Gameplay.

Players take control of Death, one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. The core gameplay is an action role-playing hack and slash style. The game makes frequent use of interactive puzzle elements, requiring the player to think their way through a series of levers, doors, elevators, portals, etc. in order to traverse areas and reach objectives.  Maps are vast and each contain open world regions that can be explored freely on foot or by horse, along with numerous dungeons where quest objectives are generally carried out. There are main and side quests, with main and side boss fights. Worlds can be traversed via fast travel, whereby the player can teleport to certain map points instantly. While inside a dungeon, the player is allowed to fast travel back to the overworld while saving their dungeon location for continuation later without losing progress.  Death is aided by Despair, a horse that is available for use in open areas of the overworld for faster travel, and Dust, a raven that guides him to his objectives. Death's primary weapons are two scythes, one wielded in each hand. Secondary weapons include melee weapons like hammers, axes, and maces as "slow" options; "fast" options are generally gauntlet-style weapons that provide the player with claws and other bladed arm extensions, at the expense of less range and power than the slow weapons.  There are several different movement options, including swimming, running along walls, and climbing options that are available on specially placed wooden elements, such as wall pegs and beams. In the course of quests, Death acquires "Death Grip", which operates as a grappling hook on certain objects; and "Voidwalker". Other abilities like "Soul Splitter" and "Interdiction" are acquired, which allow the player to control multiple characters to traverse puzzle areas.  Health, Wrath, and Reaper resource meters display on-screen whenever they change, along with an experience meter that shows how close the player is to the next character class level. Wrath is the game's mana-type system, being a resource used for special abilities. Reaper is a separate resource used for the Reaper ability, and when full, Death can transform briefly into his grim reaper form, which is more resilient and deals more damage.  There are eight player statistics, including a character class level that increases at various experience levels. Each new level gives the player a skill point that can be used in a skill tree that contains new abilities. Other statistics can be increased by equipping items, with each item having various stat-altering characteristics. The player's inventory contains seven different pages of equipment classes (primary and secondary weapon, shoulder, armor, glove, boot, and talisman, with an additional page for quest items). New equipment can be acquired via enemy drops, looting chests, or purchasing from vendor characters. New combo moves can also be purchased from "Trainer" characters.  "Stonebites", which are colored stones hidden throughout the world, can be collected (after several quests have been completed) and traded to a character named Blackroot, in groups of three, in exchange for various permanent statistic upgrades. There are three Stonebite types, indicated by their color, and the particular combination traded determines which upgrade is received.  Money is dropped by enemies and chests, and can be acquired by selling items to vendors. Special "Possessed weapons" are rarely acquired, which provide another more unorthodox mechanic for trading in unwanted items, whereby the possessed weapon can be upgraded by "sacrificing" other lesser items to it.

Plot.

"Darksiders II" is parallel to the previous game. The Four Horsemen (War, Strife, Fury, and Death) are the last of the Nephilim, fusions of angels and demons who waged war on creation. To preserve the balance of the Universe, the Four, tired of conquest, received incredible powers from the Charred Council in exchange for slaughtering the rest of the Nephilim. The Horseman Death trapped the souls of his fallen brethren in an amulet, earning the title of Kinslayer, among others (though he kept its preservation a secret, since the Council ordered the Nephilim's souls destroyed).  While War is charged with his crimes, the horseman Death, sure that his brother is innocent, sets out on a personal mission to erase his brother's 'crime' and resurrect humanity. He first travels to the Icy Veil—a dimension between the three kingdoms of Heaven, Hell, and Earth—to seek the Keeper of Secrets for proof of War's innocence and the way to restore Earth. The Keeper of Secrets, also known as the Crowfather, tells Death that he must go to the Tree of Life in order to restore humanity. The Crowfather, bitter about being given the Nephilim amulet (which torments him without end), refuses to let Death pass and attacks him in the shape of War. Death is thus forced to kill the Crowfather, but the Amulet shatters and embeds itself in his chest, knocking him out and sending him into a portal created by the Crowfather's death.  Death wakes up in the Forge Lands, a world populated by the Makers—physically imposing beings who are the Architects of Creation. He learns that their world, and many others, has been overrun with Corruption, a dark force that has blocked off the Tree of Life and has taken over many of the Maker's constructs. The Makers had crafted a massive Guardian to combat the Corruption, but had to abandon it before finishing the task due to the surrounding threats. With the help of constructs and a Maker named Karn, Death eventually reaches the Guardian, but upon activation, the Guardian is tainted by Corruption and goes on a rampage. Death battles the Guardian and destroys it, allowing it to be reassembled without Corruption. The Guardian self-destructs in the grasp of the creature blocking the path to the Tree of Life, which allows Death to reach his goal. Upon reaching the entrance, however, Death is seized by Corruption and is dragged into the Tree. There, Death is accosted by the shadowy form of Absalom, the first Nephilim, whose hatred lasted beyond his slaying at Death's hands and caused the Corruption, enabling him to take his revenge on creation.  Death is transported to the Land of the Dead, where he encounters the merchant Ostegoth. From the Merchant, he learns that in order to resurrect humanity, Death must find the Well of Souls, and to that end, he must speak with the Lord of Bones. After completing an array of trials to gain an audience with the Lord of Bones, Death is transported to the City of the Dead to find a soul capable of telling Death what he needs to know about the Well. After facing off against a creature housing all of mankind's souls, Death meets the soul the Lord of Bones alluded to: the Crowfather's. The Crowfather tells Death that while the souls of humanity are no longer bound in a host, they have merely been transported to the Well. Death learns that the Well of Souls has power over life and death, and that with it, the spirits of all things living are cleansed and renewed before they are sent out to be reborn. In order to access it, Death would need two keys: one kept by the angels, the other by the demons. Death asks why he and the other riders never knew of such things, to which the Crowfather replies that power must be tempered with ignorance: the Council feared that if the Horsemen ever learned the truth about the Well's power, they might try to resurrect their kin.  Death first seeks out the key held by the angels and is sent to an outpost of Heaven called Lostlight, which is being assaulted by Corruption. At the Ivory Tower, he meets the Archon, who tells Death that his answers are in the Ivory Citadel, which is shrouded in darkness and Corruption. The Archon sends Death to Earth to bring back the Rod of Arafel, a powerful holy weapon, so that the way to the Ivory Citadel could be cleared. On Earth, Death encounters remnants of the Hellguard being led by Uriel. With their help, Death reassembles the shattered rod. Upon returning to Lostlight, Death eventually realizes that the Archon has possessed the key the entire time and that the angel has fallen to Corruption himself. Death confronts the Archon, kills him, and acquires the first key. Death then proceeds to Shadow's Edge, described as a dark reflection of Lostlight. When Death arrives, he sees that the world itself is in the process of being devoured by Corruption. Intent on acquiring the second key, Death travels to the fortress home of the demon lord, Samael, but finds Lilith, a female demon-queen that created the Nephilim (she thus refers to herself as Death's mother, which he angrily denies). Death learns through Lilith that Samael is gone, that Death will be able to meet with the demon lord by utilizing a time portal. Before he leaves, Lilith urges Death to "follow [his] heart" and revive his brethren when he finds the Well of Souls. After traversing through the fortress in both the past and present, Death finally meets Samael who is not willing to just give Death the Key. After testing Death in a fierce battle, Samael gives Death the demon key, saying that no matter what happens, it should prove to be an interesting show. With both keys in hand, Death returns to the Tree of Life and has his penultimate meeting with the Crowfather, who reminds him of what's at stake: the fate of two races, humanity and the Nephilim. He warns that Corruption has chosen a named champion to block Death's efforts.  Death enters using the keys and proceeds to the Tree's core where he is met by Absalom. The Nephilim taunts Death by saying that the reason he is not harmed by Corruption is that the horseman is already "blackened by the sin of betrayal." Absalom and Death battle, and Death defeats Absalom just as he did eons ago. It is then that the Crowfather appears one last time and explains that Death may tap the Well's power to restore one race, but a sacrifice is needed. Warned that choosing one race will forever doom the other, Death chooses to save his brother War and sacrifices the souls of the Nephilim, still trapped in the scar on his chest, for humanity by leaping into the Well. An epilogue retells the final moments from the first game, with Uriel questioning if War intends to wage his campaign against the Charred Council alone, to which War replies "No, not alone." The scene then shows the arrival of the other Horsemen. The narrator states "And the number of the riders shall ever be four," and the Horsemen appeared: War, Strife, Fury and finally, Death.  In a post-credit scene, Lilith is seen being berated by a being who is completely in shadow (referred to by Lilith as'my Prince, strongly suggesting Lucifer'), angered that humanity has been restored and the Nephilim are lost forever. Lilith says she awaits punishment with a slight smile, but the entity states that "[she] will get no pleasure from it this time". The screen fades as Lilith screams in agony.

Development and release.

