PenTile matrix family

PenTile matrix is a family of patented subpixel matrix schemes used in electronic device displays. PenTile is a trademark of Samsung. PenTile matrices are used in AMOLED and LCD displays. These subpixel layouts are specifically designed to operate with proprietary algorithms for subpixel rendering embedded in the display driver, allowing plug and play compatibility with conventional RGB (Red-Green-Blue) stripe panels. == Overview == "PenTile Matrix" (a neologism from penta-, meaning "five" in Greek and tile) describes the geometric layout of the prototypical subpixel arrangement developed in the early 1990s. The layout consists of a quincunx comprising two red subpixels, two green subpixels, and one central blue subpixel in each unit cell. It was inspired by biomimicry of the human retina, which has nearly equal numbers of L and M type cone cells, but significantly fewer S cones. As the S cones are primarily responsible for perceiving blue colors, which do not appreciably affect the perception of luminance, reducing the number of blue subpixels with respect to the red and green subpixels in a display does not reduce the image quality. However, the layout may cause color leakage image distortion, which can be reduced by filters. In some cases the layout causes reduced moiré and blockiness compared to conventional RGB layouts. The PenTile layout is specifically designed to work with and be dependent upon subpixel rendering that uses only one and a quarter subpixel per pixel, on average, to render an image. That is, that any given input pixel is mapped to either a red-centered logical pixel, or a green-centered logical pixel. === History === PenTile was invented by Candice H. Brown Elliott, for which she was awarded the Society for Information Display's Otto Schade Prize in 2014. The technology was licensed by the company Clairvoyante from 2000 until 2008, during which time several prototype PenTile displays were developed by a number of Asian liquid crystal display (LCD) manufacturers. In March 2008, Samsung Electronics acquired Clairvoyante's PenTile IP assets. Samsung then funded a new company, Nouvoyance, Inc. to continue development of the PenTile technology. == PenTile RGBG == PenTile RGBG layout used in AMOLED and plasma displays uses green pixels interleaved with alternating red and blue pixels. The human eye is most sensitive to green, especially for high resolution luminance information. The green subpixels are mapped to input pixels on a one-to-one basis. The red and blue subpixels are subsampled, reconstructing the chroma signal at a lower resolution. The luminance signal is processed using adaptive subpixel rendering filters to optimize reconstruction of high spatial frequencies from the input image, wherein the green subpixels provide the majority of the reconstruction. The red and blue subpixels are capable of reconstructing the horizontal and vertical spatial frequencies, but not the highest of the diagonal. Diagonal high spatial frequency information in the red and blue channels of the input image are transferred to the green subpixels for image reconstruction. Thus the RG-BG scheme creates a color display with one third fewer subpixels than a traditional RGB-RGB scheme but with the same measured luminance display resolution. This is similar to the Bayer filter commonly used in digital cameras. === Devices === As of 2021, "almost all" OLED screens in portable consumer devices use some form of Pentile subpixel layout. == PenTile RGBW == PenTile RGBW technology, used in LCD, adds an extra subpixel to the traditional red, green and blue subpixels that is a clear area without color filtering material and with the only purpose of letting backlight come through, hence W for white. This makes it possible to produce