Search results

The capability of an artificial neural network to determine part pose by processing image data from the silhouette of a back‐lit part has been established in recently reported work. The chief benefit of this new approach is simplicity of training, which is important for flexible automated parts feeders. The objective of the work presented herein is to develop an effective and efficient method for determining the position and orientation of the parts to be used in training the neural network. Candidate methods were used to create sets of training data containing different numbers of images taken of each part in different patterns of position and orientation. For each set of training data, the neural network was trained and its pose recognition performance was empirically evaluated. Based on these empirical results, a method for generating training data is reported that ensures accurate performance of the trained neural network while requiring only a minimum amount of training data.

ARTHUR E. SMITH has been appointed chairman of United Aircraft on the retirement of William P. Gwinn, and HARRY J. GRAY to be chief executive officer. EDWARD L. HENNESY Jr has been appointed senior vice‐president, finance and administration.

IT is fitting that a new series of this magazine should be introduced by some reflections on the whole question of book selection, both for the general public and libraries.

William Blackwood, the founder of the firm of the name, saw service in Edinburgh, Glasgow, and London before opening in 1804 as a bookseller at 64 South Bridge, Edinburgh. Blackwood continued in his bookselling capacity for a number of years, and his shop became a haunt of the literati, rivalling Constable's in reputation and in popularity. His first success as a publisher was in 1811, when he brought out Kerr's Voyages, an ambitious item, and followed shortly after by The Life of Knox by McCrie. About this time he became agent in Edinburgh for John Murray, and the two firms did some useful collaborating. Blackwood was responsible for suggesting alterations in The Black Dwarf, which drew from Scott that vigorous letter addressed to James Ballantyne which reads: “Dear James,—I have received Blackwood's impudent letter. G ‐ d ‐ his soul, tell him and his coadjutor that I belong to the Black Hussars of Literature, who neither give nor receive criticism. I'll be cursed but this is the most impudent proposal that was ever made”. Regarding this story Messrs. Blackwood say: “This gives a slightly wrong impression. Scott was still incognito. William Blackwood was within his rights. He was always most loyal to Scott.” There has been some controversy as to the exact style of this letter, and it has been alleged that Lockhart did not print it in the same terms as Sir Walter wrote it. Blackwood came into the limelight as a publisher when he started the Edinburgh Monthly Magazine in 1817, which was to be a sort of Tory counterblast to the Whiggish Edinburgh Review. He appointed as editors James Cleghorn and Thomas Pringle, who later said that they realised very soon that Blackwood was much too overbearing a man to serve in harness, and after a time they retired to edit Constable's Scots Magazine, which came out under the new name of The Edinburgh Magazine and Literary Miscellany. [Messrs. Blackwood report as follows: “No. They were sacked—for incompetence and general dulness. (See the Chaldee Manuscript.) They were in office for six months only.”] Blackwood changed the name of The Edinburgh Magazine to Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, and became his own editor, with able henchmen in John Wilson, Christopher North, John Gibson Lockhart, and James Hogg as contributors. It was a swashbuckling magazine, sometimes foul in attack, as when it told John Keats to get “back to the shop, back to plaster, pills, and ointment boxes”. Lockhart had a vigour of invective such as was quite in keeping with the age of Leigh Hunt, an age of hard‐hitting. The history of Blackwood in those days is largely the history of the magazine, though Blackwood was at the same time doing useful publishing work. He lost the Murray connexion, however, owing to the scandalous nature of some of the contributions published in Maga; these but expressed the spirit of the times. John Murray was scared of Blackwood's Scottish independence! Among the book publications of Blackwood at the period we find Schlegel's History of Literature, and his firm, as we know, became publisher for John Galt, George Eliot, D. M. Moir, Lockhart, Aytoun, Christopher North, Pollok, Hogg, De Quincey, Michael Scott, Alison, Bulwer Lytton, Andrew Lang, Charles Lever, Saintsbury, Charles Whibley, John Buchan, Joseph Conrad, Neil Munro—a distinguished gallery. In 1942 the firm presented to the National Library of Scotland all the letters that had been addressed to the firm from its foundation from 1804 to the end of 1900, and these have now been indexed and arranged, and have been on display at the National Library where they have served to indicate the considerable service the firm has given to authorship. The collection is valuable and wide‐ranging.

EVERY librarian in his inmost heart dislikes newspapers. He regards them as bad literature; attractors of undesirable readers; a drain upon the limited resources of the library; and a target against which the detractors of public libraries are constantly battering. From the standpoint of the librarian, newspapers are the most expensive and least productive articles stocked by a library, and their lavish provision is, perhaps, the most costly method of purchasing waste‐paper ever devised. Pressure of circumstances and local conditions combine, however, to muzzle the average librarian, and the consequence is that a perfectly honest and outspoken discussion of the newspaper question is very rarely seen. In these circumstances, an attempt to marshal the arguments for and against the newspaper, together with some account of a successful practical experiment at limitation, may prove interesting to readers of this magazine.

