Saturday, April 30, 2016

Rough Set Theory and Applications

Revise Basics of Set Theory

Ch. 1. Sets - Concept Review

Ch.2. Cartesian Product of Sets and Relations - Part 2



Rough Sets Using R
_____________________

_____________________
lalasriza upload

Published on 25 Jun 2014
Presented by Lala Septem Riza for the Orange County R User Group. Organized and recorded by Ray DiGiacomo, Jr. (President, OC-RUG, rayd@liondatasystems.com). RoughSets is an R package that implements algorithms based on Rough Set Theory and Fuzzy Rough Set Theory. It contains some features: missing value completion, discretization, feature selection, instance selection, rule induction, and fuzzy rough nearest neighbor classifiers.

For further information on the package, visit the following URLs:
https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/RoughSets/index.html

Self-Control and Grit - Determinants of Success in Big Projects That Span Long Periods of Time


Zeal Required in Blogging to Make it a Success
http://nraoblogs.blogspot.com/2016/04/zeal-required-in-blogging-to-make-it.html

After publishing the above blog post, I searched for "determinants of zeal" and came across this paper.


Summary of

Self-Control and Grit: Related but Separable Determinants of Success

Angela Duckworth (1) and James J. Gross (2)

1 University of Pennsylvania and 2 Stanford University

Current Directions in Psychological Science
2014, Vol. 23(5) 319–325

Abstract


Other than talent and opportunity, what makes some people more successful than others?  The two important determinant are self-control and grit. Self-control is the capacity to regulate attention, emotion, and behavior on the goal related activity in the presence of temptation. Grit is the tenacious pursuit of a dominant superordinate goal despite setbacks. Self-control and grit are strongly correlated, but not perfectly so. Some people with high levels of self-control capably handle temptations but do not consistently pursue a dominant goal. Likewise, some exceptional achievers are prodigiously gritty but succumb to temptations and divert their attention to other activities during various periods of time. Self-control and grit are related but distinct concepts. Self-control entails aligning actions with any valued goal despite momentarily more-alluring alternatives. Grit,
in contrast, entails having and working assiduously toward a single challenging superordinate goal through thick and thin, on a timescale of years or even decades. Although both self-control and grit entail aligning actions with intentions, they operate over different timescales.


Why are some people more successful than others? Talent and opportunity are obvious answers. But
even people who have comparable levels of talent and opportunity often enjoy strikingly different levels of success.


The determinants of extraordinary achievement is a topic of interest even in  the earliest days of psychology. Galton (1869) identified “self-denial” in the face of “hourly temptations” and
“zeal [and] the capacity for hard labour” as determinants of extraordinary achievement. What Galton termed “self-denial” is now referred to as self-control. Galton’s conception of zeal and the capacity for hard work corresponds to grit, a newer construct defined as passion for and perseverance toward especially long-term goals (Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews, & Kelly, 2007).




Self-Control: Resisting the Hourly Temptations

Self-control is related constructs of ego strength, effortful control, and Big Five conscientiousness, and is associated with positive life outcomes (de Ridder, Lensvelt-Mulders, Finkenauer, Stok, & Baumeister, 2012; Hofmann, Fisher, Luhmann, Vohs, & Baumeister, 2014; Roberts, Jackson,
Fayard, Edmonds, & Meints, 2009). Prospective longitudinal studies have confirmed that higher levels of self-control earlier in life predict later academic achievement and attainment (Duckworth & Carlson, 2013; Mischel, 2014),  employment, earnings, savings, and physical health (Moffitt
et  al., 2011).

Self-control is required when there is a conflict between two possible action tendencies (i.e.,  impulses)—one corresponding to a momentarily alluring goal and the other corresponding to a more valued goal whose benefits are deferred in time, more abstract, or otherwise more psychologically
distant (Maglio, Trope, & Liberman, 2013).

In general, the capacity to exercise selfcontrol appears to improve from infancy through adulthood,
in parallel with the maturation of prefrontal brain areas and metacognitive sophistication.