a brighter image compared to an RGB-matrix while using the same amount of power, or produce an equally bright image while using less power. The PenTile RGBW layout uses each red, green, blue and white subpixel to present high-resolution luminance information to the human eyes' red-sensing and green-sensing cone cells, while using the combined effect of all the color subpixels to present lower-resolution chroma (color) information to all three cone cell types. Combined, this optimizes the match of display technology to the biological mechanisms of human vision. The layout uses one third fewer subpixels for the same resolution as the RGB stripe (RGB-RGB) layout, in spite of having four color primaries instead of the conventional three, using subpixel rendering combined with metamer rendering. Metamer rendering optimizes the energy distribution between the white subpixel and the combined red, green, and blue subpixels: W <> RGB, to improve image sharpness. The display driver chip has an RGB to RGBW color vector space converter and gamut mapping algorithm, followed by metamer and subpixel rendering algorithms. In order to maintain saturated color quality, to avoid simultaneous contrast error between saturated colors and peak white brightness, while simultaneously reducing backlight power requirements, the display backlight brightness is under control of the PenTile driver engine. When the image is mostly desaturated colors, those near white or grey, the backlight brightness is significantly reduced, often to less than 50% peak, while the LCD levels are increased to compensate. When the image has very bright saturated colors, the backlight brightness is maintained at higher levels. The PenTile RGBW also has an optional high-brightness mode that doubles the brightness of the desaturated color image areas, such as black-and-white text, for improved outdoor viewability. === Devices === Motorola MC65 Motorola ES55 Motorola ES400 Motorola Atrix 4G Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 version Lenovo Yoga 2 Pro Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro HP ENVY TouchSmart 14-k022tx Sleekbook MSI GS60 Ghost Pro 4K Lenovo IdeaPad Y50 4K Asus ZenBook UX303LN 4K Asus ZenBook Pro UX501JW LG UH7500/6500/6100 LG ThinQ G7/G7+ Oculus Quest 1 == Controversy == An ongoing controversy regarding the definition or measurement of resolution of color subpixelated flat panel displays led many people to question the resolution claims of PenTile display products. Journalists have noted that in "just about every flat-panel TV in existence, each pixel is composed of one red, one green, and one blue subpixel (RGB), all of uniform size". In traditional flat-panel screens, the resolution is defined by the number of red, green, and blue subpixels, in groups of three, in an array in each axis. As a result, each pixel or group of subpixels can render any colour on the screen, regardless of neighbouring pixels. This is not the case with PenTile screens. The Video Electronics Standards Association (VESA) method of measuring and defining resolution in color displays is to measure the contrast of line pairs, requiring a minimum of 50% Michelson contrast for displays intended for rendering text. The developers of PenTile displays use this VESA criterion for contrast of line pairs to calculate the resolutions specified. In the RGBG layout the alternate red and blue subpixels are 'shared' or sub-sampled with neighboring pixels. Due to the one third lower subpixel density on PenTile displays the pixel structure may be more visible when compared to RGB stripe displays with the same pixel density. The loss of subpixels for a given resolution specification has led some journalists to describe the use of PenTile as "shady practice" and "sort of cheating". For a