Legend.

The young nobleman Abe no Yasuna (安倍 保名), on his way to visit a shrine in Shinoda, in Settsu Province, encounters a young military commissioner who is hunting foxes in order to obtain their livers for use as medicine. Yasuna battles the hunter, sustaining several wounds in the process, and sets free the white fox he had trapped. Afterward, a beautiful woman named Kuzunoha comes along and helps him return to his home.  In reality, this woman is the fox he had saved, adopting human form in order to tend to his wounds. He falls in love with her, and they marry. Later, she bears him a child, Seimei (childhood name Dōji), who proves prodigiously clever. Kuzunoha realizes that her son has inherited part of her supernatural nature.  Several years later, while Kuzunoha is viewing some chrysanthemums, her son catches sight of the tip of her tail. Her true nature revealed, Kuzunoha prepares to depart to return to her life in the wild. She leaves behind a farewell poem, asking her husband Yasuna to come to see her in Shinoda forest.  Yasuna and his son search Shinoda for Kuzunoha, and eventually she appears to them as a fox. Revealing that she is the "kami", or deific spirit, of Shinoda shrine, she gives her son Seimei a gift, allowing him to comprehend the language of beasts.

Plays.

Kuzunoha figures in kabuki and bunraku plays based on her legend, including the five-part "Ashiya Dōman Ōuchi Kagami" ("A Courtly Mirror of Ashiya Dōman"). The fourth part, "Kuzunoha" or "The White Fox of Shinoda", which is frequently performed independently of the other scenes, focuses on her story, adding minor variations such as the idea that Kuzunoha imitates a princess and is forced to depart not because Seimei glimpsed her tail but because the real woman unexpectedly appears.

In Izumi.

In Izumi there is a Kuzunoha Inari shrine, said to be built upon the place at which Kuzunoha departed, leaving her farewell poem on a silk screen.  The poem itself has become famous: ""Koishiku ba / tazunekite miyo / izumi naru / shinoda no mori no / urami kuzunoha"." Folklorist Kiyoshi Nozaki offers the following translation: "If you love me, darling, come and see me. / You will find me yonder in the great wood / Of Shinoda of Izumi Province where the leaves / Of arrowroots always rustle in pensive mood."  A pond in the area is also remembered in connection with the legend, and has been designated a historic site by the city.

, also written Kuzu-no-Ha, is the name of a popular "kitsune" character in Japanese folklore. Her name means "kudzu leaf". Legend states that she is the mother of Abe no Seimei, the famous onmyōji.

葛叶(葛之叶,くずのは)是日本传说中一只幻化人形的女狐的名字。也被称为葛之叶狐(くずのはぎつね)、 信太妻、信田妻(しのだづま)。此外,葛叶也是人形浄瑠璃『芦屋道满大内鉴(あしやどうまんおおうちかがみ)』的主人公的名字,同名的歌舞伎通常被称为「葛叶」。


Early life.

Boxhall was born in Hull in the East Riding of Yorkshire, England, the second child of Miriam and Captain Joseph Boxhall. He was born into an established seafaring tradition: His grandfather had been a mariner, his uncle was a Trinity House buoymaster and Board of Trade official, and his father was a respected master with the Wilson Line of Hull.  Boxhall followed in the footsteps of his ancestors on 2 June 1899, when he joined his first ship, a barque of the William Thomas Line of Liverpool. Boxhall's apprenticeship lasted four years, during which time he travelled extensively. He then went to work with his father at Wilson Line and, after obtaining his Master's and Extra-Master's certifications in September 1907, joined the White Star Line. On 1 October 1911, he was confirmed as a sub-lieutenant in the Royal Naval Reserve. He served on White Star's liners and "Arabic" before moving to the "Titanic" as Fourth Officer in 1912; he was then 28 years old.

RMS "Titanic".

Like the ship's other junior officers, Boxhall reported to White Star's Liverpool offices at nine o'clock in the morning on 26 March 1912, and travelled to board the ship at Belfast the following day. After the RMS "Titanic" departed Southampton on 10 April, Boxhall settled into his regular duties; these included scheduled watches, aiding in navigation, and assisting passengers and crew when necessary.  When "Titanic" collided with an iceberg at 11:40 on 14 April, Officer Boxhall was on duty but was not on the bridge. At the two inquiries held into the sinking in 1912 he stated he was standing on the Boat Deck just outside the officers' quarters. In his 1962 BBC interview he said he was in his cabin, having gone there to make tea. Hearing the lookout bell, he headed immediately to the bridge, arriving just after the impact. Capt. Smith, who had also just arrived on the bridge, ordered Boxhall to perform an inspection of the forward part of the ship. He found no damage, but was later intercepted by the ship's carpenter, who informed him that the ship was taking water. A mail clerk confirmed this to Boxhall and Captain Smith. Later, it was Boxhall who calculated the "Titanic"s position so that a distress signal could be sent out. It was also Boxhall who sighted the masthead lights of a nearby vessel (possibly the ) and attempted in vain to signal by Morse lamp and distress flares.  Officer Boxhall was placed in charge of lifeboat No. 2, which was lowered from the port side at 1.45 with 18 persons aboard out of a possible 40. He rowed away from the ship for fear of being pulled down by suction. Boxhall did not actually see the "Titanic" founder, as her lights had gone out and his lifeboat was about three-quarters of a mile distant. Boxhall spotted the on the horizon at 4.00 and guided her to the lifeboats with a green flare. After being collected by the "Carpathia", Boxhall and the other survivors arrived at Pier 54 in New York on 18 April.  While in New York, he served as a witness in the American inquiry into the sinking. He and his fellow surviving officers were allowed to leave New York on the "Adriatic" on 2 May. After returning to England, Boxhall bore witness again, this time at the British inquiry. Much of his testimony concerned details of the lifeboat lowerings and "Titanic"s navigation, including the many ice warnings. He was also the first person to testify that he saw another vessel in proximity while "Titanic" sank.

Later years and death.

Following the "Titanic" debacle, Boxhall briefly served as Fourth Officer on White Star's "Adriatic". He was promoted to lieutenant in the RNR on 27 May 1915. During the First World War, he was commissioned to serve for one year aboard the battleship before being dispatched to Gibraltar, where he commanded a torpedo boat.  Boxhall returned to White Star following the war in May 1919, having married Marjory Beddells two months prior. On 27 May 1923, he was promoted to lieutenant-commander in the RNR. He signed on as second officer on board the lead ship of the three "Olympic"-class vessels which "Titanic" was the second ship constructed on 30 June 1926. After the White Star-Cunard merger in 1933, he served in senior capacity as first and later chief officer of the, although he was never made a captain in the merchant marine. (The White Star line never promoted any of the surviving "Titanic" officers to command rank.)  After 41 years at sea, he retired in 1940. Boxhall was a generally taciturn and quiet man, usually reluctant to speak about his experiences on the "Titanic". However, in 1958, he acted as a technical advisor for the film adaptation of Walter Lord's documentary-style novel, "A Night to Remember", and also gave a BBC interview in 1962.  His health deteriorated rapidly in the 1960s, and he was eventually hospitalised. The last surviving deck officer of "Titanic", Boxhall died of a cerebral thrombosis on 25 April 1967 at the age of 83. According to his last wishes, his ashes were scattered to sea at 41°46N 50°14W – the position he had calculated as "Titanic"s final resting place over 50 years earlier (within about 15 miles of the actual "Titanic" wreck site at 41°43N 49°56W).  He is commemorated with a green plaque on The Avenues, Kingston upon Hull.

Commander Joseph Groves Boxhall RD, RNR (23 March 1884 – 25 April 1967) was the fourth officer on the, and later served as a naval officer in World War I. Boxhall was the last surviving officer of the "Titanic" to die.

约瑟·格罗夫斯·博士尔(英语:Joseph Groves Boxhall,RD,1884年3月23日 – 1967年4月25日)是英格兰海员,也是英国皇家邮轮泰坦尼克号四副和皇家海军后备队中校。


Taxonomy and naming.

