diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'macros/latex/contrib/seminar/doc/semsamp2.tex')
-rw-r--r-- | macros/latex/contrib/seminar/doc/semsamp2.tex | 297 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 297 deletions
diff --git a/macros/latex/contrib/seminar/doc/semsamp2.tex b/macros/latex/contrib/seminar/doc/semsamp2.tex deleted file mode 100644 index b332a31414..0000000000 --- a/macros/latex/contrib/seminar/doc/semsamp2.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,297 +0,0 @@ -%% -%% This file may be distributed and/or modified under the conditions of -%% the LaTeX Project Public License, either version 1.2 of this license -%% or (at your option) any later version. The latest version of this -%% license is in: -%% -%% http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt -%% -%% and version 1.2 or later is part of all distributions of LaTeX version -%% 1999/12/01 or later. -%% - -%% BEGIN semsamp2.tex -% This is a sample document for seminar.sty, v0.93 (and maybe later). -% -% This file contains both landscape and portrait mode slides. -% Choose one of the following to print them out: -% - If using PSTricks, try the semcolor style option. -% - If using Rokicki's dvips, try the semrot style option. -% - To print the landscape slides, put \landscapeonly in the preamble. -% To print the portrait slides, include the portrait style option and -% put \portraitonly in the preamble. -% -% -\documentclass[% - slidesonly,% Try notes or notesonly instead. - %notes,% Use instead of slidesonly to typeset the notes. - %notesonly,% Use instead of slidesonly to typeset notes and slides. - semcolor,% Try me if using PSTricks. - semrot,% Try me if using Rokicki's dvips. - %semhelv,% Try me if using a PostScript printer. - %article,% Try me. - %portrait,% Try me. - %sem-a4,% Try me if using A4 paper. - semlayer% This must be included, but you need the semcolor option to - ]{seminar} % actually see the overlays. - -\slidesmag{5} -\articlemag{1} - -%\twoup % Try me for twoup printing. - -%\portraitonly % To print only portrait slides -%\landscapeonly % To print only landscape slides - -%\notslides{\ref{questions}-7,1} %Try me: The slides are omitted. -%\onlyslides{\ref{questions}-7,1} %Try me: Only these slides are included. -%\onlynotestoo %Try me: For selecting notes as well. - -%\colorlayers{red,blue} % Try deleting this if using the semcolor option, - % to get \blue and \red to use PostScript color. - -%\overlaysfalse % Suppress overlays with semcolor option. -%\layersfalse % Suppress color layers with semcolor option. - -\rotateheaderstrue % Try this out if using rotation macros. - - -\title{Example for seminar.sty} -\author{Policarpa Salabarrieta} -\date{July 21, 1991} - -\newcommand\sref[1]{SLIDE \ref{#1}} -\newcommand\heading[1]{\begin{center}\large\bf #1\end{center}} - -\newpagestyle{MH}% - {University of Guaduas, March 13, 1998\hfil\thepage}{} -\pagestyle{MH} - -\begin{document} - -\maketitle % This won't show up when \onlynotestoo is in effect. - -\begin{slide} - \ifslidesonly % Title slide only for slidesonly selection. - \maketitle - \addtocounter{slide}{-1} - \slidepagestyle{empty} - \fi -\end{slide} - -This is a lot of gobbledy-gook intended only to illustrate some of the -features of seminar.sty. - - The phrase information overload rings a bell with just about anyone. -Certainly you all receive more working papers or more applications for -graduate school than you can readily read. Nevertheless, the term information -overload is ill-defined. (\sref{too_much}, top) - - A message like this when you check your email conjures up the notion of -information overload. More generally, information overload always means too -much information, in some sense or another. But what does ``too much'' mean? -(\sref{too_much}, bottom) It might just mean that people cannot process all -the information they receive. That is certainly true for everyone. A claim -that is much stronger, and that is implicit when people complain about -informaton overload, is that people {\em should} receive less information, by -some criterion. - -\begin{slide}\label{too_much}% -\begin{center} - \large\bf - Information overload = ``Too much'' information -\end{center} -\smallskip - -\begin{verse} \bf\tt - You have 134 unread messages:\\ - Do you want to read them now? -\end{verse} - -\begin{enumerate} - {\overlay2 - \item People {\overlay1 cannot process all} the information they receive.