travel books: To that, there was not given even an inattentive assent. The Doctor continued gazing at the prone ladder, its long legs sprawled almost touching the wall on their right, its head now reaching a considerable way up the floor of the long room. " After all, you can't reopen a case," the Sergeant called at him, "if all you can say for fact is that a violent-tempered unstable woman, after exasperating her husband, fell off the top of a tall ladder. To want a person dead isn't murder." Dr. Wendover shifted around. "It is, morally:" " We're not Morality, we're Law." " Um; it's a natural law that where there's a will there's a way." " Well, the way was the ladder. How did he will her to fall off, and neatly, plumb on her head! He couldn't have pulled her off. Six people were on the line in between." Dr. Wendover did not answer but turned back to looking at the ladder itself. Sergeant Skillin tried to rouse him: " Why did you pull it down?" " Why, it's our last witness." " It'll tell us nothing we don't know. We know everyone who handled it. Doubt if you'd even find the poor woman's fingerprints on it." Evidently no longer listening, the Doctor had strolled up to the ladder's head, where the hinged back-supports joined onto the top of the flight of steps. Sergeant Skillin was reaching the end of his tether. " Here," he called out, excusing himself for his tone of voice-because old Wendover was really daydreaming-"if books
To that, there was not given even an inattentive assent. The Doctor continued gazing at the prone ladder, its long legs sprawled almost touching the wall on their right, its head now reaching a considerable way up the floor of the long room.
" After all, you can't reopen a case," the Sergeant called at him, "if all you can say for fact is that a violent-tempered unstable woman, after exasperating her husband, fell off the top of a tall ladder. To want a person dead isn't murder."
" Well, the way was the ladder. How did he will her to fall off, and neatly, plumb on her head! He couldn't have pulled her off. Six people were on the line in between."
Dr. Wendover did not answer but turned back to looking at the ladder itself. Sergeant Skillin tried to rouse him:
" It'll tell us nothing we don't know. We know everyone who handled it. Doubt if you'd even find the poor woman's fingerprints on it."
Evidently no longer listening, the Doctor had strolled up to the ladder's head, where the hinged back-supports joined onto the top of the flight of steps. Sergeant Skillin was reaching the end of his tether.
" Here," he called out, excusing himself for his tone of voice-because old Wendover was really daydreaming-"if
where is HTML where is HEAD where is TITLE To that, there was not given even an inattentive assent. what is Doctor continued gazing at what is prone ladder, its long legs sprawled almost touching what is wall on their right, its head now reaching a considerable way up what is floor of what is long room. " After all, you can't reopen a case," what is Sergeant called at him, "if all you can say for fact is that a bad -tempered unstable woman, after exasperating her husband, fell off what is top of a tall ladder. To want a person dead isn't murder." Dr. Wendover shifted around. "It is, morally:" " We're not Morality, we're Law." " Um; it's a natural law that where there's a will there's a way." " Well, what is way was what is ladder. How did he will her to fall off, and neatly, plumb on her head! He couldn't have pulled her off. Six people were on what is line in between." Dr. Wendover did not answer but turned back to looking at what is ladder itself. Sergeant S what time is it in tried to rouse him: " Why did you pull it down?" " Why, it's our last witness." " It'll tell us nothing we don't know. We know everyone who handled it. Doubt if you'd even find what is poor woman's fingerprints on it." Evidently no longer listening, what is Doctor had strolled up to what is ladder's head, where what is hinged back-supports joined onto what is top of what is flight of steps. Sergeant S what time is it in was reaching what is end of his tether. " Here," he called out, excusing himself for his tone of voice-because old Wendover was really daydreaming-"if where is meta name="keywords" content="old books, Free book , free book offer , free audio books , free coloring book pages , free book reports , free audio book , audio books free download , book free , free guest book , books free , free book summaries , download free audio books , free childrens books." where is where are they now rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../../style.css" where is meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" where is BODY bgColor=#ffffff text="#000000" where are they now ="#000000" v where are they now ="#FF0000" where is div align="center" where is strong where is strong where is a href="http://www.aaoldbooks.com" Books > where is a href="../default.asp" title="Book" Old Books > where is strong where is a href="default.asp" The Great Fog (1943) where is table width="700" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="15" cellspacing="0" where is center where is tr where is td width="160" align="center" valign="top" where is div align="center" where is td align="center" valign="top" where is div align="left" where is div align="center" where is p align="left" Page 19 where is strong THE CRAYFISH where is p align="justify" To that, there was not given even an inattentive assent. what is Doctor continued gazing at what is prone ladder, its long legs sprawled almost touching what is wall on their right, its head now reaching a considerable way up what is floor of what is long room. " After all, you can't reopen a case," what is Sergeant called at him, "if all you can say for fact is that a bad -tempered unstable woman, after exasperating her husband, fell off what is top of a tall ladder. To want a person dead isn't murder." Dr. Wendover shifted around. "It is, morally:" " We're not Morality, we're Law." " Um; it's a natural law that where there's a will there's a way." " Well, what is way was what is ladder. How did he will her to fall off, and neatly, plumb on her head! He couldn't have pulled her off. Six people were on what is line in between." Dr. Wendover did not answer but turned back to looking at what is ladder itself. Sergeant S what time is it in tried to rouse him: " Why did you pull it down?" " Why, it's our last witness." " It'll tell us nothing we don't know. We know everyone who handled it. Doubt if you'd even find what is poor woman's fingerprints on it." Evidently no longer listening, what is Doctor had strolled up to the ladder's head, where what is hinged back-supports joined onto what is top of what is flight of steps. Sergeant S what time is it in was reaching what is end of his tether. " Here," he called out, excusing himself for his tone of voice-because old Wendover was really daydreaming-"if where is Server.Execute("_SiteMap.asp") %
Welcome to the first palindrome year of the millennium! I trust this will mean not that we go backwards and forwards but that we neatly integrate developments--in theory, implementation, and applications--leading to startling new successes. Among the challenging areas of research in automated reasoning is program verification--particularly of parallel programs; Olga Shumsky Matlin has contributed an interesting article on this topic. Also in this issue are announcements for numerous conferences for the year 2002. It promises to be an exciting year, and I hope that you will contribute some of your research results to the AAR Newsletter and to its companion the Journal of Automated Reasoning.
Johann M. Schumann has published a new book entitled Automated Theorem Proving in Software Engineering. Using case studies on verification of communication and security protocols and logic-based component reuse, the book demonstrates that state-of-the-art automated theorem provers can handle important tasks automatically during the development of high-quality software. It also provides numerous techniques for increasing practical usability of the automated theorem prover for successful applications.
The Handbook of Automated Reasoning, edited by J. Alan Robinson and Andrei Voronkov. presents an overview of the fundamental ideas, techniques, and methods in automated reasoning and its applications. The material covers both theory and implementation. In addition to traditional topics, the book covers material that bridges the gap between automated reasoning and related areas. Examples include model checking, nonmonotonic reasoning, numerical constraints, description logics, and implementation of declarative programming languages.
Reasoning about parallel programs is surprisingly difficult. Even small parallel programs are difficult to write correctly, and an incorrect parallel program is equally difficult to debug. This characterization has been borne out in experiences with writing the Multi-Purpose Daemon (MPD): despite MPD's small size and apparent simplicity, errors have impeded progress toward correct code. Such a situation led to exploration of program verification techniques.
MPD [1] is a process manager for parallel programs and is itself a parallel program. Its function is to start the processes of a parallel job, manage input and output, deal with faults, provide services to the application, and cause jobs to terminate cleanly. MPD is the sort of process manager needed to run applications that use the standard MPI [3] library for parallelism, although it is not MPI-specific.
