nlp_architect.nn.torch package¶
Subpackages¶
Submodules¶
nlp_architect.nn.torch.distillation module¶
-
class
nlp_architect.nn.torch.distillation.
TeacherStudentDistill
(teacher_model: nlp_architect.models.TrainableModel, temperature: float = 1.0, dist_w: float = 0.1, loss_w: float = 1.0, loss_function='kl')[source]¶ Bases:
object
Teacher-Student knowledge distillation helper. Use this object when training a model with KD and a teacher model.
Parameters: - teacher_model (TrainableModel) – teacher model
- temperature (float, optional) – KD temperature. Defaults to 1.0.
- dist_w (float, optional) – distillation loss weight. Defaults to 0.1.
- loss_w (float, optional) – student loss weight. Defaults to 1.0.
- loss_function (str, optional) – loss function to use (kl for KLDivLoss, mse for MSELoss)
-
static
add_args
(parser: argparse.ArgumentParser)[source]¶ Add KD arguments to parser
Parameters: parser (argparse.ArgumentParser) – parser
nlp_architect.nn.torch.quantization module¶
Quantization ops
-
class
nlp_architect.nn.torch.quantization.
FakeLinearQuantizationWithSTE
[source]¶ Bases:
torch.autograd.function.Function
Simulates error caused by quantization. Uses Straight-Through Estimator for Back prop
-
static
backward
(ctx, grad_output)[source]¶ Calculate estimated gradients for fake quantization using Straight-Through Estimator (STE) according to: https://openreview.net/pdf?id=B1ae1lZRb
-
static
-
class
nlp_architect.nn.torch.quantization.
QuantizationConfig
(**kwargs)[source]¶ Bases:
nlp_architect.common.config.Config
Quantization Configuration Object
-
ATTRIBUTES
= {'activation_bits': 8, 'ema_decay': 0.9999, 'mode': 'none', 'requantize_output': True, 'start_step': 0, 'weight_bits': 8}¶
-
-
class
nlp_architect.nn.torch.quantization.
QuantizationMode
[source]¶ Bases:
enum.Enum
An enumeration.
-
DYNAMIC
= 2¶
-
EMA
= 3¶
-
NONE
= 1¶
-
-
class
nlp_architect.nn.torch.quantization.
QuantizedEmbedding
(*args, weight_bits=8, start_step=0, mode='none', **kwargs)[source]¶ Bases:
nlp_architect.nn.torch.quantization.QuantizedLayer
,torch.nn.modules.sparse.Embedding
Embedding layer with quantization aware training capability
-
class
nlp_architect.nn.torch.quantization.
QuantizedLayer
(*args, weight_bits=8, start_step=0, mode='none', **kwargs)[source]¶ Bases:
abc.ABC
Quantized Layer interface
-
CONFIG_ATTRIBUTES
= ['weight_bits', 'start_step', 'mode']¶
-
REPR_ATTRIBUTES
= ['mode', 'weight_bits']¶
-
fake_quantized_weight
¶
-
classmethod
from_config
(*args, config=None, **kwargs)[source]¶ Initialize quantized layer from config
-
weight_scale
¶
-
-
class
nlp_architect.nn.torch.quantization.
QuantizedLinear
(*args, activation_bits=8, requantize_output=True, ema_decay=0.9999, **kwargs)[source]¶ Bases:
nlp_architect.nn.torch.quantization.QuantizedLayer
,torch.nn.modules.linear.Linear
Linear layer with quantization aware training capability
-
CONFIG_ATTRIBUTES
= ['weight_bits', 'start_step', 'mode', 'activation_bits', 'requantize_output', 'ema_decay']¶
-
REPR_ATTRIBUTES
= ['mode', 'weight_bits', 'activation_bits', 'accumulation_bits', 'ema_decay', 'requantize_output']¶
-
inference_quantized_forward
(input)[source]¶ Simulate quantized inference. quantize input and perform calculation with only integer numbers. This function should only be used while doing inference
-
quantized_bias
¶
-
-
nlp_architect.nn.torch.quantization.
calc_max_quant_value
(bits)[source]¶ Calculate the maximum symmetric quantized value according to number of bits
-
nlp_architect.nn.torch.quantization.
dequantize
(input, scale)[source]¶ linear dequantization according to some scale
-
nlp_architect.nn.torch.quantization.
get_dynamic_scale
(x, bits, with_grad=False)[source]¶ Calculate dynamic scale for quantization from input by taking the maximum absolute value from x and number of bits


Recent graduate from the C#/.NET program at The Iron Yard
B.S. in Computer Science from the University of Kansas
Originally from Kansas City, I earned my degree in Computer Science from the University of Kansas, followed by 13 years programming in a COBOL Mainframe environment. Most recently I helped found and grow a successful CPA firm in Cape Coral, but my heart was never in the job. When I read about The Iron Yard, I realized it was the perfect avenue to upgrade my programming skills and re-enter the computer field that I love.
I have now graduated, and hope to find a back end development job with a team of pleasant people where I can continue to perfect my current skills and also expand my skill-set. I love working with people to find ways to make their job easier and more efficient, and I also enjoy designing and building databases. When I'm not studying, I like to play golf and video games, and I hope to take up scuba diving again soon.
Because I love working with clients and databases, my final project was a data-driven app that solved a real life problem. The app is designed to help code and law enforcement officers throughout Florida do their jobs by providing a means of entering and searching for contractors caught operating without a license so that repeat offenders can be identified and prosecuted. The requirements were developed from interviews with an Officer in Cape Coral Code Enforcement. I wrote it with C#, Entity Framework, SQL Server, and a little AJAX.