The orange-bellied parrot was first described by ornithologist John Latham as "Psittacus chrysogaster" in 1790, from a specimen (since lost) that had been collected from Adventure Bay in Tasmania in March 1773 on the second voyage of James Cook or in January 1777 on his third voyage, and subsequently been in Joseph Banks' collection. The specific name was derived from the Ancient Greek words "chrysos" 'golden' and "gaster" 'belly'. John Gould described it in 1841 as "Euphema aurantia", from an adult male specimen collected in southeast Tasmania that became the lectotype. The species name was the Latin adjective for "orange". T.J. Ewing named it "Nanodes gouldii", in honour of Gould, who he believed had discovered it.  Italian ornithologist Tommaso Salvadori erected the new genus "Neophema" in 1891, placing the orange-bellied parrot within it and giving it its current scientific name. One of six species of grass parrot in the genus "Neophema", one of four classified in the subgenus "Neonanodes"; it is most closely related to the rock parrot, the other two species being the blue-winged and elegant parrots. No subspecies are recognised.  "Orange-bellied parrot" has been designated the official name by the International Ornithologists' Union (IOC). Gould called it the orange-bellied grass parakeet. It has previously been known as the 'orange-breasted parrot'—a name given to the orange-bellied parrot in 1926 by the Royal Australasian Ornithologists Union or RAOU (now Birdlife Australia) when the word 'belly' was considered inelegant. Other names include yellow-bellied parrot, orange-bellied grass-parakeet, and trumped-up corella.

Description.

The orange-bellied parrot is a small parrot around long; the adult male has bright green head, neck and upperparts, and yellow-green breast, abdomen and flanks. The feathers of the cheeks, neck and underparts are yellow-green with lime green tips and fringes, and hence appear more bright green when the bird has just moulted and more yellowish as the plumage wears. Feathers on the crown are bright green with darker green tips. It has a prominent, two-toned blue frontal band, with a lighter blue border both above and below the horizontal dark blue band. On the belly is an oval patch of orange around 2 cm in diameter. The undertail coverts are yellow to pale yellow. The uppertail is green-blue with yellow sides. The under wing-coverts and flight feathers are dark blue, with paler blue median wing-coverts. The upper mandible of the bill is blackish grey with a greyish, orange-brown or salmon-coloured base and cutting edge, while the lower mandible a brownish orange a grey-black tip. The cere is blackish grey with a pale brown tinge around the nostrils, the orbital eye-ring is light grey and the iris is dark brown. The legs and feet are dark grey with a red tinge between scales. The adult female has slightly duller shades of green plumage overall, with a paler blue frontal band. Its orange belly patch is about 30% smaller and less distinct. Moulting takes place in late winter and early spring.  The juvenile is a duller green to yellow-olive colour overall, with a much less prominent blue frontal band above the eyes. It has a dull yellowish or orange bill, which darkens to brown by the time the bird is three months old.  The orange-bellied parrot most commonly utters a single-note buzzing sound that is repeated every one to three seconds as a contact call. This is generally made orange-bellied parrots while flying, but also by birds seeing others in flight. The alarm call is a quickly repeated "tzeet" that has a buzzing quality. Individuals may make this call when flushed from cover. The "gurgle-buzz" call is made by birds acting as sentries at feeding areas, and is a mixture of an alarm call interspersed with chattering and hissing. When feeding, orange-bellied parrots may make soft low-pitched chitting sounds.  The blue-winged and elegant parrots can be mistaken for the orange-bellied parrot, however their tinkling alarm calls and lighter olive-green upperparts distinguish them. Their blue frontal bands have only light blue border on one side.

Distribution and habitat.

One of three migratory parrot species, the orange-bellied parrot breeds solely in South West Tasmania, it nests in eucalypts bordering on button grass moors. The entire population migrates over Bass Strait to spend the winter on the coast of south-eastern Australia. On the way, they may stop (and occasionally overwinter on) King Island, particularly Lake Flannigan. The few mainland sites contain their favoured salt marsh habitat, and includes sites in or close to Port Phillip such as Werribee Sewage Farm, the Spit Nature Conservation Reserve, the shores of Swan Bay, Swan Island, Lake Connewarre State Wildlife Reserve, Lake Victoria and Mud Islands, as well as French Island in Western Port.  In late 2017, there was a possible sighting at Canunda National Park in South Australia; the most recent confirmed sighting in the state being five years beforehand at Port MacDonnell.

Behaviour.

Breeding.

In the wild, the orange-bellied parrot tends to be monogamous, though a bird will seek a new mate if its old one has died. However, males can mate with multiple females in captivity. Pairs can form on the mainland before migration or after arrival in Tasmania. The orange-bellied parrot is capable of breeding in its first year of life. The oldest known individual in the wild is known as blue/black F. At over nine years old, it is thought to have made 20 trips across Bass Strait. Breeding is restricted to southwestern Tasmania, generally within 20 km (12 mi) of Melaleuca. The breeding season is November to February, with birds arriving at Melaleuca in early October, after which time they begin looking for suitable sites for nesting. They nest in hollows in mature trees—usually Smithton peppermint ("Eucalyptus nitida") or sometimes swamp gum ("E. ovata"). The entrance is a wide hole in a broken branch or trunk, the hollow itself being up to deep. Since 1991, nest boxes have been built to increase the number of suitable nest sites. The female cleans out the hollow and lays the almost round white eggs on a layer of rotten wood.The clutch consists of 3 to 6 (average 4.5) eggs measuring 21.6 mm x 18.1 mm, with the eggs being laid at two day intervals. A pair will re-use a successful nesting site, with the some sites used for up to six years. The female commonly remains in the nest for several days before laying.  The female incubates the eggs for 21–24 days. During this time, the male forages up to from the site. The eggs hatch 1–2 days apart, and the young are nidicolous and semi-altricial—that is, they are born helpless and blind and remain in the nest for an extended period. They are initially covered in off-white down. The female remains on the nest for another 10 days, still fed by the male, after which time they both feed the young. By two weeks of age, larger nestlings come to the mouth of the hollow to be fed. The young fledge at 4–5 weeks old.

Feeding.

The orange-bellied parrot is found in pairs or small flocks, and generally remain on the ground or in low foliage searching for food. They alternate between feeding and resting quietly, beginning just before or after dawn and resting mid-morning. In the breeding season, males feed and forage constantly to supply their mates with food while incubating, and both parents do so to feed their young. Early in the breeding season, they prefer areas that were burnt 7 to 15 years previously, while by mid-breeding season, they seek out areas that are 3 to 5 years post fire. Their most important food plants are Beaded Glasswort ("Sarcocornia quinqueflora") and Shrubby Glasswort ("Tecticornia arbuscula"). Other foods include the seeds of the coast fescue ("Austrofestuca littoralis"), saltbush ("Atriplex cinerea"), Austral seablite ("Suaeda australis") and sea heath ("Frankenia pauciflora"), as well as berries, such as those of "Coprosma". They have also been reported eating kelp.  The orange-bellied parrot generally roosts at night in trees or tall shrubs within of feeding locations.

Conservation status.

The orange-bellied parrot was once much more widespread; it was found along the mainland coastline from Sydney to Adelaide outside the breeding season. Their range has shrunk with the loss and degradation of habitat. Around 1889, it had been recorded in various places around Sydney, including Malabar, Penshurst, Bankstown, Blacktown and Middle Head. A 1907 report of two birds caught in Riverstone might have been aviary escapees. In Victoria, it was a regular visitor to Port Fairy until 1967.  The orange-bellied parrot is rated as critically endangered on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)'s Red List of Endangered species. As of the 2016-17 breeding season, wild population has been counted at 16 confirmed individuals—13 males and 3 females. By April 2020, the wild population had recovered to 118 individuals.  In 2007, its status was upgraded from endangered to critically endangered on the Commonwealth "Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999."  The orange-bellied parrot has been recorded from four states within Australia: Tasmania, Victoria, New South Wales and South Australia. Its conservation status varies from state to state within Australia. For example:

Recovery program.