THQ's creative director Luis Gigliotti revealed in an interview with GameAxis that "Darksiders" would be a franchise and that they were contemplating a sequel. Joystiq stated that a "Darksiders" sequel was planned for the fiscal year of 2012.  An article on the "Official Xbox Magazine" website confirmed that "Darksiders II" was expected to be released in 2012. It was announced at E3 2011 that "Darksiders II" would be a launch title for the then-upcoming Wii U with modifications necessary to fit the controls of the Nintendo console as well as some new features unique to the console.  The game takes Death across multiple dungeons and city hubs. City hubs feature NPCs who can give out side quests etc. One city hub connects to a number of dungeons and one city area features more dungeons than the whole of the original Darksiders. Loot is also included, dropping from encounters as rewards ranging from 12 different armor piece categories, which can have different enchantments and may power up Death's Wrath Powers.  At the San Diego Comic Con, it was revealed that Michael Wincott would provide the voice of Death. On June 19, 2012, James Cosmo (who appeared as a priest in "The Last Sermon," a live-action trailer for the game) was announced as the voice of Maker Elder Eideard, Death's guide throughout the story.  On February 14, THQ has announced that "Darksiders II" would hit stores on June 26, 2012. Pre-order DLC bonuses for the game were also announced, for GameStop, Best Buy and Amazon. On April 18, 2012, THQ announced on their website that "Darksiders II" was to be delayed until August 2012. The PC requirements were released on July 19, 2012.  A remastered port of "Darksiders II" known as the "Deathinitive Edition" was released for PlayStation 4 and Xbox One in October 2015. It was published by Nordic Games, which had acquired the rights to the "Darksiders" franchise following the bankruptcy of THQ. The port was developed by Gunfire Games, a studio that was founded by "Darksiders" creator David Adams following the closure of Crytek USA (which itself was established after the closure of Vigil by THQ) and consists almost entirely of Vigil staff. Along with higher-resolution graphics and a revamped lighting engine, the studio also made changes to adjust the balance of the game. The Xbox One version of the edition was announced on June 11, 2015. A port of the "Deathinitive Edition" to the Nintendo Switch was announced on August 5, 2019.

Downloadable content.

A season pass is available and includes "The Abyssal Forge" (a story-driven installment taking place in the Shadow Lands), "The Demon Lord Belial" (another story-driven installment taking place on Earth) and The Maker Armor and Scythe Set. "Argul's Tomb" is another story-driven pack not included in the season pass. The Angel of Death Pack includes new enhanced weapons and armor along with a new visual effect for Dust. The Deadly Despair pack offers a speed boost to Death's horse Despair. Various other DLC packs have been released offering weapons and armor much like the Angel of Death pack.  The "Deathinitive Edition" of the game, released on PlayStation 4 and Xbox One, include these story expansions as well as extra equipment.

Reception.

"Darksiders II" received positive reviews. Aggregating review website Metacritic gave the Wii U version 85/100, the PlayStation 3 version 84/100, the Xbox 360 version 83/100, and the PC version 81/100. "IGN" gave it a score of 7.5, saying "Despite its problems, I was compelled onward in my quest with Death because "Darksiders II" is simply a fun game".  The game was the best selling game of August with over 247,000 units sold in the United States. As of November 5, 2012, the game had only sold 1.5 million copies, with THQ stating that the game "did not perform to our expectations."

Sequel.

A third "Darksiders" game was originally planned by Vigil Games, however, the fate of its franchise was threatened due to financial complications. Its parent company, THQ, filed for bankruptcy in 2012. The company's assets were sold at an auction, excluding Vigil Games, which was shut down along with the parent company THQ. In April 2013, THQ began a process to auction off the remaining IP that it had not yet sold, including "Darksiders". Several companies publicly expressed interest in bidding for the franchise, including the Japanese developer PlatinumGames, and Crytek USA, a Crytek subsidiary led by former Vigil CEO David Adams, and primarily staffed by former Vigil employees. Adams had expressed interest in allowing "Darksiders" to come back "home" to its creators. On April 22, 2013, "Darksiders", along with "Red Faction" and "MX vs. ATV", was purchased by Nordic Games in the final transaction of THQ's assets. On June 14, 2013, Nordic Games has stated in an interview with Joystiq that fans "[should] not look for a "Darksiders 3" before two years from now".  On May 2, 2017, after a product listing for "Darksiders III" appeared on Amazon.com, "Darksiders III" was officially revealed. The game was released on November 27, 2018.

Darksiders II is an action role-playing hack and slash action-adventure video game developed by Vigil Games and published by THQ. It is the sequel to "Darksiders" and was released in August 2012 for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and as a launch title for Wii U upon the console's Australian, European, and North American release in November 2012. The story follows the efforts of player character Death to clear the name of his brother, War, who stands accused of wiping out humanity.

是一款由Vigil Games开发并由THQ发行的动作冒险游戏。本作是《暗黑血统》的正统续作,2012年8月在Windows、Xbox 360和PlayStation 3上发售,同年12月在WiiU上发售。


History.

First generation.

The first production of the Type 73, known as the was based on the Jeep CJ-3Bs that Mitsubishi Motors had been producing under license from Willys. The first Type 73 Kyūs had been placed into production in 1973 with the chassis of the Jeep CJ-3B for basis before they made modifications based on it to create the Mitsubishi CJ-3B-J4 and the Mitsubishi CJ-3B-J4C before it was replaced again by producing the Mitsubishi CJ-5A-J54. Both gasoline and diesel variants were produced and a total over 200,000 units were made. Production continued on before it ended in 1997 after the Type 73 Light Truck Shins were placed in production by 1996.  The Kyūs had been exported out of Japan, mostly declared as military surplus vehicles to the Philippines and South Vietnam with the latter using it as one of the main jeeps of the ARVN next to the Willys M606 and M38A1s in the course of the Vietnam War. They had been exported to New Zealand for civilian use.

Second generation.

The began production in 1996 as Mitsubishi Motors began to slowly phase out the Type 73 Light Truck Kyūs from production and from selective service in the JSDF, using the frame of the Mitsubishi Pajero as a basis.  The Type 73 Light Truck Shin can be mounted with various heavy machine guns and anti-tank missile launchers. But like its predecessor, the Shin Light Truck can mount Sumitomo M2 machine guns and, for the first time, the Sumitomo MINIMI Light Machine Gun.  When Shin Light Trucks were deployed to Iraq as part of the JIRSG, the vehicles were bulletproofed due to concerns that Iraqi guerrillas would target their vehicles to provoke JSDF troops who, under the restrictions of Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, are not supposed to participate in any kind of offensive combat operations.

Design.

Both Kyū and Shin light truck vehicles can be outfitted with various weapon systems such as Kawasaki Type 64 anti-tank pods, Kawasaki Type 79 and Kawasaki Type 87 anti-tank missile launchers, Japan Steel Works Type 60 recoilless rifles, Sumitomo MINIMI LMGs<ref name="1/2 Recon truck"></ref> and Sumitomo M2 machine guns to make them both a mobile anti-tank and anti-personnel vehicle.  Both light truck variants have the tarpaulin hood mounts at the rear as an option. They also have rear seats that can be folded up when they are not needed. Air conditioning is installed as a standard feature.

Variants.

The base Kyu models for personnel and light cargo transport were designated J24A, J25A and J23A. 'A2' versions carried a wireless communications system Type 3. 'P' versions carried a recoil-less rifle, 'K' versions an anti-tank guided missile launcher Type 87. 'G-E' and 'G-N' versions carried a Type 79 guided missile launcher for either anti-tank or anti-landing craft us. 'SR' versions carried a radar system and had jacks to stabilize the vehicle. The 'SH' version carried an orientation system while the 'SC' version carried a communication relay system. 'SR, 'SH' and 'SC' versions were all equipped with winches. Small numbers were produced with small megaphones, roof-mounted single beacons and grille flashers. The Light Trucks were painted in white as they were exclusively used by JSDF military police units.

The is a series of military light trucks that are used as mini SUVs in the JSDF. They have been under production by Mitsubishi Motors since 1973. In JSDF service, it is officially known as the 1/2 Ton Truck. They are powered by Mitsubishi-made 4-cylinder diesel engines with a total of 123 horsepower.

73式吉普车是1973年服役的日本自卫队通用小型军用车(归为小货卡)。三菱汽车制造现在有2种车型。 目前称「73式」但是实际官方名称是「1/2吨货卡」。


Description.

Since the call stack is organized as a stack, the caller pushes the return address onto the stack, and the called subroutine, when it finishes, pulls or pops the return address off the call stack and transfers control to that address. If a called subroutine calls on yet another subroutine, it will push another return address onto the call stack, and so on, with the information stacking up and unstacking as the program dictates. If the pushing consumes all of the space allocated for the call stack, an error called a stack overflow occurs, generally causing the program to crash. Adding a subroutine's entry to the call stack is sometimes called "winding"; conversely, removing entries is "unwinding".  There is usually exactly one call stack associated with a running program (or more accurately, with each task or thread of a process), although additional stacks may be created for signal handling or cooperative multitasking (as with setcontext). Since there is only one in this important context, it can be referred to as "the" stack (implicitly, "of the task"); however, in the Forth programming language the "data stack" or "parameter stack" is accessed more explicitly than the call stack and is commonly referred to as "the" stack (see below).  In high-level programming languages, the specifics of the call stack are usually hidden from the programmer. They are given access only to a set of functions, and not the memory on the stack itself. This is an example of abstraction. Most assembly languages, on the other hand, require programmers to be involved with manipulating the stack. The actual details of the stack in a programming language depend upon the compiler, operating system, and the available instruction set.