In the first paragraph of "The Meaning of the Wild Body" , Wyndham Lewis sets out the major premise for his mature theory of comedy. This entails an axiomatic, apparently inarguable separation between the object of comedy and its laughing observer, between the Wild Body and its percipient:
First, to assume the dichotomy of mind and body is necessary here, without arguing it; for it is upon that essential separation that the theory of laughter here proposed is based. The essential us, that is, the laugher, is as distinct from the Wild Body as in the Upanisadic [sic] account of the souls returned from the paradise of the Moon, which, entering into plants, are yet distinct from them. Or to take the symbolic vedic re of the two birds, the one watching and passive, the other enjoying its activity, we similarly have to posit two creatures, one that never enters into life, but that travels about in a vessel to whose destiny it is momentarily attached. That is, of course, the laughing observer, and the other is the Wild Body. 1
This uncompromising dichotomy appears at odds, however, with Lewis's attitudes in a contemporary treatise, "Inferior Religions." 2 Here the "Wild Body" is "regarded as a brain" and
laughter [as] the brain-body's snort of exultation. It expresses its wild sensation of power and speed; it is all that remains physical in the flash of thought, its friction; or it may be a defiance flung at the hurrying fates.
The Wild Body is this supreme survival that is us, the stark apparatus with its set of mysterious spasms: the most profound of which is laughter. [WB, 152]
No superior or derisive sneer, laughter here wells up from the very source and matrix of the laughable. Although Lewis seems equally to root his laughter in the Wild Body and laugh his way out of that vibrating corpus, he stands as no credible witness at a comic marriage of brain and blood. For he scores his doubts too deeply into these essays--into their conceptual fabric, into the very rhetorical textures of these passages: the re of the souls returning to the plants in the Upanishadic account, for example, is poised with suspicious ambivalence between entry and abeyance.
The contrary positions Lewis assumes in these essays may reflect a generic or typical division in modern ideas of the comic, which have focused variously on the internal or psychological dimensions of laughter and its external, mechanical occasions. His preoccupation with the nature and character of the laugher resonates with Sigmund Freud's interest, in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious, in the laugh as an unleashing of forbidden energies. And his fixation on the comic object of the Wild Body matches Henri Bergson's focus, in Le Rire (Laughter), on the risible automaton, the primary scene of comedy. These several interests may testify to the comprehensive scope of Lewis's engagement with the comic, but their differing interests do not explain away the inconsistency here: the uneasy shift in positional relation between the target of humor and the laugher's vantage. There is an uncertainty about the proper comic response that we may understand as a vacillation between an experience of the ludicrous and a sense of the ridiculous: between a spirit of play, in which homo ludens happily joins with the wild body of the laughable, and a spirit of ridicule, where the observer distances and chastises the mechanical object of laughter but does not redeem or reclaim it. 3
This double measure of ludic participation and satirical rebuke has only been obscured by the re of the Enemy, the professional antagonist, which Lewis projected so strenuously as his public persona in his middle years and put forward as his literary identity in Satire and Fiction . There is indeed a richness of texture in his comic texts that is informed by a self-division that the Enemy could not admit. Now, these rival attitudes might be assimilated to some standard critical counter like "generative tension" or "creative opposition," but they are understood better, more usefully and substantively, as a residue of contrary stages in his development. His movement from reciprocity with the comic object to judgment of it turns on a moment of political recognition that gives the difference between early and later Lewis its fullness of intellectual implication. This moment stands as a watershed in his literary-intellectual career, and I wish to define and recover its importance here. I center it in the second of the three sections that follow, where I show the profound reorientation it represents by searching more deeply into the samples and model of early comedy that I set out in the first section. The difference this political perception makes will then be seen, in the third section, in the revision the older Lewis makes of his earlier work.
The variable in Lewis's comic theory and practice lies in the positional character of the laugher, not in the nature and behavior of the comic object, and so it seems best to begin with that constant: to redraw Lewis's image of the Wild Body and note its comic properties and precedents. The most influential model is surely Bergson's. After all, Lewis attended the lectures Bergson offered at the Collège de France in 1903, 4 and the recent publication of Le Rire had established its idea of the comic as a prevailing convention. It was this idea that Lewis carried with him through Brittany and Spain--in travels that would provide material for his first attempts at literary fiction, the stories he drafted and published in England in 1909 and 1910.
Bergson sees the classic incidence of comedy as involving a collision between the mechanical and the organic, the habitual and the variable. Thus the absent-minded man, who has reduced his walking to involuntary routine, slips risibly on the unseen banana peel. The changing demands of life reveal a habitual pattern for what it is, and the mirth is earned at its expense. The laughter entails more than perverse delight in such contretemps, however; it exercises a high Aristotelian function, Bergson suggests, for it identifies the fool, rebukes the automaton, and purges the nonperson, the thing, from proper society. 5 Yes, humans may revert to the lower level of mechanical life, but Bergson's comic philosophy clearly regards such descents as mere dramatic opportunities, as incidents to trigger and set in motion a whole economy of redemptive laughter, which returns the audience to the true norm of the flexible, thinking response. That is a profoundly humanist norm, after all, for it measures and celebrates a human superiority to the lower, animal-mechanical character.
It is remarkable that the tradition of critical inquiry into Lewis's appropriation of Bergson has failed uniformly to note this defining difference--all the more remarkable in view of the fact that Lewis sets the anti-Bergsonian temper of his early stories in the clear theoretical frame of his later treatises, which he published with the revised version of those stories in 1927. 6 Here Lewis reverses the value and strategy of the Bergsonian formula: "The root of the Comic is to be sought in the sensations resulting from the observations of a thing behaving like a person" (WB, 158); the mechanical thing defines the essence of Lewis's character, not simply a provisional, farcical identity. This comedy laughs at the pretence to humanity, the imitation of personhood by its inveterate inferiors; the very humanist vantage assumed by Bergson is here the butt of laughter. Lewis's comic characters are not some subnormal exception; they comprise a usual humankind, whose strenuous but vacuous attempt to supersede their animal-mechanical nature affords the constant opportunity for comedy. Lewis expresses the antihumanist philosophy that generates this perception as the passage about "the root of the comic" continues, elaborating its basic premise in typical mise-en-scènes:
But from that point of view all men are necessarily comic: for they are all things, or physical bodies, behaving as persons. . . .
If you saw (to give another example of intelligence or movement in the "dead") a sack of potatoes suddenly get up and trundle off down the street (unless you were so sceptical to think that it was some one who had got inside the sack), you would laugh. . . .
The other day in the underground, as the train was moving out of the station, I and those around me saw a fat but active man run along. . . . [H]is running, neat, deliberate, but clumsy embarkation, combined with the coolness of his eye, had a ludicrous effect, to which several of us responded. His eye I decided was the key to the absurdity of the effect. It was its detachment that was responsible for this. It seemed to say, as he propelled his sack of potatoes--that is himself--along the platform, and as he successfully landed the sack in the carriage: ". . . When you run a sack of potatoes like ME, you get the knack of them: but they take a bit of moving."
It was the detachment, in any case, that gave the episode a comic quality, that his otherwise very usual appearance would not have possessed. [WB, 158-60]
To say, as Geoffrey Wagner does, that Lewis's "comic type is the human being lacking in awareness, guilty of Bergsonian 'distraction,' and approximating to the animal machine," 7 is to miss the whole point of this radical rewriting. For Bergson's comic percipient takes an Aristotelian high ground, noting the anomaly of the mechanical person and restoring the proper human value by laughing at the mistake; the pretence of such human superiority becomes the target of Lewis's comic disdain--the animal's humorous impersonation of free and thinking humanity.
There is an anatomy of folly in Lewis's oeuvre, a tendency to see certain sensory aspects of the human creature as particularly susceptible to the mechanisms of comedy. His inclination points to backgrounds in French intellectual history that may be usefully rehearsed here. This is the post-Revolutionary tradition of idéologiecritique. 8 This quasi- or semiscientific method takes the body as primary locus for adducing truths about the human creature and uses these axioms as bases for the formulation of political principle. This discourse was being carried on at Lewis's own moment in France by Remy de Gourmont, whose analyses, compounded shortly afterward by Julien Benda, routinely identified the senses of sound (speech as well as hearing) and sight as demonstrations of opposite human possibilities and political values. In this description the eye relies on distance and separation from the object in view, while the ensuing clarity of focus induces a mental condition favoring clear conceptual definition and detached understanding; instrument and emblem of intellectual superiority, the eye validates the whole notion of social hierarchy. Hearing, by contrast, requires contact between the auditor and the physical stimulus; incapable of detached intellectual activity, the ear processes the content it has received merely by repeating it, verbatim, through the mouth: the auditory type becomes one with the sound. The fusion or empathy enabled by this process defines its political valence: the less discriminating members of the body politic are open to this lower channel of sensory communication--an audience bound first to sound and then to each other in a spurious but formidable unity, a demotic solidarity. 9 The political import of this construction may await our consideration in the second section, but it is already easy to see how this understanding of sound may cast the primary character of comedy. The re of an acoustic fool, blithely and mechanically repeating the sounds dubbed into him, is the automaton set up for a comic fall.
The fall shows its peculiarly Lewisian spin right from the start, in his first published story, "The 'Pole'" . Here the tale-teller Isobletsky has listened to himself recite his account and is now locked into the several speaking mannerisms to which he has reduced it; his own character in the adventure has become an aural impression to be duplicated. A tissue of impersonations, an overlay of echoes, he depicts the habitual, rote repetition to which aural reception inclines. By the time the narrator meets him, he shows
the strangest habit of imitating his own imitations. In telling a story in which he red (his stories were all designed to prove his independence) he had a conventional type of imitation for the voice and manner of his interlocutor, and a gruff, half-blustering tone to imitate his own voice in these dramatic moments. And gradually these two tones, mixed into each other, had become his ordinary tone in conversation. [WB, 213; emphasis added]
Isobletsky's claim to "independence" as a protagonist in these tales comes into sharp and revealing contrast with the mechanical character of his utterance: the irony here tracks Lewis's own classic comic incident, where the target of laughter lies in the assumption of human superiority over such automatic life. Thus Lewis mounts his challenge to the humanist philosophy of Bergson from a distinctively Gourmontian ground; the heavy mechanisms of aural habit exert a force like gravity here, acting as counterweight to the auditor's unsuccessful but laughably strenuous efforts at transcendence.
The comic agon in "A Breton Innkeeper" develops similarly. Roland, the concierge-dictator, inveighs thus against the boy-auditor, his assistant:
He rages often, cries nom de Dieu, stamps and fumes when the aforementioned youth does something that displeases him. And doubtless there is some nuance in this that touches the brass-buttoned boy--doubtless there is in that youth's exquisite instinct for Roland many a shade in the rough voice imperceptible to a stranger--some inflection that makes him scamper more hastily about his business. But outwardly it is the same heavy and desperate geniality. [WB, 269]
The youth is driven by aural signals as compelling but uncomprehended as a dog-whistle; such reflex response and mechanical behavior enact the truth of de Gourmont's own aperçu: the ear is unfree, incapable of detachment from its own network of rote, determinate response. Nor is the speaker Roland a straight man to this comic mechanism: his character-in-voice is no less manic and inalterable than the boy's, for Lewis prefaces the account of his speaking style with this generic identification: "I have never seen him forsake his farcical manner with anyone" (WB, 269). There may be some pronominal confusion between the speaker and auditor in the last sentence here--whose "heavy and desperate geniality" is it?--but this uncertainty resolves itself into a single debility, into the one comic opportunity of ear and mouth. Whether it is the boy or Roland, the automaton pretends an independence more risible than his ostensible slavery. He reaches toward a higher level of human polity and social decorum, but lurchingly, comically, as the phrasing suggests: his "heavy and desperate geniality" speeds up the very mill of driven behavior he is seeking to outrun.
This paradox of mechanical vitality shows its somber gusto in the visual language of the 1912 Courtship ( 1). Here the male and female res are curvilinear, lithe, thus idealizing the elementary energy of their own instinctive ritual; true to the ironic pattern, their thighs and upper torsoes bulge to a muscle-bound puppetry, and so depict their owners as chthonic automatons, dancing in grim compliance with the determinate laws of life. Bergson's élan vital runs down into self-mocking robotics, and Lewis adds his comic touch in allowing one of these res to pretend some superiority over her mechanical condition: the head angled demurely to the side affects a human shyness, a self-consciousness out of keeping with the machine, with behavior compelled by instinct. But not entirely so. Such courtship is a ritual, after all, and the head display is really no free play at all, for it is working in a fashion as grim and driven as the rest of her bodily bulk. The image of superior freedom it affects is really the focus and butt of humor here.
But it is the circuit of aural-oral compulsion that provides Lewis's main comic occasion. Thus the narrator-farçeur of "Le Père François" fiddles with his victim's throat:
After having been shown his throat, and having vainly attempted to seize between my thumb and forefinger an imaginary vessel that he insisted, with considerable violence, that I should find, our relations nearly came to an abrupt termination on my failing, and having, indeed, pursued song athwart his anatomy to its darkest and most lugubrious sources, I said irrelevantly that his hair was very long. He slowed down abruptly in his speech, but some sentences still followed. Then, after a silence, taking suddenly the most profoundly serious expression, he said, with a conviction of tone that admitted of no argument and paralysed all doubt, "I will tell you! It's too long! My hair is too long!" [WB, 278]
The mystery organ in the depths of this "florid aperture" of the mouth is the source and center of acoustic vitalism, an energy running according to those laws of élan mécanique so richly evidenced in the other early stories. Having had the vitalist innards of his throat tickled and stimulated, Francis duly produces the sort of rote, determinate reaction that vocal energy typically runs to: the Franciscan merely repeats the phrases imprinted into him by the narrator-protagonist. When he claims these words as his own--"I will tell you"--he is of course reversing the real current of influence; thus he takes the wheel of farce one turn further, and completes the scene with Lewis's own distinctive flourish: the ultimate moment of comedy is a character's attempt to pretend superiority over his own determinate nature--the paces of aural habit through which this vibrant songbird has just been put.
"The higher the slavery, the more exquisite the buffoonery": 10 the truth of Shaftesbury's elegant conceit is borne out by the deftness of Lewis's lampoons, for this farçeur also reveals an intoxication with the object of laughter. At moments in his early work, one finds the signs of an infatuation with the musical and vocal culture of the same Breton speakers he otherwise burlesques. Such attraction instances a prime type of acoustic empathy. To its considerable appeals Lewis produces a mixed response, modifying his enchantment with an emergent recognition--and resistance. He is coming to regard this musical sympathy as an experience replete with the psychological and political meanings so richly detailed in the contemporary European analysis of the subject. (There is simply no evidence that Lewis knew de Gourmont's work before beginning to write the stories; the very progressive and dialectical character of the recognition I am about to outline, indeed, suggests persuasively that he had no prior knowledge. The work of the contemporary idéologues comprises an awareness into which he moves, at least initially, on his own.) 11 While Lewis's struggle clarifies the terms of that continental discourse, and claims its relevance to his own nascent model of comedy, his divided attitudes will be most interesting when they end, as an ambivalence overcome. Once he recognizes the social manifestations of aural empathy, that is, the idea of musical fellow-feeling generates a distaste that annuls all ambiguity. His angle of relation to his comic object shifts, accordingly, from a more playful and reciprocating one, grounded in a strong sense of the ludicrous, to an attitude of detached ridicule and a concomitant vision of the ridiculous.
A travel diary fragment written at Quimperlé in 1908 (preserved at the Cornell archive) records Lewis's elementary fascination with the Breton tongue. His sympathy is as articulate as it is discriminating. Sifting through an interlingual hubbub on the quays, he concentrates on the local dialect, which sounds out its own version of the Burkean sublime. It creates a beauty as severe as fear--a mingled and compelling chime:
Several groups of Sweedish [sic] sailors from the boats and breton dock hands were working on the quay, and the harsh celtic tongue, passionate and abrupt, was mixed with the wearisome drawl of the scandinavians. Certain languages,--Russian, swedish, breton,--apart from the distinct sound of them, are spoken with a distinct tone of voice.
. . . Breton is a solemn, rude, patriarchal, monotonous tongue, with long and sudden bursts of wild, impetuous speech, with sentences coming to a dead halt, which is not a breaking off as it seems, but the excited pitch of the voice is kept up till the last syllable and so there is no drop of the voice at the end of the phrase; there seems to be a ring of joy--not benevolent,--and recklessness, hysterical, timbre drawn out, and then sudden harsh and trenchant tones, and grating emphasis. [WB, 197]
Acoustic sensation at this pitch of intensity is felt along the pulse of a fundamental life-force, various European commentators were suggesting, and thus joins its auditor in empathy with an élan vital. The same vitalist currents drew Lewis into the thrall of Bretonic aural culture, he would reveal four decades later, when its vibrancy seems inseparable from the stupefaction it induced in him:
The Atlantic air, the raw rich visual food of the barbaric environment, the squealing of the pipes, the crashing of the ocean, induced a creative torpor. Mine was now a drowsy sun-baked ferment, watching with delight the great comic energies which erupted beneath my rather saturnine but astonished gaze: Brotcotnaz, Bestre, and the rest.
During those days, I began to get a philosophy: but not a very good one, I am afraid. . . .  The characters I chose to celebrate--Bestre, the Cornac and his wife, Brotcotnaz, le père François--were all primitive creatures, immersed in life, as much as birds, or big, obsessed, sun-drunk insects. 12
The passage offers its mixed attitudes like the palimpsest of a forty-year career, yet it also provides a remarkably accurate replica of an original complexity. Its peculiar combination of attraction and censure, both glorifying and objecting to the vitalism with which Lewis had moved in elementary sympathy, describes a counterrhythm already strong in the early fiction, where it emerges less discursively, more dramatically, as the function of an open-ended, dialectical inquiry.
This counterrhythm of resistance and reciprocity with Bretonic vocal culture moves at first as a function of Lewis's response to its sublime aspect. Its severe economy of beauty and terror discovers a locus classicus in "The Death of the Ankou" (probably the first of Lewis's attempts to fictionalize his experience in Brittany), where the English narrator recounts and responds to a primitive death fetish. Whereas Lewis would later attribute this story to sources of vitalist energy in Brittany, to the "sun, a Breton rather than a British" sun, 13 the death fetish emerges narratively and dramatically out of the vitalist sounds of the place--a vocal hubbub drenched in the sharp life-blood of the locale, an acoustic milieu as stark and compelling as the object it generates:
Whenever I grew attentive to my surroundings, the passionate movement of whirling and striking arms was visible at the tables where the play was in progress, or a furious black body would dash itself from one chair to another. The "celtic screech" meantime growing harsher and harsher, sharpening itself on caustic snarling words, would soar to a paroxysm of energy. "Garce"! [Bitch!] was the most frequent sound. All the voices would clamour for a moment together. It was a shattering noise in this dusky tunnel.--I had stopped reading, as I have said, and I lifted my eyes. It was then that I saw the Ankou.
With revulsed and misty eyes almost in front of me, an imperious re, apparently armed with a club, was forcing its way insolently forward towards the door, its head up, an eloquently moving mouth hung in the air, as it seemed, for its possessor . . .
The blinded re had burst into my daydream . . . [WB, 109-10].
The Ankou embodies not only the vocal culture of the place but the double measure of its acoustic sublime, moving not by eyesight but an "eloquently moving mouth" and in that sound combining the lure of acoustic beauty with its own lore of terror, its death-mission and aim.
Behind this curtain of terrible splendor, rather like the Wizard of Oz's, stands a pair of all too human feet, a local beggar's, and the little joke of this reversal goes to the larger sense of comedy that Lewis inscribes in the tramp's name: Ludo. The sense of play in this environment--"the play was in progress," after all, when the Ankou appeared--captures an ethical value within its theatrical meaning. In this primitive culture, the drama of death (and life) is a game, a sport no less severe than boisterous but at all points a collective engagement, a playing tout ensemble: Ludo emerges from voices in "clamour . . . together." And Lewis signs this re of play into a type and model of comedy as he assigns Ludo an exact double and counterpart in the farçeur, through this fisherman's anecdote:
"Quel type!" [What a character!] he said. "When we were in Penang, no it was at Bankok, at the time of my service with the fleet, I saw just such another. He was a blind sailor, an Englishman. He had lost his sight in a shipwreck--He would not beg from the black people."