The Captive Breeding Program numbered 310 individuals as of 25 September 2016.  In early 2011, 21 new 'founders' were collected from the wild in order to improve the captive flock's genetic diversity. These birds were shared among the three core institutions with previous orange-bellied parrot breeding experience (Taroona, Healesville Sanctuary and Adelaide Zoo) and were paired with existing captive birds to begin spreading new genes through the captive population.  In May 2011, media attention focussed on the 10 individuals transferred by aircraft from Tasmania to Healesville Sanctuary near Melbourne, which was described as a last-ditch effort to save the species from extinction. It is hoped that the new additions from the wild will improve the genetic diversity of the 80 birds at Healesville Sanctuary, which are all descended from three pairs. Captive populations in Hobart and Adelaide are also important to the aim of releasing captive bred birds back to the wild.  In July, 2012, it was announced that 19 of 21 pairs with founders had produced eggs and that across all three institutions, 31 fledglings had been produced from these new pairs.  Captive breeding was expanded at the end of 2011 when Priam Australia Pty Ltd., a commercial parrot breeding centre in New South Wales, received five pairs of orange-bellied parrots.  In August, 2012, a private zoo, Moonlit Sanctuary in Pearcedale, Victoria, received seven birds for display and possible breeding. The same month, another private zoo, Halls Gap Zoo in western Victoria, received five pairs of birds for breeding. In 2016 Moonlit Sanctuary opened a dedicated facility for 20 pairs, while Halls Gap had withdrawn from the program in the previous year. With three larger breeding facilities and four smaller groups of birds involved in the captive breeding program, it is hoped the captive population will increase quickly.

Threats.

The 2000 Action Plan for Australian Birds identifies the following potential threats to the orange-bellied parrot:  Other identified potential threats include:  In 2013, the Orange-bellied Parrot Recovery Team's Annual Report for 2012/13 (published October 2013) outlined the reasons for its decline and the threats to the orange-bellied parrot as follows:  '...Current knowledge suggests that habitat loss and degradation, particularly in the non-breeding range, has caused the decline. Low breeding participation by females has been implicated in recent declines (2000-2010). The species is also at risk from climate change, and the small population size places the species at increased risk from factors such as loss of genetic diversity and inbreeding, stochastic environmental events, predators and competitors, disease, and barriers to migration and movement.'

Impact on industrial development.

The orange-bellied parrot earned the wrath of Victorian premier Jeff Kennett in the 1990s. A proposed relocation of the Coode Island Chemical storage facility to a location near Point Wilson, Victoria was jeopardised by the potential impacts upon orange-bellied parrot habitat. Mr Kennett described this species as a 'trumped-up corella'. (This epithet was later adopted as the title for the Orange-bellied Parrot Recovery Team's newsletter.)  Orange-bellied parrots were considered in the impact assessment for the Woolnorth windfarm on Tasmania's north-west coast. The planning proposal was thoroughly assessed by both State and Commonwealth regulators (having been determined to be a controlled action under the EPBC Act).  Surveys and collision risk modeling was undertaken as well as a population viability analysis to assess the impact on the species. The wind farm is not in the flight path of OBPs, but they do pass near by. In 2001, then Australian federal environment minister Robert Hill approved the wind farm.  To date no orange-bellied parrots have been found to collide with the turbines. Monitoring continues today as well as measures to reduce OBPs coming near the wind farm.  In 2006, the potential threats to the orange-bellied parrot were cited as the key reason for Commonwealth Minister rejecting the proposal to build the Bald Hills Wind Farm in eastern Victoria. It was found there were no significant risks to the species, and the decision was reversed. The company was provided with approval to proceed (under certain conditions). The intense media scrutiny at this time placed the orange-bellied parrot temporarily into the spotlight. In the subsequent months additional funding was provided for the parrot's recovery, and its status under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 was raised from "endangered" to "critically endangered".

Aviculture.

The orange-bellied parrot was first bred successfully in 1973 by South Australian aviculturist Fred Lewitska, after five years with no success. He repeated his success in 1974 before being directed to release the birds into the wild by authorities. He found that the species could be inactive in an aviary and was prone to obesity, like the related rock parrot. Victorian birdwatcher, artist and photographer, Len Robinson, bred orange-bellied parrots in suburban Melbourne between 1998 and 2006. He held four pairs for eight breeding seasons, fledging a total of 47.

The orange-bellied parrot ("Neophema chrysogaster") is a small parrot endemic to southern Australia, and one of only three species of parrot that migrate. It was described by John Latham in 1790. A small parrot around long, it exhibits sexual dimorphism. The adult male is distinguished by its bright grass-green upper parts, yellow underparts and orange belly patch. The adult female and juvenile are duller green in colour. All birds have a prominent two-toned blue frontal band and blue outer wing feathers.

橙腹鹦鹉(学名:'),又名黄腹长尾鹦鹉,是澳洲特有的一种鹦鹉。雄鸟的上身呈鲜草绿色,下身黄色,腹部橙色。雌鸟及雏鸟的绿色较沉。牠们前额都有蓝色斑纹,外飞羽蓝色。牠们主要吃种子及草莓。


Members and elections.

Article 62 of the Belgian Constitution fixes the number of seats in the Chamber of Representatives at 150. There are 11 electoral districts, which correspond with the ten Provinces (five Dutch- and five French-speaking) and the Brussels-Capital Region. Prior to the sixth Belgian state reform, the province of Flemish Brabant was divided into two electoral districts: one for Leuven and the other, named Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde (BHV), which encompassed both the 19 bilingual municipalities from the Brussels-Capital Region and the 35 Dutch-speaking municipalities of Halle-Vilvoorde in Flemish Brabant, including seven municipalities with linguistic facilities for French-speaking inhabitants.  The seats are divided among the political parties using the D'Hondt method of proportional representation, which slightly favours large parties and coalitions. There is an electoral threshold of 5%.  The Representatives are divided into two so-called "language groups". Of the total of 150 representatives, 88 are part of the Dutch-language group, which consists of representatives from the Dutch-language area, and 62 are part of the French-language group, which consists of representatives from the French-language area and the German-language area. For the representatives from the Brussels region, the language in which they take their oath as a representative determines which language group they belong to. Following the 2007 federal election, the Chamber has a German-speaking member (Kattrin Jadin) for the first time since 1999.  Nevertheless, because of the Belgian constitution, both linguistic communities are granted equal powers in the parliament. Although in general bills can be passed without a majority in both linguistic groups, bills relating to specific issues (so-called 'community laws') can not and need the consent of both language groups.  The following table shows the current (2019) distribution of seats between the language groups and the electoral districts.

Qualifications.

Article 64 of the Belgian constitution sets forth four qualifications for representatives: each representative must be at least 21 years old, possess the Belgian nationality, have the full enjoyment of civil and political rights, and be resident in Belgium. A representative can only enter into office after having taken the oath of office, in either of the three official languages in Belgium: Dutch, French or German. He or she can also choose to take the oath in more than one language. The oath of office is as follows: ""I swear to observe the Constitution"". (,, )  Certain offices are incompatible with the office of representative. Members of a regional or community parliament who take the oath of office as a representative automatically cease to sit in the regional or community parliament, in accordance with the Belgian Electoral Code. The same applies the other way around as well, a representative who takes the oath of office in a regional or community parliament automatically ceases to be a representative. A member of the Chamber of Representatives may not also be a member of the Senate at the same time, and senators must give up their seats in the Senate in order to join the Chamber of Representatives.  Another important incompatibility is based on the separation of powers. A representative who is appointed as a minister ceases to sit in the Chamber of Representatives and is replaced for as long as he or she is a minister, but if that individual resigns as a minister, he or she can return to the Chamber, in accordance with Article 50 of the Belgian Constitution. A representative cannot be a civil servant or a member of the judiciary at the same time, however, a civil servant who is elected to the Chamber is entitled to political leave and doesn't have to resign as a civil servant. It is also not possible to be a member of the Federal Parliament and a Member of the European Parliament at the same time.  The Chamber of Representatives does not systematically check whether any of these (or other) incompatibilities apply to its members, however, newly elected members are informed of the most important incompatibilities at the start of their mandate and it is up to them to verify whether they are in compliance with the regulations regarding incompatibilities and, if not, to determine which office they will abandon.

