Assignment: 04.03 the decision
- Assignment: 04.03 the decision
- 03.05. an epistemically neutral definition of “theory”: a more
- A ‘bloodborne’ valentine’s day (02.14.18) — waypoint in the
- Assignment: 04.03 the decision online
- Assignment: 04.03 the decision of the moment
- Assignment: 04.03 the decision on line
- Assignment: 04.03 the decision 2020
03.05. an epistemically neutral definition of “theory”: a more
Please complete the Checklists and Infomaterial that will be given to you prior to the start of the course to ensure the best possible preparation for the course. Please carry the following materials to the class: Methodology:
The workshop will cover the following subjects in addition to inspiring stories of accomplished female entrepreneurs:
This course will be delivered entirely online. Technical specifications: Internet access, laptop, camera, microphone, and zoom (potentially). For operational purposes, your email address will be forwarded to the trainer.
This course will provide you a summary of the principles of good scientific practice, how to handle cases of scientific fraud, and how to distinguish between the distinctions and “gray areas” of dubious research practice. Local, global, and international laws and guidelines will be covered.
We will provide a forum for reflection and discussion of scientific principles and attitudes, as well as the position of scientists. In the scientific method, you can learn to create suitable solutions for challenging situations.
A ‘bloodborne’ valentine’s day (02.14.18) — waypoint in the
Oral proceedings – appellant’s non-attendanceInventive phase – (no): obvious implementation specifics
Assignment: 04.03 the decision online
Returning the case to the first instance for further review – (no)
Assignment: 04.03 the decision of the moment
Payment of the appeal fee – (no)
Keywords and phrases
The key request is for novelty (no)
First and second alternative key demands for novelty (no)
The first auxiliary request is for novelty (no)
Amendments – second and third auxiliary requestsAmendments – expansion beyond the content of the application as filed (yes)
Fourth auxiliary request is an innovative move (yes)
Motifs d’opposition – insufficient exposé (non)
Oppositional themes – a new idea (oui)
Oppositional themes – artistic play (oui)
Technical status – PowerPoint presentation – public accessibility (non)
Instructional procedure – observer audition
Affidavits affidavits affidavits affidavits affidavits affidavits affid
Instructional procedure – degree of conviction of the instance
Instructional method – adequate power of conviction (non)
Added subject-matter – primary and auxiliary requests (first to third) (yes)
A fourth auxiliary request has been added: subject-matter (no)
Fourth auxiliary request is an innovative move (yes)
Acceptance of late submissions (no)
Assignment: 04.03 the decision on line
ABSTRACT: Although a system-theoretic approach to the safety study of innovative socio-technical systems is gaining traction in academia, Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS) safety issues are largely unexplored. In order to elaborate safety guidelines for potential developers of the actual system, we used a System-Theoretic Process Analysis to build and evaluate a preliminary model of the unmanned shipping system. According to the findings, some improvements would be made to MASS’ tech solutions in particular.
KEYWORDS: Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS), Autonomous Ship, MUNIN Project, Advanced Autonomous Waterborne Application (AAWA), System-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA), System-Theoretic Accident Model and Process (STAMP), Unmanned Shipping System, Safety at Sea, System-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA), System-Theoretic Accident Model and Process (STAMP), System-Theoretic Accident Model and Process (STAMP), System-The
Greetings, Allison. Craig K., Kirsten M. Revell, Rod Sears, and Neville A. Stanton are the authors of this paper. The year is 2017. “Safety Modeling Applied to an Aircraft Rapid Decompression Event Using the Systems Theoretic Accident Model and Process (STAMP).” Science of Safety 98 (October). 159–66, Elsevier Ltd. – doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2017.06.011 – https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.06.011
Assignment: 04.03 the decision 2020
The aim of this course is to provide assistance and critical feedback to students who are writing dissertation proposals. A proposal like this is a research outline that outlines the doctoral thesis project, including the reason for the research question(s), a review of relevant theoretical and empirical contributions, the creation of a theoretical structure, methodology specifications, and expected empirical study. You should be ready to respond to the following inquiries: What makes that a fascinating query? Is this a crucial question? What kind of academic contributions will this question and its answers make? What options do you have for answering your research question(s)? Noteworthy: During the first session, additional meeting dates will be decided. The CDSS regulations section provides information about how to apply a dissertation proposal (8 ECTS).
Students in the first through third years of CDSS Sociology are eligible to participate. Later CDSS doctoral candidates are encouraged to participate, but they will not receive any credit. The aim of this course is to provide support and critical feedback to CDSS sociology doctoral candidates working on their dissertations. CDSS students are required to take on two positions in this workshop. In order to gain feedback, they can also provide feedback to their colleagues and present their own work.