OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Sport Innovation/RipNET

This is a link to ripnet:
RipNet is a brand new sports technology released this past April, 2012 designed with lacrosse players in mind; specifically offensive lacrosse players. Their aim is to improve human performance of players. RipNet has connected the technology world to the lacrosse field. Web and mobile technology are offered on iPhones, iPads, android phones, and computers making RipNet portable to every practice and game. As a score keeper RipNet creates a visual for players, coaches, recruiters, and parents. This visual will show player tendencies and shot patterns which can help assist a player/coach improve performance.
RipNet will then create a database of these shots; showing the offensive player where his/her shots is landing and player habits. Whether it will be in the back of the net or a missed shot RipNet will help explain the outcome of the shot and why it might have occurred. In In order for RipNet to explain the shot occurrence specific details of the shot have to be entered into RipNet. These specific details can be improved to increase skill level and game performance.
RipNet also provides skill Improvement videos by working with top coaches and former players Katrina Dowd, Con Bro Chill, and NCAA Champion Goalies John Galloway and Morgan Lathrop to create a dynamic aspect of skill improvement and performance gains. (5) A social network is provided to all RipNet users. This social network connects lacrosse players from around the world mainly the US. Customers (players) can interact with one another sharing experiences of the game. Players will also have access to the latest news and events taking place giving additional opportunities to improve performance. RipNet offers data technology for coaches, recruiters, and even parents to keep track of their player’s progress.
Sport Background
Mechanics of RipNet
How RipNet seeks to improve performance of Lacrosse athletes
FAQS
References
# Sport Innovation/Skins Sportswear

Executive summary
This article analyzes and evaluates the innovation practices in SKINS[1], which is an Australian SME organisation designing and selling compression garments. SKINS has developed a strong international brand as a highly innovative company. However, there are some challenges and areas of improvement, such as the price level of compression garment products, enhancement of distribution channels and differentiation from other companies in the industry. These areas will need to be addressed to strengthen the position of SKINS on the market and sustain their competitive advantage.
The first part of the article puts forward the general background and situational analysis of the company. The second part describes and discusses the compression garment technology in general, and it applies the business innovation radar on SKINS. The competitor analysis is presented in the third section of the article, analyzing the competitors 2XU and BSc. It is followed by a comparison between SKINS' strategy and the strategies of its competitor. The fourth part then discusses the specific innovation processes of SKINS and highlights what differentiates the company from other competitors on the market. The fifth section identifies some challenges and barriers to innovation which SKINS might face in the future. Lastly, a comparison is made with a large enterprise International Management Group.
Next: Background, Current situation and SWOT
# Sport Innovation/Social Media and Soccer Fans

“Social media” as we know it now (complete with Twitter, Foursquare, etc.) did not exist in 2002, but the World Cup still found ways to connect with fans.
The soccer fan base is huge worldwide and as FIFA World Cup comes closer supporters start following their teams, athletes and coaches whatever they go.
The Social Media boom permitted fans to have live information from their idols even behind the scenes and this must be the biggest connection between followers and players.
During 2014 World Cup in Brazil, it won’t be any different, once the spread of social media is considerable and new channels of connection will be established until the beginning of the event in 2014.
The benefits of the Internet are extension of reach into target publics across national and cultural boundaries; direct communication; availability 24/7, global reach; speed of information and other.
The affirmations above reflect exactly a worthy utilization made by the event organizers as a way to establish connection with fans; maintaining the public relation channels active. However it is important to notate that website’s approach does not offer a two-way communication channel whereas the other social media tools do.
One of the key components of public relations an the use of technologies as connection outfits with fans is “the instigator two-way communication between the organisation and its publics” this tactic permits the fan to feel part of the event where their ideas and opinion can also be listened.
FIFA 2014 website is presenting a great number of interactive tools where the fan bases interface with event organisers. The competitions and general feedback are valuable instruments used by the administrators to keep on raising numbers and restructuring mew concepts. Sport public relation is all about relationships, relationship management and relationship building and social media ideally matching this idea, in this case included on it, here the communicators can establish a diverse range of information and interaction rather than any others available.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Sniderman, Zachary (2010, June 12). The World Cup’s Social Media Evolution. Retrieved on December 5, 2011 from http://mashable.com/2010/06/11/world-cup-evolution/
* 1 2 3 Hopwood, M., Kitchin, P., & Skinner, J. (2010). Sport Public Relations and Communication. Oxford : Elsevier.
* ↑ Mangolda, W., & Faulds, D. (2009). Social media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix. Business Horizons , 52 (4), 357-365.
# Space Transport and Engineering Methods/Design Studies 3

This is a conceptual design stage study of the need for, justification, and design of an Open-Source Space Program. The Systems Engineering process can be applied to any complex system, including the design of organizations which in turn design space projects. The study both serves as a tutorial example for such design studies in general, and a useful work product. Even a negative result, that open source space programs are not needed or justified, is useful in eliminating a poor option if that turns out to be the result.
Status: the study is approx. 3% complete as of 03 August 2012.

