prompt_front: Now, answer the following question based on the text below, only give me the answer and do not output any other words.

Question: When did the Tevatron Collider Run II start and when is it expected to end?

Read the following text and answer briefly.

Context 1: \section{INTRODUCTION}
The Tevatron Collider Run II started in March 2002 and is expected
to continue until the end of this decade  The Tevatron and the 
two detectors, CDF and D\O, have been performing  well in 2004,
each experiment is collecting data at the rate 
of $\approx$10 pb$^{-1}$ per week 
The total  luminosity accumulated by August 2004 is $\approx$500 pb$^{-1}$
per detector 
The rich physics program includes the
production and precision measurement of properties of  standard model (SM)
objects, as well as searches for phenomena beyond standard model 
In this brief review we focus on areas of most interest 
to the lattice community  We present
new results on the top quark mass
and their implication for the mass of the SM Higgs boson, 
on searches for the SM Higgs boson, on evidence for the $X(3872)$ state, 
on searches for pentaquarks, and on $b$ hadron properties 
All Run II results presented here are preliminary  

\section{TOP QUARK MASS}

The experiments CDF and D\O\ published several direct  measurements of
the top quark pole mass, $\ensuremath{M_{\mathrm{top}}}$, 
based on Run I data (1992-1996) 
The ``lepton $+$ jets'' channel yields the most precise determination of
$\ensuremath{M_{\mathrm{top}}}$  Recently, the
D\O\ collaboration published a new measurement~\cite{Mtop1-D0-l+j-new},
based on a powerful analysis technique yielding  greatly improved precision 
The differential probability 
that the measured variables in any event correspond to the signal
is calculated as a function of $\ensuremath{M_{\mathrm{top}}}$  
The maximum in the product of the individual event probabilities 
provides the best estimate of $\ensuremath{M_{\mathrm{top}}}$ 
The critical differences from previous analyses 
in the lepton $+$ jets decay channel lie in 
the assignment of more 
weight to events that are well measured or more likely to correspond to  
$t \bar t$ signal, 
and  the handling of the combinations of final-state objects
(lepton, jets, and imbalance in transverse momentum) 
and their identification with
top-quark decay products in an event  
The new combined value for the top-quark mass from Run I is 
$\ensuremath{M_{\mathrm{top}}}  =  178 0\pm4 3~\ensuremath{\mathrm{ Ge\kern -0 1em V }\kern -0 2em /c^2 }$ 

In Run II, both collaborations  have been exploring several different techniques 
for $\ensuremath{M_{\mathrm{top}}}$
measurements  The best single CDF result comes from a dynamic likelihood method
(DLM)  The method is similar to
the technique used in Ref ~\cite{Mtop1-D0-l+j-new} 
The result is $\ensuremath{M_{\mathrm{top}}} = 177 8^{+4 5}_{-5 0} (stat) \pm  6 2 (syst) ~\ensuremath{\mathrm{ Ge\kern -0 1em V }\kern -0 2em /c^2 }$ 
The joint likelihood of the selected events is shown in Fig  ~\ref{fig:cdf_tml}  
The Run II goal is a 1\% uncertainty on $\ensuremath{M_{\mathrm{top}}}$  




\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-5mm}
\includegraphics[height=5 8cm,width=8 1cm]  {data_22ev_likelihood eps}
\vspace*{-1 2cm}
\caption{The joint likelihood of top candidates(CDF) }
\label{fig:cdf_tml}
\end{figure}




\section{SEARCH FOR SM HIGGS BOSON}


The constraints on the SM Higgs ($H$)  boson  mass from
published  measurements, updated to include the new D\O\ top mass
measurement~\cite{Mtop1-D0-l+j-new}, are
$M_H = 117 ^{+67}_{-45}~\ensuremath{\mathrm{ Ge\kern -0 1em V }\kern -0 2em /c^2 }$, $M_H < 251~\ensuremath{\mathrm{ Ge\kern -0 1em V }\kern -0 2em /c^2 }$ at 95\% C L 
The  new most likely  value of $M_H$
is above the experimentally excluded range,
and sufficiently low for $H$ to be observed at the Tevatron 


\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-5mm}
\includegraphics[height=7 5cm,width=7 8cm]  {d0_wbb_fig_3_err eps}
\vspace*{-1 1cm}
\caption{Distribution of the dijet
invariant mass for $W+2 b$-tagged jets  events,
compared to the expectation (D\O)  
}
\label{fig:d0_wbb_2tag}
\end{figure}



D\O\  has conducted a search for $H$ at $M_H < 140~\ensuremath{\mathrm{ Ge\kern -0 1em V }\kern -0 2em /c^2 }$ 
in the production channel  
$p \bar{p} \rightarrow WH \rightarrow  e \nu b \bar{b}$  
The experimental signature of  $WH \rightarrow e \nu b \bar{b}$
is a final state with 
one high $p_T$ electron, two  $b$ jets, and
large missing transverse energy  resulting from
the undetected neutrino 
The dominant backgrounds to $WH$ production
are  $W b \bar{b}$, $t \bar{t}$ and single-top production 
The distribution 
of the dijet mass for events with two $b$-tagged jets is shown in
Fig ~\ref{fig:d0_wbb_2tag}  
Also shown is the  expected contribution ($0 06$ events)  
from the $b \bar{b}$ decay of a
SM Higgs boson with $M_H =$ 115 $\ensuremath{\mathrm{ Ge\kern -0 1em V }\kern -0 2em /c^2 }$ 
No events are observed in the  dijet mass window of 85--135  $\ensuremath{\mathrm{ Ge\kern -0 1em V }\kern -0 2em /c^2 }$ 
D\O\ sets a limit on the cross section
for $\sigma( p\bar{p} \rightarrow WH) \times B(H \rightarrow b \bar{b}) $
of 9 0 pb at the 95\% C L ,  for a 115  $\ensuremath{\mathrm{ Ge\kern -0 1em V }\kern -0 2em /c^2 }$ Higgs boson 
The results for mass points 105, 125, and 135 $\ensuremath{\mathrm{ Ge\kern -0 1em V }\kern -0 2em /c^2 }$
 are 11 0, 9 1 and 12 2 pb,  respectively 



\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-1 2cm}
\includegraphics[height=0 33\textheight,width=8 0cm]{whww_aps04_bw eps}

\vspace*{-1 2cm}
\caption{95\% limits on the $H$ production (CDF) }
\label{fig:cdf_whww}
\end{figure}


CDF  has done  a similar search, allowing either an  electron or a muon  
in the final state   Both groups have also searched for $H$ produced in
gluon-gluon fusion, with subsequent decay to a pair of $W$ bosons 
The CDF results for both channels  are shown in Fig ~\ref{fig:cdf_whww}  



\section{THE STATE X(3872)}


\begin{figure}[htb]

\includegraphics[height=8 0cm,width=7 5cm]  {X3872cdfPRL1FullM eps}
\vspace*{-1cm}
\caption{The $X(3872)$ signal (CDF) }
\label{fig:cdf_x}
\end{figure}




 The existence of the $X(3872)$ state discovered by 
the Belle Collaboration~\cite{Belle-X}
 has been confirmed 
 in $p \bar{p}$ collisions by  CDF~\cite{cdf-X} (see Fig ~\ref{fig:cdf_x})
and D\O~\cite{d0-X} 
 It is still unclear whether this particle is a $c\bar{c}$ state,
 or a more complex object   When the data are separated according to
production and decay variables, D\O\  finds no significant
differences between the $X(3872)$ and
the $c \bar{c}$ state $\psi(2S)$ 
CDF has analysed the ``lifetime'' distribution of the $X(3872)$ events in order to
quantify what fraction of this state arises from decay of $B$ hadrons, as opposed to
those produced promptly  The authors find that for the selected samples
28 3$\pm$1 0$(stat)\pm$0 7$(syst)$\% of $\psi(2S)$ candidates are from $b$ decays,
whereas 16 1$\pm$4 9$(stat)\pm$2 0$(syst)$\% of $X$ mesons arise from such decays 