Grit: Passion and Effort Sustained Over Years

Grit and related constructs are associated with lifetime educational attainment (Duckworth & Quinn, 2009) and professional success (Baum & Locke, 2004; Locke & Latham, 2013; Vallerand, Houlfort, & Forest, 2014; Wrzesniewski, 2012). Prospective longitudinal studies have shown that grit predicts the completion of challenging goals despite obstacles and setbacks.

Related research has identified harmonious passion (i.e., autonomous internalization of a passionate
activity into one’s identity) as a predictor of deliberate practice and, in turn, performance (Vallerand et al., 2014). Many other studies of expert performers in diverse domains have found that thousands of hours of extremely effortful deliberate practice are prerequisite for achieving world-class levels of skill (Ericsson & Charness, 1994).

A Hierarchical Goal Framework



Self-control and grit are   are highly correlated (e.g., rs > .6 in Duckworth et al., 2007), and both
predict success outcomes over and above intelligence (Duckworth et al., 2007; Duckworth & Seligman, 2005; Moffitt et al., 2011).

How are self-control and grit similar, and how are they different? The authors proposed that both their similarities and their differences can be understood within a hierarchical goal framework.

Goals have to be organized hierarchically, with lower order goals serving higher-order goals. Lower-order goals are more numerous, context specific, short-term, and substitutable, whereas higher-order goals are typically fewer in number, more abstract, more enduring, and more important to the individual. At any level in the goal hierarchy, goals are more likely to be activated if they are
appraised as feasible and desirable (Atkinson, 1964). Individuals can have multiple higher order goals having goal hierarchies.  This multiplicity of goals can lead to conflicts in time for striving for goal oriented action.

Within this framework, self-control refers to the successful resolution of a conflict between two action impulses in favor of a more valued goal that is realized after some period—one action that corresponds to a goal that is more valued in the moment, and another that corresponds to a goal that is of a greater enduring value.


In the same framework, grit entails having a dominant superordinate goal (e.g., producing useful new insights into the psychological determinants of success) and tenaciously working toward it in the face of obstacles and setbacks, often for years or decades. This superordinate goal sits at the top of a well-organized goal hierarchy in which lower-order goals are tightly aligned with the superordinate goal, and these lower-order goals in turn give rise to effective actions that advance the individual
toward the superordinate goal.

Gritty individuals either are able to actively suppress rival superordinate goals or lack competing superordinate goals altogether.

Superordinate goal impels gritty individuals, when faced with setbacks, to find a way forward by “sprouting” new lower-order goals (or actions) when a current lower-order goal (or action)
is blocked.  In other words, in a gritty individual’s domain of passionate interest, goals or actions deemed unfeasible are met with the response of an active search for—or even invention of—viable alternatives.

Viewed in this light, it is evident that self-control and grit both involve the defense of valued goals in the face of adversity. Where they principally differ is in  the nature of the “enemy,” and the timescale that is involved. Self-control is required to adjudicate between lower-level goals entailing necessarily
conflicting actions. In contrast, grit entails maintaining allegiance to a highest-level goal over long stretches of time and in the face of disappointments and setbacks.

The alternative to grit is following a series of different superordinate goals in rapid succession by giving up on a superordinate goal very quickly as soon as the means in the present plan to the end of that goal have been blocked at a lower level. It follows that self-control is more tightly coupled with success at lower order goals, whereas grit  is more tightly coupled with exceptional achievements
that often take decades—or even an entire lifetime—to accomplish through successful completion of many lower order goals.


Directions for Future Research


What are the characteristics of individuals who have high versus low levels of self-control or grit, both in terms of the types of goals they hold (Dweck & Leggett, 1988) and in terms of the processes they engage in to defend these goals against challenges (Fishbach, Dhar, & Zhang, 2006)?

Do individuals who exemplify grit but not self control have stronger approach-motivation systems, and do individuals who exemplify self-control but not grit have stronger avoidance systems? What are the main and interactive effects of self-control and grit with respect to specific success outcomes? It seems likely that there may be synergistic effects: High levels of both self-control and grit may lead to greater success than either alone

The proposed framework implies that self-control is a skill or capacity, which, like other skills and capacities, might be improved with training and practice (Diamond, 2012; Mischel, 2014;
Oettingen, 2012). Grit, in contrast, is as much about motivation as volition (Achtziger & Gollwitzer, 2008).


