Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Priori Methods (priori + methods)
Selected AbstractsBSSE-free description of the formamide dimersINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF QUANTUM CHEMISTRY, Issue 6 2001A. Bende Abstract The different configurations (linear, zig-zag, and cyclic) of formamide dimers have been studied at the level of both Hartree,Fock (HF) and second order Møller,Plesset perturbation theory (MP2). The widely used a posteriori Boys,Bernardi "counterpoise" (CP) correction scheme has been compared with our a priori methods utilizing the "chemical Hamiltonian approach" (CHA). The appropriate interaction energies have been calculated in six different basis sets (6-31G, 6-31G**, DZV, DZP, TZV, and cc-pVDZ). © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Int J Quant Chem, 2001 [source] Cladistic and phylogenetic biogeography: the art and the science of discoveryJOURNAL OF BIOGEOGRAPHY, Issue 3 2003Marco G. P. Van Veller Abstract All methods used in historical biogeographical analysis aim to obtain resolved area cladograms that represent historical relationships among areas in which monophyletic groups of taxa are distributed. When neither widespread nor sympatric taxa are present in the distribution of a monophyletic group, all methods obtain the same resolved area cladogram that conforms to a simple vicariance scenario. In most cases, however, the distribution of monophyletic groups of taxa is not that simple. A priori and a posteriori methods of historical biogeography differ in the way in which they deal with widespread and sympatric taxa. A posteriori methods are empirically superior to a priori methods, as they provide a more parsimonious accounting of the input data, do not eliminate or modify input data, and do not suffer from internal inconsistencies in implementation. When factual errors are corrected, the exemplar presented by M.C. Ebach & C.J. Humphries (Journal of Biogeography, 2002, 29, 427) purporting to show inconsistencies in implementation by a posteriori methods actually corroborates the opposite. The rationale for preferring a priori methods thus corresponds to ontological rather than to epistemological considerations. We herein identify two different research programmes, cladistic biogeography (associated with a priori methods) and phylogenetic biogeography (associated with a posteriori methods). The aim of cladistic biogeography is to fit all elements of all taxon,area cladograms to a single set of area relationships, maintaining historical singularity of areas. The aim of phylogenetic biogeography is to document, most parsimoniously, the geographical context of speciation events. The recent contribution by M.C. Ebach & C.J. Humphries (Journal of Biogeography, 2002, 29, 427) makes it clear that cladistic biogeography using a priori methods is an inductivist/verificationist research programme, whereas phylogenetic biogeography is hypothetico-deductivist/falsificationist. Cladistic biogeography can become hypothetic-deductive by using a posteriori methods of analysis. [source] TOUCH, SOUND, AND THINGS WITHOUT THE MINDMETAPHILOSOPHY, Issue 2 2006JAMES VAN CLEVE Abstract: Two notable thought experiments are discussed in this article: Reid's thought experiment about whether a being supplied with tactile sensations alone could acquire the conception of extension and Strawson's thought experiment about whether a being supplied with auditory sensations alone could acquire the conception of mind-independent objects. The experiments are considered alongside Campbell's argument that only on the so-called relational view of experience is it possible for experiences to make available to their subjects the concept of mind-independent objects. I consider how the three issues ought to be construed as raising questions about woulds, coulds, or shoulds,and argue that only on the normative construal of them are they resolvable as intended by the a priori methods of the philosophers who pose them. [source] A new accurate method for predicting lithium clearance and daily dosage requirements in adult psychiatric patientsBIPOLAR DISORDERS, Issue 3 2008Hisham S Abou-Auda Objective:, The present study aimed to derive new equations for estimating lithium clearance and daily dosage requirements needed to achieve an intended lithium serum level for adult psychiatric inpatients and outpatients. Methods:, Data were retrospectively collected from 60 adult psychiatric patients (34 males and 26 females, aged between 18,80 years) in both inpatient and outpatient settings. All variables that might affect lithium clearance and/or lithium serum concentration were included and analyzed by stepwise multiple linear regression to produce equations describing lithium clearance and daily dosage requirements for these patients. The validation of the developed equations was performed by application to another 60 psychiatric subjects in both the inpatient and outpatient settings. The bias and accuracy of the new methods were also compared to those set forth by the empirical method and the a priori methods developed by Zetin, Pepin, Jermain and Terao and colleagues. Results:, The following prediction equations for lithium clearance (CLLi) were obtained: CLLi (inpatients) = 0.932 + 0.185CLCr and CLLi (outpatients) = 1.021 + 0.141CLCr. The equations derived for daily dosage requirements were: daily dose (inpatients, mg) = 350.15 + 289.92 (desired lithium level, mmol/L) + 0.84 (weight, kg) , 1.76 (age, years) + 34.43 [tricyclic antidepressant (TCA), yes = 1, no = 0] + 62.1(CLCr, L/h) + 13.1 [blood urea nitrogen (BUN), mmol/L] + 40.9 (sex, male = 1, female = 0) and daily dose (outpatients, mg) = 784.92 + 530.22 (desired lithium level, mmol/L) + 8.61 (weight, kg) , 12.09 (age, years) , 11.14 (TCA, yes = 1, no = 0) , 7.63 (CLCr, L/h) , 42.62 (BUN, mmol/L) , 23.43 (sex, male = 1, female = 0). In the present method, the prediction error for clearance was 10.31% and 6.62% for inpatients and outpatients, respectively, and the prediction error for daily dosage requirements was 3.96% and 2.95% for inpatients and outpatients, respectively. Conclusions:, Compared to previously reported methods, the present method proved to be accurate and can be safely used for the prediction of lithium clearance and daily dosage requirements in psychiatric inpatients and outpatients. [source] | ||||||||||