## Background of Study

Why even consider open source? Historically space projects have been carried out by the government and commercial sectors, and data have been kept private either for national security or business competition reasons. However this results in duplication of effort, and is therefore inherently inefficient. Scientific fields, where data is published openly, and open-source software, are good examples of non-duplication of effort. The question then becomes can those methods be applied to space projects? The level of technology and size of economies restricted early space projects to the largest governments at first. As technologies have improved and the general size of economies grown, the relative scale required has gone down. Open projects tend to be relatively small, so a second question is whether space projects have reached a scale that open source projects can execute them?

### Past Work On This Topic
## Requirements Analysis
### Defining the "Customer"

The customer in the Systems Engineering process is the entity which has an unmet need or desire which a new system might satisfy. In this case the customer is assumed to be the set of humans who want to make use of the resources of space, but which cannot because it is too difficult or expensive at the moment. There are existing government and commercial space projects, but the government ones at least have shown a remarkable lack of progress in making access to space easier and less expensive. At this point the individuals who make up the customer set are mostly unidentified, so we cannot poll them to find out exactly what requirements they might have. Instead we must start with proxies to represent what they might want, and later incorporate their real requirements if we can identify them to ask.

### Establish Project Requirements

Since the unmet need is easier and less expensive access to space to make use of its resources, we must ask easier than what? We will set the baseline as the current path of already existing space programs. If an open-source approach can improve on that path, it would be worth pursuing.

### Establishing Project Measures

Normally for a complex task, there will be multiple parameters that measure "goodness" in different ways. In order to compare and select among alternatives these various measures are converted to a common scale.
# This Quantum World/Implications and applications/Time independent Schrödinger equation

< PREVIOUS

## Time-independent Schrödinger equation

If the potential V does not depend on time, then the Schrödinger equation has solutions that are products of a time-independent function $\psi (\mathbf {r} )$ and a time-dependent phase factor $e^{-(i/\hbar )\,E\,t}$:
    $\psi (t,\mathbf {r} )=\psi (\mathbf {r} )\,e^{-(i/\hbar )\,E\,t}.$
Because the probability density $|\psi (t,\mathbf {r} )|^{2}$ is independent of time, these solutions are called stationary.
Plug $\psi (\mathbf {r} )\,e^{-(i/\hbar )\,E\,t}$ into
    $i\hbar {\frac {\partial \psi }{\partial t}}=-{\frac {\hbar ^{2}}{2m}}{\frac {\partial }{\partial \mathbf {r} }}\cdot {\frac {\partial }{\partial \mathbf {r} }}\psi +V\psi$
to find that $\psi (\mathbf {r} )$ satisfies the time-independent Schrödinger equation
    $E\psi (\mathbf {r} )=-{\hbar ^{2} \over 2m}\left({\frac {\partial ^{2}}{\partial x^{2}}}+{\frac {\partial ^{2}}{\partial y^{2}}}+{\frac {\partial ^{2}}{\partial z^{2}}}\right)\psi (\mathbf {r} )+V(\mathbf {r} )\,\psi (\mathbf {r} ).$
NEXT >
# This Quantum World/Serious illnesses/de Broglie