given size and resolution specification, the PenTile screen can appear grainy, pixelated, speckled, with blurred text on some saturated colors and backgrounds when compared to RGB stripe color. This effect is understood to be caused by the restriction of the number of subpixels that may participate in the image reconstruction when colors are highly saturated to primaries. In the RGBW case, this is caused as the W subpixel will not be available in order to maintain the saturated color. In the RGBG case, this effect will occur when the color boundary is primarily red or blue, as the fully populated (one green per pixel) sub-pixel cannot contribute. For all other cases, text and especially full color images are effectively reconstructed. == Advantages and disadvantages == The PenTile layout reduces the number of subpixels needed to create a specified resolution. Consequently it is possible to achieve an HD resolution on a PenTile AMOLED screen at lower cost than other technologies, and most reviewers note that "300 ppi" (as per VESA - not full pixels) resolution displays (such as Samsung Galaxy S III) make the PenTile effect less obvious than lower resolution PenTile displays (Droid Razr). The second advantage is lower power consumption: the HTC One S's use of a PenTile display makes it more energy efficient and thinner than equivalent LCD screens, giving it better battery life than the HTC One X's IPS LCD. A PenTile AMOLED screen is also

Tandem Money

Tandem is one of the UK's original challenger banks. Tandem is a digital bank with a mobile app, and no branches. The acquisition of Harrods Bank in 2017 allowed the company to provide services using the former's banking licence. Tandem Bank Limited is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Tandem has offices across the UK in Blackpool, Cardiff, Durham and London, employing over 500 people. == History == The company was founded by Ricky Knox, Matt Cooper and Michael Kent in 2014. In December 2016, Tandem announced that it had secured a £35 million investment from The Sanpower Group, the Chinese company that also owned the department store House of Fraser; however, £29 million of this investment was later revoked by Sanpower over concerns that the Chinese Government would object to the investment following increased restrictions on outbound investment in China. This resulted in a delay in the launch of Tandem's savings products, which, at the time of the revocation, was expected imminently and, more importantly, meant that Tandem volunteered the return of their banking license but retained all other permissions. In April 2018, Tandem launched fixed-term savings accounts, offering one-, two- and three-year terms through its app. === Acquisitions === In August 2017, it was announced that Tandem would fully acquire Harrods Bank, founded in 1893, in a deal that would bring a near-£200m loan book, over £300m of deposits and nearly £80 million of capital. Prior to its sale to Tandem Money, Harrods Bank catered for high-net-worth (HNW) individuals and operated from the Harrods store in Knightsbridge, London. It offered a variety of personal and business current and savings accounts, mortgages, foreign currency and gold bullion trading services. On 7 August 2017, Tandem Money Limited announced a deal to acquire 100% of Harrods Bank Limited shares. The purchase deal closed successfully on 11 January 2018. In March 2018, Tandem agreed to acquire Pariti Technologies Limited, developers of the Pariti money management application. In August 2020 Tandem acquired green home improvement loan specialists Allium Lending Group. It was announced on 8 February 2021 that Tandem had agreed to purchase the mortgage book from private bank Bank and Clients, consisting of 300 B&C customers for an undisclosed