Officers.

The Chamber of Representatives elects a presiding officer, known as the president, at the beginning of each parliamentary term, which starts on the second Tuesday of October each year. The President is assisted by up to five vice-presidents, two of which are known respectively as the first vice-president and the second vice-president, who are also elected at the beginning of each parliamentary term. The President is customarily a member of one of the parties forming the government coalition, only thrice in the history of the Chamber has the President been a member of the opposition. The first vice-president is usually a member of the other language group than that of the President. The current President of the Belgian Chamber of Representatives is Siegfried Bracke of the New Flemish Alliance (N-VA).  The president presides over the plenary assembly of the Chamber of Representatives, guides and controls debates in the assembly, and is responsible for ensuring the democratic functioning of the Chamber, for the maintenance of order and security in the assembly and for enforcing the Rules of the Chamber of Representatives. To this end, he or she is given considerable powers. He or she also represents the Chamber at both the national (to the other institutions) and the international level. The President also assesses the admissibility of bills and proposals.  The president of the Chamber, together with the President of the Belgian Senate, ranks immediately behind the King in the order of precedence. The elder of the two takes the second place in the order of precedence. The presidents of the Chamber of Representatives and the Senate rank above the Prime Minister.  The Bureau of the Chamber of Representatives is composed of the President, the Vice-Presidents, the Secretaries and the floor leaders of the fractions with at least five members. The fractions that have at least 12 members and have no President, Vice-President or Secretary sitting on the Bureau can appoint an additional member. The Bureau is elected for the duration of one parliamentary term, but in practice the composition of the Bureau remains the same for the entire duration of the legislature, which is four years, unless the Federal Parliament is dissolved early. The Bureau is responsible for the management of the Chamber of Representatives. In addition, the Bureau also appoints and dismisses the staff of the Chamber of Representatives. The Bureau usually meets once every three months.  There is also a Conference of Presidents, which is one of the most important bodies of the Chamber of Representatives. It consists of the president and vice-presidents of the Chamber, former presidents of the Chamber who are still members of the Chamber and the floor leader and a member of each fraction. A member of the federal government responsible for the relations with the Chamber attends the meetings of the Conference as well. The Conference meets weekly to discuss the day-to-day business and the work of the Chamber.  The Chamber of the Representatives has, just like the Senate a College of Quaestors, which consists of five representatives who are elected by the plenary assembly for a duration of two years. The Quaestors are in charge of the housekeeping of the Chamber, they are also responsible for matters such as human resources and computers. The Colleges of Quaestors of the Senate and the Chamber meet regularly to settle common problems concerning the library, buildings, security, catering, etc.

Procedure.

Like the Senate, the Chamber of Representatives meets in the Palace of the Nation in Brussels. The hemicycle of the Chamber is decorated in green. In contrast, the hemicycle of the Senate is decorated in red. These colours were inspired on the colours used by the House of Commons and the House of Lords of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.  The Belgian Constitution provides that the Federal Parliament meets by right on the second Tuesday of October every year for a parliamentary session of at least 40 days. This means that the parliamentary session is opened automatically without being convened by the King. The Constitution also provides that the Senate cannot meet when the Chamber of Representatives is not in session. Although the Constitution provides that the Federal Parliament must remain in session for at least 40 days, in practice it remains in session throughout the year. In principle, an ordinary session lasts from the second Tuesday of October until the day before the second Tuesday of October the following year, however, the Federal Parliament goes into recess three times a year, for the Christmas holidays, the Easter holidays and for the summer holidays from 20 July until the end of September. In the event that the Federal Parliament is dissolved and new elections are held before the end of the parliamentary term, the newly elected Chamber meets in extraordinary session until the start of the next ordinary session.  The committees of the Chamber of Representatives usually meet on Tuesday and Wednesday. On Wednesday, the Conference of President meets to set the agenda for the plenary session. On Thursday morning the fractions meet. The Chamber of Representatives usually meets for a plenary session on Thursday afternoon and every two weeks it meets in plenary session on Wednesday as well. Every Thursday afternoon between 2:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. is Question Time. There are usually no parliamentary activities on Friday.  Article 53 of the constitution provides that at least a majority of its members must be present in order for the Chamber to make decisions. It is noteworthy that this does not apply to all business of the Chamber, such as debates or questions to members of the federal government, but that a quorum must only be present in order to make decisions. If not enough members are present, the decision is invalid. In order to make a decision, at least 50% plus 1 of the members present and voting must vote in the affirmative. If a vote is tied, the president does not have a casting vote and the proposal is rejected. The procedure outlined in Article 53 of the constitution applies to all most decisions, however, the constitution establishes two exceptions: to amend the constitution, a two-thirds majority of the members must be present and at least two-thirds of the votes cast must be in the affirmative, and in order to adopt a so-called special law, a qualified majority of 50% plus 1 of each language group must be present and at least 50% plus 1 must be present and at least 50% plus 1 of the votes cast in each language group, as well as two-thirds of the votes cast of the two language groups together, must be in the affirmative.  The Chamber may vote in three manners. Firstly, it may vote by roll call. In the past, the names of the members were read in alphabetical order and each member had to announce his or her vote when his name was called, however, since 1995, voting by roll call has been done electronically. Voting by roll call is the most frequently used method and is compulsory in three cases: at the end of debates on a government statement, the vote on bills as a whole and when requested by at least eight members. Secondly, the Chamber may vote by sitting and standing. This method is used in less important cases requiring quick treatment and in which there is a clear majority. In the event of doubt, the vote is taken again or done electronically. Voting by sitting and standing is anonymous and is used for votes on amendments and individual articles of a bill. Finally, the Chamber may conduct a secret vote. In principle, the votes are public and votes on legislation are never secret, only the appointments and nominations the Chamber has to make take place by secret vote.

Committees.

The Chamber of Representatives uses committees for a variety of purposes. The Chamber has several standing committees, each of which has responsibility for a particular area of government (for example justice or social affairs). These standing committees examine and consider bills and legislative proposals, and may for this purpose hold hearings. A standing committee comprises 17 Representatives, members are appointed using proportional representation. The chairpersons of the committees are also divided among the parties in accordance with the same principle of proportional representation. As a result, some committees are chaired by members of the opposition.

Standing committees.

This is a list of standing committees:

Special committees.

There are also special committees, such as the Committee on Naturalisations.

Legislative functions.

Since the elections of 21 May 1995, there has been a breakdown of powers between the Chamber of Representatives and the Senate, which resulted in the Senate having fewer competences than the Chamber of Representatives. Prior to that, the Chamber of Representatives and the Senate did the same legislative work on an equal footing. This means that the both chambers had to pass exactly the same version of a bill.  In certain matters both the Chamber and the Senate still have equal power, which means that both Chambers must pass exactly the same version of the bill. These include constitutional revisions, laws requiring a qualified majority (the so-called "community laws"), laws on the basic structure of the Belgian State, laws approving agreements of cooperation between the Federal State, the Communities and the Regions, laws on the approval of international treaties, and laws on the organisation of the judiciary, the Council of State, and the Constitutional Court of Belgium. However, bills concerning international treaties are introduced in the Senate first before moving on to the Chamber.  For almost all other legislation, the Chamber of Representatives takes precedence over the Senate. However, the Senate may still intervene as a chamber of consideration and reflection as it has the opportunity to, within specific time limits, examine the texts adopted by the Chamber and, if there is a reason to do so, make amendments. The Chamber can subsequently adopt or reject the amendments proposed by the Senate or make new proposals. Whatever the case, the Chamber has the final word on all "ordinary legislation". The Senate may also submit a bill it has adopted to the Chamber which can approve, reject or amend it, in this case the Chamber also has the final word.  There are also certain matters for which the Chamber of Representatives is exclusively responsible. These matters include the granting of naturalisations, passing legislation with regard to the civil and criminal liability of the ministers of the Federal Government, the government budget and the State's accounts, appointing parliamentary ombudsmen and examine their activities, and determining military quotas.