< PREVIOUS

## de Broglie

In 1923, ten years after Bohr had derived the spectrum of atomic hydrogen by postulating the quantization of angular momentum, Louis de Broglie hit on an explanation of why the atom's angular momentum comes in multiples of $\hbar .$ Since 1905, Einstein had argued that electromagnetic radiation itself was quantized (and not merely its emission and absorption, as Planck held). If electromagnetic waves can behave like particles (now known as photons), de Broglie reasoned, why cannot electrons behave like waves?
Suppose that the electron in a hydrogen atom is a standing wave on what has so far been thought of as the electron's circular orbit. (The crests, troughs, and nodes of a standing wave are stationary.) For such a wave to exist on a circle, the circumference of the latter must be an integral multiple of the wavelength $\lambda$ of the former: $2\pi r=n\lambda .$
Einstein had established not only that electromagnetic radiation of frequency $\nu$ comes in quanta of energy $E=h\nu$ but also that these quanta carry a momentum $p=h/\lambda .$ Using this formula to eliminate $\lambda$ from the condition $2\pi r=n\lambda ,$ one obtains $pr=n\hbar .$ But $pr=mvr$ is just the angular momentum $L$ of a classical electron with an orbit of radius $r.$ In this way de Broglie derived the condition $L=n\hbar$ that Bohr had simply postulated.
NEXT >
# This Quantum World/Implications and applications/How fuzzy positions get fuzzier

< PREVIOUS

## How fuzzy positions get fuzzier

We will calculate the rate at which the fuzziness of a position probability distribution increases, in consequence of the fuzziness of the corresponding momentum, when there is no counterbalancing attraction (like that between the nucleus and the electron in atomic hydrogen).
Because it is easy to handle, we choose a Gaussian function
    $\psi (0,x)=Ne^{-x^{2}/2\sigma ^{2}},$
which has a bell-shaped graph. It defines a position probability distribution
    $|\psi (0,x)|^{2}=N^{2}e^{-x^{2}/\sigma ^{2}}.$
If we normalize this distribution so that $\int dx\,|\psi (0,x)|^{2}=1,$ then $N^{2}=1/\sigma {\sqrt {\pi }},$ and
    $|\psi (0,x)|^{2}=e^{-x^{2}/\sigma ^{2}}/\sigma {\sqrt {\pi }}.$
We also have that
* $\Delta x(0)=\sigma /{\sqrt {2}},$
* the Fourier transform of $\psi (0,x)$ is ${\overline {\psi }}(0,k)={\sqrt {\sigma /{\sqrt {\pi }}}}e^{-\sigma ^{2}k^{2}/2},$
* this defines the momentum probability distribution $|{\overline {\psi }}(0,k)|^{2}=\sigma e^{-\sigma ^{2}k^{2}}/{\sqrt {\pi }},$
* and $\Delta k(0)=1/\sigma {\sqrt {2}}.$
The fuzziness of the position and of the momentum of a particle associated with $\psi (0,x)$ is therefore the minimum allowed by the "uncertainty" relation: $\Delta x(0)\,\Delta k(0)=1/2.$
Now recall that
    ${\overline {\psi }}(t,k)=\phi (0,k)e^{-i\omega t},$
where $\omega =\hbar k^{2}/2m.$ This has the Fourier transform
    $\psi (t,x)={\sqrt {\sigma \over {\sqrt {\pi }}}}{1 \over {\sqrt {\sigma ^{2}+i\,(\hbar /m)\,t}}}\,e^{-x^{2}/2[\sigma ^{2}+i\,(\hbar /m)\,t]},$
and this defines the position probability distribution
    $|\psi (t,x)|^{2}={1 \over {\sqrt {\pi }}{\sqrt {\sigma ^{2}+(\hbar ^{2}/m^{2}\sigma ^{2})\,t^{2}}}}\,e^{-x^{2}/[\sigma ^{2}+(\hbar ^{2}/m^{2}\sigma ^{2})\,t^{2}]}.$
Comparison with $|\psi (0,x)|^{2}$ reveals that $\sigma (t)={\sqrt {\sigma ^{2}+(\hbar ^{2}/m^{2}\sigma ^{2})\,t^{2}}}.$ Therefore,
    $\Delta x(t)={\sigma (t) \over {\sqrt {2}}}={\sqrt {{\sigma ^{2} \over 2}+{\hbar ^{2}t^{2} \over 2m^{2}\sigma ^{2}}}}={\sqrt {[\Delta x(0)]^{2}+{\hbar ^{2}t^{2} \over 4m^{2}[\Delta x(0)]^{2}}}}.$
The graphs below illustrate how rapidly the fuzziness of a particle the mass of an electron grows, when compared to an object the mass of a $C_{60}$ molecule or a peanut. Here we see one reason, though by no means the only one, why for all intents and purposes "once sharp, always sharp" is true of the positions of macroscopic objects.
Above: an electron with $\Delta x(0)=1$ nanometer. In a second, $\Delta x(t)$ grows to nearly 60 km.
Below: an electron with $\Delta x(0)=1$ centimeter. $\Delta x(t)$ grows only 16% in a second.
Next, a $C_{60}$ molecule with $\Delta x(0)=1$ nanometer. In a second, $\Delta x(t)$ grows to 4.4 centimeters.
Finally, a peanut (2.8 g) with $\Delta x(0)=1$ nanometer. $\Delta x(t)$ takes the present age of the universe to grow to 7.5 micrometers.
NEXT >
# This Quantum World/Serious illnesses