Functions of the call stack.

As noted above, the primary purpose of a call stack is to "store the return addresses". When a subroutine is called, the location (address) of the instruction at which the calling routine can later resume needs to be saved somewhere. Using a stack to save the return address has important advantages over alternative calling conventions. One is that each task can have its own stack, and thus the subroutine can be thread-safe, that is, can be active simultaneously for different tasks doing different things. Another benefit is that by providing reentrancy, recursion is automatically supported. When a function calls itself recursively, a return address needs to be stored for each activation of the function so that it can later be used to return from the function activation. Stack structures provide this capability automatically.  Depending on the language, operating-system, and machine environment, a call stack may serve additional purposes, including for example:  The typical call stack is used for the return address, locals, and parameters (known as a "call frame"). In some environments there may be more or fewer functions assigned to the call stack. In the Forth programming language, for example, ordinarily only the return address, counted loop parameters and indexes, and possibly local variables are stored on the call stack (which in that environment is named the "return stack"), although any data can be temporarily placed there using special return-stack handling code so long as the needs of calls and returns are respected; parameters are ordinarily stored on a separate "data stack" or "parameter stack", typically called "the" stack in Forth terminology even though there is a call stack since it is usually accessed more explicitly. Some Forths also have a third stack for floating-point parameters.

Structure.

A call stack is composed of stack frames (also called "activation records" or "activation frames"). These are machine dependent and ABI-dependent data structures containing subroutine state information. Each stack frame corresponds to a call to a subroutine which has not yet terminated with a return. For example, if a subroutine named codice_2 is currently running, having been called by a subroutine codice_1, the top part of the call stack might be laid out like in the adjacent picture.  A diagram like this can be drawn in either direction as long as the placement of the top, and so direction of stack growth, is understood. Furthermore, independently of this, architectures differ as to whether call stacks grow towards higher addresses or towards lower addresses. The logic of the diagram is independent of the addressing choice.  The stack frame at the top of the stack is for the currently executing routine. The stack frame usually includes at least the following items (in push order):

Stack and frame pointers.

When stack frame sizes can differ, such as between different functions or between invocations of a particular function, popping a frame off the stack does not constitute a fixed decrement of the stack pointer. At function return, the stack pointer is instead restored to the frame pointer, the value of the stack pointer just before the function was called. Each stack frame contains a stack pointer to the top of the frame immediately below. The stack pointer is a mutable register shared between all invocations. A frame pointer of a given invocation of a function is a copy of the stack pointer as it was before the function was invoked.  The locations of all other fields in the frame can be defined relative either to the top of the frame, as negative offsets of the stack pointer, or relative to the top of the frame below, as positive offsets of the frame pointer. The location of the frame pointer itself must inherently be defined as a negative offset of the stack pointer.

Storing the address to the caller's frame.

In most systems a stack frame has a field to contain the previous value of the frame pointer register, the value it had while the caller was executing. For example, the stack frame of codice_2 would have a memory location holding the frame pointer value that codice_1 uses (not shown in the diagram above). The value is saved upon entry to the subroutine and restored upon return. Having such a field in a known location in the stack frame enables code to access each frame successively underneath the currently executing routine's frame, and also allows the routine to easily restore the frame pointer to the "caller's" frame, just before it returns.

Lexically nested routines.

Programming languages that support nested subroutines also have a field in the call frame that points to the stack frame of the "latest" activation of the procedure that most closely encapsulates the callee, i.e. the immediate "scope" of the callee. This is called an "access link" or "static link" (as it keeps track of static nesting during dynamic and recursive calls) and provides the routine (as well as any other routines it may invoke) access to the local data of its encapsulating routines at every nesting level. Some architectures, compilers, or optimization cases store one link for each enclosing level (not just the immediately enclosing), so that deeply nested routines that access shallow data do not have to traverse several links; this strategy is often called a "display".  Access links can be optimized away when an inner function does not access any (non-constant) local data in the encapsulation, as is the case with pure functions communicating only via arguments and return values, for example. Some historical computers, such as the Burroughs large systems, had special "display registers" to support nested functions, while compilers for most modern machines (such as the ubiquitous x86) simply reserve a few words on the stack for the pointers, as needed.

Overlap.

For some purposes, the stack frame of a subroutine and that of its caller can be considered to overlap, the overlap consisting of the area where the parameters are passed from the caller to the callee. In some environments, the caller pushes each argument onto the stack, thus extending its stack frame, then invokes the callee. In other environments, the caller has a preallocated area at the top of its stack frame to hold the arguments it supplies to other subroutines it calls. This area is sometimes termed the "outgoing arguments area" or "callout area". Under this approach, the size of the area is calculated by the compiler to be the largest needed by any called subroutine.

Use.

Call site processing.

Usually the call stack manipulation needed at the site of a call to a subroutine is minimal (which is good since there can be many call sites for each subroutine to be called). The values for the actual arguments are evaluated at the call site, since they are specific to the particular call, and either pushed onto the stack or placed into registers, as determined by the used calling convention. The actual call instruction, such as "branch and link", is then typically executed to transfer control to the code of the target subroutine.

Subroutine entry processing.

In the called subroutine, the first code executed is usually termed the subroutine prologue, since it does the necessary housekeeping before the code for the statements of the routine is begun.  For instruction set architectures in which the instruction used to call a subroutine puts the return address into a register, rather than pushing it onto the stack, the prologue will commonly save the return address by pushing the value onto the call stack, although if the called subroutine does not call any other routines it may leave the value in the register. Similarly, the current stack pointer and/or frame pointer values may be pushed.  If frame pointers are being used, the prologue will typically set the new value of the frame pointer register from the stack pointer. Space on the stack for local variables can then be allocated by incrementally changing the stack pointer.  The Forth programming language allows explicit winding of the call stack (called there the "return stack").

Return processing.

When a subroutine is ready to return, it executes an epilogue that undoes the steps of the prologue. This will typically restore saved register values (such as the frame pointer value) from the stack frame, pop the entire stack frame off the stack by changing the stack pointer value, and finally branch to the instruction at the return address. Under many calling conventions the items popped off the stack by the epilogue include the original argument values, in which case there usually are no further stack manipulations that need to be done by the caller. With some calling conventions, however, it is the caller's responsibility to remove the arguments from the stack after the return.

Unwinding.

Returning from the called function will pop the top frame off the stack, perhaps leaving a return value. The more general act of popping one or more frames off the stack to resume execution elsewhere in the program is called stack unwinding and must be performed when non-local control structures are used, such as those used for exception handling. In this case, the stack frame of a function contains one or more entries specifying exception handlers. When an exception is thrown, the stack is unwound until a handler is found that is prepared to handle (catch) the type of the thrown exception.  Some languages have other control structures that require general unwinding. Pascal allows a global goto statement to transfer control out of a nested function and into a previously invoked outer function. This operation requires the stack to be unwound, removing as many stack frames as necessary to restore the proper context to transfer control to the target statement within the enclosing outer function. Similarly, C has the codice_11 and codice_12 functions that act as non-local gotos. Common Lisp allows control of what happens when the stack is unwound by using the codice_13 special operator.  When applying a continuation, the stack is (logically) unwound and then rewound with the stack of the continuation. This is not the only way to implement continuations; for example, using multiple, explicit stacks, application of a continuation can simply activate its stack and wind a value to be passed. The Scheme programming language allows arbitrary thunks to be executed in specified points on "unwinding" or "rewinding" of the control stack when a continuation is invoked.

Inspection.

The call stack can sometimes be inspected as the program is running. Depending on how the program is written and compiled, the information on the stack can be used to determine intermediate values and function call traces. This has been used to generate fine-grained automated tests, and in cases like Ruby and Smalltalk, to implement first-class continuations. As an example, the GNU Debugger (GDB) implements interactive inspection of the call stack of a running, but paused, C program.  Taking regular-time samples of the call stack can be useful in profiling the performance of programs, because if a subroutine's pointer appears on the call stack sampling data many times, it is likely a code bottleneck and should be inspected for performance problems.

Security.

In a language with free pointers or non-checked array writes (such as in C), the mixing of control flow data which affects the execution of code (the return addresses or the saved frame pointers) and simple program data (parameters or return values) in a call stack is a security risk, possibly exploitable through stack buffer overflows as the most common type of buffer overflows.  One of such attacks involves filling one buffer with arbitrary executable code, and then overflowing the same or some other buffer to overwrite some return address with a value that points directly to the executable code. As a result, when the function returns, the computer executes that code. This kind of an attack can be easily blocked with W^X. Similar attacks can succeed even with W^X protection enabled, including the return-to-libc attack or the attacks coming from return-oriented programming. Various mitigations have been proposed, such as storing arrays in a completely separate location from the return stack, as is the case in the Forth programming language.

In computer science, a call stack is a stack data structure that stores information about the active subroutines of a computer program. This kind of stack is also known as an execution stack, program stack, control stack, run-time stack, or machine stack, and is often shortened to just "the stack". Although maintenance of the call stack is important for the proper functioning of most software, the details are normally hidden and automatic in high-level programming languages. Many computer instruction sets provide special instructions for manipulating stacks.