"He liked the heat. He was a farçeur. He was such another as this one." [WB, 112]
The English farçeur's blindness may be taken to typify Lewis's openness to the sounds of the warm vitalist cultus of his own experience, in Brittany. In such reciprocity, moreover, we find the unexpected values and emphases in his earliest model of comedy: a playful synergy with the very characters of acoustic vitalism that provide his farcical types.
Such reciprocity is the theme in Lewis's recreation of the comic economy in "Les Saltimbanques" . Here the performing troupe provides a paradigm of the comic occasion and a definition of the author's relation to his comic object (and audience), the wild body of the public:
They looked upon the public as a vast beast, with a very simple but perverse character, differing from any separate man's, the important trait of which was an insatiable longing for their performances. . . . Whenever they met one of these monsters ["the many-headed beast"]--which was on an average twice a day--their only means of escape was by charming it with their pipes, which never failed to render it harmless and satisfied. They then would hurry on, until they met another, when they would again play to it and flee away.
The reflection that all these people parted with their sous for so little would be the only bright spot in the gloomy Adrien Brower of their minds. They felt that they were getting the better of them in some way. That the public was paying for an idea, for something that it gave itself, did not occur to them, but that it was paying for the performance as seen and appreciated by them, the performers. For it is most difficult to realise the charm of something we possess. [WB, 237-38]
Once again a pronominal confusion--here in the last several sentences--serves Lewis's theme perfectly: an exchange of roles, in which the audience plays music to the performers. Sounding the audience's response back to itself, Lewis's performers seal the network of acoustic empathy that binds all together. The author's own incipient resistance to such exchanges leads him to give the upper hand here to his players, who can pretend that, even while they are being paid for performing, they are the ones enjoying the show.
Yet the performers' complicity with the crowd reflects the inexorable laws of physical attraction and bonding between sound and listener and, as expressed, signals Lewis's own fascinated discovery of these rules. For his narrative modulates into semidiscursive rhythms, inscribing sympathy through sound--speech no less than music--as the constant, necessary principle of such performances:
it is the public . . . towards whom the discomfited "swell" in evening dress turns as towards his peers, for sympathy and understanding, when "scored off" anew, in, as the simile would affirm, this low-bred and unanswerable fashion. They are appealed to as though it were their mind that was being represented in the dialogue, and constantly discomfited, and he were merely their mouthpiece.
Without doubt this re originally stood for the public. [WB, 240]
To hear these exchanges between performer and audience as a protopolitical event is to exercise a Bendian hermeneutic that Lewis's language and imagery here amply invite. Thus Demos, a "low-bred" creature, is reached at the lowest sensory level through sound; musical empathy underlies and directs the very collective behavior that constitutes "the Crowd," "the public." While these scenes hint consistently at such a political insight, however, their social content is most interesting in remaining implicit, unformulated. It is as though the narrative consciousness, struck by the perplexity of its own fascinated revulsion at the music of local speech, is evolving this social analysis to sort out that paradox. For this political reading, which occurs to Lewis only as a suggestion, emerges obliquely, tentatively, as a function of his own divided response to the Bretonic vocalese. While the insight lingers on one side of the narrative consciousness, he does not look at it directly.
Lewis sees it steady and whole a year later, in the last of his continental stories, "Le Père François":
Music was his theme. In making use of certain expressions in the course of his rambling declamation, such as andante and contralto, he would add with sudden politeness "that is a term in music." . . . To look at him one would have said that the only emotion he had ever experienced was that provoked by the topical and sentimental songs of his country. He had become a very disreputable embodiment of them. His was the face of a man who had wedded, and been mastered by, the vague and neurasthenic heroine of the popular lyrical fancy; from constant intercourse with this shade he had grown as nearly as he could make himself her ideal.  [H]is discourse [was] full of what I supposed to be musicians' slang, confounded with thieves' slang and Breton slang; the hiccups that engulfed so many of his phrases and often ruined a whole train of thought . . . were only a few of the disappointments to be met . . . [WB, 277].
Here the empathy proper to the musical response reveals the same psychic and social mechanism that Benda would describe nearly a decade later. Thus Francis's fanciful marriage with the heroine of the song, following his "constant intercourse with this shade," consummates the laws of physical sympathy fundamental to acoustic experience. Presenting that response as the femme fatale's "popular draw," moreover, Lewis draws a specifically political situation. Such empathy through sound is the populist way of feeling; it also binds the membership of Demos into an acoustic amalgam and, like the national hymns heard by Benda, generates collective feeling as a function of its own musical effect. Thus the singer Francis, exuding the same "lusty" mood that compels his imaginative marriage with the ballad bride, rides his "patriotic song" into radical union with his conationals--and it is a lower order of nation, after all, that includes "thieves' slang" in its national speech.
Reversing this current of empathic projection but preserving its social meaning, Francis invites the same populist aggregate to abide within him: he has "become a giant. . . . [N]ow that he is isolated everything has come to inhabit him, and he feels constantly in his spirit the throbbing of multitudes" (WB, 279-80). Thus the modern political phenomenon of demotic gigantism whirls around an empty center; this vacant intraindividual space craves such bogus relationships and expansions as musical empathy makes all too easy and available.
Remarkable for the new virulence of its depiction of the aural, "Le Père François" moderates its invective only to serve the needs of exposition, which links this musical character to the methods and emblems of demotic solidarity. Once Lewis has recognized the social meanings of aural empathy, moreover, he exhibits a categorical antipathy to it. Thus lyrical fellow-feeling provokes a distaste that annuls all of Lewis's earlier ambiguities about the acoustic experience. Indeed, the political content of this aesthetic event decisively turns the course of his development, for "François" anticipates the substance of the author's mature social critique. 14
The difference this political perception makes in the typical mise-en-scène of Lewisian comedy may be found in a particular passage in "François," one that recasts the incident of an earlier story in view of the political import newly found in the comic action. (The unitary character of these stories was reinforced by their appearance in but two magazines: the first three [1909] in Ford Madox Hueffer's The English Review; the next three [1910] in The Tramp.) Thus "François" includes a pointed reference to "A Breton Innkeeper," the piece published immediately before it. Here Lewis compares the musical antics of the Franciscan, cryptically but knowingly, with those of the concierge. Invoking Roland as Francis's "like," the author gestures at a particular scene in which the innkeeper, seen in the company of street boys--like Francis in the matching passage--matches the "ceaseless dramatic effervescence" (WB, 279) of the priest. A juxtaposition of the two texts shows Lewis angling his later reference to point up the specifically political nature of Roland's musical antics:
Roland is like one of those "eccentric musicians," as they are called, that tear about in front of a row of different sized bottles, playing "Rule Britannia" with inconceivable agility. His perpetual verbosity and ubiquity are appalling. Rather than relapse into anything approaching calm, he will talk to his own wife, or to a little ragged boy that has stopped in the street to stare at the boy in buttons. He is capable of banging on the back of a saucepan or rattling the dishes to "keep things going." [WB, 271]
The Père François and his like spend their lives in a ceaseless dramatic effervescence. Their furious gestures, their dark sayings and invectives, are as harmless as the vacant menace of lonely and excited little boys, who occasionally take some notice of one in the streets. The only difference is that the children are conventional and romantic, whereas his impersonations are often of the most blood-curdling realism. You will find a beggar ranting in some Paris street, and with fiery exclamations he will be exciting an imaginary and sanguinary mob to revolution; or he will lash the watching people with his scorn like some misunderstood and outraged leader, and, rushing off, will constantly turn and shout his threats and reproaches at them from afar, as though he were leaving some doomed city. At the next street corner a fresh crowd will gather at his eccentric mutterings. [WB, 279]
In a nationalist lyric like "Rule Britannia," the collectivizing effects of music are channeled to their predictable political ends, but this theme holds no conceptual focus for Lewis yet. An unclaimed inference, it is passed over, lost to the very headlong fancy of the simile that generates it. Two months later, this gay charade has darkened into an augury of the political truths Lewis has lately and grimly grasped. He exploits it accordingly. As Francis's "like," then, the formerly innocuous bottle-player moves as one with this ignorant but sinister mountebank, and into the arena of real political theater, where the demagogue's vocal music consolidates the crowd and magnetizes its members to himself. And that is no laughing--or ludic--matter. The earlier sense of the ludicrous--a boisterous laughing with the wild body of comedy, a participatory fun with the comic automaton playing his harmless bottle music--dissolves into a repugnance at the dangerous political prepotence of such performance and sympathetic participation: Francis prompts only disdain; ridicule is the sign and mode of our response.
The treatises on comedy that Lewis composed later in his career, then, show the palimpsest-like character of his developed thinking on the subject: a layering of varied--and conflicting--emphases on vitalist empathy and satirical distance. It is thus especially interesting to recover a first tract, a piece written just slightly ahead of the moment of political perception that would complicate the primary model. This is an essay published in the New Age in May 1910: "Our Wild Body." My emphasis here points to its signal difference from "The Wild Body," where the definite article carries that later strain toward objectivity and distanced regard. For in May 1910 Lewis still views the Wild Body as a collective possession and the experience of comedy that it centers and generates as a game played in common, a sport of the social corpus. Indeed, this 1910 essay is so borne along by the spirit of corporate fun that it scarcely steps aside to characterize as humor the experience it valorizes, but the nature and behavior of the energy he extols here clearly belong to the genre of comedy.
The essay seeks to recover and legitimate a sense of bodily vitality by contrasting the healthy attitudes of Continentals, mainly the French, to the defensive inhibitions of the English. The bodily behavior of the French is not idealized beyond the bounds of the comic--their energy resembles Roland's, a type of the laughable automaton--but the playfulness and easy communion Lewis finds between the actors here announces the ludic, empathic character of the fun. The genteel buffoonery of these French bodies is mellowed, moreover, through its fellowship with the French mind, which ingratiates them to each other and to us:
[The French bourgeois] will . . . establish a playful and more intimate relation between your respective persons--to glory in their warmth and fitness, to slap you on the shoulders, to take your arm in his hand. . . . This will not in the least detract from the severe and dignified attitude of your two minds, and their sentimental intercourses. The Frenchman regards our bodies as children, and when the minds, like the two fathers, have become friendly, it seems natural to him that the bodies also should become better acquainted and have their little sport. [WB, 251-52]
The comic marriage of blood and brain that Lewis intimates here is consummated in the summary praise of the French as one of "those vivacious and thoughtful races, for whom life is game" (emphasis added), and for whom
such a monstrous growth as this universal life of sport [the English mind's denial of corpus ludens in the discipline of body-building] . . . would be impossible and above all unnecessary. This division weakens both life and play. But it is in our case meant as a blow at life, to divide life's forces. Art is only worth anything when the artist is as vulnerable in it as in his body. [WB, 254]
Annulling the opposition he will later drive between the laughing observer and the laughable object, Lewis declares an essential reciprocity between himself as author of comedy and its wild body, presumably his own--a synergy once again empowered through the (French) sense of play. And with the same value in mind he rewrites the typical scene of Bergsonian comedy here, deploying the orange peel for the comic automaton to slip on but falling together with the victim: "Often walking beside some man, nervous and exasperated, and silently imputing to him the whole gamut of stupidity and meanness, have you not felt that . . . should you slip by chance on a piece of orange peel, catch at him instinctively, drag him down with you on the ground, and roll about a bit with him, all would be well?" (WB, 252) Ludicrousness, in the full sense of that word, shapes Lewis's early understanding of comedy, and the admission of openness and vulnerability that attend it stand in sharp contrast to the ridicule later professed, through the persona of the Enemy, in his brandishing of the satirist's armored hide.
