The Experts below are selected from a list of 267 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

David Lowery - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Introduction to the special issue of IG&A on methodological issues of large-N research on Interest representation
    Interest Groups & Advocacy, 2014
    Co-Authors: David Lowery
    Abstract:

    The last decade has seen a remarkable transformation in the study of European national and EU Interest representation toward mid-range theories tested with large-N research. One result of these developments is renewed anticipation about the emergence of a true comparative Theory of Interest representation, one fully attentive to the importance of institutional and issue context. Given this expansion of large-N research on Interest representation, the articles in this special issue examine several of the most important methodological issues inherent in such analyses as typified by the still on going INTEREURO (Comparative Research on Interest Group Politics in Europe) Project, sponsored by the European Science Foundation (10-ECRP-008).

  • A Niche Theory of Interest Representation
    The Journal of Politics, 1996
    Co-Authors: Virginia Gray, David Lowery
    Abstract:

    The Theory of organizational niches may provide important bridging concepts upon which an integrated Theory of Interest groups might be developed. After discussing Hutchinson's (1957) n-dimensional niche concept, we develop several hypotheses about the reliance of Interest organizations on multiple resource dimensions. These are tested with survey data on Interest group leaders in the American states. On the basis of preliminary evidence of niche partitioning, we conclude that internal resource dimensions--exclusive access to members and finances--may be more critical than securing exclusive access to officials in a balkanized policy process in defining viable Interest group niches. We conclude by outlining a research agenda using niche Theory.

David Andrews - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Keynes, Ricardo and the classical Theory of Interest
    The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 2000
    Co-Authors: David Andrews
    Abstract:

    Keynes made harsh and repeated attacks on the work of Ricardo, blaming him particulary for what Keynes called the ‘classical Theory’ of Interest. Garegnani and others argue that Keynes' criticisms of the classical Theory of Interest apply to later neoclassical writers, but not to Ricardo. This paper re-examines Keynes' criticisms. It argues that Keynes attacked Ricardoapos;s Theory of Interest despite his awareness that Ricardo did not hold the ‘classical Theory’. Moreover, Keynes not only expressed sympathy for Ricardo's understanding of Interest, but his criticisms which do apply to Ricardo do not address Ricardo's Theory of Interest.

  • Keynes, Ricardo and the classical Theory of Interest
    The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 2000
    Co-Authors: David Andrews
    Abstract:

    Keynes made harsh and repeated attacks on the work of Ricardo, blaming him particulary for what Keynes called the 'classical Theory' of Interest. Garegnani and others argue that Keynes' criticisms of the classical Theory of Interest apply to later neoclassical writers, but not to Ricardo. This paper re-examines Keynes' criticisms. It argues that Keynes attacked Ricardoapos;s Theory of Interest despite his awareness that Ricardo did not hold the 'classical Theory'. Moreover, Keynes not only expressed sympathy for Ricardo's understanding of Interest, but his criticisms which do apply to Ricardo do not address Ricardo's Theory of Interest.Keynes Ricardo Interest Classical Theory Money,

Mauro Boianovsky - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Wicksell, Ramsey and the Theory of Interest *
    The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 1998
    Co-Authors: Mauro Boianovsky
    Abstract:

    The article discusses Wicksell's assessment of the controversy between Bohm-Bawerk on one side, and Fisher and Bortkiewicz on the other, on the role of productivity (the 'third reason') in the determination of the rate of Interest. It is shown that in the process of arguing out the third reason Wicksell came remarkably close to Frank Ramsey's view of the determinants of saving in economies with a positive subjective rate of discount. The similarities between Wicksell and Ramsey result from the fact that - in contrast with Fisher and Bohm-Bewerk - they assumed reinvestment, with the corollary that maximum permanent consumption will be reached at zero Interest if the subjective rate discount of future utility is zero. Wicksell used his Ramsey-like saving rule to explain the interaction betwen Bohm-Bawerk's three reasons in either dynamic or stationary conditions, which enabled him to reformulate the third reason as the 'marginal productivity of waiting'. Finally, the relevance of Wicksell's savings rule for the perennial debate on 'Wicksell's missing equation' is considered in the last section of the article.rate of Interest, saving, technical progress, time preference, capital,

Claire Dross - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Adding Decision Procedures to SMT Solvers Using Axioms with Triggers
    Journal of Automated Reasoning, 2016
    Co-Authors: Claire Dross, Sylvain Conchon, Johannes Kanig, Andrei Paskevich
    Abstract:

    Satisfiability modulo theories (SMT) solvers are efficient tools to decide the satisfiability of ground formulas, including a number of built-in theories such as congruence, linear arithmetic, arrays, and bit-vectors. Adding a Theory to that list requires delving into the implementation details of a given SMT solver, and is done mainly by the developers of the solver itself. For many useful theories, one can alternatively provide a first-order axiomatization. However, in the presence of quantifiers, SMT solvers are incomplete and exhibit unpredictable behavior. Consequently, this approach can not provide us with a complete and terminating treatment of the Theory of Interest. In this paper, we propose a framework to solve this problem, based on the notion of instantiation patterns , also known as triggers . Triggers are annotations that suggest instances which are more likely to be useful in proof search. They are implemented in all SMT solvers that handle first-order logic and are included in the SMT-LIB format. In our framework, the user provides a Theory axiomatization with triggers, along with a proof of completeness and termination properties of this axiomatization, and obtains a sound, complete, and terminating solver for her Theory in return. We describe and prove a corresponding extension of the traditional Abstract DPLL Modulo Theory framework. Implementing this mechanism in a given SMT solver requires a one-time development effort. We have implemented the proposed extension in the Alt-Ergo prover and we discuss some implementation details in the paper. To show that our framework can handle complex theories, we prove completeness and termination of a feature-rich axiomatization of doubly-linked lists. Our tests show that our approach results in a better performance of the solver on goals that stem from the verification of programs manipulating doubly-linked lists and sets.

