云南鳞毛蕨属植物分类概要

本文研究云南产鳞毛蕨属植物的属下分类并列出所有的种类。该属植物在云南现知至少有88种，属下可划分为3个亚属和12个组。为了使这些类群之间的特征轮廓清晰，本文提供了分亚属及分组的检索表。     

小麦属的分类

 In the present paper, an brief historical account and the comments on the modern taxonomic systems of the genus Triticum L. are made. The author suggests that principles to determine a species be (1) a special type of genome, and (2) reproductive isolation. The principles to determine a subspecies are the special co-type of genome and incomplete reproductive isolation. There are no differences on the level of genome constitution and no reproductive isolation between the varieties or concultivars. According to these principles, the author schemes a taxonomic system of the genus Triticum L. based on biosystematics as follows:      Triticum monococcum L. sensu lat.        subsp. boeoticum (Boiss.) Yen, st. nov.           var. thaoudar (Reut ) Flaksb.           concv. Einkhorn        subsp. urartu (Tum.)Vap.      T. timopheevi Zhuk. sensu lat.           var. araraticum (Jakubz.) Yen, st. nov.      T. zhukovskyi Men. et Er.      T. turgidum L. sensu lat.           var. dicoccoides (Körn. in litt. in Schweinf.) Bowden           concv. (1) Emmer, (2) Durum wheat, (3) Rivet wheat, (4) Polish wheat, (5) Persian wheat.      T. aestivum L. sensu lat.           concv. (1) Tibetian weed wheat, (2) Spelt, (3) Vavilov wheat, (4)  Macha wheat, (5) Yunnan hulled wheat, (6) Winter common wheat, (7) Spring common wheat, (8) Branch-eared wheat, (9) Club wheat, (I0) Indian dwarf wheat, (11) Xinjiang ricewheat.     

Probability Disassembled

While there is no universal logic of induction, the probabilitycalculus succeeds as a logic of induction in many contexts throughits use of several notions concerning inductive inference. Theyinclude Addition, through which low probabilities representdisbelief as opposed to ignorance; and Bayes property, whichcommits the calculus to a ‘refute and rescale’ dynamicsfor incorporating new evidence. These notions are independentand it is urged that they be employed selectively accordingto needs of the problem at hand. It is shown that neither isadapted to inductive inference concerning some indeterministicsystems.

1 Introduction

2 Failure of demonstrations of universality

2.1 Working backwards

2.2 The surface logic

3 Framework

3.1 The properties

3.2 Boundaries

3.2.1 Universalcomparability

3.2.2 Transitivity

3.2.3 Monotonicity

4 Addition

4.1 The property: disbelief versus ignorance

4.2Boundaries

5 Bayes property

5.1 The property

5.2 Bayes' theorem

5.3Boundaries

5.3.1 Dogmatism of the priors

5.3.2 Impossibilityof prior ignorance

5.3.3 Accommodation of virtues

6Real values

7 Sufficiency and independence

8 Illustrations

8.1 All properties retained

8.2 Bayes propertyonly retained

8.3 Induction without additivity and Bayes property

9Conclusion