The revisions Lewis performed on the stories he republished in 1927 are informed centrally and crucially by the political lesson first adduced in "Le Père François," in 1910. Even at that early date, this lesson provided him the vantage, as we have seen, for significant revision of previous stories, by enabling him to read the political character of the demagogic Franciscan back into the apparently innocuous capers of Roland. His later adjustments essentially repeat that procedure. He extends the recognition first limned in "François," applies it retroactively, and continues to shift the essential tenor of comedy from the ludicrous to the ridiculous. To place his later work on a developmental continuum with the earlier, moreover, is to subjoin its apparent mastery to those difficult beginnings. The ambiguities revolving around musical and vitalist empathy with the Wild Body beget fresh complexities, but he moves these toward resolution in the harsh solvent of the political convictions first expressed in "François."
Rewriting "Le Père François" as "Franciscan Adventures," Lewis simply takes the earlier political intuitions up a discursive level, fixing generic tags on the populist musician, whose experience now typifies the values of post-Revolutionary, populist, "Republican France" (WB, 121): he is a "sickly re of early republican romance" (WB, 129). The pre-"François" stories must undergo more extensive revision, however, because these sustain ambiguities about acoustic empathy that are simply intolerable now. Thus Lewis seeks to write equivocation out of these stories, to this purpose showing a striking singlemindedness. His target in "Les Saltimbanques" is the players' musical complicity with their audience. These exchanges, contested but necessary in 1909, showed Lewis conceding his own part in the verbal and acoustic milieu; his later revision, however, takes back that concession. Thus the musical soothing of the public beast no longer provides the show in the retitled piece, "The Cornac and His Wife," where the action seems to revert to the acrobatics suggested by the original heading, "Les Saltimbanques":
Whenever one of these monsters was met with, which on an average was twice a day, the only means of escape for the unfortunate family was to charm it. Conduct involving that never failed to render the monster harmless and satisfied. Then they would hurry on, until they met another. Then they would repeat just the same thing over again, and once more hasten away, boiling with resentment. [WB, 92]
This silencing of a formerly musical relationship coincides with a newly virulent antipathy to the public, asserted by the author through his players. The urgent need to distance themselves from the audience signals a repressed but unforgotten connection, a linkage primarily acoustic; it is most forcibly recalled when most strenuously repressed: "Had you suggested to the Showman that the Public paid for an idea, something it drew out of itself, that would have been a particularly repugnant thought." (WB, 93; emphasis added) "Particularly repugnant" to the Showman (the author's provisional double) in 1927 is a thought Lewis presented with eloquence and imaginative penetration in 1909, when he heard the rhythms and movements of the public's own inner vitalism--something it drew out of itself--echoing back through the sounds made by the players: a perfect paradigm of acoustic empathy. Now infected with political meanings, this formerly musical union survives only as an uneasy memory, a residual irritant--a sore point for the author no less than his Showman.
Behind the circuit of acoustic connection that Lewis esteemed earlier lay the residual pull of the harsh music of Breton speech, and so it seems appropriate, in conclusion, to revisit that scene of primary edification and chart the evolution of attitudes toward its appeals. In the early account of Bretonic speech in "Les Saltimbanques" , Lewis's narrator echoes the bracing appreciation made in the 1908 diary fragment, repeating its conceit. This vocal music appears to be alternately excited and imperturbable; it displays the odd but exciting combination of spontaneous vitalism and controlled mechanism. He expands that paradox, too, as he hears the speakers grasping vibrant life at its most intense--that is, at its most predetermined, automatic, fatalistic:
Their hysterical and monotonous voices are always pitched in a strain of fierce raillery and abuse. . . .
They are accustomed to look upon all conditions of life as inevitable. They can never conceive of a man being anything else but what he is. They have this primitive wisdom. [WB, 245-46]
In the 1927 revision, however, Lewis's Showman stands "before a congregation of Hodges, who could not even express themselves in the metropolitan tongue, but gibbered in breton, day in, day out" (WB, 92).
In "Franciscan Adventures," similarly, the author revokes his early fascination with a passion more exacting than his earlier appreciation. Here he alters his former excitements both in letter and spirit, casting the very terms of his first infatuation (emphasized here)--the paradoxical but pleasing medley of vitalism and mechanism--into labels of evident "scorn" for the Breton priest: "I examined this old song-bird with scorn. Monotonous passion, stereotyped into a frenzied machine, he irritated me like an aimlessly howling wind. . . . What emotions had this automaton experienced before he accepted outcast life?" (WB, 121; emphases added) Accordingly, Francis acts out a clarifying parody of his own provincial speech, both defining and mocking the halt-and-rush rhythms that, at least in the mouths of other speakers, have held Lewis in their thrall: "He would stop, and with an indrawn wheeze or a quick gasp, fetch it back as it was escaping. Then he would burst out violently again into a heaving flux of song" (WB, 120). This dramatic invective goes back to 1910 and the decisive moment of "Le Père François," where Lewis first recognized the political meanings of acoustic empathy. It is there that the sweet severity of Bretonic speech first goes sour. In "Franciscan Adventures" the enlivening abruptions of the Breton dialect produce a sad caricature in Francis, who turns its angular frisson into this blithering staccato, staggering through his own comic prosody of discontinuity:
These sayings occurred to him quite fortuitously, and he would quote them à propos of something with which they had no connection. Instead of adroitly leading the conversation round in such a way that the bon mot might be introduced, as a less sincere or enthusiastic man would do, he boldly uttered it, taking it as a text for a new discourse, until another one turned up to bring what was often its most astounding career to an abrupt end. [WB, 282]
From the start the harsh music of that coastal dialect provided Lewis a type and model of vitalist laughter; its severe percussiveness was at one with the stabbing gestures of its mirth. Thus the narrator in "Les Saltimbanques" actually roots the patterns of local speech in the raucous laughter of the place:
One sees in the Breton peasant a constant tendency to sarcasm. Their hysterical and monotonous voices are always pitched in a strain of fierce raillery and abuse. But this does not infect their mirth. Their laughter is forced and meant to be wounding, and with their grins and quips they are like armed men who never meet without clashing their swords together.
They dance, work and amuse themselves fatalistically. [WB, 245-46]
In 1927, however, that savage panoply of armored mirth is stained with a diminutive regard; its terrible beauty is changed, utterly, in the final assessment Lewis adds to the revised version:
You see in the peasant of Brittany and other primitive districts of France a constant tendency to sarcasm. Their hysterical and monotonous voices--a variety of the "celtic" screech--are always with the Bretons pitched in a strain of fierce raillery and abuse. But this does not affect their mirth. Their laughter is sharp and mirthless and designed usually to wound. With their grins and quips they are like armed men who never meet without clashing their weapons together. Were my circus-proprietor and his kind not so tough, this continual howl or disquieting explosion of what is scarcely mirth would shatter them. [WB, 101]
Removing his Showman-counterpart (his own "kind") from vital contact with the audience, and withdrawing his earlier benediction on the "primitive wisdom" of their vocal culture, Lewis measures the difference of his later estrangement most dramatically in his refusal to admit that such laughter is mirth at all.
Has a theory of humor been confused or clarified in this process of change? Lewis mounted his challenge to the Bergsonian model of comedy from a Gourmontian platform, but he built it on the shifting sands of that littoral dialect. Yes, he reduced those coastal speakers to creatures of oral (and aural) habit; these mechanisms, apparently irreversible and insurmountable, defied the humanist hope in Bergson's vision of redemptive laughter. Yet the residual thrall of the vocal music of Brittany led Lewis to thrill at the very mechanical vitality he would abuse. The political perception of 1910 at least fuses his comic philosophy to its object of rebuke, the oral automaton, who receives no quarter now. Human music, an instrument of empathy and the detested social collectivism, offers the farçeur a target unmisted by fancy--the Celtic twilight of Lewis's own youthful muse. From a history as contrary as his, however, no literary theory stands free and clear. When he sets out the mature conception of humor in the essays collected in The Wild Body, then, he retains the twists and inconsistencies of this development and, in this way, confirms the lasting importance of its opening moment: the abiding role of the vocal culture of Brittany and his obsessive engagement with--and against--the empathic response it prompts.
Vincent Sherry teaches at Villanova University. His books include James Joyce: Ulysses , Ezra Pound, Wyndham Lewis, and Radical Modernism , The Uncommon Tongue: The Poetry and Criticism of Geoffrey Hill , and two volumes on contemporary British and Irish poets that he edited for the Dictionary of Literary Biography. He is currently writing a book on the Great War and Anglo-American modernism.
1. Wyndham Lewis, "The Meaning of the Wild Body," in The Complete Wild Body, ed. Bernard Lafourcade (Santa Barbara: Black Sparrow Press, 1982), 157; hereafter abbreviated WB. This edition reprints the texts of Lewis's 1927 compilation, The Wild Body: A Soldier of Humour and Other Stories, and it supplements this with the earlier versions, as published in English journals in 1909 and 1910, and with various ancillary materials.
2. "Inferior Religions" was first published in 1917 and rewritten for the 1927 collection; the revision entailed mainly an addition of detail, not a change in the argument.
3. I employ the distinction elaborated by Harry Levin, Playboys and Killjoys: An Essay on the Theory and Practice of Comedy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987), esp. 11-12. Unfortunately, but in line with critical preconceptions inattentive to Lewis's development, Levin's single mention of Lewis reduces his work to Enemy satire, an unalloyed art of ridicule.
4. See Geoffrey Wagner, Wyndham Lewis: A Portrait of the Artist as Enemy (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1957), 215.
5. E. g., "The comic is that side of a person which reveals his likeness to a thing, that aspect of human events which, through its peculiar inelasticity, conveys the impression of pure mechanism, of automatism, of movement without life. Consequently it calls for immediate corrective. This corrective is laughter, a social gesture that singles out and represses a special kind of absent-mindedness in men and in events" (Henri Bergson, Laughter [1900], in Comedy, ed. Wylie Sypher [1956; Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980], 117). For the social uses and humanist values of laughter, see also 145 and 187.
6. The exchange between Murray and Lafourcade on the relevance of Bergson is typical insofar as it sidetracks into subtle but largely irrelevant distinctions on the idea of the "absurd"; see Robert Murray, "'Our Wild Body': Lewis's Forgotten Essay," Enemy News 14 (summer 1981): 15-17, and Bernard Lafourcade, "The Wild Body, Bergson, and the Absurd," Enemy News 15 (winter 1982): 23-25. The critical literature on modernist comedy is far from extensive. A fairly standard assumption is that modernism and comedy, at least in the traditional sense, are antithetical. This view is put forward by Laura Mooneyham, "Comedy Among the Modernists: P. G. Wodehouse and the Anachronism of Comic Form," Twentieth Century Literature 40 (spring 1994): 114-38, where the conventional comic rhythm of problem and reprieve is seen to belong to a vision of life no longer tenable. The main problem with this view is of course the undeclared assumption that there is a single sensibility in modernism; it seems more helpful to think of individual variations of certain basic premises about comedy.
7. Wagner, Wyndham Lewis, 230. That Lewis represents no significant reorientation of Bergson's comic philosophy is the argument repeated frequently by Wagner, 215-30.
8. The modern intellectual culture of idéologie is set out in the introductory chapter of my Ezra Pound, Wyndham Lewis, and Radical Modernism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 9-42. In the present essay I develop this background toward an idea of the comic not advanced in that study, where the chapter on Lewis focuses nearly exclusively on his political and fictional writing in the years between the two world wars.
9. See Remy de Gourmont, Le Problème du style (1902; Paris: Mercure de France, 1905), esp. 33, 37-38; idem, L'Esthétique de la langue Française (Paris: Mercure de France, 1905), esp. 279-80, 288, and 315-16; and Julien Benda, Belphégor, trans. S. J. I. Lawson (New York: Payson and Clarke, 1929), esp. 90, 122, and 143-44.
10. The phrase is from Anthony Ashley Cooper, third earl of Shaftesbury, Sensus Communis: An Essay on the Freedom of Wit and Humour , I, iv.
11. That Lewis knew the work of de Gourmont and Benda (and Georges Sorel) during his Paris years is an assertion made without proof by Jeffrey Meyers, The Enemy: A Biography of Wyndham Lewis (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1980), 15-16; on this question it is important to note that Frederick Tarr, the Englishman and double of Lewis in Paris in Tarr, moves almost exclusively through a community of expatriates and makes virtually no contact with local French intellectual culture, let alone the signal res named by Meyers.
12. Wyndham Lewis, Rude Assignment: A Narrative of My Career Up-To-Date (London: Hutchinson, 1951), 117.
13. Lewis discusses this work in 1935 in "Beginnings" (WB, 373-74), where he claims it as his first piece of fictional writing; it was left unpublished in 1909, possibly because it had not reached completion, and it appeared only in 1927. I believe the story to have been unrevisable at that later date. It had to appear as initially conceived, in line with the intensities and enthusiasms of that early moment: the absolute centrality not only of the death fetish but of the acoustic sublime in that re made this piece unamenable to the sort of revision Lewis carried out on other early stories.
14. See my Radical Modernism, 91-139, esp. 99-105.
.


