In his book (2021) Trueman attempts to provide a solution to the problem of the concept horse, which according to Frege’s published writings is an object, not a concept. In the course of doing so Trueman rejects Wright’s response (1998) according to which some objects are also concepts, for example, the concept horse, so the categories are not exclusive. Trueman’s argument for exclusivity (Chapter 4) is the heart of the book, and as he says, it is his response to holders of differing views, like Wright. I think that there is a gap in Trueman’s argument which needs to be filled if Wright is to be considered refuted.
Since the beginning of hydrological research hydrologists have developed models that reflect their perception about how the catchments work and make use of the available information in the most efficient way. In this paper we develop hydrologic models based on field-mapped runoff generation mechanisms as identified by a geologist. For four different catchments in Austria, we identify four different lumped model structures and constrain their parameters based on the field-mapped information. In order to understand the usefulness of geologic information, we test their capability to predict river discharge in different cases: (i) without calibration and (ii) using the standard split-sample calibration/ validation procedure. All models are compared against each other. Results show that, when no calibration is involved, using the right model structure for the catchment of interest is valuable. A-priori information on model parameters does not always improve the results but allows for more realistic model parameters. When all parameters are calibrated to the discharge data, the different model structures do not matter, i.e., the differences can largely be compensated by the choice of parameters. When parameters are constrained based on field-mapped runoff generation mechanisms, the results are not better but more consistent between different calibration periods. Models selected by runoff generation mechanisms are expected to be more robust and more suitable for extrapolation to conditions outside the calibration range than models that are purely based on parameter calibration to runoff data.
Conclusions of theoretical reasoning are assertions—or at least speech acts belonging to the class of assertives, such as hypotheses, predictions or estimates. What, however, are the conclusions of practical reasoning? Employing the concepts of speech act theory, in this paper I investigate which speech acts we perform when we’re done with an instance of a practical argument and present its result in a linguistic form. To this end, I first offer a detailed scheme of practical argument suitable for an external pragmatic account (rather than an internal cognitive account). Resorting to actual examples, I then identify a class of action-inducing speech acts as characteristic conclusions of practical argument. I argue that these speech acts—promises, orders, pieces of advice, proposals, and others—differ chiefly depending on the agent of the action induced (me, us, you, them) and their illocutionary strength.
In this paper, I aim to do three things. First, I introduce the distinction between the Uniqueness Thesis (U) and what I call the Conditional Uniqueness Thesis (U*). Second, I argue that despite their official advertisements, some prominent uniquers effectively defend U* rather than U. Third, some influential considerations that have been raised by the opponents of U misfire if they are interpreted as against U*. The moral is that an appreciation of the distinction between U and U* helps to clarify the contours of the uniqueness debate and to avoid a good deal of talking past each other.
Climate changes expected in future would influence the inflow into a multipurpose reservoir. Will be a reservoir able to supply a real demand for water during those climate conditions? This ability was calculated by rainfall-runoff balance model WBMOD that works with a monthly time step. The input data series of precipitation and air temperature and the observed reservoir outflows were used to express the expected changes of the total runoff and the required reservoir capacity. Input data were modified every month according to the last climate scenarios CCCM2000 and GISS1998 estimated for the Vihorlat reservoir catchment. Failures in the required water supply in volume and time for these changed climate conditions were evaluated. Climate scenarios of temperature and precipitation changes for the Laborec catchment above gauging station Laborec-Humenné, for time period 1971-1998 were used. and Zmena klímy očakávaná v budúcnosti by mohla ovplyvniť aj prítok do vodnej nádrže. Bude za takýchto klimatických podmienok nádrž schopná zabezpečiť reálne požiadavky na vodu, aké boli namerané za jej doterajšej prevádzky? Na výpočet týchto zmien bol použitý zrážkovo-odtokový bilančný model WBMOD pracujúci v mesačnom kroku. Zmeny celkového odtoku z povodia a požadovaného objemu nádrže na zabezpečenie reálneho odberu boli vyčíslené za pomoci vstupných údajov o zrážkach a teplotách v povodí Laborca nad profilom Humenné a za pomoci meraných odberov z vodnej nádrže Vihorlat (Zemplínska Šírava) za obdobie 1971-1998. Vstupné údaje boli modifikované podľa najnovších klimatických scenárov CCCM2000 a GISS1998 prepočítaných pre povodie Laborec-Humenné. Na záver boli vyčíslené nedodávky požadovaného množstva vody v objeme a čase za zmenených klimatických podmienok.
CoNLL 2017 and 2018 shared tasks:
Multilingual Parsing from Raw Text to Universal Dependencies
This package contains the test data in the form in which they ware presented
to the participating systems: raw text files and files preprocessed by UDPipe.
The metadata.json files contain lists of files to process and to output;
README files in the respective folders describe the syntax of metadata.json.
For full training, development and gold standard test data, see
Universal Dependencies 2.0 (CoNLL 2017)
Universal Dependencies 2.2 (CoNLL 2018)
See the download links at http://universaldependencies.org/.
For more information on the shared tasks, see
http://universaldependencies.org/conll17/
http://universaldependencies.org/conll18/
Contents:
conll17-ud-test-2017-05-09 ... CoNLL 2017 test data
conll18-ud-test-2018-05-06 ... CoNLL 2018 test data
conll18-ud-test-2018-05-06-for-conll17 ... CoNLL 2018 test data with metadata
and filenames modified so that it is digestible by the 2017 systems.
It has been argued that consciousness is not possible without peripheral self-consciousness; i.e., without an implicit awareness of oneself as the subject of one’s mental state. My purpose is to undermine this view. I contend that a subject’s first-personal access to her conscious mental states and an awareness of them as hers, along with a particular approach to consciousness according to which a subject cannot be unconsciously conscious of things motivate the view that consciousness is not possible without self-consciousness. In order to undermine this view I argue that not all conscious states are accompanied by a sense of mineness. I also reject the reasons for endorsing an approach to consciousness according to which a subject cannot be unconsciously conscious of things. Then I critically examine Kriegel’s arguments for the dependence of consciousness on self-consciousness based on the first-personal access a subject has to her conscious mental states and discuss the difficulties involved., To bylo argumentoval, že vědomí není možné bez periferního self-vědomí; tj. bez implicitní informovanosti o sobě jako o předmětu duševního stavu. Mým cílem je podkopat tento názor. Tvrdím, že první osobní přístup subjektu k jejím vědomým duševním stavům a jejich povědomí o nich, spolu s konkrétním přístupem k vědomí, podle něhož subjekt nemůže být podvědomě vědomi věcí, motivuje názor, že vědomí není možné bez sebe. -vědomí. Abych podcenil tento názor, argumentuji, že ne všechny vědomé stavy jsou doprovázeny smyslem pro jemnost. Odmítám také důvody pro podporu přístupu k vědomí, podle něhož subjekt nemůže nevědomě uvědomovat věci. Pak kriticky zkoumám Krieglovy argumenty pro závislost vědomí na sebevědomí založeném na prvním osobním přístupu subjektu k jejím vědomým duševním stavům a projednávaným problémům., and Sinem Elkatip Hatipoğlu