呼叫堆叠(英语:Call stack-{zh-cn:,港台称“呼叫堆叠”;zh-hk:,大陆称「调用堆栈」;zh-tw:,中国称「调用堆栈」}-,英文直接简称为“栈”(the stack))别称有:执行栈(execution stack)、控制栈(control stack)、运行时栈(run-time stack)与机器栈(machine stack),是电脑科学中存储有关正在执行的子程序的讯息的堆叠。有时仅称「堆叠」,但堆叠中不一定仅存储子程序讯息。几乎所有计算机程序都依赖于呼叫堆叠,然而高阶语言一般将呼叫堆叠的细节隐藏至后台。


Definition.

Let "κ" be a finite or infinite cardinal number and "M" a model in some first-order language. Then "M" is called "κ"-saturated if for all subsets "A" ⊆ "M" of cardinality less than "κ", the model "M" realizes all complete types over "A". The model "M" is called saturated if it is |"M"|-saturated where |"M"| denotes the cardinality of "M". That is, it realizes all complete types over sets of parameters of size less than |"M"|. According to some authors, a model "M" is called countably saturated if it is formula_1-saturated; that is, it realizes all complete types over countable sets of parameters. According to others, it is countably saturated if it is formula_3-saturated; i.e. realizes all complete types over finite parameter sets.

Motivation.

The seemingly more intuitive notion—that all complete types of the language are realized—turns out to be too weak (and is, appropriately, named weak saturation, which is the same as 1-saturation). The difference lies in the fact that many structures contain elements that are not definable (for example, any transcendental element of R is, by definition of the word, not definable in the language of fields). However, they still form a part of the structure, so we need types to describe relationships with them. Thus we allow sets of parameters from the structure in our definition of types. This argument allows us to discuss specific features of the model that we may otherwise miss—for example, a bound on a "specific" increasing sequence "c" can be expressed as realizing the type which uses countably many parameters. If the sequence is not definable, this fact about the structure cannot be described using the base language, so a weakly saturated structure may not bound the sequence, while an ω-saturated structure will.  The reason we only require parameter sets that are strictly smaller than the model is trivial: without this restriction, no infinite model is saturated. Consider a model "M", and the type Each finite subset of this type is realized in the (infinite) model "M", so by compactness it is consistent with "M", but is trivially not realized. Any definition that is universally unsatisfied is useless; hence the restriction.

Examples.

Saturated models exist for certain theories and cardinalities:  Both the theory of Q and the theory of the countable random graph can be shown to be ω-categorical through the back-and-forth method. This can be generalized as follows: the unique model of cardinality "κ" of a countable "κ"-categorical theory is saturated.  However, the statement that every model has a saturated elementary extension is not provable in ZFC. In fact, this statement is equivalent to the existence of a proper class of cardinals "κ" such that "κ" = "κ". The latter identity implies that either for some "λ", or "κ" is weakly inaccessible.

Relationship to prime models.

The notion of saturated model is dual to the notion of prime model in the following way: let "T" be a countable theory in a first-order language (that is, a set of mutually consistent sentences in that language) and let "P" be a prime model of "T". Then "P" admits an elementary embedding into any other model of "T". The equivalent notion for saturated models is that any "reasonably small" model of "T" is elementarily embedded in a saturated model, where "reasonably small" means cardinality no larger than that of the model in which it is to be embedded. Any saturated model is also homogeneous. However, while for countable theories there is a unique prime model, saturated models are necessarily specific to a particular cardinality. Given certain set-theoretic assumptions, saturated models (albeit of very large cardinality) exist for arbitrary theories. For "λ"-stable theories, saturated models of cardinality "λ" exist.

In mathematical logic, and particularly in its subfield model theory, a saturated model "M" is one that realizes as many complete types as may be "reasonably expected" given its size. For example, an ultrapower model of the hyperreals is formula_1-saturated, meaning that every descending nested sequence of internal sets has a nonempty intersection, see Goldblatt (1998).

在模型论中,饱和模型可以大致描述为一个实现够小的型的模型。


History.

Dedicated penal units were first envisioned during the Napoleonic era of warfare, as large armies formed of conscripts often suffered from disciplinary problems. Soldiers who refused to face the enemy were seen as detrimental to the cohesion of the army and as a disgrace to the nation. The formation of penal battalions was seen as a way of disciplining an army and keeping soldiers in line. In addition, many nations conscripted criminals into penal battalions in lieu of imprisoning or executing them during wartime to better utilize national manpower. Such military units were treated with little regard by the regular army and were often placed in compromising situations, such as being used in forlorn hope assaults. The French Empire in particular was notable for employing penal military units during the wars of the coalition, especially during the later years of the conflicts as manpower became limited. The "Régiment pénal de l'Île de Ré", formed in 1811 and composed almost entirely of criminals and other societal undesirables, would see action during the later years of the Napoleonic Wars.  The disbandment of conscripted armies and end of large scale warfare following the Napoleonic era led to the decline of the penal battalion system in continental Europe. However, the system continued in overseas colonies, again with the French as the primary employers of penal battalions. The Battalions of Light Infantry of Africa ("Bats d'Af") was formed by order of Louis Philippe I in 1832 for the purpose of expanding the French colonial empire. The Battalion fought in the French conquest of Algeria and during the Crimean War. The French also employed the "compagnies d'exclus" ("companies of the excluded"), military units which were stationed at Aîn-Sefra in Southern Algeria. These penal units consisted of convicts condemned to five years or more of hard labor and were judged unworthy to carry weapons.  The various Italian unification conflicts saw the Redshirts recruiting convicts and revolutionaries from prisons into penal regiments known as "Battaglioni degli imprigionati" ("Battalions of the Imprisoned" or "Prisoners Battalion".)  The period of military rearmament preceding World War II caused renewed interest in the concept of penal military units. In May 1935 the German Wehrmacht instituted a new policy under German conscription law that stated soldiers who were deemed disruptive to military discipline but were otherwise "worthy of service" would be sent to military penal units. Criminals were also conscripted into penal units in exchange for lighter sentences or as a form of stay of execution. These units, referred to as "special departments" or the generic term "Strafbataillon", were overseen by the German military police. Prior to World War II, there were nine "Strafbataillone" within the Wehrmacht. The primary role of a "Strafbataillon" was to provide front line support. As the war progressed, the size of "Strafbataillon" companies dramatically increased in size due to changes in German military policy. Under such policies, any soldier who had a death sentence (for retreat) commuted was automatically reassigned to penal units, greatly increasing the number of soldiers available to the "Strafbataillon".  The effectiveness of "Strafbataillone" were mixed. The combination of criminals, political prisoners, and undisciplined soldiers that made up a "Strafbataillon" often required harsh measures to be imposed for unit cohesion to be maintained. "Strafbataillone" were often ordered to undertake high risk missions on the front line, with soldiers being coached to regain their lost honor by fighting. Certain penal military units, such as the 36th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS, gained a reputation as being brutal towards civilian populations and prisoners of war, and were employed as anti-partisan troops due to the fear they inspired. Other units, most notably the 999th Light Afrika Division, suffered from poor morale and saw soldiers desert the Wehrmacht to join resistance groups.  Following Operation Barbarossa and the entry of the Soviet Union into World War II, the Red Army began to seriously consider the implementation of penal military units. These efforts resulted in the creation of "Shtrafbat", penal military units composed of sentenced soldiers, political prisoners, and others deemed to be expendable. A large number of Red Army soldiers who retreated without orders during the initial German invasion were reorganized into rudimentary penal units, the precursors to dedicated "Shtrafbat". The "Shtrafbat" were greatly increased in number by Joseph Stalin in July 1942 via Order No. 227 (Директива Ставки ВГК No227). Order No. 227 was a desperate effort to re-instill discipline after the panicked routs of the first year of combat with Germany. The order—popularized as the "Not one step back!" (Ни шагу назад!, Ni Shagu Nazad!) Order—introduced severe punishments, including summary execution, for unauthorized retreats.  During the Chinese Civil War (the part from 1945 to 1949) the National Revolutionary Army (NRA) was known to have used penal battalions. A unit made up of deserters and those accused of cowardice, the penal battalion was given tasks such as scouting ahead of the main forces to check for ambushes, crossing rivers and torrents to see whether they were fordable, and walking across unmapped minefields.

Penal military units, including penal battalions, penal companies, etc., are military formations consisting of convicts mobilized for military service. Such formations may contain soldiers convicted of offenses under military law, persons enrolled in the unit after being convicted in civilian courts or some combination of the two. Service in such units is typically considered a form of punishment or discipline in lieu of imprisonment or capital punishment.

惩戒部队(又称惩罚部队)是一种由违反军纪的的军人组成的部队。在这种部队中服役被当做是一种与监禁和死刑并列的刑罚。


History.

Political Party "European Capital".

The Political Party "European Capital" was registered in March 2005 (its party-leader was Ukrainian businessman Lev Partshaladze) and the party gained 0.04% of the votes during the Ukrainian parliamentary elections 2006; the party did not participate in the 2007 Ukrainian parliamentary elections. In February 2009 the party renamed itself Political Party "New Country". Lev Partshaladze was elected into the Kiev City Council for the Vitaliy Klychko Bloc in 2008, but expelled from the faction, for repeatedly voting differently from the faction, on 2 December 2010.