\section{SEARCH FOR PENTAQUARKS}



\begin{figure}[htb]

\includegraphics[height=0 27\textheight,width=7 6cm]  {mpks_1stminbias eps}
\vspace*{-1 2cm}

\caption{Invariant mass distribution of an identified proton and a $K^0_s$ candidate  (CDF)
}
\label{fig:pqtheta}
\end{figure}



\begin{figure}[htb]

\vspace*{-0 9cm}
\includegraphics[height=0 25\textheight,width=8 0cm]  {CM_xicst_cc_1 eps}
\vspace*{-1 2cm}
\caption{Invariant mass distribution of the $(\Xi^-,\pi^+)$ system  (CDF) 
}
\label{fig:pqxi}
\end{figure}


\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-0 9cm}

\includegraphics[height=0 25\textheight,width=7 6cm]  {theta_note_dstp_dedx_pt eps}
\vspace*{-1 2cm}
\caption{Mass of the ($D^{*+}\bar p$) system  The arrow indicates the position of 
the $\Theta_c$ state (CDF) }
\label{fig:pqthetac}
\end{figure}



Following reports of evidence for exotic
baryons containing five quarks (pentaquarks), CDF has analysed 
its data for evidence of the following pentaquarks:
$\Theta^+$ ($uud\bar d \bar s$), doubly strange states 
$\Xi_{3/2}$, charmed states $\Theta_c$, and, most recently, 
a state $(udus\bar b)$, dubbed $R^+_s$, through its weak decay to $(J/\psi, p)$  
With its excellent particle indentification and mass resolution,
CDF has a unique capability to search for  pentaquark states 
The signals of known states: $\phi$, $\Lambda$,
$\Lambda(1520)$, $K^*$, $\Xi$, 
compare favorably with those provided
by the authors of  the pentaquark evidence 
The group finds no evidence for pentaquark states, see Figs 
~\ref{fig:pqtheta},{\ref{fig:pqxi},\ref{fig:pqthetac} 
This can be interpreted as an indication that the pentaquark production 
in $p \bar p$ collisions is heavily suppressed compared to the conventional
hadron production, or as an evidence against the existence of pentaquarks 

\clearpage

\section{RECENT B PHYSICS RESULTS}


\subsection{Spectroscopy}

CDF has measured the mass of $b$ hadrons in exclusive $J/\psi$ channels 
The measurements of the $B_s$ and $\Lambda_b$ (Fig  \ref{fig:masslb})
masses are the current world's best \\

$m(B^+)$ = 5279 10$\pm$0 41$(stat)\pm$0 36$(syst)$,

$m(B^0)$ = 5279 63$\pm$0 53$(stat)\pm$0 33$(syst)$,

$m(B_s)$ = 5366 01$\pm$0 73$(stat)\pm$0 33$(syst)$,

$m(\Lambda_b)$ = 5619 7$\pm$1 2$(stat)\pm$1 2$(syst)$ MeV/$c^2$ \\


\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-1mm}
\includegraphics[height=0 30\textheight,width=7 5cm]  {lambdav1c eps}
\vspace*{-1cm}

\caption{The mass spectrum of $\Lambda_b$ candidates (CDF) }
\label{fig:masslb}
\end{figure}


D\O\ reports the first observation of the excited $B$ mesons 
$B_1$ and $B^*_2$ as two separate states in fully reconstructed
decays to $B^{(*)}\pi$  The mass of $B_1$ is measured to be
5724$\pm$4$\pm$7 MeV/c$^2$, and the mass difference $\Delta M$ between
$B^*_2$ and $B_1$ is 23 6$\pm$7 7$\pm$3 9 MeV/c$^2$
(Fig   \ref{fig:d0_bexc}) 

D\O\ observes semileptonic $B$ decays to narrow $D^{**}$ states,
the orbitally excited states  of the $D$ meson
seen as resonances in the $D^{*+}\pi^-$ invariant mass spectrum 
The $D^*$ mesons are reconstructed through the decay sequence 
$D^{*+} \rightarrow D^0\pi^+$, $D^0\rightarrow K^-\pi^+$ 
The invariant mass  of oppositely charged $(D^*,\pi)$ pairs
is shown in Fig   \ref{fig:d0_dstst} 
The mass peak between 2 4 and 2 5 GeV/$c^2$ can be interpreted as two merged 
narrow $D^{**}$ states, $D^0_1(2420)$ and $D^0_2(2460)$ 
The combined branching fraction is 
$ {\cal B}(B\rightarrow D^0_1,D^0_2)\cdot {\cal B}(D^0_1,D^0_2\rightarrow D^{*+}\pi^-)=(0 280\pm0 021(stat)\pm0 088(syst)$\%  The systematic error includes the unknown phase between the
two resonances  Work is in progress on extracting the two Breit-Wigner
amplitudes 


\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-2mm}
\hspace*{-3mm}
\includegraphics[height=0 28\textheight,width=8 3cm]  {B08F02 eps}

\vspace*{-1cm}
\caption{Mass difference $\Delta M = M(B\pi)-M(B)$ for exclusive $B$ decays 
The background-subtracted signal is a sum of 
$B^*_1 \rightarrow B^* \pi$, $B^* \rightarrow B \gamma $ (open area)
and $B^*_2 \rightarrow B^*\pi$ $B^*\rightarrow B \gamma$ (lower peak in the shaded area)
and $B^*_2 \rightarrow B \pi$ (upper peak in the shaded area)  
(D\O) }
\label{fig:d0_bexc}
\end{figure}


\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[height=0 25\textheight,width=7 5cm]  {B05F03 eps}

\vspace*{-1cm}
\caption{The invariant mass distribution of
$(D^*,\pi)$ pairs, opposite sign (points) and same-sign (solid histogram) }
\label{fig:d0_dstst}
\end{figure}






\subsection{Lifetimes}


CDF and D\O\ have measured  lifetimes of $b$ hadrons through the exclusively
reconstructed decays $B^+ \rightarrow J/\psi K^+$, $B^0 \rightarrow J/\psi K^{*0}$,
$B_s \rightarrow J/\psi \phi$, 
and $\Lambda_b \rightarrow J/\psi \Lambda$
(Fig  \ref{fig:d0_lbctau}) 
The latest results are:  \\



 $\tau(B^+)$=1 65 $\pm$ 0 08 $^{+0 096}_{-0 123}$  ps ~(D\O\ 2003),

 $\tau(B^+)$=1 662 $\pm$ 0 033  $\pm$ 0 008  ps ~(CDF),

 $\tau(B^0_d)$=1 473  $^{+0 052}_{-0 050}$ $\pm$ 0 023    ps ~(D\O) 

 $\tau(B^0_d)$=1 539 $\pm$ 0 051  $\pm$ 0 008  ps ~(CDF),

 $\tau(B^0_s)$=1 444   $^{+0 098}_{-0 090}$ $\pm$ 0 020   ps ~(D\O),

 $\tau(B^0_s)$=1 369 $\pm$ 0 100 $\pm$ $^{+0 008}_{0 010}$  ps ~(CDF),


 $\tau(\Lambda_b)$=1 221 $^{+0 217}_{-0 179}$ $\pm$ 0 043  ps ~(D\O),


 $\tau(\Lambda_b)$=1 25 $\pm$ 0 26 $\pm$ 0 10  ps ~(CDF 2003) \\



The measured lifetimes correspond to the following lifetime ratios:\\

$\tau(B^+)/\tau(B^0_d)$   =  1 080$\pm$0 042     ~(CDF),
 
$\tau(B^0_s)/\tau(B^0_d)$ =  0 890$\pm$0 072    ~(CDF),

$\tau(B^0_s)/\tau(B^0_d)$ = 0 980$ ^{+0 075}_{-0 070}   \pm$0 003    ~(D\O),

$\tau(\Lambda_b)/\tau(B^0_d)$ =  0 874$ ^{+0 169}_{-0 142}   \pm$0 028    ~(D\O) \\