Our attempt to use formal verification techniques to ensure correctness of MPD algorithms employs the model checker SPIN [4], which supports design and verification of asynchronous distributed communicating systems. Models of such systems are recorded in a special high-level verification language PROMELA, which can also be used to state some correctness properties of the models. Additional correctness properties are specified by using linear temporal logic (LTL). The verification engine of SPIN is based on on-the-fly reachability analysis with several optimizations and heuristics. The system also includes a simulation environment and a graphical user interface.
The MPD system consists of several types of processes (called daemon, manager, console, and client) that communicate over Unix sockets and pipes. Daemons and managers are connected in a ring. A typical setup of the MPD system is shown in Figure 1.
MPD algorithms execute on daemons and managers. Daemons and managers execute in essentially infinite loop: they receive messages on their connections and perform actions depending on the type of the received message. The actions are relatively simple and typically involve sending another message. Thus, daemons and managers are viewed and modeled in three layers. On the first layer is the main loop that allows to select a message from one of the attached communication connections. The middle layer is the collection of algorithms that are executed in response to each defined message type. The bottom layer is the mechanism that allows messages to travel from one process to another. The real MPD system relies on Unix sockets for communication between the processes, and the operating system provides all the necessary services.
The MPD algorithms that we would like to verify thus reside in the middle layer of the three-tiered model. To proceed with verification, we must model not only the algorithms of interest but also the interprocess communication of the bottom level; that is, we have to create a Promela model of Unix sockets. Success of verification attempts depends on the efficiency of the underlying model, and so creation of an efficient Promela model of sockets was important. Several Promela models of socket handling functions were tried. Finally, we created a reusable general-purpose library of Unix socket functions. The library contains implementations of the socket functions connect, accept, read, write, close, and select. These functions provide the interface between the interprocess communication layer of the three-tiered model and the middle layer where the algorithms reside. A different implementation of the socket library can be used, if desired, without making any changes to the model of the algorithms.
We considered algorithms that reside on different levels of the MPD system. Two related daemon-level algorithms were modeled: an algorithm for simultaneously inserting new members into a ring of daemons and an algorithm for a recovery of the ring after a single nondeterministic daemon failure. Each of the two algorithms was verified against two correctness properties. The first property (state) is a static check that the information contained in the underlying data structures indeed represents a properly connected ring. The second property (trace) is that a special purpose ring traversal algorithm completes after having visited each member of the ring. We also modeled a manager-level algorithm to provide a synchronization service to the client application processes. A correctness property, stating that no client is allowed to proceed past the synchronization point until all clients have reached the synchronization point, was proved for the algorithm with SPIN's aid.
As shown in Table 1, verification succeeded on models of only a small size, especially compared with the real MPD system that can involve hundreds if not thousands of processes. However, since even the most difficult errors can be discovered on models comprising only a few processes, the verification engine of SPIN enables us to verify the algorithms on models that are sufficiently large for our purposes.
Currently we use SPIN to explore and verify individual MPD algorithms. However, many things take place in parallel in a running MPD system. Daemons enter and leave the ring, as do managers, different client processes request different services from the managers, and several instances of the same algorithm may be executing simultaneously. Correct interaction of these algorithms is also important. We hope to be able to reason formally about MPD models that consist of several related and interdependent algorithms.
A long-term goal of this project is to model and verify MPD algorithms and then translate them into C or another programming language, while preserving the verified properties. Ideally, translation should be automated. In order to allow this to happen, the Promela model must not be overly abstract. We compared the C implementation of the barrier algorithm with its specification in Promela. The comparison suggests that the automated translation is feasible.
The Promela implementation of the the Unix socket library, models of the verified MPD algorithms and a technical report [2] with a more detailed description of the project are available at on the Web site.
This project is a joint work with E. Lusk and W. McCune. This work was supported by the Mathematical, Information, and Computational Sciences Division subprogram of the Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research, U.S. Department of Energy, under Contract W-31-109-Eng-38.