amount. In January 2022 Tandem Bank acquired consumer lender Oplo, creating a combined business with £1.2 billion of total assets. In April 2023, it was announced that Tandem had acquired money-sharing app Loop Money. At the time of the purchase, one of Loop's founders – Paul Pester – was also chairman at Tandem. == Features == Tandem Bank offers customers savings, mortgages, personal and secured loans, green home improvement loans and motor finance. In November 2022, the bank launched its new Tandem Marketplace, providing information and resources to help promote greener living.

Zassenhaus algorithm

In mathematics, the Zassenhaus algorithm is a method to calculate a basis for the intersection and sum of two subspaces of a vector space. It is named after Hans Zassenhaus, but no publication of this algorithm by him is known. It is used in computer algebra systems. == Algorithm == === Input === Let V be a vector space and U, W two finite-dimensional subspaces of V with the following spanning sets: U = ⟨ u 1 , … , u n ⟩ {\displaystyle U=\langle u_{1},\ldots ,u_{n}\rangle } and W = ⟨ w 1 , … , w k ⟩ . {\displaystyle W=\langle w_{1},\ldots ,w_{k}\rangle .} Finally, let B 1 , … , B m {\displaystyle B_{1},\ldots ,B_{m}} be linearly independent vectors so that u i {\displaystyle u_{i}} and w i {\displaystyle w_{i}} can be written as u i = ∑ j = 1 m a i , j B j {\displaystyle u_{i}=\sum _{j=1}^{m}a_{i,j}B_{j}} and w i = ∑ j = 1 m b i , j B j . {\displaystyle w_{i}=\sum _{j=1}^{m}b_{i,j}B_{j}.} === Output === The algorithm computes the base of the sum U + W {\displaystyle U+W} and a base of the intersection U ∩ W {\displaystyle U\cap W} . === Algorithm === The algorithm creates the following block matrix of size ( ( n + k ) × ( 2 m ) ) {\displaystyle ((n+k)\times (2m))} : ( a 1 , 1 a 1 , 2 ⋯ a 1 , m a 1 , 1 a 1 , 2 ⋯ a 1 , m ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ a n , 1 a n , 2 ⋯ a n , m a n , 1 a n , 2 ⋯ a n , m b 1 , 1 b 1 , 2 ⋯ b 1 , m 0 0 ⋯ 0 ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ b k , 1 b k , 2 ⋯ b k , m 0 0 ⋯ 0 ) {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}a_{1,1}&a_{1,2}&\cdots &a_{1,m}&a_{1,1}&a_{1,2}&\cdots &a_{1,m}\\\vdots &\vdots &&\vdots &\vdots &\vdots &&\vdots \\a_{n,1}&a_{n,2}&\cdots &a_{n,m}&a_{n,1}&a_{n,2}&\cdots &a_{n,m}\\b_{1,1}&b_{1,2}&\cdots &b_{1,m}&0&0&\cdots &0\\\vdots &\vdots &&\vdots &\vdots &\vdots &&\vdots \\b_{k,1}&b_{k,2}&\cdots &b_{k,m}&0&0&\cdots &0\end{pmatrix}}} Using elementary row operations, this matrix is transformed to the row echelon form. Then, it has the following shape: ( c 1 , 1 c 1 , 2 ⋯ c 1 , m ∙ ∙ ⋯ ∙ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ c q , 1 c q , 2 ⋯ c q , m ∙ ∙ ⋯ ∙ 0 0 ⋯ 0 d 1 , 1 d 1 , 2 ⋯ d 1 , m ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ 0 0 ⋯ 0 d ℓ , 1 d ℓ , 2 ⋯ d ℓ , m 0 0 ⋯ 0 0 0 ⋯ 0 ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ 0 0 ⋯ 0 0 0 ⋯ 0 ) {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}c_{1,1}&c_{1,2}&\cdots &c_{1,m}&\bullet &\bullet &\cdots &\bullet \\\vdots &\vdots &&\vdots &\vdots &\vdots &&\vdots \\c_{q,1}&c_{q,2}&\cdots &c_{q,m}&\bullet &\bullet &\cdots &\bullet \\0&0&\cdots &0&d_{1,1}&d_{1,2}&\cdots &d_{1,m}\\\vdots &\vdots &&\vdots &\vdots &\vdots &&\vdots \\0&0&\cdots &0&d_{\ell ,1}&d_{\ell ,2}&\cdots &d_{\ell ,m}\\0&0&\cdots &0&0&0&\cdots &0\\\vdots &\vdots &&\vdots &\vdots &\vdots &&\vdots \\0&0&\cdots &0&0&0&\cdots &0\end{pmatrix}}} Here, ∙ {\displaystyle \bullet } stands for arbitrary numbers, and the vectors ( c p , 1 , c p , 2 , … , c p , m ) {\displaystyle (c_{p,1},c_{p,2},\ldots ,c_{p,m})} for every p ∈ { 1 , … , q } {\displaystyle p\in \{1,\ldots ,q\}} and ( d p , 1 , … , d p , m ) {\displaystyle (d_{p,1},\ldots ,d_{p,m})} for every p ∈ { 1 , … , ℓ } {\displaystyle p\in \{1,\ldots ,\ell \}} are nonzero. Then ( y 1 , … , y q ) {\displaystyle (y_{1},\ldots ,y_{q})} with y i := ∑ j = 1 m c i , j B j {\displaystyle y_{i}:=\sum _{j=1}^{m}c_{i,j}B_{j}} is a basis of U + W {\displaystyle U+W} and ( z 1 , … , z ℓ ) {\displaystyle (z_{1},\ldots ,z_{\ell })} with z i := ∑ j = 1 m d i , j B j {\displaystyle z_{i}:=\sum _{j=1}^{m}d_{i,j}B_{j}} is a basis of U ∩ W {\displaystyle U\cap W} . === Proof of correctness === First, we define π 1 : V × V → V , ( a , b ) ↦ a {\displaystyle \pi _{1}:V\times V\to V,(a,b)\mapsto a} to be the projection to the first component. Let H := { ( u , u ) ∣ u ∈ U } + { ( w , 0 ) ∣ w ∈ W } ⊆ V × V . {\displaystyle H:=\{(u,u)\mid u\in U\}+\{(w,0)\mid w\in W\}\subseteq V\times V.} Then π 1 ( H ) = U + W {\displaystyle \pi _{1}(H)=U+W} and H ∩ ( 0 × V ) = 0 × ( U ∩ W ) {\displaystyle H\cap (0\times V)=0\times (U\cap W)} . Also, H ∩ ( 0 × V ) {\displaystyle H\cap (0\times V)} is the kernel of π 1 | H {\displaystyle {\pi _{1}|}_{H}} , the projection restricted to H. Therefore, dim ⁡ ( H ) = dim ⁡ ( U + W ) + dim ⁡ ( U ∩ W ) {\displaystyle \dim(H)=\dim(U+W)+\dim(U\cap W)} . The Zassenhaus algorithm calculates a basis of H. In the first m columns of this matrix, there is a basis y i {\displaystyle y_{i}} of U + W {\displaystyle U+W} . The rows of the form ( 0 , z i ) {\displaystyle (0,z_{i})} (with z i ≠ 0 {\displaystyle z_{i}\neq 0} ) are obviously in H ∩ ( 0 × V ) {\displaystyle H\cap (0\times V)} . Because the matrix is in row echelon form, they are also linearly independent. All rows which are different from zero ( ( y i , ∙ ) {\displaystyle (y_{i},\bullet )} and ( 0 , z i ) {\displaystyle (0,z_{i})} ) are a basis of H, so there are dim ⁡ ( U ∩ W ) {\displaystyle \dim(U\cap W)} such z i {\displaystyle z_{i}} s. Therefore, the z i {\displaystyle z_{i}} s form a basis of U ∩ W {\displaystyle U\cap W} . == Example == Consider the two subspaces U = ⟨ ( 1 − 1 0 1 ) , ( 0 0 1 − 1 ) ⟩ {\displaystyle U=\left\langle \left({\begin{array}{r}1\\-1\\0\\1\end{array}}\right),\left({\begin{array}{r}0\\0\\1\\-1\end{array}}\right)\right\rangle } and W = ⟨ ( 5 0 − 3 3 ) , ( 0 5 − 3 − 2 ) ⟩ {\displaystyle W=\left\langle \left({\begin{array}{r}5\\0\\-3\\3\end{array}}\right),\left({\begin{array}{r}0\\5\\-3\\-2\end{array}}\right)\right\rangle } of the vector space R 4 {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{4}} . Using the standard basis, we create the following matrix of dimension ( 2 + 2 ) × ( 2 ⋅ 4 ) {\displaystyle (2+2)\times (2\cdot 4)} : ( 1 − 1 0 1 1 − 1 0 1 0 0 1 − 1 0 0 1 − 1 5 0 − 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 5 − 3 − 2 0 0 0 0 ) . {\displaystyle \left({\begin{array}{rrrrrrrr}1&-1&0&1&&1&-1&0&1\\0&0&1&-1&&0&0&1&-1\\\\5&0&-3&3&&0&0&0&0\\0&5&-3&-2&&0&0&0&0\end{array}}\right).} Using elementary row operations, we transform this matrix into the following matrix: ( 1 0 0 0 ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ 0 1 0 − 1 ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ 0 0 1 − 1 ∙ ∙ ∙ ∙ 0 0 0 0 1 − 1 0 1 ) {\displaystyle \left({\begin{array}{rrrrrrrrr}1&0&0&0&&\bullet &\bullet &\bullet &\bullet \\0&1&0&-1&&\bullet &\bullet &\bullet &\bullet \\0&0&1&-1&&\bullet &\bullet &\bullet &\bullet \\\\0&0&0&0&&1&-1&0&1\end{array}}\right)} (Some entries have been replaced by " ∙ {\displaystyle \bullet } " because they are irrelevant to the result.) Therefore ( ( 1 0 0 0 ) , ( 0 1 0 − 1 ) , ( 0 0 1 − 1 ) ) {\displaystyle \left(\left({\begin{array}{r}1\\0\\0\\0\end{array}}\right),\left({\begin{array}{r}0\\1\\0\\-1\end{array}}\right),\left({\begin{array}{r}0\\0\\1\\-1\end{array}}\right)\right)} is a basis of U + W {\displaystyle U+W} , and ( ( 1 − 1 0 1 ) ) {\displaystyle \left(\left({\begin{array}{r}1\\-1\\0\\1\end{array}}\right)\right)} is a basis of U ∩ W {\displaystyle U\cap W} .

