Language Devices Flashcard

Language Devices

Retirement and old age Essays

Retirement and old age Essays Retirement and old age Essay Retirement and old age Essay Retirement and old age Many people choose to retire when they are eligible for private or public pension benefits, although some are forced to retire when physical conditions no longer allow the person to work any more (by illness or accident) or as a result of legislation concerning their position. Nowadays most developed countries have systems to provide pensions on retirement in old age, which may be sponsored by employers and/or the state. In many poorer countries, support for the old is still mainly provided through the family. In many western countries this right is mentioned in national onstitutions. The standard retirement age varies from country to country but it is generally between 50 and 70 (according to latest statistics, 2011). The list includes 91 countries, home to 89 percent of the worlds elderly. Sweden tops the list, followed by Norway and Germany. It is interesting to note that Japan, where the annual event of elderly people honouring became a national holiday half a century ago, only Just reaches the top ten. Also, Austria, which in a similar, recent survey by Forbes, was at the top of their list, was not included in this survey at all. Our country occupied 60th osition, ahead of Poland, Serbia, Ukraine, Moldova and Russia. The most uncomfortable countries for the elderly to be living are Pakistan, Tanzania and Afghanistan. The study shows that the indicator of GDP per capita is a poor one for elderly people. For example, poorer countries like Mauritius and Sri Lanka are high up on the list thanks to their progressive social policies, whilst the USA, with all its riches, is only in eighth place. Experts took into account, not only the income of those who are over 60, but also their state of health, education, employment, favourable environment and their social activity. The number of people of honourable age is growing, and by 2050 there will be more than 2 billion of them. According to forecasts, the amount of elderly people in Belarus will reach 28 percent in the next 12 years. The youngest people, teenagers, people in their 20s, are the least happy bunch. Theres a lot of uncertainty and you are forming your identity and youre not really sure who you are. You might not have the confidence that you have when youre older. But the surveys show that people tend to get happier as they get older and that peak happens fairly late. By DianaSea

Finance slp 02 pc quote web Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Finance slp 02 pc quote web - Essay Example As Wal Mart has a beta coefficient of 0.1467 it implies that the stock generally follows market movements. It also shows the relatively less risk it carries relative to the market (Levinson 2006). However, recognizing the theory of risk and return, the gains in investing in Wal Mart’s stocks is proportional to the risk involved in holding the stock. Since the stock generally carries less risk than the entire market, it also gains less relative to it. When investors put their fund in stocks, they expect to have financial gain from it. The cost of equity is the return that stockholders require for a specific stock that they hold. Using the Capital Asset Pricing Model, Wal Mart’s cost of equity can be computed as: Using the yield to maturity of US bonds maturing in one year (4.5%) as the risk free rate and the difference between the return of the market and risk free rate as 6.5%, the cost of equity of Wal Mart is 5.45% computed as ( 4.5% + 0.1467 (6.5%)). Two other stocks in my portfolio are Nike and Fed Ex which have beta coefficients of 0.8244 and 0.8418. When taken altogether, the average beta coefficient of my portfolio is 0.6043 ((0.8244 + 0.8418 + 0.1467)/3). Using the assumption above, the cost of equity is 8.42% (4.5% + (0.6043) (6.5%). Looking at the beta of the chosen business organizations, it becomes apparent that it can still be diversified. All of the beta coefficients are positive and less than one which means that they are carry less risk and are generally less volatile than the market (Keown et al 2005). I can try to further diversify the portfolio by getting a stock whose beta coefficient is more than 1 in order to shoulder more risk which in turn generates more returns (Keown et al 2005) . It will also be logical to carry a stock whose performance is negatively correlated to the market. This stock will have a negative beta