a6f
|
||||||
|
|
|
674
22 1000
These recommendations should help you design a reasonable backup schedule that will allow you to segment your backups and at the same time achieve reasonable recovery times. Of course, your system may have its own special requirements that must be addressed.
Performance VerificationOnce you design and build your system, you must have some way of verifying performance. If you build your system for optimal backup/recovery performance, this task is quite simple. The simplest method of verifying performance is to test the system using the backup process as the standard. It is not necessary to save a test database to test backup performance; simply measure the time it takes to perform your daily backups. Keep in mind that as the amount of data in your database grows, the time it takes to back up those tables also increases. By periodically documenting the backup performance of the system and trying new parameters such as various block sizes, you may be able to fine-tune your backup process. I dont recommend that you change any parameters on a production system that might put the backup at risk, but values such as block size incur no risk. The following sections look at what should be tested in the RDBMS and the operating system. What To Test in the RDBMSWhether you perform hot or cold backups, there is nothing in the RDBMS itself you can tune to increase the performance of the backup. However, this is not the case if you are using the export utility to back up the system. The export process does use the RDBMS to perform its function. The function of the export utility is to read data from the database and output that data to an OS file. An export does not require much tuning except in the case of long rows (in this case, you may want to increase the BUFFER parameter). By increasing the size of the BUFFER parameter, you may see some performance improvement. Perform the same export using different values for the BUFFER parameter and note any differences in performance. What To ede Test in the OSYou can perform various tests in the OS to verify and increase the performance of the backup process:
An improvement in any of these areas can add an incremental performance improvement to your backup process. The following sections examine some of these areas in more detail. Disk Block Size Many disk drives and disk array controllers have a certain block size that is optimal. By reading the data file and discarding the data, you may be able to find the optimal block size for your particular configuration. With some disk array controllers, having a sufficiently large disk request allows multiple disks to service that request simultaneously. During a backup operation, very large block sizes (such as 64K) are not unreasonable. With some devices, a block size even larger than this might be acceptable. When the block size gets too large, performance begins to degrade because internal OS buffers have been overflowed or the request is split up by the controllers device driver into smaller pieces, causing additional overhead. By testing various block sizes, you can determine what is optimal for your specific configuration. Tape Block Size Different types of tape drives have different characteristics. In determining the proper block size for your tape drive, the goal is to keep the tape streaming. When the tape drive is streaming, it is continually moving and writing data to the tape. If the tape drive is not fed data quickly enough, the tape stops, rewinds a short amount, and starts up again when more data arrives. Even though data may be arriving at the tape device at a certain rate, the rate at which it is written to tape may be degraded because the tape is stopping and starting. This phenomenon is known a shoe-shining or rocking because the tape must move back and forth over the tape head for the data to be written contiguously to the tape. By feeding data to the tape at a fast enough rate to stream the tape, you can see significant improvements in performance. Any time the tape has to stop and back up, performance is degraded. Providing a large enough block size and buffering data is important in helping improve tape performance. Try various block sizes when the tape is streaming to see what is optimal for your particular hardware. If the tape is not streaming, this test is not really valid because performance is severely degraded by the shoe-shining effect.
|
| 702 |
|