A workshop on "Complexity in Automated Deduction" will take place in conjunction with CADE-18 on July 25-26, 2002, in Copenhagen, Denmark. The workshop will bring together researchers interested in problems at the interface between automated deduction and computational complexity. If you are interested in giving a contributed talk, please send an abstract, preferably as a PostScript attachment, to Miki.Hermann@loria.fr no later than Friday, May 17, 2002.
The 5th International Workshop on Strategies in Automated Deduction (STRATEGIES 2002) will be held in conjunction with CADE at FLoC in Copenhagen, Denmark, on July 26, 2002.
Strategies are almost ubiquitous in automated deduction and reasoning systems, because the rules at the heart of such systems are nondeterministic and need to be complemented by strategies, or search plans, responsible for controlling them. The role that search plans play in making the resulting procedures capable of solving efficiently interesting problems is no less than that played by the inference systems themselves, since typical deduction paradigms (e.g., generation of consequences, subgoal-reduction, generation of instances, case analysis, enumeration) generate very large or infinite spaces of choices.
These considerations apply to both fully automated systems (theorem provers, model builders, rewriting engines, decision procedures) and interactive ones (proof assistants and verification systems) and affect them at all levels, from abstract definition to design and implementation. The combination of automated components (e.g., theorem provers and decision procedures) as well as their integration within interactive systems to generate the reasoning environments of the future poses new control problems and puts the study of strategies at the forefront.
The workshop on Strategies in Automated Deduction is the primary forum for the communication of new results on control strategies and search plans in automated theorem proving, automated model building, decision procedures, interactive proof assistants, proof planners, and logical frameworks and in first-order (including propositional and purely equational as special cases),, modal (e.g., temporal) and higher-order logics. Sample topics include the following:
Models of search spaces and languages or mathematical formalisms to define search plans and prove their properties
Strategy analysis (e.g., formal approaches for the machine-independent evaluation and comparison of deduction strategies)
Strategies devoted to specific theories including inductive theories, arithmetic, decidable theories, and combinations thereof
Authors are invited to submit an extended abstract of up to 10 pages. Researchers interested in attending the workshop without giving a talk are invited to send a position paper of 1--2 pages. All submissions should be sent to the Program Chairs (strategies02@cs.uiowa.edu) in Postscript before April 22, 2002. Accepted contributions will be included in the workshop proceedings, which will be available at the workshop and on the Web.
Based on the submissions, the Program Chairs will consider the possibility of a postworkshop publication (e.g., a special issue of a journal or a volume in a series of electronic proceedings), where authors may submit full versions of the workshop papers. This may involve another call for papers and refereeing process.
Advances in Modal Logic will be held September 30 - October 2, 2002, in Toulouse, France. AiML 2002 is part of an initiative aimed at presenting an up-to-date picture of the state of the art in modal logic and its many applications. Topics of interest include the following: complexity and decidability of modal and temporal logics, deontic logic, description logics, dynamic logic, epistemic logic, modal logic and game theory, modal logic and grammar formalisms, modal realism and antirealism, modal and temporal logic programming and theorem proving, model theory and proof theory of modal and temporal logic, representation of time in natural language semantics, nonmonotonic modal logics, provability logic, and common-sense temporal reasoning. During the workshop there also will be a special session on modal logics of space.
Authors are invited to submit a detailed abstract of a full paper of at most 10 pages (a4paper, 11pt) by e-mail to one of the program chairs (Nobu-Yuki Suzuki, smnsuzu@ipc.shizuoka.ac.jp, or Frank Wolter, wolter@informatik.uni-leipzig.de) using `AiML Submission' as the subject line. Submissions must be received no later than May 15, 2002. Note that at least one author of each accepted paper is required to register for and attend the conference to present the paper. Preliminary versions of the full papers should be made available at the workshop; the proceedings volumes will be submitted to CSLI Publications.