} - \item People {\em should} receive less information. - \end{enumerate} -\end{slide} - - In this paper, I use the term ``information overload'' in both senses. -(\sref{overload}, bottom). Specifically, I say that an {\em individual} is -overloaded with information if she receives more information than she can -process. But I say that there is information overload in a {\em network} if -there is some mechanism that makes the senders and/or receivers better off by -restricting the flow of information. This latter notion of information -overload is an equilibrium property, and it depends on what we mean by -``better off.'' - -\begin{slide*}\label{overload} -\ptsize{12} - -\begin{itemize}{\overlay1 - \item There is information {\overlay0 overload in a network if} there is -some mechanism that, compared to the {\em status quo}, makes the senders -and/or receivers better off by restricting the flow} of information.' - - \item There is information overload in a network if there is some mechanism -that, compared to the {\em status quo}, makes the senders and/or receivers -better off by restricting the flow of information. -\end{itemize} - -\end{slide*} - -(\sref{questions}) - The purpose of my paper is to show why there can be information overload in -a network and what kind of mechanisms can make the receivers and/or senders -better off. Since the cost of communication is one factor that restricts -communication, I am thus also going to look at how the welfare of the senders -and receivers depends on the cost of communication. - - Most messages don't become jumbled and we can choose which ones to process. -But some of us may have a bias towards choosing to process more information -than we should, like the graduate student who feels compelled to read every -article on the usual lengthy reading list, and just ends up getting confused -and ruffling through the papers. - - -\begin{slide}[7.3in,5.5in] \label{questions} -\heading{Questions} - -\begin{itemize} - {\overlay1 \item When could {\blue there be overload} in networks?} - \item What mechanims make the receivers and senders better off? - \item How does the welfare {\red of the senders} and receivers depend on the -cost of communication? -\end{itemize} -\end{slide} - - -However, experiments in consumer research and psychology have failed to find -that such a bias is prevalent. This is in spite of the fact that it is common -for stress and cognitive strain to increase with information load. We may -incur such stress and strain because the information we choose to process is -valuable to us. - -More commonly, then, we can and do choose to process roughly as much -information as we can handle efficiently. This is called screening. But when -we choose which messages to begin to process, we're ignorant of their -contents, since otherwise there would be no reason to process them in the -first place. Therefore, if we receive more junk mail, then some of the -important mail gets crowded out, and we are effectively less informed. - -\begin{slide} \label{informed} -\begin{center} - {\bf Being more informed} \par - \smallskip - is always better,\par - \medskip - \overlay1{but it's not the same as \par - \smallskip - {\bf receiving more information}} -\end{center} -\end{slide} - - Why would the senders communicate too many messages in the first place? If I -present too much material in this seminar, you have to choose which parts to -ignore and I would rather make that decision myself, since I know what I most -want to get across. Thus, it is in my interest not to overload you with -information. Generally, whenever there is a single sender of messages, that -sender will prefer to screen rather than have the receiver screen, because the -sender has an interest in which messages the receiver