Ukrainian Democratic Alliance for Reform.

On a party congress, held on 24 April 2010, the Political Party "New Country" (founded in 2005 as Political Party "European Capital and renamed into "New Country" 14 months before April 2010) renamed itself into Ukrainian Democratic Alliance for Reform and elected boxer Vitali Klitschko as its leader. The party officially became Ukrainian Democratic Alliance for Reform (UDAR) of Vitali Klitschko mid-July 2010.  During the 2010 Ukrainian local elections the party won about 400 representatives in municipalities and Oblast Councils (regional parliaments).  The Bloc of Vitali Klitschko faction in the Kiev City Council changed its name to UDAR of Vitali Klitschko in February 2011. The party has a strong popularity in Kiev.  In September 2011 party leader Klitschko stated that the party was considering the possibility of merging with other political parties before contending in the 2012 Ukrainian parliamentary elections. In December 2011 UDAR of Vitali Klitschko and Civil Position where negotiating a unification. But Civil Position eventionally joined Batkivshchyna during these elections.  UDAR became a partner of the Christian Democratic Union of Germany in November 2011. Udar is supported by the German government and the Konrad Adenauer Foundation and received support in particular from Angela Merkel and also politicians from the conservative European People's Party. According to information gained by the German magazine DER SPIEGEL, the target was to "set up Klitschko purposefully as a new strong man in Kiew - in order to counter this way the Kremlin's growing influence". Support consisted in logistics, training and joint performances. Assistance was also promised by Christoph Heusgen, Ronald Pofalla and Guido Westerwelle.  UDAR did not join the Dictatorship Resistance Committee; but on 22 January 2012 it did sign an agreement on joint actions with that alliance.  Starting in March 2010 the party's popularity in opinion polls reached a level almost twice as high as the election threshold (which was raised to 5% in November 2011). The election list of the party was a mixture of candidates who used to represent parties from all over the political spectrum of Ukraine.  After a successful application the European People's Party started on 5 April 2012 the process of making UDAR an "observer member" of the organization.  In July 2012 party leader Klychko stated that his party would not cooperate with the Party of Regions in a new parliament.  Early August 2012 the party complained its candidates for people's deputies (and all other parties not involved in the first Azarov Government) suffered "psychological and physical pressure" and this "ten times higher than other parties".  Two weeks before the 28 October 2012 Ukrainian parliamentary election UDAR withdrew 26 of its candidates running in single-member constituencies in favour of Batkivshchyna candidates and Batkivshchyna withdrew 26 parliamentary candidates in favor of UDAR in an attempt to maximise votes for the opposition. In the election the party won 13.97% of the national votes and 6 constituencies (it had competed in 183 of the 225 constituencies) and thus 40 parliamentary seats. Support for UDAR was the least diversified at the regional level compared with the results of the other leading parties. Independent candidates Yaroslav Dubnevych and Fedir Nehoi joined the UDAR parliamentary faction on 12 December 2012; the same day party leader Klitschko was elected to lead the party's faction.  Late December 2012 UDAR and the United National Movement from Georgia signed a cooperation agreement.  In May 2013 UDAR, Batkivshchyna and Svoboda vowed to coordinate their actions during the 2015 Ukrainian presidential election.  On 6 September 2013 the party was granted "observer status" in the European People's Party.  Party leader Klitschko confirmed on 28 February 2014 that he would take part in the 2014 Ukrainian presidential election(, this also ended the May 2013 agreement to coordinate with Batkivshchyna and Svoboda). But on 29 March 2014 announced that he had changed his mind and would run for the post of Mayor of Kiev in the 2014 Kiev local election (including Mayoral elections) set for 25 May 2014. In the 2014 Ukrainian presidential election Klitschko endorsed the candidacy of Petro Poroshenko. Klitschko won Kiev's mayoral elections with almost 57% of the votes. Poroshenko was elected President of Ukraine on 25 May 2014. Klitschko was sworn in as Mayor on 5 June 2014. The same day the Ukrainian parliament had deprived Klitschko of his MP mandate (Ukrainian MPs are not entitled to combine parliamentary activities with any other public employment). Hence Vitaliy Kovalchuk was elected to lead the party's faction in parliament on 7 June 2014.

Merge into the Petro Poroshenko Bloc.

On 2 September Kovalchuk stated that since his party and Petro Poroshenko Bloc had agreed to "joint participation in parliamentary elections" on 29 March 2014 the two parties were "in discussion" about "the format" for how to do so in the (late) October 2014 Ukrainian parliamentary election. On 15 September it became clear that 30% of the Petro Poroshenko Bloc election list would be filled by members of UDAR and that UDAR leader Vitali Klitschko is at the top of this list, Klitschko vowed not to resign as incumbent Mayor of Kiev. Petro Poroshenko Bloc went on to win the 2014 Ukrainian parliamentary election with 132 seats; surpassing the runner up People's Front which won 82 seats. However, People's Front did perform better than the Petro Poroshenko Bloc with 0.33% in the nationwide election under party lists (22.14% against 21.81%) but the party did win 69 constituency seats while People's Front won only 18 constituencies.  On 28 August 2015 Petro Poroshenko Bloc and UDAR merged into 1 party, Petro Poroshenko Bloc. At the unifying congress (of 28 August 2015) Klitschko was elected as leader of this party.  In 2017 UDAR was still registered as a political party and it employed two persons. According to former UDAR member and Ukrainian lawmaker Dmytro Belotserkovets it was necessary that "the party performs only the technical functions necessary in terms of Ukrainian legislation."

Return as a political party.

On 18 May 2019 party leader Klitschko announced that the party would take part in the 2019 Ukrainian parliamentary election.  On 4 June Klitschko offered former President of Georgia Mikheil Saakashvili to join the leadership of his party and to take part in the July 2019 early parliamentary elections with UDAR, Saakashvili turned down the offer.  In the July 2019 Ukrainian parliamentary election the party only competed in 15 single-mandate constituencies. It failed to win any seats.

Ideology and political positions.

UDAR tends to avoid sensitive and polarising subjects and focuses instead on popular topics, such as more empowerment to ordinary Ukrainians and a ruthless campaign against corruption, the indifference of the authorities, the lack of local governance, inequality, and poverty. The party wants to "unleash the power of the state and provide conditions for welfare".  The party is in favor of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the European Union (EU). It has made no stance on a possible NATO membership of Ukraine.  UDAR wants to overcome social inequality with "the abandonment of the idea of cheap labor".  In education, the party wants to bring education in Ukraine to "European standards" by "development of external testing and monitoring the quality of education". UDAR wants to return to a 12-year compulsory secondary education with specialized training in the last two classes and three cycles of learning in higher education – bachelor's degree, master's degree and postgraduate. It also wants to guarantee autonomy of educational institutions by legislation.  The party wants to combat corruption in Ukraine with more transparency and the creation of an independent anti-corruption agency.  UDAR wants to reduce the number of state agencies in order "to minimize the interaction of the citizen with an official". And it wants to simplify procedures for registering property. It wants to reduce the number of taxes from 23 to 7 and to generally simplify the taxing system. "Owners of the land for agricultural purposes" should only be citizens of Ukraine.  UDAR wants to abolish the privileges of the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada (Ukraine's parliament) and former Presidents of Ukraine and to reduce benefits for current parliamentarians.  The party has pledged to "reboot" the court system, and "reinforce the control of the public over elections".  The party is in favor of holding Citizens' initiatives after 150,000 signatures are collected. The party is in favor of elections with regional open lists and mayoral elections in two rounds. In local elections, it favors a voting age of 16 (currently 18). It also wants to introduce in Ukraine a law on impeachment of the President of Ukraine.  The party wants to simplify procedures for the establishment and registration of public and charitable organizations.  In June 2013, the party's parliamentary faction voted for the denunciation of the 2010 Ukrainian–Russian Naval Base for Natural Gas treaty.

The Ukrainian Democratic Alliance for Reform (; the acronym UDAR/УДАР translates to "strike" or "punch", ) is a political party in Ukraine headed by retired Ukrainian professional heavyweight boxer and the WBC world heavyweight champion emeritus Vitali Klitschko. The party has been an observer member of the European People's Party (EPP) since 2013.

乌克兰民主改革联盟(),简称打击党(因其缩写具有“打击”的含义),乌克兰政党,现任领导人为乌克兰前职业拳击手维塔利·克利奇科。该党主张反腐化,立场亲欧。


History.

Emergence.

Research into the peaceful uses of nuclear materials began in the United States under the auspices of the Atomic Energy Commission, created by the United States Atomic Energy Act of 1946. Medical scientists were interested in the effect of radiation upon the fast-growing cells of cancer, and materials were given to them, while the military services led research into other peaceful uses.  The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 encouraged private corporations

Power reactor research.