A workshop on "Hybrid Logics" will take place at LICS 2002, on July 25, 2002, in Copenhagen, Denmark. Hybrid logic is a branch of modal logic in which it is possible to directly refer to worlds, times, states, or whatever the elements of the (Kripke) model are meant to represent. Although they date back to the late 1960s and have been sporadically investigated ever since, it is only in the 1990s that work on them really got into its stride. The workshop is relevant to a wide range of people, including those interested in description logic, feature logic, applied modal logics, temporal logic, and labeled deduction. Moreover, the workshop is devoted to exploring ideas Prior first introduced 30 years ago: it will be an ideal opportunity to see how his ideas have been developed in the intervening period. Contributions in the form of an extended abstract (up to 10 A4 size pages) should be sent in PostScript format to carlos@science.uva.nl before April 26, 2002. Please note that all workshop contributors are required by the LICS organizers to register for FLoC 2002. Visit the Web site for further information.
The 5th International Symposium on the Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing will take place on May 6-9, 2001, in Cincinnati, Ohio, USA. Several aspects of satisfiability testing will be explored including propositional proof systems, search techniques, relationship between BDDs and search, applications such as in formal verification, probabilistic analysis of SAT algorithms and SAT properties, upper bounds on SAT algorithm performance, specific solvers, empirical results, and quantified Boolean formulas. Extended abstracts are due February 6, 2002.
In conjunction with the symposium, there will be an SAT Solver Competition (BDD packages welcome). SAT solvers and benchmarks are due March 6, 2002. See the symposium home page for further details.
The second international workshop on "Reduction Strategies in Rewriting and Programming" will be held in conjunction with RTA 2002 in Copenhagen, Denmark, on July 21, 2002.
Reduction strategies bridge the gap between unrestricted general rewriting (computation) and (more deterministic) rewriting with particular strategies (programming). Moreover, reduction strategies provide a natural way to go from operational principles (e.g., graph and term rewriting, narrowing, lambda-calculus) and semantics (e.g., normalization, computation of values, infinitary normalization, head-normalization) to implementations of programming languages. Therefore, progress in this area is likely to be of interest not only to the rewriting community, but also to neighboring fields like functional programming, functional-logic programming, and termination proofs of algorithms.
The workshop seeks to provide a forum for the presentation of recent developments and new research directions (max. 10 pages) as well as discussion of surveys on existing knowledge in this area (no page limit). Topics of interest include theoretical foundations for reduction strategies; strategies in different frameworks (e.g., term rewriting, lambda calculi, constraint solving) and their application in programming; properties of reduction strategies and computation under strategies (e.g., completeness, computability, decidability); interrelations, combinations, and applications of reduction under different strategies; program analysis and other semantics-based optimization techniques dealing with reduction strategies; rewrite systems, tools, and implementations with programmable strategies as an essential concept; specification of reduction strategies in (real) languages; and data structures and implementation techniques for reduction strategies.
Submissions should be sent in PostScript format to the following e-mail address wrs02@dsic.upv.es before April 15, 2002. Accepted papers will be included in the workshop proceedings that will be available at the workshop, and electronically on the web. A special issue of the Journal of Symbolic Computation on will be designated for revised and extended versions of selected contributions from both WRS 2001 (Utrecht, May 2001) and WRS 2002.
The 2002 International Conference on Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics will be held August 20-23, 2002, in Hampton, Virginia, USA. It is being organized jointly by NASA Langley Research Center, ICASE, and Concordia University.
The program committee welcomes submissions on all aspects of theorem proving in higher-order logics and on related topics in theorem proving and verification. Topics of interest include the following:
Submissions are invited in two categories: (A) full research paper, and (B) work in progress report. Submissions under category A are due February 22, 2002; they will be fully refereed, and accepted papers will be published as a volume of Springer-Verlag's Lecture Notes in Computer Science series. Submissions under category B are due May 17, 2002; they will not be formally refereed, but their content and relevance will be reviewed. Those submissions accepted will be published in a NASA technical report. Unless otherwise requested, submissions rejected under category A will also be considered for inclusion under category B. Papers should be no more than 16 pages. Details are available from the Web page.
