"This paper addresses weight optimization problem in distributed consensus averaging algorithm over networks with symmetric star topology. We have determined optimal weights and convergence rate of the network in terms of its topological parameters. In addition, two alternative topologies with more rapid convergence rates have been introduced. The new topologies are Complete-Cored Symmetric (CCS) star and K-Cored Symmetric (KCS) star topologies. It has been shown that the optimal weights for the edges of central part in symmetric and CCS star configurations are independent of their branches. By simulation optimality of obtained weights under quantization constraints have been verified."

"We propose an online form of the cake cutting problem. This models situations where agents arrive and depart during the process of dividing a resource. We show that well known fair division procedures like cut-and-choose and the Dubins-Spanier moving knife procedure can be adapted to apply to such online problems. We propose some fairness properties that online cake cutting procedures can possess like online forms of proportionality and envy-freeness. We also consider the impact of collusion between agents. Finally, we study theoretically and empirically the competitive ratio of these online cake cutting procedures. Based on its resistance to collusion, and its good performance in practice, our results favour the online version of the cut-and-choose procedure over the online version of the moving knife procedure."

"We started by scanning existing social value metrics, such as the ones described in the table “10 Ways to Measure Social Value” on page 41. We found hundreds of competing tools, of which foundations and NGOs generally use one set, governments another, and academics yet another. In addition to discovering this segmentation, our survey suggested two more reasons why so few metrics guide real decisions. First, most metrics assume that value is objective, and therefore discoverable through analysis. Yet as most modern economists now agree, value is not an objective fact. Instead, value emerges from the interaction of supply and demand, and ultimately reflects what people or organizations are willing to pay. Because so few of the tools reflect this, they are inevitably misaligned with an organization’s strategic and operational priorities."

"Personally, if I believed in Republican/Austrian School/Libertarian, I'd either be putting a heck of a lot of time and effort into explaining why the results don't apply, or, if I could not come up with a home run explanation, I'd give up my views.…The fact that members of these dogmas don't know or care that reality doesn't fit their beliefs makes me a bit leery of other things they believe in as well. And yet, Republican/Austrian School/Libertarian is now the dominant paradigm. Even most Democrats believe cutting taxes, for instance increases growth - they just feel that even so, in most cases, the non-growth related benefits of keeping taxes higher (say, to pay for certain programs) makes it worth not cutting taxes in many instances."

"The recent happiness literature suggests that interpersonal utility comparisons are to some extent possible. Yet this does not undermine the basic philosophical criticism of utilitarianism (or, more generally, of subjective welfarism). A focus on subjective utility may lead to a relative neglect of the real conditions of life. Moreover, valuing a life is a reáective activity that should not be reduced to the evaluation of hedonic states. In fact, the psychological literature has also argued that ìutilityîis a multidimensional phenomenon and that it is crucial to distinguish a§ects and cognition. Therefore it appears unlikely that we should witness a revival of primitive utilitarianism in the near future. At the same time, however, the empirical work on happiness has drawn attention to the importance of the non-material dimensions of life ó a welcome shift away from the exclusive focus on material consumption."

"Decisions: The first type of decisions is simple, “binary”, i.e. you just care if something is true or false. Very true or very false does not matter. Someone is either pregnant or not pregnant. A statement is “true” or “false” with some confidence interval. (I call these M0 as, more technically, they depend on the zeroth moment, namely just on probability of events, and not their magnitude —you just care about “raw” probability). A biological experiment in the laboratory or a bet with a friend about the outcome of a soccer game belong to this category.

The second type of decisions is more complex. You do not just care of the frequency—but of the impact as well, or, even more complex, some function of the impact. So there is another layer of uncertainty of impact. (I call these M1+, as they depend on higher moments of the distribution). When you invest you do not care how many times you make or lose, you care about the expectation..."

"The puzzle: The puzzle is to find the flaw, the erroneous step, in the switching argument above. This includes determining exactly why and under what conditions that step is not correct, in order to be sure not to make this mistake in a more complicated situation where the misstep may not be so obvious. In short, the problem is to solve the paradox."

"But if an entire team walks, that’s much more like an addict’s “hitting bottom”. The consequences are going to be huge because any new team would have to learn the system from scratch. (Though I suppose management could delude themselves into thinking they have the project documentation to make that tractable.) And the departure of any series of employees [or, in the case of an addict, friends] is easy to rationalize: “he’s just a malcontent [no fun any more since he got married]”. But when *everyone* rejects you at once…"

"But do these goals really work? Researchers from four top business schools have collaborated to show that in many cases goals do more harm than good. Worse, they can cause real damage to organizations and individuals using them.

"We argue that the beneficial effects of goal setting have been overstated and that systematic harm caused by goal setting has been largely ignored," the researchers conclude. Bad "side effects" produced by goal-setting programs include a rise in unethical behavior, over-focus on one area while neglecting other parts of the business, distorted risk preferences, corrosion of organizational culture, and reduced intrinsic motivation."

"Most large organizations have a "top-down" central planning function, although they operate externally within a "bottom-up" (market) economy. As the business environment becomes more complex, top-down planning systems have been hard pressed to adequately understand and effectively respond to the quickly-developing challenges.

To cope with the complexity, some leading organizations are introducing more market-based BI systems to help with organizational decision-making. One of the emerging practices is called, prediction markets."

"Who would be invited to a social charrette in a technocracy? One thinks of blue ribbon panels and legislative hearings, but those are not public deliberations in most cases…they are public hearings. A charrette is a publicly deliberative process. It has rules and structures that are pliant and disruptive influences are addressed by a combination of rhetoric and interest, not “leadership,” which is a term I find increasingly dubious. "

"The purpose of the committee is presumably to ensure that the company doesn't waste money. And yet the result is that the company pays 10 times as much."

"Because the public doesn't understand the intricacies of finance, it's easily persuaded that this is definition of "soundness" is the same as keeping savings flowing to the banks so that the banks can lend to them to Main Street. That's why the public and its representatives have committed $700 billion of taxpayer money to Wall Street and another $500 to $600 billion of subsidized loans to the Street from the Fed -- bailing out the investors and creditors of every major bank, including , any moment, Citi -- only to discover, at the end of this frantic and unbelievably expensive exercise, that American jobs and communities are more endangered than they were at the start."

The ground is a foreign country

"Shared governance takes time."

"Losing isn’t proof that your input was disregarded. It may well have been taken seriously. It just didn’t win." (A sentiment no tenured faculty I've ever met will ever get....)

Politics of research proposals