Search

Submodular maximization has found extensive applications in various domains within the field of artificial intelligence, including but not limited to machine learning, computer vision, and natural language processing. With the increasing size of datasets in these domains, there is a pressing need to develop efficient and parallelizable algorithms for submodular maximization. One measure of the parallelizability of a submodular maximization algorithm is its adaptive complexity, which indicates the number of sequential rounds where a polynomial number of queries to the objective function can be executed in parallel. In this paper, we study the problem of non-monotone submodular maximization subject to a knapsack constraint, and propose the first combinatorial algorithm achieving an $(8+\epsilon)$-approximation under $\mathcal{O}(\log n)$ adaptive complexity, which is \textit{optimal} up to a factor of $\mathcal{O}(\log\log n)$. Moreover, we also propose the first algorithm with both provable approximation ratio and sublinear adaptive complexity for the problem of non-monotone submodular maximization subject to a $k$-system constraint. As a by-product, we show that our two algorithms can also be applied to the special case of submodular maximization subject to a cardinality constraint, and achieve performance bounds comparable with those of state-of-the-art algorithms. Finally, the effectiveness of our approach is demonstrated by extensive experiments on real-world applications., Comment: Part of the contribution appears in AAAI-2023

A profilometer can be used to monitor the tooth surface topography evolution during gear pitting tests. Due to the mounting relationship variation between the instrument and the gear, the tooth profile's measurement position deviation from its theoretical location will introduce a measurement error. In this study, the tooth profile measurement error introduced by mounting using a tactile profilometer was theoretically analysed and experimentally confirmed as a fish shape. A mounting error compensation method based on projection onto the perpendicular plane to the gear's datum axis was proposed. The results show that the fish-shaped tooth profile measurement error can be effectively compensated, benefitting the evaluation of the gear tooth surface wear during gear pitting tests., QC 20220502

FZG gear testing is widely used to evaluate the performance of lubricants, gear materials, and gear-tooth geometries under different loads. During these tests, gear tooth wear results in the loss of gear profile in the form of micro-pitting, pitting and scuffing, can be observed. However, gear wear is usually measured by weighting. This method cannot be used to study the wear depth on a specific point on the gear-tooth surface. In this study, tooth profiles were measured via a profilometer during the FZG gear-pitting test. Moreover, an algorithm was developed to quantitatively evaluate the distributed cumulative wear and wear progress at a certain test stage. Simultaneously, the real tooth profile was obtained. Experiments were performed to validate the proposed method, and the results showed that gear-tooth-surface wear can be quantitatively determined. Thus, the proposed method can be used for further gear-failure-prediction experiments., QC 20210419

“International law generally rejects deportation to torture, even where national security interests are at stake.” ¹ There had been a fierce debate when Hassan Ahmed Shaqlane, a Somalian refugee who was sentenced to an 8-year prison term for rape and kidnapping, won his appeal against deportation, upheld by the Deportation Review Tribunal.² Controversy arose again when Al Baiiaty, an Iraqi resettlement refugee was convicted of sexual violation by rape for the fourth time. With the Court of Appeal’s noting that Mr Al Baiiaty poses a serious risk to the community³, the then Minister of Immigration called for a report on the deportation issues raised by the case.⁴ Deportation to torture may deprive a refugee of the right to liberty, security and perhaps life⁵, which is against many states’ domestic laws and international instruments such as the International Conant on Civil and Political Rights⁶ and the Convention against Torture⁷. It has been said that even if Article 33 of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees does not categorically reject deportation to torture on its face, it should not be used to deny rights that other legal interments make available to everyone.⁸ It is highly questionable, however, under this broad obligation, if a refugee poses a significant threat to the protecting country’s national security, what action can a state take to protect its own national security and its own people. Are provision in the Refugee Convention, the ICCPR and the CAT absolute, binding and non derogable? If so, can a state derogate from its international obligation to refoule a refugee to potential torture to protect its national security? On what grounds then, can a state derogate from it? This paper will consider these questions. By doing so, this paper will first outline the international obligations, provided by the Refugee Convention, the ICCPR and the CAT, what is an international norm and states’ derogation rights in these provisions. The paper then look