EntityAddSymbolString
| Syntax | |
int EntityAddSymbolString(struct Entitydata *ptr,char *str); | |
| Header | |
| base/entity.h | |
| Library | |
| rxmldb | |
| Description | |
The The argument ptr points to the control structure. The text that defines the symbol is stored in the zero terminated string pointed to by the argument str. An entity is often used as short hand for repeated text, to refer to symbols that would otherwise confuse the XML passer, such as "<" or ">", or to refer to external data.The entity codec encodes and decodes entity/symbol pairs. | |
| Returns | |
| Returns zero on success. On error, (-1) is returned. | |
| Errors | |
| On error (-1) is returned. | |
| Example | |
| None |


Benefit from Networks, Projects, People etc who already developed projects for social good
Benefit from Networks, Projects, People etc who already developed projects for social good
Benefit from Networks, Projects, People etc who already developed projects for social good
Share your projects, contacts, networks and experience to the world
Share your projects, contacts, networks and experience to the world
There are thousands of people and projects all over the world, doing good work, often with similar aims and in similar fields, but they all start from scratch, spend time, energy and resources building the networks and gaining access to the communities and strategic partners that are necessary to make meaningful progress.
Recognizing that impact could be amplified by more strategic efforts and collaborative interventions...
Do you have access to projects & networks that can help good causes?
Do you have access to projects & networks that can help good causes?
Do you have skills to offer that can help good causes?
Do you have skills to offer that can help good causes?
Looking for skills or projects & networks from experts in the sector?
Looking for skills or projects & networks from experts in the sector?
Involved in a non-profit that could benefit from skills & support?
Involved in a non-profit that could benefit from skills & support?
View all contact requests and requests to join solutions hub.
View all contact requests and requests to join solutions hub.
It allows for people who can offer resources by:
It offers a way for those who want to make a difference to reach out to those offering legitimate resources in a secure way.
It allows for global collaborative working through the Solutions Hub, where people can post problems that they want collaborators to help on. People can enter the hub, engage in discussions, and work toward solutions. In many instances a smaller group may be chosen from this larger discussion group, to enter a separate 'lounge area' of the hub, to finalise solutions, presentations etc.
Allows for non-profits to gain access to a library of resources from experts in the sector- for example, resources on set-up and governance, fundraising, financial management, development toolkits, monitoring & evaluation tools etc.


NBC's Chuck Todd: Trump's Yovanovitch Tweet Is What Authoritarians Do | Breitbart
by Pam KeyOn Sunday’s broadcast of NBC’s “Meet the Press,” anchor Chuck Todd said President Donald Trump’s tweet about former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch during her public testimony was what authoritarians did.
Discussing the tweet, Todd said, “You sort of realized, it’s consumed him. He can’t compartmentalize. Bill Clinton compartmentalized in ways some of are like how do you do that? Almost overly so. This guy can’t at all to the point he had to force himself —What he did at the hearing is what authoritarian people do. That was just a rough moment.”
Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN


Psalms 150:4
Praise him with the timbrel and dance: praise him with stringed instruments and organs.


Atuba Chief Varkees:
Stop?! Our vengeance against these creatures has just begun, and already you wish to sheathe your weapons and creep away from the field of battle! Are you frightened?
Young Orc, you dishonor yourself, your tribe and our entire race! Death first!


This is a short quiz to help you determine where your political allegiances lie.
Lets playYou are very passionate!
You've got some ideas, but need more action.
 Get outta here.


A large rose-tree stood near the entrance of the garden: the
roses growing on it were white, but there were three gardeners at
it, busily painting them red. Alice thought this a very curious
thing, and she went nearer to watch them, and just as she came up
to them she heard one of them say, 'Look out now, Five! Don't go
splashing paint over me like that!'
'I couldn't help it,' said Five, in a sulky tone; 'Seven
jogged my elbow.'
On which Seven looked up and said, 'That's right, Five! Always
lay the blame on others!'
You'd better not talk!' said Five. 'I heard the Queen
say only yesterday you deserved to be beheaded!'
'What for?' said the one who had spoken first.
'That's none of your business, Two!' said Seven.
'Yes, it is his business!' said Five, 'and I'll tell
him--it was for bringing the cook tulip-roots instead of
onions.'
Seven flung down his brush, and had just begun 'Well, of all
the unjust things--' when his eye chanced to fall upon Alice, as
she stood watching them, and he checked himself suddenly: the
others looked round also, and all of them bowed low.
'Would you tell me,' said Alice, a little timidly, 'why you
are painting those roses?'
Five and Seven said nothing, but looked at Two. Two began in a
low voice, 'Why the fact is, you see, Miss, this here ought to
have been a red rose-tree, and we put a white one in by
mistake; and if the Queen was to find it out, we should all have
our heads cut off, you know. So you see, Miss, we're doing our
best, afore she comes, to--' At this moment Five, who had been
anxiously looking across the garden, called out 'The Queen! The
Queen!' and the three gardeners instantly threw themselves flat
upon their faces. There was a sound of many footsteps, and Alice
looked round, eager to see the Queen.
First came ten soldiers carrying clubs; these were all shaped
like the three gardeners, oblong and flat, with their hands and
feet at the corners: next the ten courtiers; these were
ornamented all over with diamonds, and walked two and two, as the
soldiers did. After these came the royal children; there were ten
of them, and the little dears came jumping merrily along hand in
hand, in couples: they were all ornamented with hearts. Next came
the guests, mostly Kings and Queens, and among them Alice
recognised the White Rabbit: it was talking in a hurried nervous
manner, smiling at everything that was said, and went by without
noticing her. Then followed the Knave of Hearts, carrying the
King's crown on a crimson velvet cushion; and, last of all this
grand procession, came THE KING AND QUEEN OF HEARTS.
Alice was rather doubtful whether she ought not to lie down on
her face like the three gardeners, but she could not remember
ever having heard of such a rule at processions; 'and besides,
what would be the use of a procession,' thought she, 'if people
had all to lie down upon their faces, so that they couldn't see
it?' So she stood still where she was, and waited.
When the procession came opposite to Alice, they all stopped
and looked at her, and the Queen said severely 'Who is this?' She
said it to the Knave of Hearts, who only bowed and smiled in
reply.
'Idiot!' said the Queen, tossing her head impatiently; and,
turning to Alice, she went on, 'What's your name, child?'
'My name is Alice, so please your Majesty,' said Alice very
politely; but she added, to herself, 'Why, they're only a pack of
cards, after all. I needn't be afraid of them!'
'And who are these?' said the Queen, pointing to the
three gardeners who were lying round the rosetree; for, you see,
as they were lying on their faces, and the pattern on their backs
was the same as the rest of the pack, she could not tell whether
they were gardeners, or soldiers, or courtiers, or three of her
own children.
'How should I know?' said Alice, surprised at her own courage.
'It's no business of mine.'
The Queen turned crimson with fury, and, after glaring at her
for a moment like a wild beast, screamed 'Off with her head!
Off--'
'Nonsense!' said Alice, very loudly and decidedly, and the
Queen was silent.
The King laid his hand upon her arm, and timidly said
'Consider, my dear: she is only a child!'
The Queen turned angrily away from him, and said to the Knave
'Turn them over!'
The Knave did so, very carefully, with one foot.
'Get up!' said the Queen, in a shrill, loud voice, and the
three gardeners instantly jumped up, and began bowing to the
King, the Queen, the royal children, and everybody else.
'Leave off that!' screamed the Queen. 'You make me giddy.' And
then, turning to the rose-tree, she went on, 'What have
you been doing here?'
'May it please your Majesty,' said Two, in a very humble tone,
going down on one knee as he spoke, 'we were trying--'
'I see!' said the Queen, who had meanwhile been examining the
roses. 'Off with their heads!' and the procession moved on, three
of the soldiers remaining behind to execute the unfortunate
gardeners, who ran to Alice for protection.
'You shan't be beheaded!' said Alice, and she put them into a
large flower-pot that stood near. The three soldiers wandered
about for a minute or two, looking for them, and then quietly
marched off after the others.
'Are their heads off?' shouted the Queen.
'Their heads are gone, if it please your Majesty!' the
soldiers shouted in reply.
'That's right!' shouted the Queen. 'Can you play croquet?'
The soldiers were silent, and looked at Alice, as the question
was evidently meant for her.
'Yes!' shouted Alice.
'Come on, then!' roared the Queen, and Alice joined the
procession, wondering very much what would happen next.
'It's--it's a very fine day!' said a timid voice at her side.
She was walking by the White Rabbit, who was peeping anxiously
into her face.
'Very,' said Alice: '--where's the Duchess?'
'Hush! Hush!' said the Rabbit in a low, hurried tone. He
looked anxiously over his shoulder as he spoke, and then raised
himself upon tiptoe, put his mouth close to her ear, and
whispered 'She's under sentence of execution.'
'What for?' said Alice.
'Did you say "What a pity!"?' the Rabbit asked.
'No, I didn't,' said Alice: 'I don't think it's at all a pity.
I said "What for?"'
'She boxed the Queen's ears--' the Rabbit began. Alice gave a
little scream of laughter. 'Oh, hush!' the Rabbit whispered in a
frightened tone. 'The Queen will hear you! You see, she came
rather late, and the Queen said--'
'Get to your places!' shouted the Queen in a voice of thunder,
and people began running about in all directions, tumbling up
against each other; however, they got settled down in a minute or
two, and the game began.
The chief difficulty Alice found at first was in managing her
flamingo: she succeeded in getting its body tucked away,
comfortably enough, under her arm, with its legs hanging down,
but generally, just as she had got its neck nicely straightened
out, and was going to give the hedgehog a blow with its head, it
would twist itself round and look up in her face, with
such a puzzled expression that she could not help bursting out
laughing: and when she had got its head down, and was going to
begin again, it was very provoking to find that the hedgehog had
unrolled itself, and was in the act of crawling away: besides all
this, there was generally a ridge or furrow in the way wherever
she wanted to send the hedgehog to, and, as the doubled-up
soldiers were always getting up and walking off to other parts of
the ground, Alice soon came to the conclusion that it was a very
difficult game indeed.
The players all played at once without waiting for turns,
quarrelling all the while, and fighting for the hedgehogs; and in
a very short time the Queen was in a furious passion, and went
stamping about, and shouting 'Off with his head!' or 'Off with
her head!' about once in a minute.
Alice began to feel very uneasy: to be sure, she had not as
yet had any dispute with the Queen, but she knew that it might
happen any minute, 'and then,' thought she, 'what would become of
me? They're dreadfully fond of beheading people here; the great
wonder is, that there's any one left alive!'
She was looking about for some way of escape, and wondering
whether she could get away without being seen, when she noticed a
curious appearance in the air: it puzzled her very much at first,
but, after watching it a minute or two, she made it out to be a
grin, and she said to herself 'It's the Cheshire Cat: now I shall
have somebody to talk to.'
'How are you getting on?' said the Cat, as soon as there was
mouth enough for it to speak with.
Alice waited till the eyes appeared, and then nodded. 'It's no
use speaking to it,' she thought, 'till its ears have come, or at
least one of them.' In another minute the whole head appeared,
and then Alice put down her flamingo, and began an account of the
game, feeling very glad she had someone to listen to her. The Cat
seemed to think that there was enough of it now in sight, and no
more of it appeared.
'I don't think they play at all fairly,' Alice began, in
rather a complaining tone, 'and they all quarrel so dreadfully
one can't hear oneself speak--and they don't seem to have any
rules in particular; at least, if there are, nobody attends to
them--and you've no idea how confusing it is all the things being
alive; for instance, there's the arch I've got to go through next
walking about at the other end of the ground--and I should have
croqueted the Queen's hedgehog just now, only it ran away when it
saw mine coming!'
'How do you like the Queen?' said the Cat in a low voice.
'Not at all,' said Alice: 'she's so extremely--' Just then she
noticed that the Queen was close behind her, listening: so she
went on, '--likely to win, that it's hardly worth while finishing
the game.'
The Queen smiled and passed on.
'Who are you talking to?' said the King, going up to
Alice, and looking at the Cat's head with great curiosity.
'It's a friend of mine--a Cheshire Cat,' said Alice: 'allow me
to introduce it.'
'I don't like the look of it at all,' said the King: 'however,
it may kiss my hand if it likes.'
'I'd rather not,' the Cat remarked.
'Don't be impertinent,' said the King, 'and don't look at me
like that!' He got behind Alice as he spoke.
'A cat may look at a king,' said Alice. 'I've read that in
some book, but I don't remember where.'
'Well, it must be removed,' said the King very decidedly, and
he called the Queen, who was passing at the moment, 'My dear! I
wish you would have this cat removed!'
The Queen had only one way of settling all difficulties, great
or small. 'Off with his head!' she said, without even looking
round.
'I'll fetch the executioner myself,' said the King eagerly,
and he hurried off.
Alice thought she might as well go back, and see how the game
was going on, as she heard the Queen's voice in the distance,
screaming with passion. She had already heard her sentence three
of the players to be executed for having missed their turns, and
she did not like the look of things at all, as the game was in
such confusion that she never knew whether it was her turn or
not. So she went in search of her hedgehog.
The hedgehog was engaged in a fight with another hedgehog,
which seemed to Alice an excellent opportunity for croqueting one
of them with the other: the only difficulty was, that her
flamingo was gone across to the other side of the garden, where
Alice could see it trying in a helpless sort of way to fly up
into a tree.
By the time she had caught the flamingo and brought it back,
the fight was over, and both the hedgehogs were out of sight:
'but it doesn't matter much,' thought Alice, 'as all the arches
are gone from this side of the ground.' So she tucked it away
under her arm, that it might not escape again, and went back for
a little more conversation with her friend.
When she got back to the Cheshire Cat, she was surprised to
find quite a large crowd collected round it: there was a dispute
going on between the executioner, the King, and the Queen, who
were all talking at once, while all the rest were quite silent,
and looked very uncomfortable.
The moment Alice appeared, she was appealed to by all three to
settle the question, and they repeated their arguments to her,
though, as they all spoke at once, she found it very hard indeed
to make out exactly what they said.
The executioner's argument was, that you couldn't cut off a
head unless there was a body to cut it off from: that he had
never had to do such a thing before, and he wasn't going to begin
at his time of life.
The King's argument was, that anything that had a head could
be beheaded, and that you weren't to talk nonsense.
The Queen's argument was, that if something wasn't done about
it in less than no time she'd have everybody executed, all round.
(It was this last remark that had made the whole party look so
grave and anxious.)
Alice could think of nothing else to say but 'It belongs to
the Duchess: you'd better ask her about it.'
'She's in prison,' the Queen said to the executioner: 'fetch
her here.' And the executioner went off like an arrow.
The Cat's head began fading away the moment he was gone, and,
by the time he had come back with the Duchess, it had entirely
disappeared; so the King and the executioner ran wildly up and
down looking for it, while the rest of the party went back to the
game.
Project Gutenberg Release 2.7a of Alice in Wonderland
These electronic texts of the classics are released in the CopyLeft traditions of the Free Software Foundation and Richard M. Stallman. This means the document is to be considered under copyright, and an individual may make as may copies for self and/or friends, etc. and will be under no obligation as long as this is not commercial. Not for profit corporations and all other corporate entities are not to distribute this file for any more cost to the user than $2 and only if a disk is provided for that fee, including all shipping-handling and/or other fees associated with that disk. If this file is to be included with any other hardware, software or other material no fee may be charged for this file. If anyone finds an error, and we are sure you will, please email location of the errors to hart@uiucvmd, (BITNET) or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(INTERNET), or to Duncan Research via U.S. Mail at the address below.