Argonne National Laboratory was assigned by the United States Atomic Energy Commission the lead role in developing commercial nuclear energy beginning in the 1940s. Between then and the turn of the 21st century, Argonne designed, built, and operated fourteen reactors at its site southwest of Chicago, and another fourteen reactors at the National Reactors Testing Station in Idaho. These reactors included initial experiments and test reactors that were the progenitors of today's pressurized water reactors (including naval reactors), boiling water reactors, heavy water reactors, graphite-moderated reactors, and liquid-metal cooled fast reactors, one of which was the first reactor in the world to generate electricity. Argonne and a number of other AEC contractors built a total of 52 reactors at the National Reactor Testing Station. Two were never operated; except for the Neutron Radiography Facility, all the other reactors were shut down by 2000.  In the early afternoon of December 20, 1951, Argonne director Walter Zinn and fifteen other Argonne staff members witnessed a row of four light bulbs light up in a

Start of commercial nuclear power.

From the successful naval reactor program, plans were quickly developed for the use of reactors to generate steam to drive turbines turning generators. In April 1957, the SM-1 Nuclear Reactor in Fort Belvoir, Virginia was the first atomic power generator to go online and produce electrical energy to the U.S. power grid. On May 26, 1958 the first commercial nuclear power plant in the United

Opposition to nuclear power.

There has been considerable opposition to the use of nuclear power in the United States. The first U.S. reactor to face public opposition was Enrico Fermi Nuclear Generating Station in 1957. It was built approximately 30 miles from Detroit and there was opposition from the United Auto Workers Union. Pacific Gas & Electric planned to build the first commercially viable nuclear power plant in the US at Bodega Bay, north of San Francisco. The proposal was controversial and conflict with local citizens began in 1958. The conflict ended in 1964, with the forced abandonment of plans for the power plant. Historian Thomas Wellock traces the birth of the anti-nuclear movement to the controversy over Bodega Bay. Attempts to build a nuclear power plant in Malibu were similar to those at Bodega Bay and were also abandoned.  Nuclear accidents continued into the 1960s with a small test reactor exploding

Over-commitment and cancellations.

By the mid-1970s it became clear that nuclear power would not grow nearly as quickly as once believed. Cost overruns were sometimes a factor of ten above original industry estimates, and became a major problem. For the 75 nuclear power reactors built from 1966 to 1977, cost overruns averaged 207 percent. Opposition and problems were galvanized by the Three Mile Island accident in 1979.  Over-commitment to nuclear power brought about the financial collapse of the Washington Public Power Supply System, a public agency which undertook to build five large nuclear power plants in the 1970s. By 1983, cost overruns and delays, along with a slowing of electricity demand growth, led to cancellation of two WPPSS plants and a construction halt on two others. Moreover, WPPSS defaulted on $2.25 billion of municipal bonds, which is one of the largest municipal bond defaults in U.S. history. The court case that followed took nearly a decade to resolve.  Eventually, more than 120 reactor orders were cancelled, and the construction of new reactors ground to a halt. Al Gore has commented on the historical record

Three Mile Island and after.

The NRC reported "(...the Three Mile Island accident...) was the most serious in U.S. commercial nuclear power plant operating history, even though it led to no deaths or injuries to plant workers or members of the nearby community." The World Nuclear Association reports that "...more than a dozen major, independent studies have assessed the radiation releases and possible effects on the people and the environment around TMI since the 1979 accident at TMI-2. The most recent was a 13-year study on 32,000 people. None has found any adverse health effects such as cancers which might be linked to the accident." Other nuclear power incidents within the US (defined as safety-related events in civil nuclear power facilities between INES Levels 1 and 3 include those at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant, which was the source of two of the top five highest conditional core damage frequency nuclear incidents in the United States

Effects of Fukushima.

Following the 2011 Japanese nuclear accidents, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has announced it will launch a comprehensive safety review of the 104 nuclear power reactors across the United States, at the request of President Obama. A total of 45 groups and individuals had formally asked the NRC to suspend all licensing and other activities at 21 proposed nuclear reactor projects in 15 states until the NRC had completed a thorough post-Fukushima reactor crisis examination. The petitioners also asked the NRC to supplement its own investigation by establishing an independent commission comparable to that set up in the wake of the serious, though less severe, 1979 Three Mile Island accident.  An industry observer noted that post-Fukushima costs were likely to go up for both current and new nuclear power plants, due to increased

Competitiveness problems.

In May 2015, a senior vice president of General Atomics stated that the U.S. nuclear industry was struggling because of comparatively low U.S. fossil fuel production costs, partly due to the rapid development of shale gas, and high financing costs for nuclear plants.  In July 2016 Toshiba withdrew the U.S. design certification renewal for its Advanced Boiling Water Reactor because "it has become increasingly clear that energy price declines in the US prevent Toshiba from expecting additional opportunities for ABWR construction projects".  In 2016, Governor of New York Andrew Cuomo directed the New York Public Service Commission to consider ratepayer-financed subsidies similar

Westinghouse Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

On March 29, 2017, parent company Toshiba placed Westinghouse Electric Company in Chapter 11 bankruptcy because of $9 billion of losses from its nuclear reactor construction projects. The projects responsible for this loss are mostly the construction of four AP1000 reactors at Vogtle in Georgia and V. C. Summer in South Carolina. The U.S. government had given $8.3 billion of loan guarantees for the financing of the Vogtle nuclear reactors being built in the U.S., which are delayed but remain under construction. While the V.C. Summer facility owners, did not avail of the loan guarantee program as stating in 2014 that they meant "extensive

Possible renaissance.

In 2008, it was reported that The Shaw Group and Westinghouse would construct a factory at the Port of Lake Charles at Lake Charles, Louisiana to build components for the Westinghouse AP1000 nuclear reactor. On October 23, 2008, it was reported that Northrop Grumman and Areva were planning to construct a factory in Newport News, Virginia to build nuclear reactors.  As of March 2009, the NRC had received applications to construct 26 new reactors with applications for another 7 expected. Six of these reactors were ordered. Some applications were made to reserve places in a queue for government incentives available for the first three plants based on each innovative reactor design.  In May 2009, John Rowe, chairman of Exelon, which operates 17 nuclear reactors, stated that he would cancel or delay construction of two new reactors in Texas without federal loan guarantees. Following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, he remarked that the nuclear renaissance was dead. Amory Lovins added that "market forces had killed it years earlier".  In July 2009, the proposed Victoria County Nuclear Power Plant was delayed, as the project proved difficult to finance.

Nuclear power plants.

As of 2020, a total of 88 nuclear power plants have been built in the United States, 86 of which have had at least one operational reactor. In 2019

Safety and accidents.

Regulation of nuclear power plants in the United States is conducted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which divides the nation into 4 administrative divisions.

Three Mile Island.

On March 28, 1979, equipment failures and operator error contributed to loss of coolant and a partial core meltdown at the Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant in Pennsylvania. The mechanical failures were compounded by the initial failure of plant operators to recognize the situation as a loss-of-coolant accident due to inadequate training and human factors, such as human-computer interaction design oversights relating to ambiguous control room indicators in the power plant's user interface. The scope and complexity of the accident became clear over the course of five days, as employees of Met Ed, Pennsylvania state officials, and members of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) tried to understand the problem, communicate the situation to the press and local community, decide whether the accident required an emergency evacuation, and ultimately end the crisis. The NRC's authorization of the release of 40,000 gallons of radioactive waste water directly in the

Other incidents.

On March 5, 2002, maintenance workers discovered that corrosion had eaten a football-sized hole into the reactor vessel head of the Davis-Besse plant. Although the corrosion did not lead to an accident, this was considered to be a serious nuclear safety incident. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission kept Davis-Besse shut down until March 2004, so that FirstEnergy was able to perform all the necessary maintenance for safe operations. The NRC imposed its largest fine ever—more than $5 million—against FirstEnergy for the actions that led to the corrosion. The company paid an additional $28 million in fines under a settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice.  In 2013 the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station was permanently retired when premature wear was found in the Steam Generators which had been replaced in 2010–2011.  The nuclear industry in the United States has maintained one of the best industrial safety records in the world with respect to all kinds of accidents. For 2008, the industry hit a new low of 0.13

Post-Fukushima concerns.

Following the Japanese Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, according to Black & Veatch’s annual utility survey that took place after the disaster, of the 700 executives from the US electric utility industry that were surveyed, nuclear safety was the top concern. There are likely to be increased requirements for on-site spent fuel management and elevated design basis threats at nuclear power plants. License extensions for existing reactors will face additional scrutiny, with outcomes depending on the degree to which plants can meet new requirements, and some extensions already granted for more than 60 of the 104 operating U.S. reactors could be revisited. On-site storage, consolidated long-term storage, and geological disposal of spent fuel is "likely to be reevaluated in a new light because of the Fukushima storage pool experience". In March 2011, nuclear experts told Congress that spent-fuel pools at US

Security and deliberate attacks.

The United States 9/11 Commission has said that nuclear power plants were potential targets originally considered for the September 11, 2001 attacks. If terrorist groups could sufficiently damage safety systems to cause a core meltdown at a nuclear power plant, and/or sufficiently damage spent fuel pools, such an

Uranium supply.

A 2012 report by the International Atomic Energy Agency concluded: “The currently defined uranium resource base is more than adequate to meet high-case requirements through 2035 and well into the foreseeable future.”  At the start of 2013, the identified remaining worldwide uranium resources stood at 5.90 million tons, enough to supply the world's reactors

Fuel cycle.

Uranium mining.

The United States has the 4th largest uranium reserves in the world. The U.S. has its most prominent uranium reserves in New Mexico, Texas, and Wyoming. The U.S. Department of Energy has approximated there to be at least 300 million

Uranium enrichment.