Relationship with the Government.

The members of the Federal Government are answerable to the Chamber of Representatives, in accordance with Article 101 of the Constitution. On taking office, the Federal Government must have the confidence of the majority of the representatives. The Chamber of Representatives is also exclusively responsible for the political control of the Federal Government. The confidence in the Federal Government may be revoked by the Chamber at any time by the adoption of a motion of no confidence or by the rejection of a motion of confidence.  Due to the fragmented nature of Belgian politics, no party family has a realistic chance of winning the 76 seats needed for an outright majority in the Chamber of Representatives. As a result, nearly all Belgian governments since the end of World War I have been coalitions between two or more parties or party families.

Current composition.

Current party standings, as of September 2019:

Former compositions.

Before 1993: 212 MPs.

1978–1981 1981–1985 1985–1987 1987–1991 1991–1995

After 1993: 150 MPs.

1995–1999 1999–2003 2003–2007 2007–2010 2010–2014 2014–2019  2019–

The Chamber of Representatives (Dutch:,, ) is one of the two chambers in the bicameral Federal Parliament of Belgium, the other being the Senate. It is considered to be the "lower house" of the Federal Parliament.

众议院(;;)是比利时联邦议会的下议院,和参议院共同组成了比利时联邦议会。比利时众议院共有150名议员,其中法语区有62人,弗拉芒语区有88人。德语区没有自己的名额,被算入法语区当中。按照比利时法律规定,特别重要的法律需要得到各语言集团过半数的支持和总体三分之二以上的支持。


History.

George David Birkhoff introduced the chromatic polynomial in 1912, defining it only for planar graphs, in an attempt to prove the four color theorem. If formula_1 denotes the number of proper colorings of "G" with "k" colors then one could establish the four color theorem by showing formula_2 for all planar graphs "G". In this way he hoped to apply the powerful tools of analysis and algebra for studying the roots of polynomials to the combinatorial coloring problem.  Hassler Whitney generalised Birkhoff’s polynomial from the planar case to general graphs in 1932. In 1968, Read asked which polynomials are the chromatic polynomials of some graph, a question that remains open, and introduced the concept of chromatically equivalent graphs. Today, chromatic polynomials are one of the central objects of algebraic graph theory.

Definition.

For a graph "G", formula_3 counts the number of its (proper) vertex "k"-colorings. Other commonly used notations include formula_4, formula_5, or formula_6. There is a unique polynomial formula_7 which evaluated at any integer "k ≥ 0" coincides with formula_3; it is called the chromatic polynomial of "G".  For example, to color the path graph formula_9 on 3 vertices with "k" colors, one may choose any of the "k" colors for the first vertex, any of the formula_10 remaining colors for the second vertex, and lastly for the third vertex, any of the formula_10 colors that are different from the second vertex's choice. Therefore, formula_12 is the number of "k"-colorings of formula_9. For a variable "x" (not necessarily integer), we thus have formula_14.

Deletion–contraction.

The fact that the number of "k"-colorings is a polynomial in "k" follows from a recurrence relation called the deletion–contraction recurrence or Fundamental Reduction Theorem. It is based on edge contraction: for a pair of vertices formula_15 and formula_16 the graph formula_17 is obtained by merging the two vertices and removing any edges between them. If formula_15 and formula_16 are adjacent in "G", let formula_20 denote the graph obtained by removing the edge formula_21. Then the numbers of "k"-colorings of these graphs satisfy: Equivalently, if formula_15 and formula_16 are not adjacent in "G" and formula_25 is the graph with the edge formula_21 added, then This follows from the observation that every "k"-coloring of "G" either gives different colors to formula_15 and formula_16, or the same colors. In the first case this gives a (proper) "k"-coloring of formula_25, while in the second case it gives a coloring of formula_17. Conversely, every "k"-coloring of "G" can be uniquely obtained from a "k"-coloring of formula_25 or formula_17 (if formula_15 and formula_16 are not adjacent in "G").  The chromatic polynomial can hence be recursively defined as Since the number of "k"-colorings of the edgeless graph is indeed formula_39, it follows by induction on the number of edges that for all "G", the polynomial formula_7 coincides with the number of "k"-colorings at every integer point "x=k". In particular, the chromatic polynomial is the unique interpolating polynomial of degree at most "n" through the points  Tutte’s curiosity about which other graph invariants satisfied such recurrences led him to discover a bivariate generalization of the chromatic polynomial, the Tutte polynomial formula_42.

Properties.

For fixed "G" on "n" vertices, the chromatic polynomial formula_43 is a monic polynomial of degree exactly "n", with integer coefficients.  The chromatic polynomial includes at least as much information about the colorability of "G" as does the chromatic number. Indeed, the chromatic number is the smallest positive integer that is not a zero of the chromatic polynomial,  The polynomial evaluated at formula_45, that is formula_46, yields formula_47 times the number of acyclic orientations of "G".  The derivative evaluated at 1, formula_48 equals the chromatic invariant formula_49 up to sign. If "G" has "n" vertices and "c" components formula_50, then  The last property is generalized by the fact that if "G" is a "k"-clique-sum of formula_59 and formula_60 (i.e., a graph obtained by gluing the two at a clique on "k" vertices), then  A graph "G" with "n" vertices is a tree if and only if

Chromatic equivalence.

Two graphs are said to be "chromatically equivalent" if they have the same chromatic polynomial. Isomorphic graphs have the same chromatic polynomial, but non-isomorphic graphs can be chromatically equivalent. For example, all trees on "n" vertices have the same chromatic polynomial. In particular, formula_63 is the chromatic polynomial of both the claw graph and the path graph on 4 vertices.  A graph is "chromatically unique" if it is determined by its chromatic polynomial, up to isomorphism. In other words, "G" is chromatically unique, then formula_64 would imply that "G" and "H" are isomorphic. All cycle graphs are chromatically unique.

Chromatic roots.

A root (or "zero") of a chromatic polynomial, called a “chromatic root”, is a value "x" where formula_65. Chromatic roots have been very well studied, in fact, Birkhoff’s original motivation for defining the chromatic polynomial was to show that for planar graphs, formula_66 for "x" ≥ 4. This would have established the four color theorem.  No graph can be 0-colored, so 0 is always a chromatic root. Only edgeless graphs can be 1-colored, so 1 is a chromatic root of every graph with at least one edge. On the other hand, except for these two points, no graph can have a chromatic root at a real number smaller than or equal to 32/27. A result of Tutte connects the golden ratio formula_67 with the study of chromatic roots, showing that chromatic roots exist very close to formula_68: If formula_69 is a planar triangulation of a sphere then  While the real line thus has large parts that contain no chromatic roots for any graph, every point in the complex plane is arbitrarily close to a chromatic root in the sense that there exists an infinite family of graphs whose chromatic roots are dense in the complex plane.

Colorings using all colors.

For a graph "G" on "n" vertices, let formula_71 denote the number of colorings using exactly "k" colors "up to renaming colors" (so colorings that can be obtained from one another by permuting colors are counted as one; colorings obtained by automorphisms of "G" are still counted separately). In other words, formula_71 counts the number of partitions of the vertex set into "k" (non-empty) independent sets. Then formula_73 counts the number of colorings using exactly "k" colors (with distinguishable colors). For an integer "x", all "x"-colorings of "G" can be uniquely obtained by choosing an integer "k ≤ x", choosing "k" colors to be used out of "x" available, and a coloring using exactly those "k" (distinguishable) colors. Therefore: where formula_75 denotes the falling factorial. Thus the numbers formula_71 are the coefficients of the polynomial formula_7 in the basis formula_78 of falling factorials.  Let formula_79 be the "k"-th coefficient of formula_7 in the standard basis formula_81, that is: Stirling numbers give a change of basis between the standard basis and the basis of falling factorials. This implies:

Categorification.