Dr. Pickeral
School of Music
Director of Operations
(352) 273-3165
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Online calendar application created by Clarence Hwang, Danny Sepler, Diandra D'Achille, Joseph McConnell, Trevor Owens, Yanina Yegorova.


{%extends 'base.html'%} {% block content %} {% for post in posts %}
20 likes
{{post.author.username}} {{post.caption}}
{{comment.author}} {{comment.body}}
5 minutes ago


The documentation can also be printed from the pdf file.
This documentation outlines everything an developer needs to know about this library to develop an application.
Including (and not limited to):
- Minimum requirements
- Library dependencies
- Error checking
- Window management
- User input handling
- GPU usage
- 3D math


Consvin1052.github.io
Jacobsen 67951 – LF 3407 Manuals User Guides User Manuals, Guides and Specifications for your Jacobsen 67951 – LF 3407 Lawn Mower. Database contains 2 Jacobsen 67951 – LF 3407 Manuals (available for free online viewing or downloading in PDF): Parts maintenance manual.
LF 3800 - Jacobsen - exploredoc.com. Jacobsen Lf 1880 Service Manual Download PDF Download. Jacobsen Lf 3400 Lf 3800 Repair Service Manuals PDF Download. 67950 – LF 3800™ Turbo, Kubota V1505-TE, 5 Gang, 4WD 67951 – LF 3407 ™ , Kubota V1305-E, 5 Gang, 2WD 67952 – LF 3407 ™ , Kubota V1305-E Full Download Jacobsen Lf 3400 Fairway Mower Repair Manual. View online Parts maintenance manual for Jacobsen 67945 – LF 3400 Lawn Mower or simply click Download button to examine the Jacobsen 67945 – LF 3400 guidelines offline on your desktop or laptop computer. No category; LF 3800 - Jacobsen. Parts Maintenance Manual - Jacobsen Turf Equipment. Parts Maintenance Manual Manual de Peças Manutençao.
Jacobsen 67951 – LF 3407 Manuals and User Guides Jacobsen 67945 â LF 3400 Parts Maintenance Manual. 3400 67947 lf 3800 67950 lf 3800 67951 lf 3407 67952 lf 3407 67948 lf parts maintenance manual when performance matterstm warning lightweight fairway mower with rops 67971 lf 3400 and prudence of those who operate or service the equipment never allow minors to operate any equipment 2 it is your responsibility to read this manual and all lightweight fairway mower 67868 lf 3400 4100740 safety.
Jacobsen super lf 1880 parts maintenance manual, view and download jacobsen super lf 1880 parts maintenance manual online fairway mower with rops super lf 1880 lawn mower pdf manual download. Jacobsen 67951 – LF 3407 Pdf User Manuals. View online or download Jacobsen 67951 – LF 3407 Parts Maintenance Manual. Jacobsen Lf 3400 Parts Manual Jacobsen 67945 lf 3400 parts maintenance manual, view and download jacobsen 67945 lf 3400 parts maintenance manual online jacobsen lightweight fairway mower 67945 lf 3400 lawn mower pdf manual download also for: 67946 lf 3400, 67947 lf 3800, 67950 lf 3800, 67951 lf 3407, 67952 lf 3407, 67948 lf. Jacobsen 67971 lf 3400 parts maintenance manual Jacobsen 67951 Pdf User Manuals. View online or download Jacobsen 67951 Parts Maintenance Manual, Dealer's Manual, Safety And Operation Manual.
Jacobsen 67951 – LF 3407 Handbücher. Jacobsen 67951 – LF 3407 Manuals - ManualsLib - Makes. Jacobsen Lf 3400 Parts Manual PDF Download - cressonafire.com.
Mower 67945 lf 3400 lawn mower pdf manual download also for: 67946 lf 3400, 67947 lf 3800, 67950 lf 3800, 67951 lf 3407, 67952 lf 3407, 67948 lf. Jacobsen 67971 lf 3400 parts maintenance manual, view and download jacobsen 67971 lf 3400 parts maintenance manual online lightweight fairway mower with rops 67971 lf 3400 lawn mower pdf manual download also for: 67972 lf 3400, 67958


Cookies aren't used to identify you personally but they can remember activities and preferences chosen by you and your browser. They're here to make the site work better for you, and to help us understand how people use the website.
To learn more about the cookies we use please read the information below.
We use Google Analytics to collect information about how people use this site. We do this to make sure it's meeting its users' needs and to understand how we could do it better.
Google Analytics stores information about what pages you visit, how long you are on the site, how you got here and what you click on. Our cookies do not store your personal information (e.g. your name or address) so this information cannot be used to identify who you are. We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data.
| Name | Description | Expiration |
|---|---|---|
| _utma | This cookie keeps track of the number of times a visitor has been to the site, when their first visit was, and when their last visit occurred. | 2 years |
| _utmb | This cookie takes a timestamp of the exact moment in time when a visitor enters a site 30 minutes | 30 minutes |
| _utmc | This cookie takes a timestamp of the exact moment in time when a visitor leaves a site. | End of session (this expires when you close your browser window) |
| _utmz | This cookie takes a timestamp of the exact moment in time when a visitor leaves a site. | 6 months |
| _utmv | This cookie takes a timestamp of the exact moment in time when a visitor leaves a site. | 2 years |
| _bcap | This cookie is used to differentiate between individual computers accessing Student Finance services | 3 months |
You can manage these small files and learn more about them from Gov.uk: How government websites use cookies. There's also further information on how to remove cookies at About Cookies: how to control cookies.


Browse Exams by Department
These exams and solutions have been collected with the explicit consent of the corresponding instructor(s). If you are an instructor, and you wish to no longer have your exams or solutions available on our site, please email examfiles@hkn.