< PREVIOUS

## Planck

Quantum mechanics began as a desperate measure to get around some spectacular failures of what subsequently came to be known as classical physics.
In 1900 Max Planck discovered a law that perfectly describes the spectrum of a glowing hot object. Planck's radiation formula turned out to be irreconcilable with the physics of his time. (If classical physics were right, you would be blinded by ultraviolet light if you looked at the burner of a stove, aka the UV catastrophe.) At first, it was just a fit to the data, "a fortuitous guess at an interpolation formula" as Planck himself called it. Only weeks later did it turn out to imply the quantization of energy for the emission of electromagnetic radiation: the energy $~E~$ of a quantum of radiation is proportional to the frequency $\nu$ of the radiation, the constant of proportionality being Planck's constant $~h~$
    $~E=h\nu ~$.
We can of course use the angular frequency $~\omega =2\pi \nu ~$ instead of $\nu$. Introducing the reduced Planck constant $~\hbar =h/2\pi ~$, we then have
    $E=\hbar \omega$.
This theory is valid at all temperatures and helpful in explaining radiation by black bodies.

## Rutherford

In 1911 Ernest Rutherford proposed a model of the atom based on experiments by Geiger and Marsden. Geiger and Marsden had directed a beam of alpha particles at a thin gold foil. Most of the particles passed the foil more or less as expected, but about one in 8000 bounced back as if it had encountered a much heavier object. In Rutherford's own words this was as incredible as if you fired a 15 inch cannon ball at a piece of tissue paper and it came back and hit you. After analysing the data collected by Geiger and Marsden, Rutherford concluded that the diameter of the atomic nucleus (which contains over 99.9% of the atom's mass) was less than 0.01% of the diameter of the entire atom. He suggested that the atom is spherical in shape and the atomic electrons orbit the nucleus much like planets orbit a star. He calculated mass of electron as 1/7000th part of the mass of an alpha particle. Rutherford's atomic model is also called the Nuclear model.
The problem of having electrons orbit the nucleus the same way that a planet orbits a star is that classical electromagnetic theory demands that an orbiting electron will radiate away its energy and spiral into the nucleus in about 0.5×10$^{-10}$ seconds. This was the worst quantitative failure in the history of physics, under-predicting the lifetime of hydrogen by at least forty orders of magnitude! (This figure is based on the experimentally established lower bound on the proton's lifetime.)
NEXT >
# This Quantum World/Implications and applications/Why energy is quantized

< PREVIOUS

## Why energy is quantized

Limiting ourselves again to one spatial dimension, we write the time independent Schrödinger equation in this form:
    ${d^{2}\psi (x) \over dx^{2}}=A(x)\,\psi (x),\qquad A(x)={2m \over \hbar ^{2}}{\BigV(x)-E{\Big ]}.$
Since this equation contains no complex numbers except possibly $\psi$ itself, it has real solutions, and these are the ones in which we are interested. You will notice that if $V>E,$ then $A$ is positive and $\psi (x)$ has the same sign as its second derivative. This means that the graph of $\psi (x)$ curves upward above the $x$ axis and downward below it. Thus it cannot cross the axis. On the other hand, if $V<E,$ then $A$ is negative and $\psi (x)$ and its second derivative have opposite signs. In this case the graph of $\psi (x)$ curves downward above the $x$ axis and upward below it. As a result, the graph of $\psi (x)$ keeps crossing the axis — it is a wave. Moreover, the larger the difference $E-V,$ the larger the curvature of the graph; and the larger the curvature, the smaller the wavelength. In particle terms, the higher the kinetic energy, the higher the momentum.
Let us now find the solutions that describe a particle "trapped" in a potential well — a bound state. Consider this potential:
Observe, to begin with, that at $x_{1}$ and $x_{2},$ where $E=V,$ the slope of $\psi (x)$ does not change since $d^{2}\psi (x)/dx^{2}=0$ at these points. This tells us that the probability of finding the particle cannot suddenly drop to zero at these points. It will therefore be possible to find the particle to the left of $x_{1}$ or to the right of $x_{2},$ where classically it could not be. (A classical particle would oscillates back and forth between these points.)
Next, take into account that the probability distributions defined by $\psi (x)$ must be normalizable. For the graph of $\psi (x)$ this means that it must approach the $x$ axis asymptotically as $x\rightarrow \pm \infty .$
Suppose that we have a normalized solution for a particular value $E.$ If we increase or decrease the value of $E,$ the curvature of the graph of $\psi (x)$ between $x_{1}$ and $x_{2}$ increases or decreases. A small increase or decrease won't give us another solution: $\psi (x)$ won't vanish asymptotically for both positive and negative $x.$ To obtain another solution, we must increase $E$ by just the right amount to increase or decrease by one the number of wave nodes between the "classical" turning points $x_{1}$ and $x_{2}$ and to make $\psi (x)$ again vanish asymptotically in both directions.
The bottom line is that the energy of a bound particle — a particle "trapped" in a potential well — is quantized: only certain values $E_{k}$ yield solutions $\psi _{k}(x)$ of the time-independent Schrödinger equation:
NEXT >
# Topfield 5800/Troubleshooting/EPG Gathering