\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[height=0 3\textheight,width=8 2cm]  {d0_lbctau_B11F02 eps}
\vspace*{-1cm}

\caption{ Fit projection on  $c\tau$ for the $\Lambda_b$ candidates   (D\O)}
\label{fig:d0_lbctau}
\end{figure}


The $B_s$ lifetime measurements listed above are results of
a single-lifetime fit to data, integrated over the decay angles 
Because  of the presence of  final
states  common to ${B_s^0}$\ and its charge conjugate ${\overline{B}_s^0}$,
the two meson states   are expected
to mix in such a way that the two CP  eigenstates may have a relatively
large lifetime difference 
It is possible to
separate the two CP components of ${B_s^0 \rightarrow J/\psi \phi}$\ and thus to measure the
lifetime difference by studying the time evolution of the
polarization states of the vector mesons in the final state 
CDF has carried out a combined analysis of $B_s$ lifetimes 
and polarization amplitudes  The results for the lifetimes of the
low mass (CP even) and high mass (CP odd) eigenstates, and the relative 
width difference are:\\

 $\tau_L = 1 05 ^{+0 16}_{-0 13} \pm 0 02$ ~ps,
 
 $\tau_H = 2 07 ^{+0 58}_{-0 46} \pm 0 03$ ~ps,

 $\Delta \Gamma /\overline \Gamma   = 0 65 ^{+0 25}_{-0 33} \pm 0 01$ \\

Figure \ref{fig:cdf_dg} shows  the scan of the likelihood function 
for $\Delta \Gamma /\overline \Gamma$ 
Pseudoexperiments tossed with $\Delta \Gamma /\overline \Gamma =0$
yield the betting odds for observing the above results at
1/315  For $\Delta \Gamma /\overline \Gamma = 0 12$ (SM prediction,
which has recently been updated to 0 14$\pm$0 05~\cite{dg_un}) the betting odds are
1/84 

\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-1mm}
\includegraphics[height=0 3\textheight,width=8 2cm]  {cdf_scan-dg-un eps}

\vspace*{-1cm}
\caption{Scan of the likelihood function 
for $\Delta \Gamma /\overline \Gamma$ (CDF) 
}
\label{fig:cdf_dg}
\end{figure}




D\O\ has used a novel technique to  measure the lifetime ratio
of the charged and neutral $B$ mesons, exploiting the large
semileptonic sample  $B$ hadrons were reconstructed in the channels
$B\rightarrow \mu^+ \nu D^*(2010)^-X$, which are dominated by $B^0$ decays, 
and  $B\rightarrow \mu^+ \nu D^0X$, which are dominated by $B^+$ decays 
The lifetime ratio was
obtained from the variation of the ratio of the number of events in these two
processes at different decay lengths 
The result is \\


$\tau(B^+)/\tau(B^0_d)$   =  1 093$\pm$0 021$\pm$0 022       ~(D\O)




\subsection{Towards $B_s$ mixing}

Measurement of the $B_s$ oscillation frequency via ${B_s^0}$ -${\overline{B}_s^0}$ ~mixing
will provide an important constraint on the CKM matrix  The oscillation
frequency is proportional to the mass difference between the mass eigenstates,
$\Delta m_s$, and is related to the CKM matrix through 
$\Delta m_s \propto |V_{tb}V_{ts}|$  When combined with the
$B_d$ mass difference, $\Delta m_d$ it helps in extraction of $|V_{td}|$,
and thereby the CP violating phase  

As a benchmark for future $B_s$ oscillation measurement, both groups
study  $B_d$ mixing, gaining an understanding of the different components
of a $B$ mixing analysis (sample composition, flavor tagging, vertexing,
asymmetry fitting)  For a sample of partially reconstructed decays
$B\rightarrow D^*(2010)^+\mu^-X$, D\O\ obtains 
$\Delta m_d = 0 506 \pm 0 055 (stat) \pm  0 049 (syst))$ ps$^{-1}$ and
$\Delta m_d = 0 488 \pm 0 066 (stat) \pm  0 044 (syst))$ ps$^{-1}$
when employing  opposite side muon tagging and the same side tagging,
respectively 

The CDF result for semileptonic channels is
$\Delta m_d = 0 536 \pm 0 037 (stat) \pm  0 009 (s c ) \pm 0 015 (syst)$ ps$^{-1}$ 
CDF also reports a result on $B$ oscillations using fully reconstructed
decays:
$\Delta m_d = 0 526 \pm 0 056 (stat) \pm  0 005 (syst))$ ps$^{-1}$ 

Reconstructing $B_s$ decays into different final states is another
important
 step in the ${B_s^0}$ -${\overline{B}_s^0}$ ~mixing analysis 
Thanks to the  large muon and tracking coverage,   D\O\ is accumulating
a  high statistics sample of semileptonic $B_s$ decays 
D\O\ reconstructs the $B_s \rightarrow D^+_s \mu^- X$ decays, with
$D^+_s \rightarrow \phi \pi^+ $ and
$D^+_s \rightarrow K^* K^+ $,
at a rate of $\approx$ 40(25) events per pb$^{-1}$,  respectively 
Figure \ref{fig:d0_bsdsphipi} shows the mass distribution of the
$D^+_s \rightarrow \phi \pi$ candidates 


\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-5mm}
\includegraphics[height=0 3\textheight,width=8 0cm]  {blds-250 eps}
\vspace*{-1 2cm}
\caption{  $D^+_s \rightarrow \phi \pi^+$  signal  (D\O)}
\label{fig:d0_bsdsphipi}
\end{figure}


\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-10mm}
\hspace*{-4mm}
\includegraphics[height=0 35\textheight,width=7 9cm]  {cdf_Bs-DsPi-PhiPi eps}

\vspace*{-1 0cm}
\caption{ $B_s \rightarrow D_s \pi$, $D_s \rightarrow \phi \pi$  signal   (CDF)}
\label{fig:cdf_bsdsphipi}
\end{figure}


CDF has clean signals for fully hadronic, flavor-specific  $B_s$ decays,
providing the best sensitivity to $B_s$ oscillations at high
$\Delta m_s$  Figure \ref{fig:cdf_bsdsphipi} shows the signal for
the best channel, $B_s \rightarrow D_s \pi$, $D_s \rightarrow \phi \pi$ 

\clearpage


\subsection{Rare decays}

The purely leptonic decays $B_{d,s}^0 \rightarrow \mu^+
\mu^-$ are flavor-changing neutral current (FCNC) processes 
In the standard model, these decays are forbidden at the tree level and
proceed at a very low rate through higher-order diagrams 
The latest SM prediction~\cite{sm_ref3}
is ${\cal B}(B^0_s \rightarrow \mu^+ \mu^-)=(3 42\pm 0 54)\times
10^{-9}$, where the error is dominated by non-perturbative uncertainties  The
leptonic branching fraction of the $B_d^0$ decay is suppressed by CKM matrix elements $|V_{td}/V_{ts}|^2$
leading to a predicted SM branching fraction of $(1 00\pm0 14)\times 10^{-10}$ 
The best published experimental bound (Fig ~\ref{fig:cdf_bsmumu})
 for the branching fraction
of $B^0_s$ $(B^0_d)$ is presently
${\cal B}(B^0_s \, (B^0_d) \rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-)<7 5\times 10^{-7}\, 
(1 9\times 10^{-7})$ at the 95\% C L ~\cite{cdfII} 
The decay amplitude of $B^0_{d,s} \rightarrow \mu^+ \mu^-$ can be
significantly enhanced in some extensions of the SM  

\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[height=8 3cm,width=7 9cm]  {cdfbsmumu_results_prl eps}

\vspace*{-1cm}
\caption{Invariant mass for the events passing all requirements  (CDF)}
\label{fig:cdf_bsmumu}
\end{figure}