“International law generally rejects deportation to torture, even where national security interests are at stake.” ¹ There had been a fierce debate when Hassan Ahmed Shaqlane, a Somalian refugee who was sentenced to an 8-year prison term for rape and kidnapping, won his appeal against deportation, upheld by the Deportation Review Tribunal.² Controversy arose again when Al Baiiaty, an Iraqi resettlement refugee was convicted of sexual violation by rape for the fourth time. With the Court of Appeal’s noting that Mr Al Baiiaty poses a serious risk to the community³, the then Minister of Immigration called for a report on the deportation issues raised by the case.⁴ Deportation to torture may deprive a refugee of the right to liberty, security and perhaps life⁵, which is against many states’ domestic laws and international instruments such as the International Conant on Civil and Political Rights⁶ and the Convention against Torture⁷. It has been said that even if Article 33 of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees does not categorically reject deportation to torture on its face, it should not be used to deny rights that other legal interments make available to everyone.⁸ It is highly questionable, however, under this broad obligation, if a refugee poses a significant threat to the protecting country’s national security, what action can a state take to protect its own national security and its own people. Are provision in the Refugee Convention, the ICCPR and the CAT absolute, binding and non derogable? If so, can a state derogate from its international obligation to refoule a refugee to potential torture to protect its national security? On what grounds then, can a state derogate from it? This paper will consider these questions. By doing so, this paper will first outline the international obligations, provided by the Refugee Convention, the ICCPR and the CAT, what is an international norm and states’ derogation rights in these provisions. The paper then look

"Items of historical significance of two wars Iraq and Afghanistan Significant Activity, Sigacts, between 0001 January 2004 and 2359 31 December 2009 extracts from CSV documents from Department of Defence and CDNE database…This is one of the most significant documents of our time removing the fog of war and revealing the true nature of 21st century asymmetric warfare…" ¹ This was part of the message sent along with the documents later known as Iraq and Afghanistan war logs from Chelsea Manning, a United States solider, to the website of WikiLeaks - an international, online, non-profit organisation which publishes secret and sensitive information. The release of the war logs was referred as “the largest leak of classified documents in its history” and the release of diplomatic cables exposed numerous unguarded comments and revelations regarding critiques and praises about the host countries of various United States embassies; United States intelligence and counterintelligence efforts and other diplomatic actions. These leaks put the United States in great controversy considering its actions in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and caused quite an embarrassment due to its comments regarding diplomatic actions. Chelsea Manning was convicted and Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, is facing potential criminal prosecution, despite being granted political asylum. While WikiLeaks still works as an important role of exposing the “truth” to the public, it imposed great concerns to many of the governments around the world towards their government policies, national security and general reputation. The consequence of WikiLeaks releasing sensitive information about United States government rang the alarm of the importance of governments safeguarding secret information. The motivation of the United Kingdom government issuing the Justice and Security Act arguably comes from the concern of exposing sensitive information. The Introduction of the Act reads that the JSA is “to prov

"Items of historical significance of two wars Iraq and Afghanistan Significant Activity, Sigacts, between 0001 January 2004 and 2359 31 December 2009 extracts from CSV documents from Department of Defence and CDNE database…This is one of the most significant documents of our time removing the fog of war and revealing the true nature of 21st century asymmetric warfare…" ¹ This was part of the message sent along with the documents later known as Iraq and Afghanistan war logs from Chelsea Manning, a United States solider, to the website of WikiLeaks - an international, online, non-profit organisation which publishes secret and sensitive information. The release of the war logs was referred as “the largest leak of classified documents in its history” and the release of diplomatic cables exposed numerous unguarded comments and revelations regarding critiques and praises about the host countries of various United States embassies; United States intelligence and counterintelligence efforts and other diplomatic actions. These leaks put the United States in great controversy considering its actions in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and caused quite an embarrassment due to its comments regarding diplomatic actions. Chelsea Manning was convicted and Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, is facing potential criminal prosecution, despite being granted political asylum. While WikiLeaks still works as an important role of exposing the “truth” to the public, it imposed great concerns to many of the governments around the world towards their government policies, national security and general reputation. The consequence of WikiLeaks releasing sensitive information about United States government rang the alarm of the importance of governments safeguarding secret information. The motivation of the United Kingdom government issuing the Justice and Security Act arguably comes from the concern of exposing sensitive information. The Introduction of the Act reads that the JSA is “to prov