Task Force on Process Mining

The IEEE Task Force on Process Mining (TFPM) is a non-commercial association for process mining. The IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) Task Force on Process Mining was established in October 2009 as part of the IEEE Computational Intelligence Society at the Eindhoven University of Technology. The task force is supported by over 80 organizations and has around 750 members. The main goal of the task force is to promote the research, development, education, and understanding of process mining. == About == In 2012, the IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence/ IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation held a session on Process Mining. Process mining is a type of research that is a mix of computational intelligence and data mining, as well as process modeling and analysis. === Activities and organization === The Task Force on Process Mining has a Steering Committee and an Advisory Board. The Steering Committee, was chaired by Wil van der Aalst in its inception in 2009, defined 15 action lines. These include the organization of the annual International Process Mining Conference (ICPM) series, standardization efforts leading to the IEEE XES standard for storing and exchanging event data, and the Process Mining Manifesto which was translated into 16 languages. The Task Force on Process Mining also publishes a newsletter, provides data sets, organizes workshops and competitions, and connects researchers and practitioners. In 2016, the IEEE Standards Association published the IEEE Standard for Extensible Event Stream (XES), which is a widely accepted file format by the process mining community. As of 2023, Boudewijn van Dongen serves as chair of the Steering Committee. Wil van der Aalst and Moe Wynn both serve as vice-chair of the Steering Committee.

Organizational metacognition

Organizational metacognition is knowing what an organization knows, a concept related to metacognition, organizational learning, the learning organization and sensemaking. It is used to describe how organizations and teams develop an awareness of their own thinking, learning how to learn, where awareness of ignorance can motivate learning. The organizational deutero-learning concept identified by Argyris and Schon defines when organizations learn how to carry out single-loop and double-loop learning. It has also been described as learning how to learn through a process of collaborative inquiry and reflection (evaluative inquiry). "When an organization engages in deutero-learning its members learn about the previous context for learning. They reflect on and inquire into previous episodes of organizational learning, or failure to learn. They discover what they did that facilitated or inhibited learning, they invent new strategies for learning, they produce these strategies, and they evaluate and generalize what they have produced" Learning what facilitates and inhibits learning enables organizations to develop new strategies to develop their knowledge. For example, identification of a gap between perceived performance (such as satisfaction) and actual performance (outcomes) creates an awareness that makes the organization understand that learning needs to occur, driving appropriate changes to the environment and processes. == Learning prototypes == Wijnhoven (2001) grouped four learning prototypes that best meet learning needs, the match between these needs and learning norms dictating an organization's learning capabilities; deutero-learning is the acquisition of these capabilities. knowledge gap analysis classification of problems to select operationally required knowledge and skills coping with organizational tremors and jolts by anticipation, response and adjustments of behavioural repertoires decisional uncertainty measurement == Terminological ambiguities == Organizational metacognition and organizational deutero-learning have both been described as the concept or phenomenon where organizations learn how to learn. Argyris and Schon (1978) place deutero-learning into their cognitive theory of action framework, neglecting aspects of adaptive behaviour and context core to Bateson's (1972) original definitions. In order to resolve terminological ambiguities, Visser (2007) reviewed and reformulated the concept of deutero-learning as, "the behavioral adaptation to patterns of conditioning in relationships in organizational contexts, distinguishing it from meta-learning and planned learning" (pg. 659). == Significance == Organizational metacognition is considered a key norm to the prescriptive concept of the learning organization. Its significance has been recognized by industry, the military and in disaster response. == Examples in practice == Examples of poor metacognition (deutero-learning) have been described in knowledge network environments, "Knowledge networking is important to most competitive enterprises today. Enterprise knowledge is becoming ever more specialized in nature, so no single person or organization can know everything in detail. Hence addressing complex, multidisciplinary problems requires developing and accessing a network of knowledgeable people and organizations. The problem is, many otherwise knowledgeable people and organizations are not fully aware of their knowledge networks, and even more problematic, they are not aware that they are not aware. This focuses our attention toward organizational metacognition."