The fourth international workshop on ``Automated Deduction in Geometry'' will be held in Hagenberg, Austria, on September 4-6, 2002. The ADG workshop provides a forum to exchange ideas and views, to present research results, and to demonstrate software tools.
Potential participants of ADG 2002 are invited to submit an extended abstract (3 or more pages) or a full paper by June 3, 2002. Electronic submissions are preferred, and should be sent to the chairman Franz.Winkler@risc.uni-linz.ac.at. Authors of the extended abstracts and full papers accepted for presentation at the workshop will be invited to submit their full or revised papers for publication in the proceedings of ADG 2002 after the workshop. It is expected that the accepted papers will be published as a volume in the LNAI series by Springer-Verlag.
Amy Felty has issued a call for papers for a special issue of the Journal of Aumated Reasoning on proof-carrying code and related approaches that use formal reasoning to enhance safety and reliability of software. Topics of interest include original results and study of tools and methods for proof generation, proof checking, and their integration with code generation/compilation. Manuscripts should be unpublished works and not submitted elsewhere. Revised and enhanced versions of papers published in conference proceedings that have not appeared in archival journals are eligible for submission. All submissions will be reviewed according to the usual standards of scholarship and originality. The deadline for submissions is February 22, 2002.
From the viewpoint of automated reasoning and, in a different way, from the viewpoint of mathematics, when asked to find a proof for a theorem, you have three choices. You can proceed as is often done in a class by starting with the axioms, make one deduction after another, and conclude with the desired result. In other words, you can produce a forward proof. Instead, you could deny the conclusion of the theorem, work backward, and, if successful, produce a deduction that contradicts some axiom. In this case, you have a backward proof. Or, as you have surmised, you can seek a bidirectional proof, working forward from the axioms and backward from the denial of the conclusion.
One of the piquant, or annoying, properties of automated reasoning is encountered when you have a bidirectional proof and wish, instead, to have a forward proof. Especially (but not exclusively) when paramodulation is the inference rule, you can be offered theorems to prove for which you can find a bidirectional proof, perhaps with some effort, but for which finding a forward proof will be most challenging. One reason is that if you simply give a program permission to paramodulate from or into a variable, with no constraints, the program can drown. Yes, paramodulation is indeed sinister.
In this column, I offer you such a theorem. The theorem focuses on ring theory. You are first challenged to find a proof, any proof. Then, more challenging, you are asked to find a forward proof.
If and when success is yours, a nice research topic focuses on finding a procedure—not necessarily an algorithm—for converting bidirectional proofs to forward.
The 24th International Conference on Automated Deduction will be held in Lake Placid, New York, USA on 9–14 June 2013.
propositional, first-order, equational, classical, higher-order, non-classical, constructive, modal, temporal, many-valued, description, meta-logics, logical frameworks, type theory, set theory, as well as any combination thereof.
theorem proving, model building, constraint solving, computer algebra, model checking, proof checking, and their integrations.
resolution, superposition or paramodulation, completion, saturation, term rewriting, decision procedures and their combinations, model elimination, connection method, inverse method, tableaux, induction, proof planning, sequent calculi, natural deduction, as well as their supporting algorithms and data structures, including unification, matching, orderings, indexing, proof presentation and explanation, and search plans or strategies for inference control, including semantic guidance and AI-related methods.
analysis, verification and synthesis of software and hardware, formal methods, computer mathematics, computational logic, declarative programming, knowledge representation, deductive databases, natural language processing, computational linguistics, ontology reasoning, robotics, planning, and other areas of artificial intelligence.
CADE calls for regular papers of up to 15 pages and system descriptions of up to 7 pages. Full system descriptions that provide in-depth presentation of original ideas in an implemented system can be submitted as regular papers.
