精测安培表内阻的新方法——电桥伏安法

本文提出了精测安培表内阻的新方法,并将其与其它测量方法进行了比较。     

水电工程规划设计方案的自动生成及评价

本文介绍了在水电工程规划设计时，如何利用三次自然样条插值函数在有限个方案的基础上自动生成无限多个方案，然后采用多目标综合决策模型在其中选择最优方案的一种方法．文中还给出了程序流程，并以某水电站正常蓄水位选择作为实例，对方法进行了验证，结果与专家决策完全吻合．     

弘扬国学精粹 提高人文素质--高校非中文专业开设"中国古典文学鉴赏"课的必要性与可行性

从高校非中文专业学生知识结构的现状出发，阐述加强人文素质教育的重要性；“中国古典文学鉴赏”课的课程特点及其在人文素质教育中所起的作用决定了在高校非中文专业学生中开设这门课程的必要性和可行性。     

新世纪图书馆员社会角色转换研究综述

就近几年图书馆界关于新世纪馆员意识转换及社会角色转换等方面的研究进行了综述，指出新时期的馆员要实现自我社会角色的转换，首先是要明确转换的必要性，然后采取有效的策略逐步地、系统地推进转换，才能取得较好的效果。     

基于RBF网络的增量学习

提出了一种基于径向网络的增量学习算法 ,在对新样本进行学习时 ,通过恢复受干扰样本的方式来尽可能保持已有的知识不变 .模拟实验证明了本算法的正确性和有效性 .     

变电站自动化系统中一种新智能测控装置设计

介绍了变电站自动化系统一种基于80C196KB控制CPU设计的新型线路单元测控装置。它能完成一条线路的遥测、遥信、遥控和遥脉功能。模拟量测量采用基于快速傅里叶变换的交流采样算法，测量精度高。与上位机的通信提供多种选择方式，人机交互采用点阵液晶显示及薄膜式键盘，开关量状态、脉冲量的采集以及控制输出都采用二次隔离技术，并采用了先进软件抗干扰技术，遥控操作可靠。     

Pragmatism in Economic Methodology: The Duhem-Quine Thesis Revisited

Contemporary developments in economicmethodology have produced a vibrant agenda ofcompeting positions. These include, amongothers, constructivism, critical realism andrhetoric, with each contributing to the Realistvs. Pragmatism debate in the philosophies of thesocial sciences. A major development in theneo-pragmatist contribution to economicmethodology has been Quine's pragmatic assaulton the dogmas of empiricism, which are nowclearly acknowledged within contemporaryeconomic methodology. This assault isencapsulated in the celebrated Duhem-Quinethesis, which according to a number ofcontemporary leading philosophers of economics,poses a particularly serious methodologicalproblem for economics. This problem, asreflected in Hausman's analysis, consists ofthe inability of economics to learn fromexperience, thereby subverting the capacity totest economic theories. In this paper wedispute this position. Our argument is basedon a combination of Quine's holism with VanFraassen's constructive empiricism, especiallythe latter's analysis of empirical adequacy andhis pragmatic approach to explanation. Theresulting reorientation of economic methodologyrestores the capacity of economics to learnfrom experience and reinstates the imperativeof developing alternatives to orthodoxtheorizing in economics.     

Newton's Easy Quadratures ``Omitted for the Sake of Brevity'

In the 1687 Principia, Newton gave a solution to the direct problem (given the orbit and center of force, find the central force) for a conic-section with a focal center of force (answer: a reciprocal square force) and for a spiral orbit with a polar center of force (answer: a reciprocal cube force). He did not, however, give solutions for the two corresponding inverse problems (given the force and center of force, find the orbit). He gave a cryptic solution to the inverse problem of a reciprocal cube force, but offered no solution for the reciprocal square force. Some take this omission as an indication that Newton could not solve the reciprocal square, for, they ask, why else would he not select this important problem? Others claim that ``it is child's play' for him, as evidenced by his 1671 catalogue of quadratures (tables of integrals). The answer to that question is obscured for all who attempt to work through Newton's published solution of the reciprocal cube force because it is done in the synthetic geometric style of the 1687 Principia rather than in the analytic algebraic style that Newton employed until 1671. In response to a request from David Gregory in 1694, however, Newton produced an analytic version of the body of the proof, but one which still had a geometric conclusion. Newton's charge is to find both ``the orbit' and ``the time in orbit.' In the determination of the dependence of the time on orbital position, t(r), Newton evaluated an integral of the form ∫dx/x <sup>n</sup> to calculate a finite algebraic equation for the area swept out as a function of the radius, but he did not write out the analytic expression for time t = t(r), even though he knew that the time t is proportional to that area. In the determination of the orbit, θ (r), Newton obtained an integral of the form ∫dx/√(1−x<sup>2</sup>) for the area that is proportional to the angle θ, an integral he had shown in his 1669 On Analysis by Infinite Equations to be equal to the arcsin(x). Since the solution must therefore contain a transcendental function, he knew that a finite algebraic solution for θ=θ(r) did not exist for ``the orbit' as it had for ``the time in orbit.' In contrast to these two solutions for the inverse cube force, however, it is not possible in the inverse square solution to generate a finite algebraic expression for either ``the orbit' or ``the time in orbit.' In fact, in Lemma 28, Newton offers a demonstration that the area of an ellipse cannot be given by a finite equation. I claim that the limitation of Lemma 28 forces Newton to reject the inverse square force as an example and to choose instead the reciprocal cube force as his example in Proposition 41. (Received August 14, 2002) Published online March 26, 2003 Communicated by G. Smith