Property law assignment about Certainty of objects in discretionary Essay

Property law assignment about Certainty of objects in discretionary trusts - Essay Example The case of McPhail decided on the essential element of the ‘is or is not’ test and the important points that were made were that the courts that is the fact that the ‘is or is not’ test deals with conceptual certainty and the fact that that the ‘the court is never defeated on the basis of evidential certainty’. The decision is said to be the key case in this respect because the problem on the ‘is or is not’ test in respect of the broad list was considered. The essential problem in respect of certainty of objects was that the is or is not test needed be clearly spelled out in respect of such lists. This was because the trusts with such lists would fail for uncertainty of objects and thus the principle needed establishment, which was clearly done by the important decision in McPhail and a demarcation and principle in respect of such lists was clearly identified. 2. Explain the background to the Court of Appeal decision in Re Badenâ⠂¬â„¢s DT No.2, and its lasting significance. (500-600 words) The issue in this question requires an analysis of the background of the case in respect of Re Baden’s DT No.2. ... The trust in this case was about, amongst others, employees and their ‘dependants’ and ‘relatives’. The court stated that ‘dependants’ was not uncertain and the reasoning for this was that the Parliament had used it often whereby it had described dependants. However, there were issues in respect of ‘relatives’ whereby differences in interpretation arose. The meaning that was normally ascribed to relatives was descendants who originated from common ancestors thereby discussing the indefinite and large number of distant relatives. It was discussed at length that the common ancestor was not a conceptual uncertainty and the problem lied in respect of the evidential uncertainty that is the problem of proving the connection. In the case of Re Baden there was property which had been left "to or for the benefit of any of the officers or ex officers or ex employees of the company or to any of the relatives or dependants of any such persons". The applicant argued that for identification of the beneficiary it was important the each and every individual should be identified so as to ensure the question of whether they were a class or not. The respondent argued to the contrary and stated that this was not necessary to identify each and every individual and therefore the trust should be held to be valid and should not fail on the basis of uncertainty of objects. It was further argued that if the class was not considered and the trust was held to be failed then it would be contrary to the wishes of the settler as the reason for such a broad class was the intention of the settler and he could have clearly narrowed the class if he wanted to and therefore the settler had clearly by writing the words had taken

MGMT Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

MGMT - Term Paper Example It is their management which is primarily responsible for the formulation of strategies, assigning goals, implementation of strategies, tracking the success of these by matching them to their predetermined goals. This is done in my forms however their strategic thrusts rely heavily on feedback which they receive. The most effective feedback is by the numbers which are generated by each store. These are then forwarded to the headquarters by the use of the vast digital network. In 2007 Wal-Mart was labeled one of the most competitive and innovative companies in the world (Plambeck, 2007). Their ability to be innovative is critical for them being able to achieve sustainability through measures that positively impact and reduce strain on the environment. This they do by three ambitious goals: incorporating as much of renewable energy as they can as part of their operations, minimizing the creation of waste and continuously striving to sell products which lead to sustaining their resources as well as the environment. As far as innovation is concerned an analysis of the activities and measures taken by Wal-Mart focus on incorporating a culture which aids the organization through making efficient use of a learning culture. This can be seen in the extensive measures taken by Wal-Mart to facilitate learning of the employees and introducing frequent training sessions. From the instance an employee starts working at Wal-Mart they undergo a extensive customer service training, they also undertake on the job training and ongoing formal training as far as responsibilities of the work are concerned. Analysis suggests that initially it was customer service and the ten foot rule applied to the workforce which served as driving forces for Wal-Mart’s innovative culture. Suggestions, feedback and communication with the employees were valued and some of their suggestions were even adopted