Assuming no contributions 
from the decay $B^0_d\rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-$ in the signal region,
D\O\  finds the conservative upper limit on the branching fraction 
to be ${\cal B}(B^0_s \rightarrow \mu^+ \mu^-) \leq 4 6\times 10^{-7}$ 
at the 95\% C L  (Fig ~\ref{fig:d0_bsmumu}) 






\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[height=5 0cm,width=8 0cm]  {B06F03 eps}
\vspace*{-1cm}
\caption{Invariant mass for the events  passing all requirements  (D\O)}
\label{fig:d0_bsmumu}
\end{figure}


Context 2: \section*{Dynamical Behaviour of $O$ in Lattice Gases}

The dynamical behaviour of the anisotropic order parameter  $m$ [see Eq ~\eqref{eq:def-m} in the Letter] following a quench to the critical point is well described by
the Gaussian theory for all the three lattice gas models studied, $i e ,$ driven lattice gas with either constant (IDLG) or random (RDLG) infinite drive and equilibrium lattice gas (LG)  In other words, in the short-time regime, $m \sim t^{1/2}$ [see Eq  \eqref{eq:mt}] and the Binder cumulant $g$ of the lowest transverse mode [defined in Eq  \eqref{eq:binder}] is zero in this regime  The alternative order parameter $O,$ however, distinguishes between the driven (IDLG, RDLG) and the equilibrium (LG) lattice gases  

In order to understand  this, we first write the phenomenological scaling form for $O$,  analogous to Eq  \eqref{eq:scalingass} in  the Letter,
\begin{eqnarray}
O (t, L_{\parallel} ; S_\Delta) = L_{\parallel}^{-\beta/[\nu(1+\Delta)]} \tilde f_O (t/L_{\parallel}^{z/(1+\Delta)} ; S_\Delta) \quad
\label{eq:Oscalingass}
\end{eqnarray}
We already remarked that, in the LG, this scaling form is not compatible with the prediction $O \sim t^{1/8}  L_{\parallel}^{-1/2}$ of the Gaussian theory   However, following Ref  \cite{AS2002}, it can be argued that, at short times, the only dependence of $O$ on the system size $L_{\parallel}$ is of the form $O \sim L_\parallel^{-1/2}$ which is very well confirmed by numerical simulations  Accordingly,  the generic behaviour of $O$ can be assumed to be
\begin{eqnarray}
O \sim t^{\alpha} L_\parallel^{-1/2}, \label{eq:O}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\alpha$ is a phenomenological exponent to be determined  This, along with Eq  \eqref{eq:Oscalingass}, implies $\tilde f_O(x) \sim x^{\alpha} $ Comparing the finite-size behaviour in Eq ~\eqref{eq:O} with Eq ~\eqref{eq:Oscalingass} one actually infers,
\begin{eqnarray}
\alpha &=& \frac{1+ \Delta -2 \beta/\nu}{2 \, (4- \eta)}  \label{eq:alpha}
\end{eqnarray}
This equation, together with the hyperscaling relation $\Delta - 2 \beta/\nu= - \eta$ in two spatial dimensions, shows that the prediction $\alpha = 1/8$ of the Gaussian theory [see Eq  \eqref{eq:Ot}] can be obtained only when $\eta=0,$ which is the case for the IDLG (exactly) and the RDLG (approximately) but not for the LG  

On the other hand,  Eq ~\eqref{eq:alpha} predicts $\alpha = 1/10$ upon substituting the values of the critical exponents corresponding to the Ising  universality class (LG)  This is consistent with the numerical simulation results presented in the main text, see Fig  \ref{fig:ising}(b) therein 

\begin{figure}[th]
\vspace*{0 2 cm}
 \centering
 \includegraphics[width=10 cm]{ /compare_binder pdf}

\caption{Comparison between the temporal evolution of the Binder cumulants $g$ corresponding to the $12^{th}$ transverse mode, $i e ,$ with $n_\perp =12,$ in the LG (lowest curve), IDLG and RDLG (two upper curves) on a $32 \times 32$ lattice  \label{fig:b}}
 \label{fig:binder}
\end{figure}


The emergence of this new value $1/10$ of the exponent $\alpha$ must be traced back to the non-Gaussian nature of higher fluctuating modes in the LG  In fact, even though the lowest mode behaves identically in all the three models we considered,  characterized by the same behaviour of $m$, higher modes show a significant difference in the non-driven case   


To illustrate this, we measured the Binder cumulants of higher modes which is defined  analogously to Eq ~(11), using transverse modes other than the first, i e , with $\mu=\tilde \sigma(0,2 \pi n_\bot/L_\bot)$ and $n_\bot>1 $  
 Figure \ref{fig:b} compares the same for all the three lattice gases for the mode with $n_\perp =12$ on a $32 \times 32$ lattice  Clearly, the curve corresponding to the LG (lowest, blue) departs from Gaussian behaviour $g=0$ (in practice, $e g ,$ $|g| \lesssim 0 005,$ corresponding to the shaded gray area) much earlier than it does for the IDLG  or RDLG (two upper curves, red and green respectively) 

Accordingly, the different dynamical behaviour of $O$, which involves a sum over all modes, can be attributed to the non-Gaussian nature of the higher modes in the LG  
Such a departure is not entirely surprising  In fact, for higher modes, mesoscopic descriptions such as the ones in Eqs  \eqref{eq:L-DLG} or \eqref{eq:g_evol} are not expected to hold, while the anisotropy at the microscopic level could be the mechanism leading to the Gaussianity of higher modes in the driven models 