EPG data is not preserved when the Toppy is turned off, so it starts with no data when it first comes out of standby. However, it does not take long to collect a lot of data, especially when tuned to the better BBC channels. You should also be able to see the EPG Guide being populated with new data while you are looking at it.
If this situation persists then the Freeview channel list may have changed, or your local transmitter may be experiencing problems or maintenance.
As the number of Freeview channels increased beyond what was envisaged when the Toppy firmware was written, from about May 2012 the EPG has ever more gaps, as it simply doesn't have enough slots for all the programmes. Deleting unwanted channels doesn't help; the whole lot are stored. It's unlikely there'll be new firmware. Workarounds: to see more for a specific channel, tune to it, then go into standby and restart. More entries for that channel will probably get filled, at the expense of other channels. If not all multiplexes are required, tuning to only 4 or 5 of the 6 will probably reduce the number enough to eliminate the gaps, but this is likely to be unacceptable. Or use a TAP that stores its EPG on disc, such as MyStuff or Jag's EPG. See for example this page (for Humax and Topfield), message #3.
# Topfield 5800/Troubleshooting/Confusing Text

The Toppy's normal interface has the occasional bit of poor English text that can make things a bit confusing — the "Check Your Reservation" prompt is probably the most notorious. Most of these can be replaced by better text using the [Cy] NotCYR firmware patch.
# Topfield 5800/Troubleshooting/Delete Channel

Duplicate channels may give bad recordings (if a poor quality duplicate channel is used) and may cause various problems with TAPs. To delete a duplicate, old or unwanted channel, press OK to bring up the Channel List, select the channel, then press the Red button and choose the Delete option (note that you cannot delete channels while recording).
You may also want to rescan to include any new channels, especially if there's been a Freeview reshuffle recently (which may have caused channels to appear to be duplicated).
There are TAPs available which can automate the process of deleting the low quality duplicates or other collections of channels (e.g. pay channels).
# Topfield 5800/Troubleshooting/EPG Old Firmwares

Old firmware versions (pre-"Bastille", 5.12.88) only collect EPG data for the group of channels associated with the currently viewed channel (i.e. those on the same multiplex (or mux)). As you change channel, more data is collected but this is reliant on the broadcaster to actually be sending the correct data (and some muxes are occasionally quite lax about this — either wait for them to sort themselves out or upgrade your firmware!). This is why the Toppy's EPG on these firmware releases actually changes channel as you browse the Guide (if it didn't there would probably be no data to show for some channels). Another issue is that these old firmware versions can only hold about half (or less) of the complete list of EPG data currently being broadcast on Freeview (about 10,000 programmes!), so inevitably the data will be incomplete or have problems.
Newer firmware versions (5.12.88 onwards) collect the EPG data for all channels when tuned to any channel (assuming the broadcaster is sending it — the main BBC channels are pretty reliable). And they have room for the whole Freeview 7 day EPG, although there are still some bugs that cause duplication and waste EPG space.
The channel organisation on Freeview is sometimes shuffled about with no obvious change (the channel may still be viewable) apart from missing EPG data, or your local transmitter may be experiencing problems or maintenance.