Fault Tree Analysis

Fault Tree Analysis Fault Tree Analysis Fault tree analysis (FTA) is a failure analysis in which an undesired state of a system is analyzed using boolean logic to combine a series of lower-level events. This analysis method is mainly used in the field of safety engineering to quantitatively determine the probability of a safety hazard. An Overview of Basic Concepts This quick subject guide provides an overview of the basic concepts in Fault Tree Analysis (FTA, system analysis) as it applies to system reliability and a directory of some other resources on the subject. History of Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) is another technique for reliability and safety analysis. Bell Telephone Laboratories developed the concept in 1962 for the U.S. Air Force for use with the Minuteman system. It was later adopted and extensively applied by the Boeing Company. Fault tree analysis is one of many symbolic analytical logic techniques found in operations research and in system reliability. Other techniques include Reliability Block Diagrams (RBDs). Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) was originally developed in 1962 at Bell Laboratories by H.A. Watson, under a U.S. Air Force Ballistics Systems Division contract to evaluate the Minuteman I Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) Launch Control System. Following the first published use of FTA in the 1962 Minuteman I Launch Control Safety Study, Boeing and AVCO expanded use of FTA to the entire Minuteman II system in 1963-1964. FTA received extensive coverage at a 1965 System Safety Symposium in Seattle sponsored by Boeing and the University of Washington. Boeing began using FTA for civil aircraft design around 1966. In 1970, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) published a change to 14 CFR 25.1309 airworthiness regulations for transport aircraft in the Federal Register at 35 FR 5665 (1970-04-08). This change adopted failure probability criteria for aircraft systems and equipment and led to widespread use of FTA in civil aviation. Within the nuclear power industry, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission began using probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) methods including FTA in 1975, and significantly expanded PRA research following the 1979 incident at Three Mile Island. This eventually led to the 1981 publication of the NRC Fault Tree Handbook NUREG-0492, and mandatory use of PRA under the NRCs regulatory authority. Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) attempts to model and analyze failure processes of engineering and biological systems. FTA is basically composed of logic diagrams that display the state of the system and is constructed using graphical design techniques. Originally, engineers were responsible for the development of Fault Tree Analysis, as a deep knowledge of the system under analysis is required. Often, FTA is defined as another part, or technique, of reliability engineering. Although both model the same major aspect, they have arisen from two different perspectives. Reliability engineering was, for the most part, developed by mathematicians, while FTA, as stated above, was developed by engineers. Fault Tree Analysis usually involves events from hardware wear out, material failure or malfunctions or combinations of deterministic contributions to the event stemming from assigning a hardware/system failure rate to branches or cut sets. Typically failure rates are carefully derived from substantiated historical data such as mean time between failure of the components, unit, subsystem or function. Predictor data may be assigned. Assigning a software failure rate is elusive and not possible. Since software is a vital contributor and inclusive of the system operation it is assumed the software will function normally as intended. There is no such thing as a software fault tree unless considered in the system context. Software is an instruction set to the hardware or overall system for correct operation. Since basic software events do not fail in the physical sense, attempting to predict manifestation of software faults or coding errors with any reliability or accuracy is impossible, unless assumptions are made. Predicting and assigning human error rates is not the primary intent of a fault tree analysis, but may be attempted to gain some knowledge of what happens with improper human input or intervention at the wrong time. FTA can be used as a valuable design tool, can identify potential accidents, and can eliminate costly design changes. It can also be used as a diagnostic tool, predicting the most likely system failure in a system breakdown. FTA is used in safety engineering and in all major fields of engineering. More on Fault Tree Diagram (FTD) Fault tree diagrams (or negative analytical trees) are logic block diagrams that display the state of a system (top event) in terms of the states of its components (basic events). Like reliability block diagrams (RBDs), fault tree diagrams are also a graphical design technique, and as such provide an alternative to methodology to RBDs. An FTD is built top-down and in term of events rather than blocks. It uses a graphic model of the pathways within a system that can lead to a foreseeable, undesirable loss event (or a failure). The pathways interconnect contributory events and conditions, using standard logic symbols (AND, OR etc). The basic constructs in a fault tree diagram are gates and events, where the events have an identical meaning as a block in an RBD and the gates are the conditions. Fault Trees and Reliability Block Diagrams The most fundamental difference between FTDs and RBDs is that in an RBD one is working in the success space, and thus looks at system successes combinations, while in a fault tree one works in the failure space and looks at system failure combinations. Traditionally, fault