The chromatic polynomial is categorified by a homology theory closely related to Khovanov homology.

Algorithms.

Computational problems associated with the chromatic polynomial include  The first problem is more general because if we knew the coefficients of formula_43 we could evaluate it at any point in polynomial time because the degree is "n". The difficulty of the second type of problem depends strongly on the value of "x" and has been intensively studied in computational complexity. When "x" is a natural number, this problem is normally viewed as computing the number of "x"-colorings of a given graph. For example, this includes the problem #3-coloring of counting the number of 3-colorings, a canonical problem in the study of complexity of counting, complete for the counting class #P.

Efficient algorithms.

For some basic graph classes, closed formulas for the chromatic polynomial are known. For instance this is true for trees and cliques, as listed in the table above.  Polynomial time algorithms are known for computing the chromatic polynomial for wider classes of graphs, including chordal graphs and graphs of bounded clique-width. The latter class includes cographs and graphs of bounded tree-width, such as outerplanar graphs.

Deletion–contraction.

The deletion-contraction recurrence gives a way of computing the chromatic polynomial, called the "deletion–contraction algorithm". In the first form (with a minus), the recurrence terminates in a collection of empty graphs. In the second form (with a plus), it terminates in a collection of complete graphs. This forms the basis of many algorithms for graph coloring. The ChromaticPolynomial function in the Combinatorica package of the computer algebra system Mathematica uses the second recurrence if the graph is dense, and the first recurrence if the graph is sparse. The worst case running time of either formula satisfies the same recurrence relation as the Fibonacci numbers, so in the worst case, the algorithm runs in time within a polynomial factor of  on a graph with "n" vertices and "m" edges. The analysis can be improved to within a polynomial factor of the number formula_89 of spanning trees of the input graph. In practice, branch and bound strategies and graph isomorphism rejection are employed to avoid some recursive calls, the running time depends on the heuristic used to pick the vertex pair.

Cube method.

There is a natural geometric perspective on graph colorings by observing that, as an assignment of natural numbers to each vertex, a graph coloring is a vector in the integer lattice. Since two vertices formula_90 and formula_91 being given the same color is equivalent to the formula_90’th and formula_91’th coordinate in the coloring vector being equal, each edge can be associated with a hyperplane of the form formula_94. The collection of such hyperplanes for a given graph is called its graphic arrangement. The proper colorings of a graph are those lattice points which avoid forbidden hyperplanes. Restricting to a set of formula_95 colors, the lattice points are contained in the cube formula_96. In this context the chromatic polynomial counts the number of lattice points in the formula_97-cube that avoid the graphic arrangement.

Computational complexity.

The problem of computing the number of 3-colorings of a given graph is a canonical example of a #P-complete problem, so the problem of computing the coefficients of the chromatic polynomial is #P-hard. Similarly, evaluating formula_98 for given "G" is #P-complete. On the other hand, for formula_99 it is easy to compute formula_1, so the corresponding problems are polynomial-time computable. For integers formula_101 the problem is #P-hard, which is established similar to the case formula_102. In fact, it is known that formula_43 is #P-hard for all "x" (including negative integers and even all complex numbers) except for the three “easy points”. Thus, from the perspective of #P-hardness, the complexity of computing the chromatic polynomial is completely understood.  In the expansion  the coefficient formula_105 is always equal to 1, and several other properties of the coefficients are known. This raises the question if some of the coefficients are easy to compute. However the computational problem of computing "a" for a fixed "r ≥ 1" and a given graph "G" is #P-hard, even for bipartite planar graphs.  No approximation algorithms for computing formula_43 are known for any "x" except for the three easy points. At the integer points formula_107, the corresponding decision problem of deciding if a given graph can be "k"-colored is NP-hard. Such problems cannot be approximated to any multiplicative factor by a bounded-error probabilistic algorithm unless NP = RP, because any multiplicative approximation would distinguish the values 0 and 1, effectively solving the decision version in bounded-error probabilistic polynomial time. In particular, under the same assumption, this rules out the possibility of a fully polynomial time randomised approximation scheme (FPRAS). For other points, more complicated arguments are needed, and the question is the focus of active research., it is known that there is no FPRAS for computing formula_43 for any "x" > 2, unless NP = RP holds.

The chromatic polynomial is a graph polynomial studied in algebraic graph theory, a branch of mathematics. It counts the number of graph colorings as a function of the number of colors and was originally defined by George David Birkhoff to study the four color problem. It was generalised to the Tutte polynomial by Hassler Whitney and W. T. Tutte, linking it to the Potts model of statistical physics.

在代数图论中,色多项式是乔治·戴维·伯克霍夫为了尝试证明四色定理而定义的一种多项式。


History.

The original theorizing was done by the Soviet Armed Forces in the 1970s and 1980s, particularly by Marshal Nikolai Ogarkov. The United States initially became interested in it through Andrew Marshall, the head of the Office of Net Assessment, a Department of Defense think tank. It slowly gained credence within official military circles, and other nations began exploring similar shifts in organization and technology.  Interest in RMA and the structure of future U.S. armed forces is strong within China's People's Liberation Army and it has been incorporated into China's strategic military doctrine. Many other militaries have also researched and considered RMA as an organizational concept—e.g., those of Canada, United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Sweden, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Singapore, Republic of China (Taiwan), India, Russia, and Germany—but not all militaries have adopted RMA, due to its significant infrastructure and investment costs.

Soviet views.

Nikolai Ogarkov called the early idea of RMA the Military Technological Revolution (MTR). Pentagon officials in the United States changed the name of his original idea, which is how it became known as RMA. Orgarkov's belief that the potential and possibility for new weapons was increasing rapidly led to the development of his initial idea.  At the time of the initial development of MTR, the Soviets anticipated that certain technologies, including energy weapons and robots, would be in use by 2015 at the latest. They believed that the use of large ground forces would be minimized. In place of some ground forces, these new technologies would be implemented in order to establish dominance on the battlefield. Russians also believed that control of space would become essential for maintaining dominance in future conflicts. Soviets believed that it would be essential to control the satellite space around earth, in order to more effectively relay information. They also anticipated the ability to use space as a medium in which they could deploy weapons.

Renewed interest.

The United States' victory in the 1991 Gulf War renewed interest in RMA theory. In the view of RMA proponents, American dominance through superior technology emphasized how the United States' technological advances reduced the relative power of the Iraqi military, by no means a lightweight rival, to insignificance. According to Stephen Biddle, part of the growth in popularity of the RMA theory after the Gulf War was that virtually all American military experts drastically over-estimated the coalition casualty count. This led many experts to assume that their models of war were wrong—that a revolution of sorts had occurred.  After the Kosovo War, in which the United States did not lose a single life, others suggested that war had become too sterile, creating a "virtual war". Furthermore, the United States’ inability to capture Osama bin Laden or effectively combat the Iraqi insurgency led some to question RMA in the face of asymmetrical warfare, in which foes of the United States may increasingly engage in order to counter RMA's advantages.  In 1997, the U.S. Army mounted an exercise codenamed "Force 21", to test the application of digital technologies in warfare in order to improve communications and logistics by applying private-sector technologies adapted for military use. Specifically, it sought to increase awareness of one's position on the battlefield as well as that of the enemy, in order to achieve increased lethality, greater control of the tempo of warfare, and fewer instances of friendly fire via improved identification friend or foe.  In 2002, Chris Bray described RMA as new ideas about "the use of information and automation on the battlefield" to make forces "more lethal" and "more agile."

Areas of focus.