Context 3: UT College of Liberal Arts: College of Liberal Arts University of Texas at Austin Departments Graduate Resources Undergraduate Resources Courses Online Courses Dean's Office Alumni & Giving Faculty by Department Search the College of Liberal Arts
next profile Jeffrey Tulis Associate Professor — Ph D ,
E-mail: tulis@austin utexas edu
Office: MEZ 3 152
Political Theory and American Politics
Professor Tulis's interests bridge the fields of political theory and American politics, including more specifically, American political development, constitutional theory, political philosophy and the American presidency  His publications include The Presidency in the Constitutional Order (LSU, 1981; Transaction, 2010), The Rhetorical Presidency (Princeton, 1987), The Constitutional Presidency (Johns Hopkins 2009), The Limits of Constitutional Democracy (Princeton, 2010) and recent journal articles and chapters on constitutional interpretation, the logic of political change, and the meaning of political success  Four collections of essays on The Rhetorical Presidency with responses by Tulis have been published, including a special double issue of Critical Review: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Politics and Society, (2007), where his book is described as "one of the two or three most important and perceptive works written by a political scientist in the twentieth century "
He has served as President of the Politics and History Section of the American Political Science Association  He received the President's Associates Teaching Excellence Award at the University of Texas  He has held research fellowships from NEH, ACLS, Olin Foundation, Harvard Law School, and the Mellon Preceptorship at Princeton University, where he taught before moving to Texas  He has held visiting positions at Notre Dame and Harvard  He has served as associate chair of the Department of Government from 1989-2001 and was acting chair during 1992-93  and for part of each year between 1989 and 2001  During the academic year 2008-09, he was a Laurance S  Rockefeller Visiting Fellow at the University Center for Human Values at Princeton  During Spring 2016, he was a Dahrendorf Visiting Fellow at the London School of Economics and Political Science 
His forthcoming books include: Legacies of Losing in American Politics, with Nicole Mellow (University of Chicago Press, Fall 2017), and an expanded edition of The Rhetorical Presidency in the Princeton Classics series (Princeton, Fall 2017)  For two decades he served as co-editor of the Johns Hopkins Series in Constitutional Thought, and he currently co-edits (with Sanford Levinson) Constitutional Thinking, a Series at the University Press of Kansas 
GOV 370L • Pres In Constitutional Ord 38840 • Spring 2017 Meets MW 2:30PM-4:00PM CAL 221 show description
GOV 370 Seminar: The Presidency in the Constitutional Order
Spring 2017 Unique # 38840
MW 2:30 to 4pm GDC 2 402
Jeffrey K  Tulis
In this Seminar we will discuss a series of constitutional problems including: the problem of executive energy in the American Constitution; presidential selection and the problem of political legitimacy; separation of powers; delegation of powers, the constitutional status of war and foreign affairs, administration and bureaucracy and the meaning of leadership in the constitutional order 
Seminar will meet twice a week and regular attendance and thorough preparation for discussion is expected  Unexcused absence from more than three classes will result in failure of the participation component of the course  There will also be pop quizzes on the reading that will count as part of your participation grade  In addition to class participation, course requirements include four short analytic essays, and one in-class test  The course grade will be calculated as follows:
Seminar participation: 20%
In-class test: 20%
Three analytic essays 60% (20% each)
Class participation is especially important  Preparation for seminar and for your in-class test will be enhanced by careful note taking on the readings  If students appear to be unprepared, pop quizzes will be given and the grades on them will affect the participation component of your course grade 
Texts: (tentative)
Joseph M  Bessette and Jeffrey K  Tulis, The Constitutional Presidency
Michael Nelson, The Presidency in the Political System (tenth edition)
Richard Ellis and Michael Nelson, Debating the Presidency (third edition)
The Federalist (any edition, or online) GOV 310L • American Government-Honors 38335 • Fall 2016 Meets TTH 3:30PM-5:00PM BEN 1 106 show description
GOV 310 (Honors) (38335) Fall 2016
TTH 3:30-5:00pm, BEN 1 106
This honors seminar offers an introduction to American politics that emphasizes the confluence of ideas, mores, institutions, and interests, in the constitutional system  This course covers more theory, and the readings are more demanding, than other versions of GOV 310  One of the main objectives of the course is to deepen your understanding of the practical aspects of contemporary public affairs by developing your ability to understand the theoretical foundations of American politics  Although we cover the nuts and bolts of politics there is much more theory in this version of GOV 310  If you have registered for this section mainly because 310 is a legislative requirement that you need to fulfill, this is not the right version for you  There is a substantial workload in this class 
Regular attendance, thorough and timely preparation, and active participation are all necessary to do well 
Four essays (approximately 1000 words each)  Three of these will be assigned analytic essay topics  The last will be a book review of a title chosen by the student from a long list of provided possibilities  (15% each essay, 60% of total course grade)
Two in-class tests  These will count 15% each, 30% of total course grade 
Class participation  (10% of course grade)  Both informed participation and occasional leadership of the seminar will be graded 
No make-up exams or late papers, except for documented medical or other emergencies 
Mark Landy and Sidney M  Milkis, American Government: Enduring Principles, Critical Choices, Third Edition
Mary Nichols and David Nichols, Readings in American Government, Ninth Edition
Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein, Its Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism
Bruce Ackerman,Before the Next Attack: Preserving Civil Liberties in an Age of Terrorism GOV 381L • Constitutional Conflict 38660 • Fall 2016 Meets W 3:30PM-6:30PM BAT 5 102 show description
GOV 381L Fall 2016
Constitutional Conflict
W 3:30-6:30pm, BAT 5 102
Many of the most important debates regarding the nature and character of contemporary American politics are essentially arguments regarding the structure of separation of powers  In this seminar we will consider such questions as whether the American system is prone to deadlock of stalemate in the construction of national policy; whether conflict is a hindrance to institutional responsibility or an essential attribute of responsibility; whether there are “political questions” especially suitable to resolution between President and Congress; how one can distinguish salutary from pathological conflict, and whether it is truly possible to harness the ambition of office holders to the duties of their office 
More specifically, we will review literature and arguments regarding constitutional reform; divided government; separation of powers theory; and case studies of Supreme Court appointments; the budget process; and war powers and foreign affairs  In these contexts we will also discuss current controversies surrounding war authorization, intelligence and secrecy, sequestration, government shut downs and budget resolutions, and debt ceiling politics 
The course is designed to accommodate two different student needs: it will provide a good overview of important literature relevant to the comprehensive examination in American politics and it will provide opportunities for research  This subject area is a treasure trove of “hot” topics, publication possibilities, subjects for MA theses and Ph D  dissertations  I will tailor the written requirements to the objectives of individual students 
1  All students will prepare a short analytic essay early in the semester, and an annotated bibliography at mid-semester  These assignments will count (30%) of the grade 
2  Students interested primarily in exam preparation will complete an examination near the end of the semester based on study questions assigned in advance  OR
Students interested in research will write a 20-25 page paper  (60%)
3  A basic requirement of the course is that students prepare for each seminar by carefully reading the material assigned for that week  Class discussion is an essential component of the course  (10%)
Tentative Texts:
Jones, Separate But Equal Branches
Silverstein, Imbalance of Powers
Wilson & Schram, Separation of Powers and Good Government
Burgess, Contest for Constitutional Authority
Farrier, Passing the Buck: Congress, the Budget and Deficits
Weissman, A Culture of Deference
Zeisberg, War Powers: The Politics of Constitutional Authority
Fisher, Congressional Abdication on War and Spending