trees have been used to access fixed probabilities (i.e. each event that comprises the tree has a fixed probability of occurring) while RBDs may have included time-varying distributions for the success (reliability equation) and other properties, such as repair/restoration distributions. Drawing Fault Trees: Gates and Events Fault trees are built using gates and events (blocks). The two most commonly used gates in a fault tree are the AND and OR gates. As an example, consider two events (or blocks) comprising a Top Event (or a system). If occurrence of either event causes the top event to occur, then these events (blocks) are connected using an OR gate. Alternatively, if both events need to occur to cause the top event to occur, they are connected by an AND gate. As a visualization example, consider the simple case of a system comprised of two components, A and B, and where a failure of either component causes system failure. The system RBD is made up of two blocks in series (see RBD configurations), as shown next: The fault tree diagram for this system includes two basic events connected to an OR gate (which is the Top Event). For the Top Event to occur, either A or B must happen. In other words, failure of A OR B causes the system to fail. Relationships Between Fault Trees and RBDs In general (and with some specific exceptions), a fault tree can be easily converted to an RBD. However, it is generally more difficult to convert an RBD into a fault tree, especially if one allows for highly complex configurations. The following table shows gate symbols commonly used in fault tree diagrams and describes their relationship to an RBD. (The term Classic Fault Tree refers to the definitions as used in the Fault Tree Handbook (NUREG-0492) by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). Methodology FTA methodology is described in several industry and government standards, including NRC NUREG-0492 for the nuclear power industry, an aerospace-oriented revision to NUREG-0492 for use by NASA, SAE ARP4761 for civil aerospace, MIL-HDBK-338 for military systemsfor military systems. IEC standard IEC61025 is intended for cross-industry use and has been adopted as European Norme EN61025. Since no system is perfect, dealing with a subsystem fault is a necessity, and any working system eventually will have a fault in some place. However, the probability for a complete or partial success is greater than the probability of a complete failure or partial failure. Assembling a FTA is thus not as tedious as assembling a success tree which can turn out to be very time consuming. Because assembling a FTA can be a costly and cumbersome experience, the perfect method is to consider subsystems. In this way dealing with smaller systems can assure less error work probability, less system analysis. Afterward, the subsystems integrate to form the well analyzed big system. An undesired effect is taken as the root (top event) of a tree of logic. There should be only one Top Event and all concerns must tree down from it. Then, each situation that could cause that effect is added to the tree as a series of logic expressions. When fault trees are labeled with actual numbers about failure probabilities (which are often in practice unavailable because of the expense of testing), computer programs can calculate failure probabilities from fault trees. The Tree is usually written out using conventional logic gate symbols. The route through a tree between an event and an initiator in the tree is called a Cut Set. The shortest credible way through the tree from fault to initiating event is called a Minimal Cut Set. Some industries use both Fault Trees and Event Trees. An Event Tree starts from an undesired initiator (loss of critical supply, component failure etc.) and follows possible further system events through to a series of final consequences. As each new event is considered, a new node on the tree is added with a split of probabilities of taking either branch. The probabilities of a range of top events arising from the initial event can then be seen. Classic programs include the Electric Power Research Institutes (EPRI) CAFTA software, which is used by many of the US nuclear power plants and by a majority of US and international aerospace manufacturers, and the Idaho National Laboratorys SAPHIRE, which is used by the U.S. Government to evaluate the safety and reliability of nuclear reactors, the Space Shuttle, and the International Space Station. Outside the US, the software RiskSpectrum is a popular tool for Fault Tree and Event Tree analysis and is licensed for use at almost half of the worlds nuclear power plants for Probabilistic Safety Assessment. Analysis Many different approaches can be used to model a FTA, but the most common and popular way can be summarized in a few steps. Remember that a fault tree is used to analyze a single fault event, and that one and only one event can be analyzed during a single fault tree. Even though the fault may vary dramatically, a FTA follows the same procedure for an event, be it a delay of 0.25 msec for the generation of electrical power, or the random, unintended launch of an ICBM. FTA analysis involves five steps: Define the undesired event to study Definition of the undesired event can be very hard to catch, although some of the events are very easy and obvious to observe. An engineer with a wide knowledge of the design of the system or a system analyst with an engineering background is the best person who can help define and number the undesired events. Undesired events are used then to make the FTA, one event for one FTA; no two events will be used to make one FTA. Obtain an understanding of the system Once the undesired event is selected, all causes with probabilities of affecting the undesired event of 0 or more are studied and analyzed. Getting exact numbers for the probabilities leading