Papers shall be submitted until 14 January 2013. An abstract must be submitted already on 7 January 2013. Accepted papers will be published in Springer's LNCS series.
CADE-24 is soliciting proposals for workshops, tutorials, and system competitions to be held in conjunction with CADE-24.
Proposals should be submitted until 9 November 2012, and notifications are scheduled to be sent out on 30 November 2012.
RDP 2013, the seventh Federated Conference on Rewriting, Deduction, and Programming, will take place on 23–28 June 2013 in Eindhoven, The Netherlands. RDP 2013 will consist of two main conferences,
RTA 2013, the 24th International Conference on Rewriting Techniques and Applications, is the major forum for the presentation of research on all aspects of rewriting, including applications, foundations, frameworks, and implementations. Papers of at most 10 pages for system descriptions, and 15 pages for regular papers in LIPIcs style, are to be submitted by 5 February 2013, with abstracts due on 1 February.
TLCA 2013, the 11th International Conference on Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications is a forum for original research in the theory and applications of typed lambda calculus, broadly construed, including the whole range of applicable proof theory, semantics, type systems, and connections to programming. Research papers of up to 15 pages shall be submitted by 1 February 2013, with abstracts registered until 25 January 2013.
The 5th NASA Formal Methods Symposium (NFM) will take place at the NASA Ames Research Center at Moffett Field, CA, USA on 14–16 May 2013.
The NASA Formal Methods Symposium is a forum for theoreticians and practitioners from academia, industry, and government, with the goals of identifying challenges and providing solutions to achieving assurance in mission- and safety-critical systems. The focus of the symposium will be on formal techniques, their theory, current capabilities, and limitations, as well as their application to aerospace, robotics, and other safety-critical systems.
The symposium encourages submissions on cross-cutting approaches that bring together formal methods and techniques from other domains such as probabilistic reasoning, machine learning, control theory, robotics, and quantum computing among others. Formal verification, including theorem proving is amongst the areas of interest.
An election was held from 6 August through 9 September 2012 to fill three positions on the board of trustees of Cade, Inc. Rajeev Goré, Bernhard Gramlich, Konstantin Korovin, Christopher Lynch, Renate Schmidt, and Christoph Weidenbach were nominated.
Ballots were sent by electronic mail to all members of AAR on 6 August, for a total of 993 ballots. Of these, 129 were returned with a vote, representing a participation level of 13.0% (as compared to 16.2% in 2011, 13.3% in 2010, 18.3% in 2009, 18% in 2008, 16.4% in 2007, and 16.0% in 2006). All votes were valid.
Therefore, in each iteration of the single transferrable vote algorithm described in the CADE Bylaws, a candidate is elected iff she or he gets at least 65 1st preference votes. Otherwise, the votes of the candidate with the least 1st preference votes are redistributed.
The two remaining candidates have the same number of 1st preference votes. In this case, the CADE STV algorithm requires redistributing the votes of the candidate with the fewest 2nd preference votes.
To find the next elected candidate, we redistribute the votes of Bernhard Gramlich and get the following table:
To find the next elected candidate, we redistribute the votes of Renate Schmidt and get the following table:
On behalf of the AAR and CADE Inc., I thank Rajeev Goré for his services as a trustee during the last three years.
While the Open Carry Texas guys swagger about in public with their ginormous junk on display, others prefer to keep their guns on the downlow… Especially the ladies.
WFAA 8 reports Texas women hold over 25 percent of concealed firearms permits in the state, and 67,000 applied in 2013 alone. This presents them with a puzzling dilemma — no, not what the heck’s going on in our society that makes all these women feel like they need to carry weapons around, that would be silly — but, where to hide their handguns.
According to WFAA 8 (scroll down to the bottom for the video report), women often keep their handguns in their purses because, as Carrie Lightfoot from The Well Armed Woman points out:
“Most holsters have been built for men’s bodies. Women are built differently, and we dress differently. Because one day she’s wearing a dress, the next day she’s wearing a suit, the next day she’s wearing exercise clothing.”