  • Generic decision procedures for axiomatic first-order theories
    2014
    Co-Authors: Claire Dross
    Abstract:

    SMT solvers are efficient tools to decide the satisfiability of ground formulas, including a number of built-in theories such as congruence, linear arithmetic, arrays, and bit-vectors. Adding a Theory to that list requires delving into the implementation details of a given SMT solver, and is done mainly by the developers of the solver itself. For many useful theories, one can alternatively provide a first-order axiomatization. However, in the presence of quantifiers, SMT solvers are incomplete and exhibit unpredictable behavior. Consequently, this approach can not provide us with a complete and terminating treatment of the Theory of Interest. In this thesis, we propose a framework to solve this problem, based on the notion of instantiation patterns, also known as triggers. Triggers are annotations that suggest instances which are more likely to be useful in proof search. They are implemented in all SMT solvers that handle first-order logic and are included in the SMT-LIB format. In our framework, the user provides a Theory axiomatization with triggers, along with a proof of completeness and termination properties of this axiomatization, and obtains a sound, complete, and terminating solver for her Theory in return. We describe and prove a corresponding extension of the traditional Abstract DPLL Modulo Theory framework. Implementing this mechanism in a given SMT solver requires a one-time development effort. We believe that this effort is not greater than that of adding a single decision procedure to the same SMT solver. We have implemented the proposed extension in the Alt-Ergo prover and we discuss some implementation details in the thesis. To show that our framework can handle complex theories, we prove completeness and termination of three axiomatization, one for doubly-linked lists, one for applicative sets, and one for Ada's vectors. Our tests show that, when the Theory is heavily used, our approach results in a better performance of the solver on goals that stem from the verification of programs manipulating these data-structures.

  • Adding Decision Procedures to SMT Solvers using Axioms with Triggers
    2013
    Co-Authors: Claire Dross, Sylvain Conchon, Johannes Kanig, Andrei Paskevich
    Abstract:

    SMT solvers are efficient tools to decide the satisfiability of ground formulas, including a number of built-in theories such as congruence, linear arithmetic, arrays, and bit-vectors. Adding a Theory to that list requires delving into the implementation details of a given SMT solver, and is done mainly by the developers of the solver itself. For many useful theories, one can alternatively provide a first-order axiomatization. However, in the presence of quantifiers, SMT solvers are incomplete and exhibit unpredictable behavior. Consequently, this approach can not provide us with a complete and terminating treatment of the Theory of Interest. In this paper, we propose a framework to solve this problem, based on the notion of instantiation patterns, also known as triggers. Triggers are annotations that suggest instances which are more likely to be useful in proof search. They are implemented in all SMT solvers that handle first-order logic and are included in the SMT-LIB format. In our framework, the user provides a Theory axiomatization with triggers, along with a proof of completeness and termination properties of this axiomatization, and obtains a sound, complete, and terminating solver for her Theory in return. We describe and prove a corresponding extension of the traditional Abstract DPLL Modulo Theory framework. Implementing this mechanism in a given SMT solver requires a one-time development effort. We believe that this effort is not greater than that of adding a single decision procedure to the same SMT solver. We have implemented the proposed extension in the Alt-Ergo prover and we discuss some implementation details in the paper. To show that our framework can handle complex theories, we prove completeness and termination of a feature-rich axiomatization of doubly-linked lists. Our tests show that our approach results in a better performance of the solver on goals that stem from the verification of programs manipulating doubly-linked lists.

Paul A Okeefe - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • thinking beyond boundaries a growth Theory of Interest enhances integrative thinking that bridges the arts and sciences
    Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2021
    Co-Authors: Paul A Okeefe, E J Horberg, Anandita Sabherwal, Gabrielle C Ibasco, Adlin Binti Zainal
    Abstract:

    Abstract Innovations often arise when people bridge seemingly disparate areas of knowledge, such as the arts and sciences. What leads people to make connections that others might miss? We examined the role of implicit theories of Interest—the belief that Interests are relatively fixed (a fixed Theory of Interest) or developed (a growth Theory of Interest) among people with established Interests either in the area of arts or sciences. A stronger growth Theory predicted that participants spontaneously noticed more stimuli from the area outside their Interests (Studies 2 and 3) and generated better integrative ideas (Study 1). Furthermore, they were more likely to generate ideas that bridged the arts and sciences (Study 2), which was also found after inducing fixed or growth theories, establishing causality (Study 3). Finally,perceived utility of the outside area mediated this relation (Study 4). These results suggest that a growth Theory may be important for integrative thinking and innovation across traditional disciplinary boundaries.