to the event is usually impossible for the reason that it may be very costly and time consuming to do so. Computer software is used to study probabilities; this may lead to less costly system analysis. System analysts can help with understanding the overall system. System designers have full knowledge of the system and this knowledge is very important for not missing any cause affecting the undesired event. For the selected event all causes are then numbered and sequenced in the order of occurrence and then are used for the next step which is drawing or constructing the fault tree. Construct the fault tree After selecting the undesired event and having analyzed the system so that we know all the causing effects (and if possible their probabilities) we can now construct the fault tree. Fault tree is based on AND and OR gates which define the major characteristics of the fault tree. Evaluate the fault tree After the fault tree has been assembled for a specific undesired event, it is evaluated and analyzed for any possible improvement or in other words study the risk management and find ways for system improvement. This step is as an introduction for the final step which will be to control the hazards identified. In short, in this step we identify all possible hazards affecting in a direct or indirect way the system. Control the hazards identified This step is very specific and differs largely from one system to another, but the main point will always be that after identifying the hazards all possible methods are pursued to decrease the probability of occurrence. Comparison With Other Analytical Methods FTA is a deductive, top-down method aimed at analyzing the effects of initiating faults and events on a complex system. This contrasts with Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA), which is an inductive, bottom-up analysis method aimed at analyzing the effects of single component or function failures on equipment or subysystems. FTA is very good at showing how resistant a system is to single or multiple initiating faults. It is not good at finding all possible initiating faults. FMEA is good at exhaustively cataloging initiating faults, and identifying their local effects. It is not good at examining multiple failures or their effects at a system level. FTA considers external events, FMEA does not. In civil aerospace the usual practice is to perform both FTA and FMEA, with a Failure Mode Effects Summary (FMES) as the interface between FMEA and FTA. Alternatives to FTA include Dependence Diagram (DD), also known as Reliability Block Diagram (RBD) and Markov Analysis. A Dependence Diagram is equivalent to a Success Tree Analysis (STA), the logical inverse of an FTA, and depicts the system using paths instead of gates. DD and STA produce probability of success (i.e., avoiding a top event) rather than probability of a top event. References Ericson, Clifton (1999). Fault Tree Analysis A History (pdf). Proceedings of the 17th International Systems Safety Conference. http://www.fault-tree.net/papers/ericson-fta-history.pdf. Retrieved 2010-01-17. Rechard, Robert P. (1999). Historical Relationship Between Performance Assessment for Radioactive Waste Disposal and Other Types of Risk Assessment in the United States (pdf). Risk Analysis (Springer Netherlands) 19 (5): 763-807. doi:10.1023/A:1007058325258. SAND99-1147J. http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/759847-JsFRIG/webviewable/. Retrieved 2010-01-22. Winter, Mathias (1995). Software Fault Tree Analysis of an Automated Control System Device Written in ADA (pdf). Masters Thesis (Monterey, CA: Naval Postgraduate School). ADA303377. http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA303377. Retrieved 2010-01-17. Benner, Ludwig (1975). Accident Theory and Accident Investigation. Proceedings of the Society of Air Safety Investigators Annual Seminar. http://www.iprr.org/papers/75iasiatheory.html. Retrieved 2010-01-17. DeLong, Thomas (1970). A Fault Tree Manual (pdf). Masters Thesis (Texas AM University). AD739001. http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=AD739001Location=U2doc=GetTRDoc.pdf. Retrieved 2010-03-09. Eckberg, C. R. (1964). Fault Tree Analysis Program Plan. Seattle, WA: The Boeing Company. D2-30207-1. http://www.dtic.mil/srch/doc?collection=t3id=AD0299561. Retrieved 2010-01-17. Begley, T. F.; Cummings (1968). Fault Tree for Safety. RAC. ADD874448. http://www.dtic.mil/srch/doc?collection=t3id=ADD874448. Retrieved 2010-01-17. Hixenbaugh, A. F. (1968). Fault Tree for Safety. Seattle, WA: The Boeing Company. D6-53604. http://www.dtic.mil/srch/doc?collection=t3id=AD0847015. Retrieved 2010-01-17. Acharya, Sarbes; et. al. (1990) (pdf). Severe Accident Risks: An Assessment for Five U.S. Nuclear Power Plants. Wasthington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NUREG-1150. http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1150/v1/sr1150v1-intro-and-part-1.pdf. Retrieved 2010-01-17. Vesely, W. E.; et. al. (1981) (pdf). Fault Tree Handbook. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NUREG-0492. http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr0492/sr0492.pdf. Retrieved 2010-01-17. Vesely, William; et. al. (2002) (pdf). Fault Tree Handbook with Aerospace Applications. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codeq/doctree/fthb.pdf. Retrieved 2010-01-17. 7.9 Fault Tree Analysis (pdf). Electronic Reliability Design Handbook. B. U.S. Department of Defense. 1998. MIL-HDBK-338B. http://www.everyspec.com/MIL-HDBK/MIL-HDBK+(0300+-+0499)/download.php?spec=MIL-HDBK-338B.015041.pdf. Retrieved 2010-01-17. Fault Tree Analysis. Edition 2.0. International Electrotechnical Commission. 2006. IEC61025. ISBN2-8318-8918-9. Long, Allen (pdf), Beauty the Beast Use and Abuse of Fault Tree as a Tool, fault-tree.net, http://www.fault-tree.net/papers/long-beauty-and-beast.pdf, retrieved 16 January 2010.