Dhammin

Dhammin (Arabic: ضمّن) is a political platform that manages candidates' electoral campaigns for the National Assembly, Municipal Council or Cooperative Society councils of Kuwait. The platform was founded by Abdullah Al-Salloum and it is, according to news reports and interviews, the first within the field to apply distributed-systems' methodologies.

Source criticism

Source criticism (or information evaluation) is the process of evaluating an information source, i.e.: a document, a person, a speech, a fingerprint, a photo, an observation, or anything used in order to obtain knowledge. In relation to a given purpose, a given information source may be more or less valid, reliable or relevant. Broadly, "source criticism" is the interdisciplinary study of how information sources are evaluated for given tasks. == Meaning == Problems in translation: The Danish word kildekritik, like the Norwegian word kildekritikk and the Swedish word källkritik, derived from the German Quellenkritik and is closely associated with the German historian Leopold von Ranke (1795–1886). Historian Wolfgang Hardtwig wrote: His [Ranke's] first work Geschichte der romanischen und germanischen Völker von 1494–1514 (History of the Latin and Teutonic Nations from 1494 to 1514) (1824) was a great success. It already showed some of the basic characteristics of his conception of Europe, and was of historiographical importance particularly because Ranke made an exemplary critical analysis of his sources in a separate volume, Zur Kritik neuerer Geschichtsschreiber (On the Critical Methods of Recent Historians). In this work he raised the method of textual criticism used in the late eighteenth century, particularly in classical philology to the standard method of scientific historical writing. (Hardtwig, 2001, p. 12739) Historical theorist Chris Lorenz wrote: The larger part of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries would be dominated by the research-oriented conception of historical method of the so-called Historical School in Germany, led by historians as Leopold Ranke and Berthold Niebuhr. Their conception of history, long been regarded as the beginning of modern, 'scientific' history, harked back to the 'narrow' conception of historical method, limiting the methodical character of history to source criticism. (Lorenz, 2001) In the early 21st century, source criticism is a growing field in, among other fields, library and information science. In this context source criticism is studied from a broader perspective than just, for example, history, classical philology, or biblical studies (but there, too, it has more recently received new attention). == Principles == The following principles are from two Scandinavian textbooks on source criticism, written by the historians Olden-Jørgensen (1998) and Thurén (1997): Human sources may be relics (e.g. a fingerprint) or narratives (e.g. a statement or a letter). Relics are more credible sources than narratives. A given source may be forged or corrupted; strong indications of the originality of the source increases its reliability. The closer a source is to the event which it purports to describe, the more one can trust it to give an accurate description of what really happened A primary source is more reliable than a secondary source, which in turn is more reliable than a tertiary source and so on. If a number of independent sources contain the same message, the credibility of the message is strongly increased. The tendency of a source is its motivation for providing some kind of bias. Tendencies should be minimized or supplemented with opposite motivations. If it can be demonstrated that the witness (or source) has no direct interest in creating bias, the credibility of the message is increased. Two other principles are: Knowledge of source criticism cannot substitute for subject knowledge: "Because each source teaches you more and more about your subject, you will be able to judge with ever-increasing precision the usefulness and value of any prospective source. In other words, the more you know about the subject, the more precisely you can identify what you must still find out". (Bazerman, 1995, p. 304). The reliability of a given source is relative to the questions put to it. "The empirical case study showed that most people find it difficult to assess questions of cognitive authority and media credibility in a general sense, for example, by comparing the overall credibility of newspapers and the Internet. Thus these assessments tend to be situationally sensitive. Newspapers, television and the Internet were frequently used as sources of orienting information, but their