Lowi, The End of Liberalism GOV 379S • Regime Persp Amer Poltc-Honors 38105 • Spring 2016 Meets TH 3:30PM-6:30PM GAR 1 134 (also listed as CTI 335, LAH 350) show description
GOV 379S Regime Perspectives on American Politics
This is a seminar on American politics and culture  Two purposes govern the selection of texts for the course and guide our discussion of them  All of our texts attempt to look at American politics as a whole  Most books and courses on America look at only a part, such as the Presidency, or elections, or popular culture  Here we attempt to think about how the parts of America fit together  Even when these texts speak about a part, for example an institution such as the presidency or the Congress, they present the topic from a vantage point on the whole polity  To see the polity as a whole also means that we will have to revisit and rethink aspects of our political life that we take for granted – that we don’t examine because those parts have become so natural or familiar to us  Seeing the polity whole enables us to render the familiar unfamiliar, to make what we take for granted strange and new 
To see the polity as a whole requires that we get some distance from our subject, much as to see the planet earth as a whole requires one to look at it from outer space  Just as it is difficult to get visual perspective on a place living within it, it is difficult to understand the promise or pathologies of a regime from within  To get critical distance from our politics, we will closely study three sets of texts that look at American politics from a distance  The first part of the course will recover the perspective of the founding debate between Federalists and Anti-federalists  This fundamental debate reveals what is a stake in the basic architecture of the American regime  The second part of the course is a close study of Tocqueville’s Democracy in America  Regarded by many as the best book ever written on democracy and the best book written on America, Tocqueville sees our polity whole because he looks at it from the vantage point of Europe, in general, and France, in particular  In the third part of the seminar we think about American politics from the perspective of thoughtful commentators who feel only nominally included in the polity  Half in and half out, these extraordinary black American writers reveal fissures and fault lines in the American regime  We end the class with a discussion of America’s place in the world today – examining a speech by a writer who articulately raises challenges to our self-understanding that are inarticulately expressed today in rage and ranting from enemies of the United States 
Three take home analytic essays, chosen from a list of topics I provide, each weighted 25% of the course grade  Late essays will not be accepted, except with a doctor’s excuse or a Dean’s excuse for family emergency 
OR as an option: you may write the two short essays (both together weighted 25%) and do a longer 15 page paper on a topic of your choice in consultation with me (weighted 50% of your course grade)  Government honors students who are thinking of doing an honors thesis next year may prefer this option to begin to develop research and writing skills for longer work  Students who prefer this option will need to designate their preferred third short essay and have discussed with me a topic for their long paper by March 30  Texts:
Selected Anti-Federalist writings
Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Essays, speeches and articles by Frederick Douglass, W E B  Dubois, Booker T  Washington, James Baldwin and Ralph Ellison GOV 382M • Democratic Theory 38120 • Spring 2016 Meets M 3:30PM-6:30PM BAT 1 104 show description
GOV 382M (38120)
Democratic Theory Spring 2016
This is a graduate seminar on contemporary topics in democratic theory  Topics to be covered include: democratic epistemology; deliberative democracy; the meaning of the people; oracular democracy; agonistic democracy; and possibly new theories of republicanism, representation and partisanship 
Texts (tentative)
Helene Landemore, Democratic Reason
Jeffrey Edward Green, The Eyes of the People
Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson, Why Deliberative Democracy?
Alan Keenan, Democracy in Question
Jason Frank, Constituent Moments
Jason Frank, Publius and Political Imagination
Nadia Urbanati, Democracy Disfigured
Russell Muirhead, Partisanship in a Polarized Age
Bryan Garsten, manuscript
Active seminar participation; an annotated bibliography or review essay; a research/analytic paper  GOV 310L • American Government-Honors 37615 • Fall 2015 Meets TTH 2:00PM-3:30PM BEN 1 106 show description
TTH 2-3:30/BEN 1 106
Bruce Ackerman,Before the Next Attack: Preserving Civil Liberties in an Age of Terrorism GOV 370L • Presidency In Constitutl Order 37845 • Fall 2015 Meets TTH 5:00PM-6:30PM PAR 310 show description
GOV 370L (37845)
TTH 5-6:30 PAR 310
The Presidency in the Constitutional Order
A study of the place of the presidency in the American political order that stresses tension between power and accountability inherent in the office and the system  Topics include: separation of powers, presidential selection, impeachment, relations with Congress and bureaucracy, emergency powers, presidential character, and leadership 
This is a very demanding writing flag class  If you are enrolling in this class just in order to satisfy the writing flag, you are in the wrong class  Interest in political theory and willingness to work very hard are necessary for success in this class 
Joseph M  Bessette, The Constitutional Presidency
Andrew Rudalevige, The New Imperial Presidency
Bruce Ackerman, The Rise and Decline of the American Republic
Michael Nelson, ed , The Presidency in the Political System
Michael Nelson, ed , The Evolving Presidency
Louis Fisher, Constitutional Conflicts Between Congress and the President
Active and prepared class participation
Regular quizzes on the reading
Four analytic essays (approximately 1200 words) 
One term paper, (approximately 5000 words)  GOV 379S • Regime Persp On Amer Politics 38100 • Spring 2015 Meets T 3:30PM-6:30PM MEZ 1 104 (also listed as LAH 350) show description
Essays, speeches and articles by Frederick Douglass, W E B  Dubois, Booker T  Washington, James Baldwin and Ralph Ellison GOV 382M • Tocqueville 38135 • Spring 2015 Meets M 3:30PM-6:30PM BAT 5 102 show description
This graduate seminar will be devoted to close readings of two principal writings of Tocqueville: Democracy in America and The Ancien Regime and the Revolution  We will also assess some of the best secondary studies of Tocqueville, including work by Sheldon Wolin, Harvey Mansfield, Delba Winthrop, Jon Elster, Francois Furet, and a book by Pierre Manent 
Course requirements will include two very short analytic essays and one seminar paper (20-25 pages)  GOV 310L • American Government-Honors 38722 • Fall 2014 Meets TTH 2:00PM-3:30PM GAR 2 112 show description
Joseph M  Bessette and John J  Pitney, American Government and Politics: Deliberation, Democracy and Citizenship
Mary Nichols and David Nichols, Readings in American Government
Bruce Ackerman,Before the Next Attack: Preserving Civil Liberties in an Age of Terrorism GOV 370L • Presidency In Constitutl Order 38977 • Fall 2014 Meets TTH 9:30AM-11:00AM CBA 4 332 show description
A study of the place of the presidency in the American political order that stresses
tension between power and accountability inherent in the office and the system 
Topics include: separation of powers, presidential selection, impeachment,
relations with Congress and bureaucracy, emergency powers, presidential
character, and leadership 
This is a very demanding writing flag class  If you are enrolling in this class just in order
to satisfy the writing flag, you are in the wrong class  Interest in political theory and willingness
to work very hard are necessary for success in this class 
One term paper, (approximately 5000 words)  GOV 379S • Regime Persp On Amer Politics 39395 • Spring 2014 Meets T 3:30PM-6:30PM MEZ 1 104 (also listed as CTI 335, LAH 350) show description
Essays, speeches and articles by Frederick Douglass, W E B  Dubois, Booker T  Washington, James Baldwin and Ralph Ellison GOV 381L • Constitutional Conflict 39415 • Spring 2014 Meets M 3:30PM-6:30PM BAT 1 104 show description
Lowi, The End of Liberalism GOV 330K • The American President 39140 • Fall 2013 Meets MW 3:00PM-4:30PM MEZ B0 306 show description
This course offers an over view of the place of the presidency in the American political order  Topics covered include: constitutional design of the office; nominations and elections; legislative leadership; leadership of the bureaucracy; staffing and organizing the White House; the presidency and the judiciary; war and emergencies  We will spend extra time this fall on the presidential campaign and election of 2012 
Two in-class examinations (50% of the final grade)
One short (1000 word) take-home essay (30% of the final grade)
Class participation and quizzes (20% of the final grade)
Richard J  Ellis, The Development of the American Presidency (Routledge, 2012)
Richard J  Ellis and Michael Nelson, eds, Debating the American Presidency, (2nd edition, CQ Press, 2009)
Packet of selected primary texts (to be linked or posted on Blackboard)  GOV 330K • The American President 39145 • Fall 2013 Meets MW 5:00PM-6:30PM MEZ B0