Very generally, we assume that commitment to a superordinate goal is a function of that goal’s feasibility and desirability, and thus that the diverse psychological antecedents to such valuations (e.g., growth mindset, optimism, attribution style, locus of control, counterfactual style, core self-evaluation, intrinsic motivation, interest, approaches to happiness) are logical targets for intervention and inquiry.


Conclusion


Much of human behavior is goal-directed (Locke & Latham, 2013).  Hence human behavior can be studied as a a series of actions every day to achieve higher order goals that are achieved with a hierarchical framework of lower order goals that may be relevant for even hour, minute and second.

A hierarchical-goal perspective on self-control and grit advances the understanding of the related but distinct psychological mechanisms that underlie these two key determinants of success.


References

Papers quoted in the post are prefixed by *.

*Achtziger, A., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2008). Motivation and volition in the course of action. In J. Heckhausen & H. Heckhausen (Eds.), Motivation and action (pp. 273–295). Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press.

*Atkinson, J. W. (1964). An introduction to motivation. Oxford, England: Van Nostrand.

*Baum, J. R., & Locke, E. A. (2004). The relationship of entrepreneurial traits, skill, and motivation to subsequent venture growth. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 587–598.

*de Ridder, D. T. D., Lensvelt-Mulders, G., Finkenauer, C., Stok, F. M., & Baumeister, R. F. (2012). Taking stock of self-control: A meta-analysis of how trait self-control relates to a wide range of behaviors. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16, 76–99.

*Diamond, A. (2012). Activities and programs that improve children’s executive functions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 335–341.

*Duckworth, A. L., & Carlson, S. M. (2013). Self-regulation and school success. In B. W. Sokol, F. M. E. Grouzet, & U. Muller (Eds.), Self-regulation and autonomy: Social and developmental dimensions of human conduct (pp. 208–230). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

*Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1087–1101.

*Duckworth, A. L., & Quinn, P. D. (2009). Development and validation of the Short Grit Scale (Grit-S). Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 166–174.

*Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science, 16, 939–944.

*Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256–273.

*Ericsson, K. A., & Charness, N. (1994). Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition. American Psychologist, 49, 725–747.

*Fishbach, A., Dhar, R., & Zhang, Y. (2006). Subgoals as substitutes or complements: The role of goal accessibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 232–242. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.2.232



*Galton, F. (1869/2006). Hereditary genius: An inquiry into its laws and consequences. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. (Original work published 1869)

*Hofmann, W., Fisher, R. R., Luhmann, M., Vohs, K. D., & Baumeister, R. F. (2014). Yes, but are they happy? Effects of trait self-control on affective well-being and life satisfaction.
Journal of Personality, 82, 265–277.

 *Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (Eds.). (2013). New developments in goal setting and task performance. New York, NY: Routledge.

*Maglio, S. J., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2013). The common currency of psychological distance. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 22, 278–282.

*Mischel, W. (2014). The Marshmallow Test: Mastering selfcontrol. New York, NY: Little, Brown.

*Moffitt, T. E., Arseneault, L., Belsky, D., Dickson, N., Hancox, R. J., Harrington, H. L., . . . Caspi, A. (2011). A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 108, 2693–2698.

*Oettingen, G. (2012). Future thought and behaviour change. European Review of Social Psychology, 23, 1–63.

*Roberts, B. W., Jackson, J. J., Fayard, J. V., Edmonds, G., & Meints, J. (2009). Conscientiousness. In M. Leary & R. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in social behavior (pp. 369–381). New York, NY: Guilford.

*Vallerand, R. J., Houlfort, N., & Forest, J. (2014). Passion for work: Determinants and outcomes. In M. Gagne (Ed.), Oxford handbook of work engagement, motivation, and self-determination theory (pp 85–105). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

*Wrzesniewski, A. (2012). Callings. In K. S. Cameron & G. M. Spreitzer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship (pp. 45–55). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.