Poem analysis. Essay -- English Literature

Poem analysis. POEM The deathly child is very gay, He walks in the sunshine but no shadow falls his way. He has come to warn us that one must go who would rather stay Oh deathly child With a hear of woe And a smile on your face, Who is it that must go? He walks down the avenue, the trees Have leaves that are silver when they are turned upon the breeze He is more pale than the silver leaves more pale that these He walks delicately, He has a delicate tread. Why look, he leaves no mark at all Where the dust is spread Over the cafà © tables the talk is going to and fro An the people smile and they frown, but they do not know That the deathly child walks. Ah who is it that must go? I think that this poem is about the angel of death who is here to take the soul of a person. The first text gives us a brief outline of the poem. From the second to the fourth text we find a description of the deathly child and the last text gives the perception of the public as from the deathly child's own perspective. The deathly child decides whose soul to take as he passes the people. The language of the text has an interesting rhythm effect which has some underlying regularity mixed with variation. In the first, middle and last text, the last word in each stanza all rhyme, however the last word in the second and fourth stanza rhymes.which appears to look like this: - 1st text all rhymes 2nd text 2nd and 4th stanza rhymes 3rd text all rhymes 4th text 2nd and 4th stanza rhymes 5th text all rhymes I have also noticed that when looking at the poem, these rhythmic words have only one-word syllables, when pronounced they are stressed. The first, third and fifth texts have... ...e leaves no mark at all where the dust is spread". I think that the writer writes in this particular way, because the writer is describing the deathly child as something different from the humans. If someone does not have a shadow, it means that they do not have a soul. When it says "he leaves not mark at all where the dust is spread" is shows that the deathly child cannot be seen. Graphology: all lines begin with a capital letter because to give relations between speech and writing. And there are no two sentences within the same line, except the last stanza, which not only has a capital at the beginning of the line but also in the next sentence. I have also noticed that all the stanzas in the middle text begin with the letter "h" and the first letters in the first and second texts are also represented in the third and fifth text but in different order.