In October, 1902, the Secretary of the Mineral Water Bottle Exchange and Trade Protection Society addressed a letter to the Clerk of the London County Council stating that aerated and mineral waters are, in many instances, manufactured under insanitary conditions, and suggesting that the Council should take action in the matter. The Public Health Committee of the Council thereupon directed that a number of premises where aerated waters are manufactured should be inspected, and, in February, 1903, Dr. Shirley Murphy, the Medical Officer to the Council, presented a report drawn up by Dr. Hamer, the Assistant Medical Officer, by whom the inspections ordered were carried out. Dr. Hamer came to the conclusion that it was most desirable in the interests of the consumer that the manufacture of aerated waters in London should be regulated and controlled. The quantity of aerated water sold in London is very large, and Dr. Hamer's inspection of numerous premises showed that there are many possible sources of dangerous contamination of the water used during the process of the manufacture. We are in a position to state that Dr. Hamer was thoroughly justified in drawing the conclusions which appear in his report. The enormous growth in popularity during recent years of aerated and mineral waters, while unquestionably fraught with a most important influence for good, has brought a number of firms into existence who manufacture more or less inferior and, in some instances, positively injurious and dangerous waters, and who place their products on the market at “cutting” prices, with the result that the honest and careful manufacturer on the one hand, and the public on the other, are made to suffer. Unfair “competition” of the kind referred to exists, of course, in every trade, and only by the authoritative approval of the good and, by implication, the authoritative condemnation of the bad, can such “competition” be effectively checked. But where the health of the consumer is directly threatened or affected, as it particularly is by the supply of inferior or actually injurious aerated waters, the necessity for adequate regulation and control is immediately obvious. The matter cannot be dealt with under the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts. It is not one involving analysis only but, so far as analysis is concerned, the provisions of the Acts make it impossible to carry out the analytical investigations that would be required. In addition to the official registration of all manufacturers of mineral and aerated waters, a combination of inspection and analysis by an authoritative bedy of some kind, or by a recognised individual authority, is necessary to supply a sufficient guarantee to the public and efficient protection to the manufacturer and vendor of pure and high‐class waters.

This research provides accounting-ethics authors and administrators with a benchmark for accounting-ethics research. While Bernardi and Bean (2010) considered publications in business-ethics and accounting’s top-40 journals this study considers research in eight accounting-ethics and public-interest journals, as well as, 34 business-ethics journals. We analyzed the contents of our 42 journals for the 25-year period between 1991 through 2015. This research documents the continued growth (Bernardi & Bean, 2007) of accounting-ethics research in both accounting-ethics and business-ethics journals. We provide data on the top-10 ethics authors in each doctoral year group, the top-50 ethics authors over the most recent 10, 20, and 25 years, and a distribution among ethics scholars for these periods. For the 25-year timeframe, our data indicate that only 665 (274) of the 5,125 accounting PhDs/DBAs (13.0% and 5.4% respectively) in Canada and the United States had authored or co-authored one (more than one) ethics article.

The British Food Journal is in no way concerned with politics, and as it would appear that the propositions put forward by Mr. CHAMBERLAIN are commonly regarded as constituting matter for political controversy instead of being looked upon as subjects for serious investigation and discussion entirely outside the field of politics, it would be an undesirable course and one likely to be misunderstood and, no doubt, misrepresented, were we to refer to the great question which is now before the country without plainly indicating at the outset that we have no intention of supporting or opposing any political party or any section of politicians. We believe Mr. CHAMBERLAIN'S suggestion that the subjects which he has brought forward should be discussed on a higher plane than on the muddy plane of party politics was a reasonable and proper suggestion which all men of sense who are not blinded by political bias should applaud and endeavour to adopt. We do not mean to say that problems of so complicated a character are capable of being accurately solved, in the present state of knowledge, by scientific methods other than actual experiment. They certainly cannot be solved by abstract discussions of a pseudo‐scientific character. The factors which enter into the problems of political economy are so numerous, so complex, and so little understood, that to endeavour to argue even on the basis of what are alleged by political economists to be well‐ascertained facts in the so‐called “dismal science” is to lay oneself open to the charge of theorising from insufficient data. HERBERT SPENCER has lucidly demonstrated the universality of this scientific crime. On comparatively simple subjects, in regard to which a man has no special knowledge, he will, if possessed of the quality known as common sense, generally decline to deliver oracular opinions; but, let a subject be sufficiently complex and let the data relating to it be few, obscure, and uncertain, then decisive opinions will be delivered by all and sundry,—and the more profound the ignorance the more decisive will be the expression of opinion.

The Oxford English Dictionary (hereafter referred to as the OED) is one of the most well‐known and respected reference works in the world. Its imposing bulk has even led some people to believe incorrectly that it actually lists every word in the English language. Of course, a good number of words were omitted from the distinguished dictionary because they were considered vulgar or because they were American words, categories that were actually somewhat synonymous to certain less tolerant Englishmen of the late nineteenth century.

Communications regarding this column should be addressed to Mrs. Cheney, Peabody Library School, Nashville, Term. 37203. Mrs. Cheney does not sell the books listed here. They are available through normal trade sources. Mrs. Cheney, being a member of the editorial board of Pierian Press, will not review Pierian Press reference books in this column. Descriptions of Pierian Press reference books will be included elsewhere in this publication.