Thursday, April 21, 2016

Organizational Climate - Literature Review




Organizational Climate: Measures, Research and Contingencies
DON HELLRIEGEL, JOHN W. SLOCUM, JR.
The Pennsylvania State University
Academy of Management Journal, June 1974, Volume 17. Number 2. pp.255 - 280

Toward a Definition
The present definition of organizational climate represents an adaptation of conceptions set forth by Beer (1), Campbell et ai. (3, p. 329),Dachler 7), and Schneider (56). Organizational climate refers to a set of attributes which can be perceived about a particular organization and/or its subsystems, and that may be induced from the way that organization and/or its subsystems deal with their members and environment. Several themes are imphcit in this definition of organizational climate (7, 56, 64): (a) perceptual responses sought are primarily descriptive rather than evaluative; (b) the level of inciusiveness of the items, scales, and constructs are macro rather than micro; (c) the units of analysis tend to be attributes of the organization or specific subsystems rather than the individual; and (d) the perceptions have potential behavioral consequences.

Thursday, March 31, 2016

Adoption of 3D Printing in the World



The 3D printing plastic market is forecast based on two scenarios as its growth is primarily based on the adoption of 3D printing technology by end-use industries. Scenario one represents comparatively normal growth whereas scenario two projects exponential growth. Scenario one predicts a comparatively normal growth of USD 692.2 Million by 2020, at a CAGR of 25.7% from 2015 to 2020, whereas scenario two predicts market to reach USD 822.7 Million by 2020, at a CAGR of 34.6% from 2017 to 2020.

http://www.prnewswire.co.in/news-releases/3d-printing-plastic-market-worth-6922-million-usd-by-2020-572533831.html



The report "3D Printing Automotive Market Applications by Technology (SLA, SLS, EBM, FDM, EBM, LOM, 3DIP), Material (Metals, Polymers), Application (Prototyping & Tooling, R&D, Manufacturing), and by Region - Global Trends and Forecast to 2020" is published by MarketsandMarkets. The 3D Printing Automotive Market is estimated to be USD 482.27 Million in 2015, and is projected to reach USD 1.56 Billion by 2020, growing at a CAGR of 26.58%.
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/3d-printing-automotive-market-application-worth-156-billion-usd-by-2020-528043771.html


Full Color Comes to Consumer 3D Printing With the Mcor ARKe
http://in.pcmag.com/3d-printer-reviews/98938/news/full-color-comes-to-consumer-3d-printing-with-the


3D printing of medical devices reaches peak hype: Gartner
Aug 2015
http://www.firstpost.com/business/3d-printing-of-medical-devices-reaches-peak-hype-gartner-2407060.html

Friday, March 25, 2016

Adoption of IoT - Global Trends



March 2016

21 Mar 2016
How the Internet of Things is transforming digital marketing
MARCH 21, 2016
by Ryan Begley
Product Manager IoT Division - Connected Products, IBM
Follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter
http://www.ibmbigdatahub.com/blog/how-internet-things-transforming-digital-marketing

Potential of IoT
IBMBigDataHub Article
14 March 2016
http://www.ibmbigdatahub.com/blog/how-are-you-harnessing-your-internet-things-potential


11 Mar 2016

General Motor acquiring driverless car company Cruise spending around $1 billion.
https://iotworldnews.com/2016/03/general-motors-cranks-iot-strategy-up-a-gear-with-cruise-acquisition/

10 IoT Technologies Every CIO Needs To Understand

By Nick Jones
Gartner, Inc.
11 March 2016
http://www.forbes.com/sites/gartnergroup/2016/03/11/10-iot-technologies-every-cio-needs-to-understand/#323e0cf5290b

Manufacturing to invest $80 Billion in IoT in 2020
There are 18 business sectors under analysis.  $1 trillion is the estimated total spend in 2020.
http://www.businessinsider.com/internet-of-things-in-manufacturing-2016-2?IR=T


Quick History of the Internet of Things..
by Bill McCabe
Published on 03-09-2016
http://www.semiwiki.com/forum/content/5559-quick-history-internet-things.html

Gartner Survey Shows That 29% are using  currently and 14% plan to use IOT in 2016 

Thus 43 Percent of Organizations will Implement the Internet of Things by end of  2016

Current IoT Adoption Varies Widely By Industry

The Internet of Things (IoT) will move toward mainstream adoption in 2016 for many industries, according to the findings of a recent survey by Gartner, Inc. The online survey was conducted in November 2015. It has responses from 465 IT and business professionals spanning 18 business sectors in North America, EMEA, Asia/Pacific and Latin America.