ground_truth: The Tevatron Collider Run II started in March 2002 and is expected to continue until the end of this decade.

prompt_front: Now, answer the following question based on the text below, only give me the answer and do not output any other words.

Question: What is the scaling form for the alternative order parameter O?

Read the following text and answer briefly.

Context 3: 306 show description
Packet of selected primary texts (to be linked or posted on Blackboard)  GOV 381L • American Founding 39040 • Spring 2013 Meets T 6:30PM-9:30PM BAT 1 104 show description
NOTE WELL: Course meets Tuesdays, 6:30 to 9:30pm
Batts Hall 1 104
This is a seminar on American political thought and constitutional design  It is designed for students of American politics and political theory  The principal themes include: 1) the nature of founding and its constitutive significance; 2) the relation of structure and power in American politics; 3) the meaning and significance of the Federalist/Anti-Federalist debate; 4) the philosophic background of the American founding; and 5) the relevance of the founding to debate to prospects for, and pathologies of, American politics today 
We will conduct a close reading of the Madison’s Notes, of The Federalist, and selected Anti-Federalist writings  We will also study a larger and growing body of secondary literature on the constitutional convention, ratification and early American political thought 
James Madison, Notes of the Debates: In the Federal Convention of 1787
The Federalist (Rossiter, ed )
The Anti-Federalist (Storing, ed )
David Brian Robertson, The Constitution and America’s Destiny (2005)
Pauline Maier, Ratification (2012)
Gordon Wood, The Idea of America (2011)
Jack Rakove, Original Meanings: Politics & Ideas in the Making of the Constitution
Herbert Storing, What the Anti-Federalists Were For (1981)
Numerous essays and articles (to be posted on line or gathered in packet)
Grading: Active seminar participation, including three short papers and presentations (40%) and one article-length seminar paper (60%) T C 357 • Amer Founding/Probs Const Des 43095 • Spring 2013 Meets M 3:30PM-6:30PM CRD 007B show description
The American Founding and Problems of Constitutional Design
Jeffrey Tulis, Associate Professor, Department of Government
Sanford Levinson, Professor, School of Law
This Plan II seminar will be built around a close reading of the debates that informed the drafting and ratification of the U S  Constitution  We aim to recover the perspective of these founding thinkers -- their way of thinking -- as much as their concrete ideas, in order to raise fundamental questions about the American political order today  Are some of the most important pathologies of American politics today rooted in design features of our original political architecture? Are the original answers to basic founding questions (such as "how democratic is our Constitution?) still adequate for contemporary circumstances? What features of the Constitution should we preserve and what features should we amend, if possible? Would it be good for the polity as a whole to reconsider these questions in a new constitutional convention today, or would such an event be a political nightmare? Our reading will include notes from the founding conventions, writings by Federalists and Anti-Federalists, and present-day critiques of the American political order  Our aim will be to generate a dialogue between the thought of the founders and some of the best present day critics and supporters of the Constitution 
James Madison, Notes of the Debates in the Federal Convention
The Federalist, ed  Clinton Rossiter
The Anti-Federalist, ed  Herbert Storing
Pauline Maier, Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788
Sanford Levinson, Framed: America’s 51 Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance
Bruce Ackerman, The Decline and Fall of the American Republic
Robert Goldwin, ed  How Democratic is the Constitution?
a course packet of selected articles, essays, and additional primary materials 
Class participation, including at least one presentation of a short discussion paper 25%
One take-home analytic essay 25%
One term paper 50%
About the Professors:
Professor Tulis's interests bridge the fields of political theory and American politics, including more specifically, American political development, constitutional theory, political philosophy and the American presidency  He received the President's Associates Teaching Excellence Award at the University of Texas  He has held research fellowships from NEH, ACLS, Olin Foundation, Harvard Law School, and the Mellon Preceptorship at Princeton University, where he taught before moving to Texas  He has held visiting positions at Notre Dame and Harvard  During the academic year 2008-09, he was a Laurance S  Rockefeller Visiting Fellow at the University Center for Human Values at Princeton 
Proefessor Levinson holds the W  St  John Garwood and W  St  John Garwood, Jr  Centennial Chair in Law, he joined the University of Texas Law School in 1980  Previously a member of the Department of Politics at Princeton University, he is also a Professor in the Department of Government at the University of Texas  The author of over 350 articles and book reviews in professional and popular journals--and a regular contributor to the popular blog Balkinization  He received the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Law and Courts Section of the American Political Science Association in 2010  He has been a visiting faculty member of the Boston University, Georgetown, Harvard, New York University, and Yale law schools in the United States and has taught abroad in programs of law in London; Paris; Jerusalem; Auckland, New Zealand; and Melbourne, Australia 
GOV 330K • The American President 38675 • Fall 2012 Meets MW 3:00PM-4:30PM MEZ B0 306 show description
Packet of selected primary texts (to be linked or posted on Blackboard)  GOV 330K • The American President 38675 • Fall 2011 Meets MW 3:30PM-5:00PM WAG 420 show description
see syllabus GOV 330K • The American President 38680 • Fall 2011 Meets MW 5:30PM-7:00PM UTC 1 146 show description
see syllabus GOV 379S • Regime Persp On Amer Polit-Hon 39110 • Spring 2011 Meets W 3:30PM-6:30PM BAT 5 102 (also listed as CTI 326, LAH 350) show description
To see the polity as a whole requires that we get some distance from our subject, much as to see the planet earth as a whole requires one to look at it from outer space  Just as it is difficult to get visual perspective on a place living within it, it is difficult to understand the promise or pathologies of a regime from within it  To get critical distance from our politics, we will closely study three sets of texts that look at American politics from a distance  The first part of the course will recover the perspective of the founding debate between Federalists and Anti-federalists  This fundamental debate reveals what is a stake in the basic architecture of the American regime  The second part of the course is a close study of Tocqueville’s Democracy in America  Regarded by many as the best book ever written on democracy and the best book written on America, Tocqueville sees our polity whole because he looks at it from the vantage point of Europe, in general, and France, in particular  In the third part of the seminar we think about American politics from the perspective of thoughtful commentators who feel only nominally included in the polity  Half in and half out, these extraordinary black American writers reveal fissures and fault lines in the American regime  We end the class with a discussion of America’s place in the world today – examining a speech by a writer who articulately raises challenges to our self-understanding that are inarticulately expressed today in rage and ranting from enemies of the United States 
Four take home writing assignments  Analytic essays, each 1000-1500 words  (Grades weighted: 10%, 25%, 25%, and 25%) Late essays will not be accepted, except with a doctor’s excuse or a Dean’s excuse for family emergency  Regular preparation and class participation: 15% 
OR as an option: By prior arrangement with me by the due date of the second analytic essay, students may substitute one longer research paper (15 – 20 pages) for two of the last three analytic papers This paper will be on a topic of the students choosing , if I approve, and the due date will be the same as the last assigned analytic essay  This project would count 50% of the students course grade 
Selected writings by Frederick Douglass, W E B  Dubois, Ralph Ellison, James Baldwin
Solzhenitsyn, “A World Split Apart”
Tocqueville, Democracy in America GOV 382M • Tocqueville 39150 • Spring 2011 Meets T 6:30PM-9:30PM BAT 5 102 show description
See syllabus GOV 370L • President, Congress, And Court 38695 • Fall 2010 Meets TTH 8:00AM-9:30AM UTC 3 112 show description
Course Description: A Study of the political relationship of the President, Congress and Court in the American constitutional order  Has this relationship changed over the course of American history? Is American national politics prone to stalemate or deadlock between the branches regarding major issues of public policy? Do we have a new “imperial presidency?” Should the Court arbitrate disputes between the President and Congress over custody of their respective powers? Has Congress abdicated its constitutional responsibilities? We will examine questions like these in light of practical problems such as executive privilege and secrecy, the war on terror, budget politics and controversies regarding appointments to the Supreme Court  Grading:Three in class essay tests, for which study questions will be distributed in advance  The exam questions will be chosen from the list of study questions  (25% each) One short take home essay (10% each)  Class participation and attendance (15%)  Tentative Texts: The FederalistFisher, Congressional Abdication on War and SpendingRudalevige, The New Imperial PresidencyBessette and Tulis, The Constitutional PresidencySkowronek, Presidency in Political TimeGoldsmith, The Terror PresidencyA course packet of articles and essays GOV 370L • President, Congress, And Court 38700 • Fall 2010 Meets TTH 5:00PM-6:30PM UTC 3 122 show description
Course Description: A Study of the political relationship of the President, Congress and Court in the American constitutional order  Has this relationship changed over the course of American history? Is American national politics prone to stalemate or deadlock between the branches regarding major issues of public policy? Do we have a new “imperial presidency?” Should the Court arbitrate disputes between the President and Congress over custody of their respective powers? Has Congress abdicated its constitutional responsibilities? We will examine questions like these in light of practical problems such as executive privilege and secrecy, the war on terror, budget politics and controversies regarding appointments to the Supreme Court  Grading:Three in class essay tests, for which study questions will be distributed in advance  The exam questions will be chosen from the list of study questions  (25% each) One short take home essay (10% each)  Class participation and attendance (15%)  Tentative Texts: The FederalistFisher, Congressional Abdication on War and SpendingRudalevige, The New Imperial PresidencyBessette and Tulis, The Constitutional PresidencySkowronek, Presidency in Political TimeGoldsmith, The Terror PresidencyA course packet of articles and essays GOV 312L • Iss & Policies In Amer Gov-Hon 38698 • Spring 2010 Meets MW 3:30PM-5:00PM UTC 3 104 show description
Government 312L satisfies the second half of the mandated six hours of government that every UT student must take  Course covers analysis of varying topics concerned with American political institutions and policies, including the United States Constitution, and assumes basic knowledge of government from GOV 310L, which is a prerequiste  May be taken for credit only once  GOV 370L • President, Congress, And Court 38966 • Spring 2010 Meets MW 5:00PM-6:30PM MEZ B0 306 show description
Prerequisite: Six semester hours of lower-division coursework in government 
GOV 370L • President, Congress, And Court 39295 • Fall 2009 Meets TTH 2:00PM-3:30PM UTC 3 112 show description
GOV 370L • President, Congress, And Court 39435 • Spring 2008 Meets MW 3:00PM-4:30PM PAR 203 show description
GOV 312L • Iss & Policies In Am Gov-Hon-W 38615-38620 • Spring 2007 Meets MW 11:00AM-12:00PM MEZ B0 306 show description
Government 312L satisfies the second half of the mandated six hours of government that every UT student must take  Course covers analysis of varying topics concerned with American political institutions and policies, including the United States Constitution, and assumes basic knowledge of government from GOV 310L, which is a prerequiste  May be taken for credit only once  GOV 312L • Iss & Policies In Am Gov-Hon-W 37600-37605 • Spring 2006 Meets MW 11:00AM-12:00PM MEZ B0 306 show description
Government 312L satisfies the second half of the mandated six hours of government that every UT student must take  Course covers analysis of varying topics concerned with American political institutions and policies, including the United States Constitution, and assumes basic knowledge of government from GOV 310L, which is a prerequiste  May be taken for credit only once  GOV 312L • Iss & Policies In Am Gov-Hon-W 34900-34905 • Spring 2004 Meets MW 11:00AM-12:00PM BUR 134 show description
Government 312L satisfies the second half of the mandated six hours of government that every UT student must take  Course covers analysis of varying topics concerned with American political institutions and policies, including the United States Constitution, and assumes basic knowledge of government from GOV 310L, which is a prerequiste  May be taken for credit only once  GOV 312L • Iss & Policies In Am Gov-Hon-W 34495-34500 • Spring 2003 Meets MW 11:00AM-12:00PM UTC 1 130 show description
Government 312L satisfies the second half of the mandated six hours of government that every UT student must take  Course covers analysis of varying topics concerned with American political institutions and policies, including the United States Constitution, and assumes basic knowledge of government from GOV 310L, which is a prerequiste  May be taken for credit only once  Publications
Tulis, JK (2011), "Plausible Futures," in Dunn, Charles W  (ed ) The Presidency in the Twenty-First Century, University Press of Kentucky Tulis, J K  and Macedo, S  (2010) The Limits of Constitutional Democracy, Princeton University Press Tulis, J K  and Macedo, S  (2010) "Constitutional Boundaries," in The Limits of Constitutional Democracy, Princeton University Press Tulis, JK (2010), "The Possibility of Constitutional Statesmanship," in Tulis, JK and Macedo, S (eds ) The Limits of Constitutional Democracy, Princeton University Press Tulis, J  (2009) The Constitutional Presidency  Johns Hopkins University Press Tulis, J  (2009) Impeachment in the Constitutional Order  In J  Tulis & J M  Bessette (Eds ), The Constitutional Presidency  Johns Hopkins University Press Tulis, J  & Bessette, J M  (2009) On the Constitution, Politics, and the Presidency  In J  Tulis & J M  Bessette (Eds ), The Constitutional Presidency  Johns Hopkins University Press Tulis, J (and Bessette, J M) (2010) The Presidency in the Constitutional Order: Historical Perspectives, Reissued Classics Series, Transaction Publishers,Tulis, J and Bessette, J M  (2010, "Introduction to the Transaction Edition," The Presidency in the Constitutional Order: Historical Perspectives, Transaction Publishers 
Tulis, JK, (2009) "The Two Constitutional Presidencies," in Nelson, Michael (ed ) The Presidency in the Political System, Congressional Quarterly Press Tulis, J  & Mellow, N  (2007) Andrew Johnson and the Politics of Failure  In S  Skowronek & M  Glassman (Eds ), Formative Acts: Reckoning with Agency in American Politics  Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press Tulis, J  (2007, September) The Rhetorical Presidency in Retrospect  Critical Review: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Politics and Society, 19(2&3)  Curriculum Vitae