There is one gas centrifuge enrichment plant currently in commercial operation in the US. The National Enrichment Facility, operated by URENCO east of Eunice, New Mexico, was the first uranium enrichment plant in 30 years to be built in the US. The plant started enriching uranium in 2010. Two additional gas centrifuge plants have been licensed by the NRC, but are not

Reprocessing.

Nuclear reprocessing has been politically controversial because of the potential to contribute to nuclear proliferation, the potential vulnerability to nuclear terrorism, the political challenges of repository siting, and because of its high cost compared to the once-through fuel cycle. The Obama administration has disallowed reprocessing of nuclear waste, citing nuclear proliferation concerns. Critics of reprocessing worry that the recycled materials will be used for weapons. However, it is unlikely that reprocessed plutonium would be used for nuclear weapons, because it is

Waste disposal.

Recently, as plants continue to age, many on-site spent fuel pools have come near capacity, prompting creation of dry cask storage facilities as well. Several lawsuits between utilities and the government have transpired over the cost of these facilities, because by law the government is required to foot the bill for actions that go beyond the spent fuel pool.  There are some 65,000 tons of nuclear waste now in temporary storage throughout the U.S. Since 1987, Yucca Mountain, in Nevada, had been the proposed site for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, but the project was shelved in 2009 following years of controversy and legal wrangling. An alternative plan has not been proffered. In June 2018, the Trump administration and some members of Congress again began proposing using Yucca Mountain, with Nevada Senators raising opposition.  At places like Maine Yankee, Connecticut Yankee and Rancho Seco, reactors no longer operate, but the spent fuel remains in small concrete-and-steel silos that require maintenance and

Water use in nuclear power production.

A 2011 NREL study of water use in electricity generation concluded that the median nuclear plant with cooling towers consumed 672 gallons per megawatt-hour (gal/MWh), a usage similar to that of coal plants, but more than other generating technologies, except hydroelectricity (median reservoir evaporation loss of 4,491 gal/MWh) and concentrating solar power (786 gal/MWh for power tower designs, and 865 for trough). Nuclear plants with once-through cooling systems consume only 269 gal/MWh, but require withdrawal of 44,350 gal/MWh. This makes nuclear plants with once-through cooling susceptible to drought.  Once-through cooling systems, while once common, have come under attack for the possibility of damage to the

Plant decommissioning.

The price of energy inputs and the environmental costs of every nuclear power plant continue long after the facility has finished generating its last useful electricity. Both nuclear reactors and uranium enrichment facilities must be decommissioned, returning the facility and its parts to a safe enough level to be entrusted for other uses. After a cooling-off period that may last as long as a century, reactors must be dismantled and cut into small pieces to be packed in containers for final disposal. The process is very expensive, time-consuming, dangerous for workers, hazardous to the natural environment, and presents new opportunities for human error, accidents or sabotage.  The total energy required for decommissioning can be as much as 50% more than the energy needed for the original construction. In most cases, the decommissioning process costs between US$300 million to US$5.6 billion. Decommissioning at nuclear sites which have experienced a serious accident are the most expensive and

Organizations.

Fuel vendors.

The following companies have active Nuclear fuel fabrication facilities in the United States. These are all light water fuel fabrication facilities

Industry and academic.

The American Nuclear Society (ANS) scientific and educational organization has both academic and industry members. The organization publishes a large amount of literature on nuclear technology in several journals. The

Anti-nuclear power groups.

Some sixty anti-nuclear power groups are operating, or have operated, in the United States. These include: Abalone Alliance, Clamshell Alliance, Greenpeace USA, Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, Musicians United for Safe Energy, Nuclear

Debate.

There has been considerable public and scientific debate about the use of nuclear power in the United States, mainly from the 1960s to the late 1980s, but also since about 2001 when talk of a nuclear renaissance began. There has been debate about issues such as nuclear accidents, radioactive waste disposal, nuclear proliferation, nuclear economics, and nuclear terrorism.  Some scientists and engineers have expressed reservations about nuclear power, including: Barry Commoner, S. David Freeman, John Gofman, Arnold Gundersen, Mark Z. Jacobson, Amory Lovins, Arjun Makhijani, Gregory Minor, and Joseph Romm. Mark Z. Jacobson, professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford University, has said: "If our nation wants to reduce global warming, air pollution and energy instability, we should invest only in the best energy options. Nuclear energy isn't one of them". Arnold Gundersen, chief engineer of Fairewinds Associates and a former nuclear power industry executive, has questioned the safety of the Westinghouse AP1000, a proposed third-generation nuclear reactor. John Gofman, a nuclear chemist and doctor, raised concerns about exposure to low-level radiation in the 1960s and argued against commercial nuclear power in the U.S. In “Nuclear Power: Climate Fix or Folly,” Amory Lovins, a physicist with the Rocky Mountain Institute, argued that expanded nuclear power "does not represent a cost-effective solution to global warming and that investors would shun it were it not for generous government subsidies lubricated by intensive lobbying efforts".  Patrick Moore (an early Greenpeace member and former president of Greenpeace Canada) spoke out against nuclear power in 1976, but today he supports it, along with renewable energy sources. In Australian newspaper "The Age", he writes "Greenpeace is wrong — we must consider nuclear power". He argues that any realistic plan to reduce reliance on fossil fuels or greenhouse gas emissions requires increased use of nuclear energy. Phil Radford, Executive Director of Greenpeace US responded that nuclear energy is too risky, takes too long to build to address climate change, and by showing that the can U.S. shift to nearly 100% renewable energy while phasing out nuclear power by 2050.  Environmentalist Stewart Brand wrote the book "Whole Earth Discipline", which examines how nuclear power and some other technologies can be used as tools to address global warming. Bernard Cohen, Professor Emeritus of Physics at the University of Pittsburgh, calculates that nuclear power is many times safer than other forms of power generation. President Obama early on included nuclear power as part of his “all of the above” energy strategy. In a speech to the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers in 2010, he demonstrated his commitment to nuclear power by announcing his approval of an $8 billion loan guarantee to pave the way for construction of the first new US nuclear power plant in nearly 30 years. Then in 2012, his first post-Fukishima state-of-the-union address, Barack Obama said that America needs “an all-out, all-of-the-above strategy that develops every available source of American energy,” yet pointedly omitted any mention of nuclear power. But in February 2014, Energy secretary Ernest Moniz announced $6.5 billion in federal loan guarantees to enable construction of two new nuclear reactors, the first in the US since 1996.  According to the Union of Concerned Scientists in March 2013 over one-third of U.S. nuclear power plants suffered safety-related incidents over the past three years, and nuclear regulators and plant operators need to improve inspections to prevent such events.  "Pandora's Promise" is a 2013 documentary film, directed by Robert Stone. It presents an argument that nuclear energy, typically feared by environmentalists, is in fact the only feasible way of meeting humanity's growing need for energy while also addressing the serious problem of climate change. The movie features several notable individuals (some of whom were once vehemently opposed to nuclear power, but who now speak in support of it), including: Stewart Brand, Gwyneth Cravens, Mark Lynas, Richard Rhodes and Michael Shellenberger. Anti-nuclear advocate Helen Caldicott appears briefly.  As of 2014, the U.S. nuclear industry has begun a new lobbying effort, hiring three former senators — Evan Bayh, a Democrat; Judd Gregg, a Republican; and Spencer Abraham, a Republican — as well as William M. Daley, a former staffer to President Obama. The initiative is called Nuclear Matters, and it has begun a newspaper advertising campaign.

Economics.