29 percent of responding organizations are currently using IoT. An additional 14 percent are planning to implement IoT in the coming 12 months.  A further additional 21 percent planning to implement after 2016.  In aggregate, the majority of organizations (64 percent) plan to eventually implement IoT. However, it is also important to note that another 36 percent have no plans to implement IoT, including 9 percent that see no relevance whatsoever in the technologies.


Hurdles:  The first set of hurdles are business-related. Many organizations have yet to establish a clear picture of what benefits the IoT can deliver, or have not yet invested the time to develop ideas for how to apply IoT to their business. The second set of hurdles are the organizational skills to understand and assess IoT.  Many of the survey participants have insufficient expertise and staffing for IoT.

Industry adoption also varies widely with heavy industries such as utilities, oil and gas, and manufacturing leading adoption, and service-oriented light or "weightless" industries lagging. Gartner estimates that slightly more than half (56 percent) of businesses in asset-intensive "heavy" industries will have implemented IoT by the end of 2016, and approximately one-third (36 percent) of "light" or "weightless" will do so.


 For those organizations that have already implemented IoT, the focus has been on internal operational improvements over external customer-facing objectives. To date, the primary business case for IoT is internally focused, namely improved efficiencies, cost savings and enhanced asset utilization (52 percent of total) versus the externally facing IoT benefits of enhancing customer experience or increasing revenue (40 percent).


The survey shows a dramatic jump in focus on customer experience, doubling in nominal terms from 18 percent to 34 percent. This indicates that we can expect a much higher IoT focus on end customers during the next 12 months. In effect, IoT programs and processes will become competitive marketplace weapons starting in 2016 in more number of companies.

The survey found that the biggest IoT technology challenges for those that have already implemented IoT are cybersecurity, integration and managing business requirements. However, orchestration of workflows and processes looms as a major concern for those planning to implement IoT.
2016 will be a very big year for IoT adoption. A wide range of IoT use cases  are seen  virtually in all industries. But, the big challenge now is demonstrating return on investment. Executives need to validate the contribution that IoT has made in pilot projectyd in order to justify large-scale rollouts.

Additional information is available in the Gratner report "Survey Analysis: Early Adopters of Internet of Things Poised to Make 2016 the Year of the Customer." More information on IoT implementation can be found in the Gartner Special Report "The Internet of Things," which looks at the necessary steps to building and rolling out an IoT strategy.

http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/3236718



Saturday, March 19, 2016

Adoption of Big Data in USA



The fourth annual Big Data Executive Survey was conducted by NewVantage Partners.

It revealed that that reducing time-to-insight rather than saving money is the primary driver for their Big Data business investment.

The survey was conducted in November and December 2015. It was  published on January 11, 2016,
The survey confirms that Fortune 1000 firms believe that Big Data will deliver competitive advantage by enabling their firms to act faster when it comes to analyzing data, gaining insights, making critical decisions, and bringing new capabilities to market.



The fourth survey reveals that, it has taken only four short years for Big Data to assert itself as an essential component of the corporate practice. Among the Fortune 1000 firms surveyed by NewVantage, 62.5% reported having Big Data initiatives in  the enterprise — nearly double the 31.4% of firms at this stage in 2013. While only 5.4% of firms reported Big Data investments in excess of $50 million in 2014, the number of firms that project investments in Big Data of greater than $50 million leaps to 26.8% by 2017.  For the first time, a majority of firms (54%) reports having appointed a Chief Data Officer, up from just 12% in 2012.

http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/how-time-to-insight-is-driving-big-data-business-investment/


TCS 2015 Survey

THE INTERNET OFTHINGS A Manufacturing Industry Perspective

The manufacturing industry leads the way as an early adopter of the Internet of Things (IoT). The respondents in the survey have an annual revenue of $10 bn or more. Of the 140 manufacturing companies TCS surveyed, $108 mn average spend per company in 2015 $120 mn average projected spend per company in 2018.  0.45% revenue is spent on the IoT initiatives in 2015.
http://fortune.com/2015/07/27/tata-internet-of-things/


26 companies are planning #1 billion investment/expenditure in IoT systems in 2016. GE is one of them.