ground_truth: O(t, L_{\parallel}; S_\Delta) = L_{\parallel}^{-\beta/[\nu(1+\Delta)]} \tilde f_O(t/L_{\parallel}^{z/(1+\Delta)}; S_\Delta).

prompt_front: Now, answer the following question based on the text below, only give me the answer and do not output any other words.

Question: What is Professor Tulis's forthcoming book?

Read the following text and answer briefly.

Context 4:  Although there doesn't seem to be a connection between Njoroge's family and the murder, it is eventually revealed that Njoroge's brothers are behind the assassination, and that Boro is the real leader of the Mau Mau  Ngotho soon dies from his injuries and Njoroge finds out that his father was protecting his brothers  Kamau has been imprisoned for life  Only Njoroge and his two mothers remain free, and Njoroge is left as the sole provider of his two mothers  Njoroge fears that he cannot make ends meet; he gives up hope of continuing in school and loses faith in God 

Njoroge asks Mwihaki's for support, but she is angry because of her father’s death  When he finally pledges his love to her, she refuses to leave with him, realizing her obligation to Kenya and her mother  Njoroge decides to leave town and makes an attempt at suicide; however, he fails when his mothers find him before he is able to hang himself  The novel closes with Njoroge feeling hopeless, and ashamed of cowardice 

Characters in Weep Not, Child
 Njoroge: the main character of the book whose main goal throughout the book is to become as educated as possible 
 Ngotho: Njoroge's father  He works for Mr Howlands and is respected by him until he attacks Jacobo at a workers strike  He is fired and the family is forced to move to another section of the country  Over the course of the book his position as the central power of the family weakened, to the point where his self-realization that he has spent his whole life waiting for the prophecy (that proclaims the blacks will be returned their land) to come true rather than fighting for Kenyan independence, leads to his depression 
 Nyokabi and Njeri: the two wives of Ngotho  Njeri is Ngotho's first wife, and mother of Boro, Kamau, and Kori  Nyokabi is his second wife, and the mother of Njoroge and Mwangi 
 Njoroge has four brothers: Boro, Kamau, Kori and Mwangi (who is Njoroge's only full brother, who died in World War II) 
 Boro: Son of Njeri who fights for the Allies in World War II  Upon returning his anger against the colonial government is compounded by their confiscation of the his land  Boro's anger and position as eldest son leads him to question and ridicule Ngotho, which eventually defeats their father's will (upon realizing his life was wasted waiting and not acting)  It is eventually revealed that Boro is the leader of the Mau Mau (earlier alluded to as "entering politics") and murders Mr Howlands  He is caught by police immediately after and is scheduled to be executed by the book's end  It is highly likely that it is also Boro who kills Jacobo 
 Mwihaki: Njoroge's best friend (and later develops into his love interest)  Daughter of Jacobo  When it is revealed that his family killed Jacobo (most likely Boro), Mwihaki distances herself from Njoroge, asking for time to mourn her father and care for her mother 
 Jacobo: Mwihaki's father and an important landowner  Chief of the village 
 Mr  Howlands: A white settler who emigrated to colonial Kenya and now owns a farm made up of land that originally belonged to Ngotho's ancestors  Has three children: Peter who died in World War II before the book's beginning, a daughter who becomes a missionary, and Stephen who met Njoroge while the two were in high school 

Themes and motifs
Weep Not, Child integrates Gikuyu mythology and the ideology of nationalism that serves as catalyst for much of the novel's action  The novel explores the negative aspects of colonial rule over Kenya  Njoroge's aspiration to attend university is frustrated by both the violence of the Mau Mau rebels and the violent response of the colonial government  This disappointment leads to his alienation from his family and ultimately his suicide attempt 

The novel also ponders the role of saviours and salvation  The author notes in his The River Between: "Salvation shall come from the hills  From the blood that flows in me, I say from the same tree, a son shall rise  And his duty shall be to lead and save the people " Jomo Kenyatta, the first prime minister of Kenya, is immortalised in Weep Not, Child  The author says, "Jomo had been his (Ngotho's) hope  Ngotho had come to think that it was Jomo who would drive away the white man  To him, Jomo stood for custom and traditions purified by grace of learning and much travel " Njoroge comes to view Jomo as a messiah who will win the struggle against the colonial government 



ground_truth: Legacies of Losing in American Politics and an expanded edition of The Rhetorical Presidency in the Princeton Classics series.