The tradition, enunciated by St. Augustine and developed by St. Bonaventure and John Wyclif, invites us to see property from the perspective of a moral end: it ought to be used for the love of God and neighbours, and as such it can be owned only by the just. In spite of important insights into the moral nature of property, the Augustinian thesis not only fails to spell out what ‘use for love’ means but also suffers from elitism. Nor does it offer an adequate justification of private property. Such weaknesses call for revision. When we reinterpret the Augustinian thesis through the concept of the divine imperative of service coupled with a proper understanding of human work, property acquires a distinctive justification. Property, as an institution, is justified as a requisite for carrying out God’s redemptive work towards the world. From this general justification ensues the particular justification. We hold property as specifically ‘mine,’ since each person’s ordained mission to participate in God’s work requires a uniquely personal material means, although the recognition and fulfilment of individual mission still demands communal efforts. The duty to carry out the God-commanded mission at first allows us to possess private property only in a non-proprietorial and non-exclusive manner. Yet in the prevailing condition of economic scarcity and human greed, civil jurisdiction must provide a structure of rights to enforce property institution. As God’s invitation for the transformation of the world is a universal command, everybody should have a minimum of property, and yet in differentiation of the scope and kinds commensurate with the particularities of individual mission.