processes. -But when there are more senders, one sender's messages tend to crowd out the -messages of the other senders, as in this example here. If the senders don't -take this external cost into account when sending messages, they may -collectively overload the receiver. (\sref{akbar}) - -There are several reasons that our scarcity of attention, that is, our limited -capacity to process information, can mean that we become less informed when we -receive more information. I have a cartoon here to illustrate these reasons. -(\sref{akbar}) - -\begin{slide}\label{akbar}\def\slidefuzz{15pt} - {\large A tax $\tau$ on communication is said to support -$\tilde{\cal{X}}(c)$ if $\tilde{\cal{X}}(c)$ is an equilibrium for -$\Gamma(c+\tau)$.} -\medskip - - {\bf Proposition 6.} {\em Assume $\tilde{\cal{X}}(c)$ is not an equilibrium -for $\Gamma(c)$.\vspace{-3pt} -\begin{enumerate} - \item If $\mbox{supp}(\gamma)=[0,1]^n$, there is no tax that supports -$\tilde{\cal{X}}(c)$. - \item If $\mbox{supp}(\gamma)=S^{n-1}$, there is a tax that supports -$\tilde{\cal{X}}(c)$ if and only if $m=1$, $p_j>c\, \forall j$, and - \begin{enumerate} - \item $n=2$; or - \item $n=3$ and $p_i^{-1}+p_j^{-1}\geq p_k^{-1}$ for all distinct -$i,j,k$; or - \item $n=4$ and $p_1=p_2=p_3=p_4$. -\end{enumerate} -\end{enumerate}} -\end{slide} - - If, by restricting communication, we eliminate the less relevant messages, -then we can become more informed. But how can we achieve this? Restricting the -flow of information shifts the task of screening messages from the receivers -to the senders. Unlike the receivers, the senders do know the contents of the -messages they originate. If the senders' interests coincide with those of the -receiver and if the senders have sufficient knowledge about the receivers, -then the senders will choose the messages which are most relevant to the -receivers. This may make the receivers, and even the senders, better off. - - The network in Slide \ref{architectures} attains the minimal delay $c(8,24) -= 6$ using 8 processors. It is an example of the efficient one-shot networks -described by Foo. We will focus on a class of networks that are similar to the -Foo networks but that may differ slightly. For $q$, $c$ and $n$ such that $1 -\leq q \leq \lfloor n/2 \rfloor$ and $c(q,n) \leq c \leq n$, let $R_{nqc}$ be -the class of essential networks for adding $n$ items using $q$ processors in -$c$ cycles that have the following properties: - -\begin{slide*}\label{architectures} -\heading{Architecture} - -\begin{center} -\setlength{\unitlength}{1.65in} -\begin{picture}(1.1,1.6)(3.5,5.0) -\put(4.0,6.5){\circle*{.04}} -\put(4.1,6.5){1} -\put(4.0,6.0){\circle*{.04}} -\put(4.1,6.0){2} -\put(4.0,6.1){\vector(0,1){.3}} -\put(3.5,6.0){\circle*{.04}} -\put(3.6,6.0){3} -\put(3.6,6.1){\vector(1,1){.3}} -\put(4.0,5.5){\circle*{.04}} -\put(4.1,5.5){4} -\put(4.0,5.6){\vector(0,1){.3}} -\put(4.5,6.0){\circle*{.04}} -\put(4.6,6.0){5} -\put(4.4,6.1){\vector(-1,1){.3}} -\put(4.5,5.5){\circle*{.04}} -\put(4.6,5.5){6} -\put(4.4,5.6){\vector(-1,1){.3}} -\put(3.5,5.5){\circle*{.04}} -\put(3.6,5.5){7} -\put(3.5,5.6){\vector(0,1){.3}} -\put(4.0,5.0){\circle*{.04}} -\put(4.1,5.0){8} -\put(4.0,5.1){\vector(0,1){.3}} -\end{picture} -\end{center} -\end{slide*} - -Why would the senders communicate too many messages in the first place? If I -present too much material in this seminar, you have to choose which parts to -ignore and I would rather make that decision myself, since I know what I most -want to get across. Thus, it is in my interest not to overload you with -information. - -Generally, whenever there is a single sender of messages, that sender will -prefer to screen rather than have the receiver screen, because the sender has -an interest in which messages the receiver processes. But when there are more -senders, one sender's messages tend to crowd out the messages of the other -senders, as in this example here. If the senders don't take this external cost -into account when sending messages, they may collectively overload the -receiver. (\sref{architectures}) - -\end{document} -%% END semsamp2.tex |