One of the central problems in understanding the current debate over RMA arises from many theorists' use of the term to refer to the revolutionary technology itself, which is the driving force of change. Concurrently, other theorists tend to use the term as referring to revolutionary adaptations by military organisations that may be necessary to deal with the changes in technology. Other theorists place RMA more closely inside the specific political and economic context of globalization and the end of the Cold War.  When reviewing the gamut of theories, three fundamental versions of RMA come to the forefront. The first perspective focuses primarily upon changes in the nation-state and the role of an organised military in using force. This approach highlights the political, social, and economic factors worldwide, which might require a completely different type of military and organisational structure to apply force in the future.  Authors such as the RAND Corporation's Sean J. A. Edwards (advocate of BattleSwarm tactics, a type of military swarming), Carl H. Builder and Lt. Col. Ralph Peters emphasized the decline of the nation-state, the nature of the emerging international order, and the different types of forces needed in the near future.  The second perspective—most commonly assigned the term RMA—highlights the evolution of weapons technology, information technology, military organization, and military doctrine among advanced powers. This "System of Systems" perspective on RMA has been ardently supported by Admiral William Owens, former Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who identified three overlapping areas for force assets. These are intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, command, control, communications and intelligence processing, which allows for the use of precision force.  Advanced versions of RMA incorporate other sophisticated technologies, including unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), nanotechnology, robotics, and biotechnology. Recently, the RMA debate focussed on "network-centric warfare" which is a doctrine that aims to connect all troops on the battlefield.  Finally, the third concept is that a "true" revolution in military affairs has not yet occurred or is unlikely to. Authors such as Michael E. O'Hanlon and Frederick Kagan, point to the fact much of the technology and weapons systems ascribed to the contemporary RMA were in development long before 1991 and the Internet and information technology boom.  Several critics point out that a "revolution" within the military ranks might carry detrimental consequences, produce severe economic strain, and ultimately prove counterproductive. Such authors tend to profess a much more gradual "evolution" in military affairs, as opposed to a rapid revolution.

Precision attack.

In considering the implications of precision attack, it is clear that precision weapons, when coupled to recent developments in aerospace, have transformed warfare, and as a result, the question is not that "Does an RMA exist?" rather, "When did it begin, and what are its implications?" Tied to this are surprisingly persistent questions about the use and value of air power, now more accurately seen as aerospace power. If nothing else, given the record of precision air power application, aerospace power advocates should not still have to spend as much time as they do arguing the merits of three-dimensional war and precision attack's value to it. Modern joint service aerospace forces offer the most responsive, flexible, lethal, and devastating form of power projection across the spectrum of conflict, employing a range of aerospace weaponry such as maritime patrol aircraft, attack and troop-lift helicopters, land-based long-range aircraft, and battlefield rocket artillery systems. Service-specific aerospace power can often be formidable and, as such, has transformed conflict from two-dimensional to three-dimensional, and has changed the critical focus of conflict from that of seizing and holding to one of halting and controlling.  In reviewing a few points from the military history of the 20th century, within roughly a decade of the first flight of an airplane, aircraft were having an occasionally decisive effect on the battlefield. Within four decades, a nation—Great Britain—secured its national survival through air warfare. By the midst of the Second World War, three-dimensional attack (from above and below the surface) had become the primary means of sinking both vessels at sea and destroying the combat capability of armies on land. In fact, for the United States, this trend of inflicting losses and material destruction primarily through air attack continued after the second world war for Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf, Bosnia, and other, lesser, conflicts. In particular, air attack directed against land forces has been especially powerful in blunting and destroying opponents on the offensive, whether in older experience—such as confronting Rommel in the Western Desert, or Nazi armored forces trying to split the Normandy invasion at Mortain, or at the Bulge (where German commanders credited Allied fighter attacks on fuel trucks and supplies as being the decisive factor in halting their drive), in the opening and closing stages of the Korean War, and confronting the 1972 North Vietnamese Spring Invasion—or, more recently, in destroying the Khafji offensive of Saddam Hussein in 1991. NATO's reliance upon air power in the Yugoslav Wars was not surprising because from the very earliest days, the NATO alliance saw air power as the linchpin of Western military strength and the necessary offset to the Warsaw Pact's huge military forces.  Given its historical underpinnings, we should not be surprised that the revolution in warfare that has been brought about both by the confluence of the aerospace and the electronic revolutions, and by the offshoot of both—the precision guided munition—is one that has been a long time coming, back to the Second World War, back, even, to the experimenters of the First World War who attempted, however crudely, to develop "smart" weapons to launch from airships and other craft. Used almost experimentally until the latter stages of the Vietnam War, the precision weapon since that time has increasingly come to first influence, then dominate, and now perhaps to render superfluous, the traditional notion of a linear battlefield.

Criticism.

The revolution of military affairs is the inclusion and expansion of new technology—e.g., drones, satellite imaging, and remotely operated vehicles—within current military tactics. RMA has generally been praised for its ability to reduce casualty rates and facilitate intelligence gathering. On the other hand, some critics argue that RMA serves to further dissociate soldiers from the horrific realities of warfare, while others maintain that RMA restricts the overall understanding of warfare and its dynamics. Scholars recommend gaining a critical understanding of RMA before implementing it.  Operation Desert Storm is considered the first major global conflict successfully implementing RMA and is considered a paragon of future military operations due to the low casualty rate and the U.S. military's speed and precision. On the other hand, others claim that RMA technology severely inhibited the U.S. military's ability to respond to guerrilla tactics and that efforts to incorporate advanced weapons like Patriot missiles were unsuccessful. Indeed, a number of epistemological issues have cropped up.  In the wake of RMA technologies such as drones, unmanned ground vehicles, and clean bombs there are several concerns about the distancing and disassociation that eclipse the realities of war. An analysis of tactical strikes reveals that while the number of ones own soldiers may be preserved as the number of long-range attacks increases, so does collateral damage. Furthermore, by removing the soldier-on-soldier element of warfare, the natural reactions and consequences of wartime actions are impacted, which has been frequently referred to as the removal of humanity from war. RMA technological advances have resulted in a dehumanizing of warfare, which negatively effects the decisions made by officers, as well as individuals in the field. Another critique argues that RMA's good intentions notwithstanding, the resulting collateral damage is unacceptable and thus urges more careful consideration in incorporating RMA technology.  Stephen Biddle's 2004 book, "Military Power: Explaining Victory and Defeat in Modern War", discounts the idea of RMA. He argues that military doctrine and tactics are far more important to battle outcomes in modern warfare than is technological progress, and that basic doctrine has changed little since the second half of World War I.

See also.

US military-specific:

A revolution in military affairs (RMA) is a hypothesis in military theory about the future of warfare, often connected to technological and organizational recommendations for military reform.

军事事务变革(英语:Revolution in Military Affairs,缩写:英语:RMA)亦译「新军事革命」,在中华人民共和国也称为「有中国特色的军事变革」、「军事变革」、「军事上的革命」、「军事革命」、「战争革命」、「军事转型」、「新军事变革」等,并不是中文使用者常指的「革命」,而是专指对未来军事技术等要件发生重要转型的概念,如同工业革命的语意一样。


Early life and education.

Thrun was born in 1967 in Solingen, Germany (former West Germany), the son of Winfried and Kristin (Grüner) Thrun. He completed his "Vordiplom" (intermediate examination) in computer science, economics, and medicine at the University of Hildesheim in 1988. At the University of Bonn, he completed a "Diplom" (first degree) in 1993 and a Ph.D. ("summa cum laude") in 1995 in computer science and statistics.

Career and research.

In 1995 he joined the Computer Science Department at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) as a research computer scientist. In 1998 he became an assistant professor and co-director of the Robot Learning Laboratory at CMU. As a faculty member at CMU, he co-founded the Master's Program in Automated Learning and Discovery, which later would become a Ph.D. program in the broad area of machine learning and scientific discovery. In 2001 Thrun spent a sabbatical year at Stanford University. He returned to CMU to an endowed professorship, the Finmeccanica Associate Professor of Computer Science and Robotics.  Thrun left CMU in July 2003 to become an associate professor at Stanford University and was appointed as the director of SAIL in January 2004. From 2007–2011, Thrun was a full professor of computer science and electrical engineering at Stanford. On April 1, 2011, Thrun relinquished his tenure at Stanford to join Google as a Google Fellow. On January 23, 2012, he co-founded an online private educational organization, Udacity. He was a Google VP and Fellow, and worked on development of the Google driverless car system. Thrun was interviewed in the 2018 documentary on artificial intelligence "Do You Trust This Computer?".

