An Effective Technique for System-Level Prediction of the Radiated Emissions of Unknown Sources Inside Low-${Q}$ Cavities Using Unit-Level Measurements

2009 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Saez de Adana ◽  
Manuel F. CÁtedra ◽  
JosÉ M. GÓmez ◽  
Raj Mittra ◽  
Jorge Berkowitsch Renuncio ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Michiel Foulon

Neoclassical realism offers insights into why particular foreign policy choices are made, and under what systemic conditions unit-level factors are likely to intervene between systemic stimuli and state behavior. Neoclassical realism brings a multilevel framework that combines both systemic incentives and mediating unit-level variables to arrive at conclusions about foreign policy choices in particular cases. It sets the relative distribution of capabilities in the international system as the independent variable and adds mediating variables at the unit level of analysis. Variables at the domestic level of analysis, such as the role of ideology, the foreign policy executive’s perceptions, resource extraction, and domestic institutions, add explanatory power to system-level approaches. Neoclassical realism accounts for state behavior in a way that a more parsimonious systems-level theory is unable to achieve. But this rich theoretical framework also faces controversies and criticisms: Is neoclassical realism distinct from other theories and what is its added value? Neoclassical realism overlaps only to a small extent with alternative theoretical approaches. The domestic level of analysis dominates Foreign Policy Analysis (a subfield of International Relations). Unit-level variables suffice to explain state behavior in bottom-up approaches, and opening the structure of the international system for fundamental rethinking is central to constructivism. Neither explains the system-level conditions under which unit-level variables mediate between systemic stimuli and foreign policy. Neoclassical realism analyzes and explains a given foreign policy that more parsimonious or alternative theoretical approaches cannot.


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Korolev ◽  
Vladimir Portyakov

This article attempts to advance the neoclassical realist framework by elaborating on the interaction between system-level and unit-level factors in the formation of states’ behavior. With an empirical focus on post-Cold War China–Russia relations, which represent the ambivalent combination of a consistently growing strategic entente and a simultaneous reluctance to form a full-fledged political-military alliance, this study establishes two major unit-level factors – differing economic models and negative historical memories – that create hurdles for alliance formation between the two countries. However, under greater systemic pressure from the US-led unipolarity, China’s and Russia’s state leaders have not only increased bilateral military-to-military cooperation but have begun to actively implement policies to deliberately transform, if not remove, the existing non-systemic hurdles. Therefore, the neoclassical realist framework can be understood and further tested as a dynamic interaction model in which the unit-level circumstances, while moderating the causal impact of the system, are themselves being transformed by the system via state policies, as is their impact on states’ foreign policy.


2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giordano Spadacini ◽  
Flavia Grassi ◽  
Diego Bellan ◽  
Sergio A. Pignari ◽  
Filippo Marliani

This work reports a modeling methodology for the prediction of conducted emissions (CE) in a wide frequency range (up to 100 MHz), which are generated by dc/dc converters and propagate along the power buses of satellites. In particular, the dc/dc converter seen as a source of CE is represented by a behavioral model, whose parameters can be identified by two unit-level experimental procedures performed in controlled test setups. A simplified multiconductor transmission-line (MTL) model is developed to account for the propagation of CE in shielded bundles of twisted-wire pairs used as power cables. The whole power system is represented by the interconnection of the circuit models of dc/dc converters, cables, and Power Conditioning and Distribution Unit (PCDU). By solving the obtained network, frequency spectra of CE can be predicted. Experimental results are reported to substantiate the accuracy of the proposed unit-level dc/dc converter model and the MTL model of cables. Finally, a system-level test setup composed of three dc/dc converters connected to a PCDU is considered, and predicted CE are compared versus experimental measurements.


Author(s):  
Holger Afflerbach

The politics and diplomacy of First World War are a complex topic. Tens of thousands of books, articles, and editions of primary sources were published on many aspects of the question, but very few works try to cover the ground comprehensively. The reason is the sheer complexity. The attempt to cover the topic in its entirety and in depth would fail to amalgamate the enormous amount of information. There is not a simple “line of events” to follow. A thorough analysis of the politics and diplomacy of First World War has to cover the events and the political intentions and actions of key protagonists, and then to link them with internal politics, with military events and strategic expectations—and this for the entire duration of the war. The task is massive; over thirty states fought in this war. Many neutrals as well as non-state-actors, like for example the churches, would have to be included in such a survey. It is evident that it is very difficult to deliver such an analysis for the entire period of the war in reasonable depth; and maybe it would not even be sensible to try. Many studies analyze developments in politics, strategy, and war aims on the level of single states or on the level of wartime alliances, or they examine single political events of international nature. What is missing are not the “unit level” studies, but “system level” analysis of First World War diplomacy and political relations covering the entire war. We have to pay a significant price for the non-existence of thorough international studies of the war. It leads to serious and unavoidable shortfalls in interpretation because the “unit level” view—let’s say, the view of the contemporaries living during the Great War—tends to survive and perpetuate itself and to dominate research up to our present times. This bibliography reflects this state of research, by offering first an introduction to some key works on the start of the war (i.e., the July crisis) and introducing then some useful studies which cover the entire topic of international politics and wartime diplomacy. It will then turn toward the politics and diplomacy of First World War on a “unit level,” state by state. It ends with literature on the armistice in 1918. It abstains from covering the Versailles peace negotiations which are a closely linked but separate topic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document