Govt IT systems in intelligent processing shocker!
Yesterday
Due to me taking up a new post within the Uni from Jan next year it has become apparent that the Uni HR system has had the wrong National Insurance number for me since I started 18 months ago.
This incorrect number has been on all my payslips and on my last P60 (end of year tax return that is used to sort out contributions and whatnot that relate to state pensions and other benefits).
Bit of a panic! HR have now corrected it on our systems so I phoned up Her Majesties Revenue and Customs NI helpline and explained it all to them.
And now for the shocker - even though the end of year tax return had the wrong number on it - their systems had managed to work out it was wrong and still credit my account with that years tax and NI!
 Inteeligent govt. IT systems, whatever next! Apparently no problems, everything is fine. I'm in shock...
(and the moral of this story is, always check the details that HR have for you!)
 Discuss this entry
- 4 replies
- Latest reply: 21 Hours Ago
XKCD
5 Weeks Ago
if you haven't already, check out xkcd ( http://xkcd.com/653/ ) as they're commemorating the shutdown of geocities. My but web design has moved on!
Discuss this entry
- 4 replies
- Latest reply: 5 Weeks Ago
Psychology and Horizon Proggy
Oct 21, 2009
Well, monday was my 3hr exam for this year's module. 4 essay questions in 3 hrs. Not too bad, usual format of 1 fact based repetition (You hear a psychologist stating that Cognitive neuropsychology is boswellox, counter this showing an understanding of the criticisms and how the discipline has advance cognitive science) next 2 were fact and waffle ('are attentional processes sequential or parallel in nature' and 'discuss how models of LTM/STM (long term memory and short term memory) compare to psychological actuality') followed by a very waffly one ('discuss the various criteria that affect the processing of emotional stimulus'). So I think I did enough to pass, but we shall see, remembered most of the theories but not all of the attributions.
And the horizon thingy was a programme about consciousness and 'I' by Marcus du Sautoy (bloke who succeeded Dawkins as to the Simoni chair for public understanding of science).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episod...56/Horizon_20092010_The_Secret_You/
very interesting if you can get to iPlayer proggies. Nothing ground breaking within the discipline but well presented and put together (although he does get a bit over enthusiastic sometimes when he should be quiet and let the other person speak).
Discuss this entry
- 12 replies
- Latest reply: Oct 22, 2009
Near death experiences and brain wave activity
Oct 8, 2009
Interesting report:
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/10/06/near-death-brain.html
"Moments before death, the patients experienced a burst in brain wave activity, with the spikes occurring at the same time before death and at comparable intensity and duration."
They're tentatively putting it down to the neurons discharging due to lack of oxygen.
Discuss this entry
- 3 replies
- Latest reply: Oct 8, 2009
Thinking caps on - Opinions for those who may read this welcomed
Aug 23, 2009
Right, bit of a convoluted one this, here goes...
As mentioned below in earlier journal I did an experiment as part of my OU course that was designed to clarify some elements of how human beings compare 2-digit numbers represented externally on a computer screen.
I've now had a chance to analyse the data and been able to pull some further information out.
One of the main motivators in this study was to see whether when doing the comparisons we compared the individual digits in parallel and then combine at the end to com up with a result. So comparing 41 with 45 would compare 4 with 4 and 1 with 5. 4 with 4 is not clear but 1 with 5 is less so we combine them and decide that 41 is less than 45.
Equally comparing 21 with 45. Compare 2 with 4 and we see it is less. Compare 1 with 5 and we see it is less. Combine the two and we conclude that 21 is less than 45.
However, the theory behind all this indicates that in the case of number comparisons such as 29 with 45 or 61 with 45 we have a different problem. Since 2 is less that 4 but 9 is greater than 5 when we compare them we have to work out that the 2 < 4 result is more important than the 9 > 5 result in order to conclude that 29 is less than 45. And vice versa for 61 with 45.
The study I did showed that in these later cases there is indeed a delay in response time (and one that is statistically significant with p<0.001). This looks great and indicates that we do indeed compare 2-digit numbers by looking at the individual digits and then combining the results and applying a weighting where the individual digit results differ (ie the 2<4 but 9>5 result).
However, I then worked out that I could add a further check in. I could look at how the response times differed when the comparison was between numbers of the same decade (ie 41 with 45) or different decade (ie 21 with 45). And I could look and see how that interacted with the previous effect (know as a stroop like effect).
Now it probably won't surprise anyone outside the university of the bleedin' obvious that comparing numbers of different decades (21 with 45) is faster than comparing numbers of the same decade (41 with 45) because you can ignore the units and just look at the decade digit. Half the processing, faster response time.
BUT what is interesting is the combined effect, and this is also statistically significant.
What I mean is that comparing 41 with 45 is faster than comparing 49 with 45. And this is regardless of the order the numbers are shown in (ie as 49 45 or 45 49, makes little difference and no statistically significant difference).
I can understand why 21 with 45 is faster than 29 with 45 because of the stroop like effect where in 21 with 45 the two comparisons reinforce each other and in 29 with 45 they clash and weighting has to be added to decide.
But in 49 with 45 the 4 is essentially irrelevant since it provides no help in determining which is larger. So why should 49 with 45 be slower than 41 with 45?
We're talking a difference, in average, of about 60ms. Approx 830ms compared with 890ms for same decade comparisons.
For outside decade comparisons the values are more like 760ms (for 21 with 45) vs. 780ms (for 29 with 45) so the within decade is clearly having an effect.
Or could it be that I modeled my data incorrectly? I specified that 49 with 45, 59 with 55 and 69 with 65 as being stroop like but that 41 with 45, 51 with 55 and 61 with 65 as non stroop). Maybe I was wrong to do that and something else is going on here that has been hidden by this assignment?
I realise this is probably so much nonsense to most readers but any comments welcome. I'm confused!
Discuss this entry
- 19 replies
- Latest reply: Sep 8, 2009
Show more of My Journal Entries
|
Home
Leave a Message