Robotics.

Thrun developed a number of autonomous robotic systems that earned him international recognition. In 1994, he started the University of Bonn's Rhino project together with his doctoral thesis advisor Armin B. Cremers. In 1997 Thrun and his colleagues Wolfram Burgard and Dieter Fox developed the world's first robotic tour guide in the Deutsches Museum Bonn (1997). In 1998, the follow-up robot "Minerva" was installed in the Smithsonian's National Museum of American History in Washington, DC, where it guided tens of thousands of visitors during a two-week deployment period. Thrun went on to found the CMU/Pitt Nursebot project, which fielded an interactive humanoid robot in a nursing home near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. In 2002, Thrun helped develop mine mapping robots in a project with his colleagues William L. Whittaker and Scott Thayer, research professors at Carnegie Mellon University. After his move to Stanford University in 2003, he engaged in the development of the robot Stanley, which in 2005 won the DARPA Grand Challenge. His former graduate student Michael Montemerlo, who was co-advised by William L. Whittaker, led the software development for this robot. In 2007, Thrun's robot "Junior" won second place in the 2007 DARPA Urban Challenge. Thrun joined Google as part of a sabbatical, together with several Stanford students. At Google, he co-developed Google Street View.  Thrun's best known contributions to robotics are on the theoretical end. He contributed to the area of probabilistic robotics, a field that marries statistics and robotics. He and his research group made substantial contributions in areas of mobile robot localization, mapping (SLAM), and control. Probabilistic techniques have since become mainstream in robotics, and are used in numerous commercial applications. In the fall of 2005, Thrun published a textbook entitled "Probabilistic Robotics" together with his long-term co-workers Dieter Fox and Wolfram Burgard. Since 2007, a Japanese translation of Probabilistic Robotics has been available on the Japanese market.  Thrun is one of the principal investors of the Stanford spin-off VectorMagic.

Sebastian Thrun (born May 14, 1967) is an entrepreneur, educator, and computer scientist from Germany. He is CEO of Kitty Hawk Corporation, and chairman and co-founder of Udacity. Before that, he was a Google VP and Fellow, a Professor of Computer Science at Stanford University, and before that at Carnegie Mellon University. At Google, he founded Google X and Google's self-driving car team. He is also an Adjunct Professor at Stanford University and at Georgia Tech.

塞巴斯蒂安·特龙(1967年-5月14日),德国发明家、企业家、教育家、计算机科学家。他是Kitty Hawk Corporation的首席执行官,也是Udacity的董事长兼联合创始人。在此之前,他是谷歌的副总裁兼研究员,斯坦福大学的计算机科学教授,在此之前在卡内基梅隆大学。在谷歌,他创立了谷歌X和谷歌自动驾驶汽车团队。他目前还是斯坦福大学和佐治亚理工学院的兼职教授。


Stress-tests published in 2011-restart crises.

On 14 December 2011 the Kyushu Electric Power Company published the outcome of the primary safety assessments or "stress-tests" for three of its suspended nuclear reactors: two of them located at the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant in Kagoshima Prefecture, the third at was located the Genkai Nuclear Power Plant in Saga prefecture. The reports were sent to the Japanese Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency. The papers were also sent to the local authorities of the prefectures where the plants were located, because the reactors are not allowed to be restarted without their consent. According to the test, the reactors could withstand a seismic shock of 945 to 1,020 gals and tsunami-waves of a height of 13 to 15 meters. The power company asked its customers to reduce their power-consumption by at least 5% after 26 December, because at 25 December the number 4 reactor in Genkai would be taken out of operation for regular check-ups. Nuclear power generation did account for about 40 percent of the total output of the company, according to company official Akira Nakamura. He said that restarting reactors was crucial for them, and that the company will do all it can do to win back public-trust. However, Hideo Kishimoto, the mayor of Genkai said that it would be difficult to resume operations. He asked Kyushu Electric to disclose their practices in full, besides their efforts to prevent future accidents.

Draft safety test report 2013-2014.

According to a Special Bulletin issued on July 17, 2014 by The Institute of Energy Economics, Japan, in June 2013 the Japanese Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) created new stricter safety standards for all Japanese nuclear power plants. Tests on 19 reactors at 12 nuclear power plants based on the new standards began the following month and were expected to take six months, but took longer on account of their strictness.  The two-reactor Sendai plant was given priority and was approved by the NRA as meeting both its earthquake and tsunami assumptions in March 2014. An effective safety test pass certificate was issued on July 16 and the draft safety test report was opened to public comments until August 15.  The basis for the approval was enhanced safety measures, in particular raising the previous assumption for the Sendai plant of 540 gal for maximum earthquake strength to 620 gal, and similarly the assumption of maximum tsunami height from 4 meters to 5 meters. Furthermore, a 10-meter-high protection wall was built. Design standards were further enhanced to take into account all other natural disasters, in particular volcanic eruptions and tornadoes, along with plans to address terrorist attacks. Further details on the tests may be found in the Special Bulletin.

Restarting.

On 10 September 2014 the NRA declared that the plant was safe to be operated. Actual operation was originally expected by the end of 2014, following approval of local authorities, however, local and national groups and NGOS opposed the planned restart of the Sendai nuclear plants. John Large of the London-based consulting Engineers Large & Associates, provided opinion and evidence in an ongoing civil action in Japan contesting the restart of the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant and separately Large & Associates prepared an assessment of the effectiveness of the Japanese NRA recently introduced guide for the evaluation of nuclear power plant sites with respect to the potential effects of volcanic activity, specifically aligning this to the Sendai NPP presently proposed for restart following a four-year shut down in the aftermath of Fukushima Daiichi.  In April 2015, a Japanese court rejected a complaint against the restart. On May 28, 2015, The Nuclear Regulation Authority approved the station's emergency plans, which was the last regulatory hurdle remaining before restarts could happen. Owner Kyushu Electric Power Company then had all approvals necessary for restart. On July 7, 2015, fuel loading of Sendai unit #1 began. The NRA completed its pre-operational examinations and gave Kyushu Electric Company the green light to place fuel inside the reactor vessel.  Sendai's reactor no. 1 was restarted on August 11, 2015. Naoto Kan, former Prime Minister (2010–2011), was among the protesters who were demonstrating in front of the Sendai plant when the reactor was restarted.  On November 1, 2015, followed reactor n.2, at full-capacity the same day, with its thermal output reaching the maximum level, about two weeks after it was reactivated. No major problems occurred in the process. The utility first restarted reactor n.2, removing the control rods on October, 15.  The unit 1 was shut down for maintenance from October to December 2016; Kagoshima governor Satoshi Mitazono approved the restarting of the reactor despite his personal opposition to nuclear power.  On 7 January 2017 unit 1 resumed commercial operation.  In March 2019, the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) announced it would install seabed sensors to monitor the Aira Caldera 40 km from the nuclear plant, to supplement land-based monitoring. In the extremely unlikely event of signs of major volcanic activity, it would be possible to remove nuclear fuel from the reactors.  In March of 2020, it was shut down again because it could not meet the deadline for anti-terrorism safety measures.

The is a nuclear power plant located in the city of Satsumasendai in Kagoshima Prefecture. The two 846 MW net reactors are owned and operated by the Kyūshū Electric Power Company. The plant, like all other nuclear power plants in Japan, did not generate electricity after the nationwide shutdown in the wake of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in 2011, but was restarted on August 11, 2015, and began providing power to nearby towns again. Sendai is the first of Japan's nuclear power plants to be restarted.

川内核电厂()是九州电力公司位于日本九州鹿儿岛县萨摩川内市久见崎町的核能发电厂。该核电厂位于第10管区海上保安本部辖区内。在川内川另一侧还有一间火力发电厂,即川内电厂。