credibility varied depending on the actual topic at hand" (Savolainen, 2007). The following questions are often good ones to ask about any source according to the American Library Association (1994) and Engeldinger (1988): How was the source located? What type of source is it? Who is the author and what are the qualifications of the author in regard to the topic that is discussed? When was the information published? In which country was it published? What is the reputation of the publisher? Does the source show a particular cultural or political bias? For literary sources complementing criteria are: Does the source contain a bibliography? Has the material been reviewed by a group of peers, or has it been edited? How does the article/book compare with similar articles/books? == Levels of generality == Some principles of source criticism are universal, other principles are specific for certain kinds of information sources. There is today no consensus about the similarities and differences between source criticism in the natural science and humanities. Logical positivism claimed that all fields of knowledge were based on the same principles. Much of the criticism of logical positivism claimed that positivism is the basis of the sciences, whereas hermeneutics is the basis of the humanities. This was, for example, the position of Jürgen Habermas. A newer position, in accordance with, among others, Hans-Georg Gadamer and Thomas Kuhn, understands both science and humanities as determined by researchers' preunderstanding and paradigms. Hermeneutics is thus a universal theory. The difference is, however, that the sources of the humanities are themselves products of human interests and preunderstanding, whereas the sources of the natural sciences are not. Humanities are thus "doubly hermeneutic". Natural scientists, however, are also using human products (such as scientific papers) which are products of preunderstanding (and can lead to, for example, academic fraud). == Contributing fields == === Epistemology === Epistemological theories are the basic theories about how knowledge is obtained and are thus the most general theories about how to evaluate information sources. Empiricism evaluates sources by considering the observations (or sensations) on which they are based. Sources without basis in experience are not seen as valid. Rationalism provides low priority to sources based on observations. In order to be meaningful, observations must be explained by clear ideas or concepts. It is the logical structure and the well definedness that is in focus in evaluating information sources from the rationalist point of view. Historicism evaluates information sources on the basis of their reflection of their sociocultural context and their theoretical development. Pragmatism evaluate sources on the basis of how their values and usefulness to accomplish certain outcomes. Pragmatism is skeptical about claimed neutral information sources. The evaluation of knowledge or information sources cannot be more certain than is the construction of knowledge. If one accepts the principle of fallibilism then one also has to accept that source criticism can never 100% verify knowledge claims. As discussed in the next section, source criticism is intimately linked to scientific methods. The presence of fallacies of argument in sources is another kind of philosophical criterion for evaluating sources. Fallacies are presented by Walton (1998). Among the fallacies are the ad hominem fallacy (the use of personal attack to try to undermine or refute a person's argument) and the straw man fallacy (when one arguer misrepresents another's position to make it appear less plausible than it really is, in order more easily to criticize or refute it.) === Research methodology === Research methods are methods used to produce scholarly knowledge. The methods that are relevant for producing knowledge are also relevant for evaluating knowledge. An example of a book that turns methodology upside-down and uses it to evaluate produced knowledge is Katzer; Cook & Crouch (1998). === Science studies === Studies of quality evaluation processes such as peer review, book reviews and of the normative criteria used in evaluation of scientific and scholarly research. Another field is the study of scientific misconduct. Harris (1979) provides a case study of how a famous experiment in psychology, Little Albert, has been distorted throughout the history of psychology, starting with the author (Watson) himself, general textbook authors, behavior therapists, and a prominent learning theorist. Harris proposes possible causes for these distortions and analyzes the Albert study as an ex