Response to Baruch: We Weren't Seeking Canonization, Just a Hearing

Do We Know What We Do not Know? A Response to Celine Bonnet

Finite canonization

The canonization theorem says that for given m, n for some m (the first one is called ER(n;m)) we have for every function f with domain [1, . . . , m], for some A ∈ [1, . . . , m], the question of when the equality f(i1, . . . , in) = f(j1, . . . , jn) (where i1 < · · · < in and j1 < · · · jn are from A) holds has the simplest answer: for some v ⊆ {1, . . . , n} the equality holds iff ∧

do we know what we do not know? a response to celine bonnet

From Invariants to Canonization in Parallel

A function f of a graph is called a complete graph invariant if two given graphs G and H are isomorphic exactly when f(G) = f(H). If additionally, f(G) is a graph isomorphic to G, then f is called a canonical form for graphs. Gurevich [Gur97] proves that any polynomial-time computable complete invariant can be transformed into a polynomial-time computable canonical form. We extend this equivale...

Just Say No to the TPP: A Democratic Setback for American and Asian Public Health; Comment on “The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Is It Everything We Feared for Health?”

The article by Labonté, Schram, and Ruckert is a significant and timely analysis of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) policy and the severe threats to public health that it implies for 12 Pacific Rim populations from the Americas and Asia (Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States, and Vietnam). With careful and analytic precision t...