Autonomous Collective Systems Lab
Arizona State University
| FSE : | Fulton Schools of Engg. |
| SOLS : | School of Life Sciences |
Robot capabilities
✓ Sense / Communicate within limited range
✖ Global Localization
✖ Environment Map
Kumar and Berman, IEEE-TRO (under review)
Kumar and Berman, SICOMP (in prep.)
Engineers: develop robust strategies for CT
Ant CT is Scalable, decentralized, and has no map
Biologists: understand CT in certain ant species
|
SHS State Vector
$$ \mathbf{x} = \begin{bmatrix} N_{F} & N_B & N_D & x_L & v_L \end{bmatrix}^T$$Flow Equation
$$ \mathbf{\dot{x}} = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0& v_L & a_L \end{bmatrix}^T$$$$ \frac{d}{dt} \Exp(v_L) \approx c_g + c_F \Exp(N_F) + c_B \Exp(N_B) + c_{Fv} \Exp( N_F ) \Exp( v_L ) $$
where $$ \begin{align} c_g \eqdef -\mu g &,& c_B \eqdef \mu F_l/m_L \\ c_F \eqdef (K v_L^d + \mu F_l)/m_L &,& c_{Fv} \eqdef K/m_L \end{align} $$.
Transition Rates \begin{align*} r_{DB} &= 0.0197\,\text{s}^{-1},& r_{BD} &= 0.0205\,\text{s}^{-1},\\ % r_{DF} &= 0, & r_{FD} &= 0,\\ % r_{BF} &= 0.0301\,\text{s}^{-1},& r_{FB} &= 0.0184\,\text{s}^{-1}, % % \end{align*}
Proportional Regulator Parameters \begin{align*} \text{Gain} &:& K &= 0.0035\,\text{N/(cm/s)},& \\ \text{Velocity set-point} &:&v_L^d &= 0.3185 \,\text{cm/s}. \end{align*}
Goal : Cover the boundary, forming a connected network
Only CF configurations considered from now.
Define the communication graph $\mathcal{G}$ as one with
We define $\G$ to be connected when
Suppose $\upos{i}$ are realizations of iid parents $\rvupos{i}$ each with pdf $\fpar(t)$ supported on $\Bo=\{t:0\leq t\leq s\}$.
Determine:
Extend the analysis in Part I to the cases when:
Determine the complexity of computing $\pcon$.
Consider point robots, for which CF is irrelevant
Theorem ( Kumar and Berman ) The disconnected region can be expressed as the intersection of simplices $$ \unfav := \bigcap\limits_{\vvec \in \{0,1 \} ^{n+1}, \1^T \vvec \geq 1} \ssimp(\vvec), $$ where $$ \begin{align} \label{eqn:decomp} \ssimp(\vvec):= \{ \svec \in \ssimp : s_i \geq \conn ~\text{whenever}~ v_i =1 \}. \end{align} $$
$\ssimp(\vvec)$ forms a simplex of side $s-d\1^T\vvec$.
When parents $\rvupos{i}$ are each uniform on $\Bo$, we have $$ \pcon(\G) = 1 - \sum _{k=1} ^{\nmin} (-1)^{k-1} \binom{n}{k} {(1-kd/s)^n } ~\text{where}~ \nmin = \lfloor \frac{s}{\conn} \rfloor. $$
Here, $\nmin$ is the minimum number of robots needed for connectivity.
When robots have diameter $\dia$, use $\ssimp_{CF}$ instead of $\ssimp$ $$ \ssimp_{CF} := \{ \svec \in \ssimp: s_i \geq d \}. $$
No (simple) formula for any of $\rvpos{i}, S_i$, and $\pcon$!
Define the $\PCON(\fpar)$ problem with
Theorem (Kumar and Berman, to appear) $\PCON(\mathrm{Uni})$ can be solved in $\Omega(n)$ and $O(n \log n)$ time.
Proof : Straightforward from formula.
Theorem (Kumar and Berman, to appear) $\PCON$ is $\PH$ for arbitrary polynomial parents supported on $\Bo$.
Proof : Reduction from (Dyer and Frieze '87) .
Theorem (Kumar and Berman, to appear) $\PCON$ is $\PH$ for the following instances:


| # | Sta | Rlx | Name | Row Text |
| 0 | | 0 | autoRow0 | "bacteria" is a kind of "pathogen" "sometimes" (a6b3-0704-7aa1-879d) |
| 1 | | 0 | autoRow1 | "mast cells" are a kind of "white blood cell" (efce-6c09-2791-1993) |
| 2 | ST | 0 | autoRow2 | as the cause of something decreases , that something will decrease (1562-b39a-4392-304b) |
| 3 | ST | 0 | autoRow3 | pathogens can cause disease (3801-5e11-2d3b-4a2e) |
| 4 | ST | 0 | autoRow4 | white blood cell destroys pathogens in the body (4bfa-70f5-4c5f-1484) |
| 5 | ST | 0 | autoRow5 | destroying something decreases the amount of that something (84bb-0231-2480-1c8b) |
| 6 | ST | 0 | autoRow6 | white blood cells are a part of the immune system (b91b-e9f6-099b-f79b) |
| 7 | ST | 0 | autoRow7 | pathogen is similar to harmful substance (cc8d-65bd-dfc0-9c0d) |
| 8 | ST | 0 | autoRow8 | decreasing something is similar to fighting something (252e-8de8-4e74-54c8) |
| 9 | ST | 0 | autoRow9 | function means job (5bed-2cfd-fe4d-324e) |


Experience Skill
I am an Experienced Developer with huge IT encounter, programming skills, analytical thinking, innovative critical thinking & capacity to apply client benefit ideas to Apps to enhance user experience for clients and organization.
A person with huge IT encounter, Programming skills(Data-Structures & Algorithms), Analytical & Innovative critical thinking and capacity to apply client benefit ideas to IT to enhance the user experience for clients.
I am an Experienced Developer with huge IT encounter, programming skills, analytical thinking, innovative critical thinking & capacity to apply client benefit ideas to Apps to enhance user experience for clients and organization.
I am pursuing my Bachelors degree in Computer Applications from The ICFAI University, Jaipur.
Score: 9.9 CGPA (First Class)
Here are some of the snapshots from my recent work.
YOGA+ is a complete fitness and wellness coach android app
Product: An Android app designed for daily requirements of fitness and wellness, a yoga coach with a calories tracker and daily reminders
Backend: JAVA, Kotlin
Frontend: XML
Database: SQL, SQLite
Others:
Implemented Navigation Drawer with custom icons, Third Party GIF Image View, Dynamic Sharing options to various app , Notification with call to action and custom splash screen
Use of fragments and Custom Alert Dialogue Boxes with actions, frame transitions and animations
3rd Party Integrations:Integrated Google Ads SDK and intents to various social media like Instagram Integrated Google Play In-App Review API for in-app review flow that reflects on the play store
Thank you for visiting my portfolio. Please feel free to ask me anything to know more about me in my email or you can connect with me on Socials. I'll try to respond you as soon as possible.
I declare that all details written above are true according to my knowledge, If you find anything wrong you can report it.


image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
| # |
Donor name |
Amount |
| 1 |
John Doe |
$1000 |
| 2 |
Brian Adams |
$3500 |
| 3 |
Mickey Mayer |
$400 |
| 4 |
Peter Joy |
$100 |
| 4 |
Peter Joy |
$100 |
| 4 |
Peter Joy |
$100 |
| 4 |
Peter Joy |
$100 |
| 4 |
Peter Joy |
$100 |
| 4 |
Peter Joy |
$100 |
| 4 |
Peter Joy |
$100 |
| 4 |
Peter Joy |
$100 |
| 4 |
Peter Joy |
$100 |
| 5 |
Nicky Jones |
$450 |


A shared space cultivated with inclusivity and innovation. Let us be your gathering place.
$25/h
$100/h
$75/h
$10/h
$50/h


The goal for this site is to keep end users, organizations, and companies in the Automatic Identification Data Collection industry up to date with essential standards activities and technical information that can effect business decisions. autoid.org™ also offers website creation, website management and web hosting services for small and large companies and trade organizations in the automatic identification business. To get the best the web has to offer in the field of automatic identification, let autoid.org's™ expertise create your online presence. Whether you are simply looking for a place to announce your products and services, or if you are looking to create an interactive megasite offering technical information, primers, tutorials, or online commerce, become a part of the AIDC online community with autoid.org™. Copyright: 1999 - 2014; autoid.org™ is a registered trademark of Q.E.D. Systems


--- title: Home ---
Welcome to Mallika's Dishes Website! You will find nothing but The Best and Authentic Vegetarian South Indian Dishes here. This is my personal collection of recipes that I use every day at home that I have collected over the years. I am a strict vegetarian, and you will ONLY find vegetarian recipes in here.
The following are some of the new recipes I added recently. Enjoy and don't forget to share your experience!


There already is user with this username!
Role:
Role:
E-mail:
Username:
*
Password:
*
New Password:
*
New Password:
*
*
Required field
Remove user:


@(committeeForm: Form[Committee], participantsForm: Form[CommitteeParticipants]) @import helper._ @localScripts = { } @main(scripts = localScripts) {


Welcome to RunShare!


If the numbers 1 to 5 are written out in words: one, two, three, four, five, then there are 3 + 3 + 5 + 4 + 4 = 19 letters used in total.
If all the numbers from 1 to 1000 (one thousand) inclusive were written out in words, how many letters would be used?
NOTE: Do not count spaces or hyphens. For example, 342 (three hundred and forty-two) contains 23 letters and 115 (one hundred and fifteen) contains 20 letters. The use of "and" when writing out numbers is in compliance with British usage.
Iterate and calculate as instructed.
def solve(bound):
one_digit = ['', 'one', 'two', 'three', 'four', 'five', 'six', 'seven', 'eight', 'nine']
_t = ['thir', 'four', 'fif', 'six', 'seven', 'eigh', 'nine']
teens = ['ten', 'eleven', 'twelve'] + [t+'teen' for t in _t]
ties = ['twenty'] + [t+'ty' for t in _t]
# 40 is 'forty'
ties[2] = 'forty'
def one_digit_letters(n):
return one_digit[n]
def two_digits_letters(n):
if n < 10:
return one_digit_letters(n)
elif n < 20:
return teens[n % 10]
else:
return ties[(n // 10) - 2] + (one_digit_letters(n % 10))
def three_digits_letters(n):
return one_digit_letters(n // 100) + 'hundred' + ('and' + two_digits_letters(n % 100) if n % 100 else '')
cnt = 0
for i in range(1, bound+1):
if len(str(i)) == 1:
cnt += len(one_digit_letters(i))
elif len(str(i)) == 2:
cnt += len(two_digits_letters(i))
elif len(str(i)) == 3:
cnt += len(three_digits_letters(i))
elif len(str(i)) == 4:
cnt += len('onethousand')
return cnt
solve(5)
solve(1000)