The low price of natural gas in the US since 2008 has spurred construction of gas-fired power plants as an alternative to nuclear plants. In August 2011, the head of America's largest nuclear utility said that this was not the time to build new nuclear plants, not because of political opposition or the threat of cost overruns, but because of the low price of natural gas. John Rowe, head of Exelon, said “Shale [gas] is good for the country, bad for new nuclear development".  In 2013, four older reactors were permanently closed: San Onofre 2 and 3 in California, Crystal River 3 in Florida, and Kewaunee in Wisconsin. The state of Vermont tried to shut Vermont Yankee, in Vermont, but the plant was closed by the parent corporation for economic reasons in December 2014. New York State is seeking to close Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant, in Buchanan, 30 miles from New York City, despite this reactor being the primary contributor to Vermont's green energy fund.  The additional cancellation of five large reactor upgrades (Prairie Island, 1 reactor, LaSalle, 2 reactors, and Limerick, 2 reactors), four by the largest nuclear company in the U.S., suggest that the nuclear industry faces "a broad range of operational and economic problems".  In July 2013, economist Mark Cooper named some nuclear power plants that face particularly intense challenges to their continued operation. Cooper said that the lesson for policy makers and economists is clear: "nuclear reactors are simply not competitive".  In December 2010, "The Economist" reported that the demand for nuclear power was softening in America. In recent years, utilities have shown an interest in about 30 new reactors, but the number with any serious prospect of being built as of the end of 2010 was about a dozen, as some companies had withdrawn their applications for licenses to build. Exelon has withdrawn its application for a license for a twin-unit nuclear plant in Victoria County, Texas, citing lower electricity demand projections. The decision has left the country's largest nuclear operator without a direct role in what the nuclear industry hopes is a nuclear renaissance. Ground has been broken on two new nuclear plants with a total of four reactors. The Obama administration was seeking the expansion of a loan guarantee program but as of December 2010 had been unable to commit all the loan guarantee money already approved by Congress. Since talk a few years ago of a “nuclear renaissance”, gas prices have fallen and old reactors are getting license extensions. The only reactor to finish construction after 1996 was at Watts Bar, Tennessee, is an old unit, begun in 1973, whose construction was suspended in 1988, and was resumed in 2007. It became operational in October 2016. Of the 100 reactors operating in the U.S., ground was broken on all of them in 1974 or earlier.  Experts see continuing challenges that will make it very difficult for the nuclear power industry to expand beyond a small handful of reactor projects that "government agencies decide to subsidize by forcing taxpayers to assume the risk for the reactors and mandating that ratepayers pay for construction in advance".  In August 2012, Exelon stated that economic and market conditions, especially low natural gas prices, made the "construction of new merchant nuclear power plants in competitive markets uneconomical now and for the foreseeable future". In early 2013 UBS noted that some smaller reactors operating in deregulated markets may become uneconomic to operate and maintain, due to competition from generators using low priced natural gas, and may be retired early. The 556 MWe Kewaunee Power Station is being closed 20 years before license expiry for these economic reasons. In February 2014 the "Financial Times" identified Pilgrim, Indian Point, Clinton and Quad Cities power stations as potentially at risk of premature closure for economic reasons. As of 2017, the U.S. shale gas boom has lowered electricity generation costs placing severe pressure on the economics of operating older existing nuclear power plants. Analysis by Bloomberg shows that over half of U.S. nuclear plants are running at a loss. The Nuclear Energy Institute has estimated that 15 to 20 reactors are at risk of early closure for economic reasons. Nuclear operators in Illinois and New York have obtained financial support from regulators, and operators in Connecticut, New Jersey, Ohio and Pennsylvania are seeking similar support. Some non-nuclear power generating companies have filed unfair competition lawsuits against these subsidies, and have raised the issue with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Nuclear power in the United States is provided by 96 commercial reactors with a net capacity of 98 gigawatts (GW), 64 pressurized water reactors and 32 boiling water reactors. In 2019 they produced a total of 809,409 thousand megawatt hours of electricity, which accounted for 20% of the nation's total electric energy generation. In 2018, nuclear energy comprised nearly 50 percent of U.S. emission-free generation.

美国核能由99个商业反应堆提供,总净容量为100,350 MW(兆瓦),65个压水反应堆和34个沸水反应堆。 2016年共生产805.3 TW-h(太瓦·时),占全国发电总量的19.7%。 2016年,核能占美国无排放发电量的近60%。


Plot.

Teenager Kevin Khatchadourian is in prison after committing a massacre at his high school. His mother, Eva, once a successful travel writer, lives alone in a rundown house and works in a travel agency near the prison, where she visits Kevin. She looks back at her memories of him growing up as she tries to cope with the hostility of her neighbors.  Kevin is detached and difficult from childhood. He appears to loathe and deliberately antagonize Eva, and she has trouble bonding with him. As a baby, he cries incessantly, but only around her; as a child, he resists toilet training, rebuffs Eva's attempts at affection, and shows no interest in anything. He behaves like a happy, loving son when his father Franklin is watching. Eva's frustration drives her to throw Kevin against the wall, breaking his arm. Kevin tells Franklin he fell, using the incident to manipulate Eva into doing what he wants.  Franklin dismisses Eva's concerns and makes excuses for Kevin's behavior. When Kevin is confined to bed with a fever, Eva reads him a book about Robin Hood; when Robin competes in Prince John's archery contest, Kevin shows Eva affection for the first time. Franklin gives him a bow and arrow and teaches him archery.  Eva and Franklin have a second child, Celia, who is lively and cheerful. However, Kevin is disdainful and jealous. A few years later, Celia's pet guinea pig is killed and she is blinded in one eye by caustic cleaning fluid. Eva suspects Kevin is to blame, but Franklin defends him. Eva's suspicion strains the couple's marriage and they discuss divorce. Eva comes to fear her son, as she sees growing evidence of Kevin's sadism.  As a teenager, Kevin locks several students in the school gymnasium and murders them with his bow. When Eva arrives home, she finds Kevin has murdered Franklin and Celia. On the second anniversary of the massacre, Eva visits Kevin in prison. Eva asks him why he committed the murders. Kevin, who is about to be transferred to an adult prison, responds that he used to think he knew but is no longer sure. Eva hugs Kevin and walks away sadly.

Development.

In 2005 BBC Films acquired the rights to adapt the book as a film. Executive producers Paula Jalfon and Christine Langan took it through the development stage, and were joined by executive producer Steven Soderbergh.  Lynne Ramsay, who became available after her involvement in the film adaptation of "The Lovely Bones" came to an end, signed on to direct, and was working on a script with "In the Bedroom" writer Robert Festinger by 2006. Shriver was offered a consultative role in the production process but declined, stating she had "had it up to [her] eyeballs with that book," though she did express concern for how the film would capture Eva's role as the unreliable narrator. Production had not begun by 2007, though BBC Films renewed the adaptation rights early in the year. In an interview with "The Herald" in September 2007, Shriver stated that she had not been in contact with Ramsay about the film for over two years. Ramsay's spokesperson told the newspaper that a new script draft was being prepared and, at the time the interview was published, had not been submitted to the producers. "Michael Clayton" producer Jennifer Fox joined the production team in 2008; the film was expected to begin shooting that year. The script appeared on the 2008 Brit List, a film-industry-compiled list of the best unproduced screenplays in British film. Ramsay's partner Rory Stewart Kinnear also contributed to the final shooting script.  Christine Langan told the London "Evening Standard" in February 2010 that the long delay in production had been caused by BBC Films having difficulty funding the high budget; Ramsay rewrote the script so the film could be made for a lower cost. The UK Film Council awarded £18,510 to the production from its development fund in the same month. Financial backing was also provided by Footprint Investments LLP, Caemhan Partnership LLP and Lipsync Productions, and production is in association with Artina Films and Forward Films.  Filming commenced on 19 April 2010 on location in Stamford, Connecticut, and concluded on 28 May 2010. A key filming location was J.M. Wright Technical High School in Stamford. Jonny Greenwood of the band Radiohead composed the film's score.

Release.

In October 2009, IFC Films picked up the rights to international sales, and made pre-sales at the American Film Market. The film premiered In Competition at the 2011 Cannes Film Festival, where it was met with praise from film critics.  Artificial Eye distributed the film in the UK from 21 October 2011 and Oscilloscope Laboratories distributed the film theatrically in North America in the winter of 2011. "We Need to Talk About Kevin" opened in a limited release in North America in a single theater and grossed $24,587, ranking 53rd at the box office. The film ended up earning $1,738,692 in America, and $5,754,934 internationally, for a total of $7,493,626.  "We Need to Talk About Kevin" was released on Blu-ray and DVD on 29 May 2012.

Reception.

Critical response.

"We Need to Talk About Kevin" received positive reviews. The film currently holds an approval rating of 75% on Rotten Tomatoes; the site's consensus reads, ""We Need to Talk About Kevin" is a masterful blend of drama and horror, with fantastic performances across the board (Tilda Swinton especially, delivering one of her very best)." On Metacritic, the film received a score of 68 out of 100 based on 37 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews."  "Chicago Sun-Times" critic Roger Ebert gave the film 4 out of 4 stars and wrote, "As a portrait of a deteriorating state of mind, "We Need to Talk About Kevin" is a masterful film." British film critic Mark Kermode of BBC Radio 5 Live named "We Need to Talk About Kevin" as the Best Film of 2011 and as the second best film of the 2010s. Richard Brody wrote in "The New Yorker" that "We Need to Talk About Kevin" "masquerades as a psychological puzzle but is essentially a horror film full of decorous sensationalism." He opined that the film exploited but did not explore the fascination that "bad seed" children exert. Jake Martin, a Jesuit priest and movie critic, wrote in his review in "Busted Halo" that the film is "[not] yet another installment in the pantheon of post-modern films intent upon assaulting the human desire to give meaning to the world." Instead, he says, ""We Need to Talk About Kevin" in fact needs to be talked about, as what it is attempting to do by marrying the darkest, most nihilistic components of contemporary cinema with a redemptive message is groundbreaking."  Tilda Swinton was nominated for a number of acting awards, including a Golden Globe Award, Screen Actors Guild and BAFTA for Best Actress in a leading role.'

We Need to Talk About Kevin is a 2011 psychological thriller drama film directed by Lynne Ramsay. The screenplay, written by Ramsay and Rory Stewart Kinnear, was based on the 2003 novel of the same name by Lionel Shriver. A long process of development and financing began in 2005, with filming commencing in April 2010.

《我儿子是恶魔》(英语:We Need To Talk About Kevin)是一部改编自美国作家兰诺·丝薇佛(Lionel Shriver)2003年的同名小说("We Need to Talk About Kevin")的英美电影。由Lynne Ramsay执导。由2005年开始制作,它面对了长期的制作和资金问题,直到2010年4月才开始拍摄。