Demand has spawned a bustling new industry that offers a dizzying array of holsters and accessories, so women can pack their heat more comfortably. These include all sorts of garter belts, waistbands, magic underwear, pouches, purses, anklets, and more. Yet, these femme-fatale-friendly options pose a whole new set of challenges — like quickly extracting your handgun from your Flash Bang Bra holster.
That’s where Lightfoot and her organization come in. Tag-lined “Where the feminine and firearms meet,” the Well Armed Woman offers merchandise, classes, and resources to its large and growing community of women gun owners.
1. Wear it like a man: If you’re wearing jeans and don’t mind that unflattering bulge on your hip, you can wear your gun like a man and hook a regular holster on your belt. But this doesn’t work for many women — or their wardrobes.
4. The waist or belly band. They’re comfortable and can have additional pockets for personal items like wallets, keys, kleenex, and extra ammunition. But, The Well-Armed Woman web site warns:
A caution when using belly bands and under wraps is the likelihood of aiming the muzzle of your firearm at your torso when placing it in the holster. Placing the firearm in the holster prior to putting it on is a good practice. It can be difficult to adjust or re-holster your firearm once the band or wrap is in place without compromising your non-dominant hand or torso.
7. Compression concealment shorts. These give you a place to put your handgun and a smooth, flattering fit! Well, smooth and flattering except for that weird bulge… Available in white and nude, with holsters for right- or left-hand access … or both.
8. Compression tank top. As with the compression concealment shorts, you get a flattering fit, and they’re available in white, nude, and black. Unfortunately, you may need to stick your spare handgun in the above compression shorts, because the tank top doesn’t exactly offer easy access.
“These ‘undershirts’ have holster pockets on both sides and holds the firearm just under the armpit. These are not considered fast draw holsters as depending on the clothing you are wearing – you will have to get to the firearm to draw it, this can slow up your draw time considerably.”
9. Pistol Pouch from Thunderwear: Great for a casual summer day at the beach! Is that a gun in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me?
11. Classic Hip Hugger Holster: Billed as “the most versatile holster you’ll ever wear,” this Can Can Concealment original lets you carry “up to four firearms and three mags at the same time.”
12. Garter Holster: This stylish little number holds two firearms and one magazine. Toss a classic little black dress over it, and you’re all set to dance the night away. The laces and trim come in several jazzy colors.
“The combination of a super strong clip and a perfectly light retention on the gun allows this holster to be used with or without a belt. It can also be clipped into an interior pocket of a purse, or even to the top of a cowboy boot!”
14. A purse: If you’d rather carry your concealed weapon in a purse, there are lots of stylish options online with secret compartments. Just please don’t drop it!
16. Shoes with guns for heels: Watch out, Manolo, these Louboutins are chic, practical, and lethal. Though, for a quick get-away, you’ll need to bring along your Chucks.
Next article Customers at Gun Range Held at Gun Point in Attempted Robbery - Authorities Still Looking For 1 Suspect
Affordable Outdoor Furniture Porch Furniture Cool Garden Furniture Small Patio Furniture Small Balcony Furniture White Outdoor Furniture Affordable Outdoor Furniture Outdoor Patio Affordable Outdoor F
affordable outdoor furniture singapore sale sydney discount sets patio table chairs only for garden,affordable patio furniture canada outdoor sale discount near me garden sets,affordable outdoor furniture garage sale singapore sets,patio outdoor furniture wicker sale canada affordable sets,affordable garden furniture sets outdoor toronto cheap discount singapore,sale outdoor furniture brisbane sectionals affordable sectional discount garden near me sets,discount outdoor furniture sydney sale melbourne affordable pool nz,discount outdoor patio furniture sets affordable brisbane wicker lawn budget near me,interior affordable outdoor patio furniture covers target good canada toronto sale brisbane,discount outdoor furniture brisbane sale picture of also sydney.