• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.51
• /
• pp.317-358
• /
• 2011

The purpose of this study aims to analyse the key differences of the sea waybill and electronic B/L in the international transport documents. Sea waybills look remarkably like ordinary bills of lading. Indeed, in two important ways, they are just like bills of lading: the front of the document will near a description of the quantity and apparent condition of the goods; and the back of the document provides evidence of the terms of the contract of carriage. They differ from bills of lading in that, far from indicating that the goods described are deliverable to the order of the shipper or of the consignee, they will make it explicit that the goods are deliverable only to the consignee. Again, different carries will do thai in a variety of ways. For example, the document may call itself non-negotiable, omitting the word order from the consignee box on the front of the document, and stating explicitly that the goods will be deliverable to the consignee or his authorised representative on proper proof of identity and authorisation. The Hague-Visby Rules and Hamburg Rules give no guidance as to any right to instruct the carrier in respect of goods while they are in transit. However, in applying Article 50 of the Rotterdam Rules, in particular when applying it in the context of seawaybills, straight bills of lading or ship's delivery orders, regard would need to be had to preserve the shipper's rights under any of those three documents even after the buyer of goods covered by them has acquired rights of its own. And, the right of control is defined at Article 1.12 of the Rotterdam Rules. The right to give instruction is further limited by the terms of Article 50.1 to three particular types of instruction in respect of the goods, relating broadly to the goods, their delivery en route, and the identity of the consignee. And, the CMI formulated the CMI Uniform Rules for Sea Waybills for voluntary incorporation into any contract of carriage covered by such a document. Recognising that neither the Hague nor the Hague-Visby Rules are applicable to sea waybills, the CMI Rules provide that a contract of carriage covered by a waybill shall be governed by whichever international or national law, if any, would have been compulsorily applicable if the contract had in fact been covered by a bill of lading or similar document of title.

• Journal of the Korea Institute of Information Security & Cryptology
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.401-410
• /
• 2023

In this paper, we propose optimization methods for implementing SPARKLE, one of the NIST LWC finalists, on a 64-bit ARMv8 processor. The proposed methods consist of two approaches: an implementation using ARM A64 instructions and another using NEON ASIMD instructions. The A64-based implementation is optimized by performing register scheduling to efficiently utilize the available registers on the ARMv8 architecture. By utilizing the optimized A64-based implementation, we can achieve speeds that are 1.69 to 1.81 times faster than the C reference implementation on a Raspberry Pi 4B. The ASIMD-based implementation, on the other hand, optimizes data by parallelizing the ARX-boxes to perform more than three of them concurrently through a single vector instruction. While the general speed of the optimized ASIMD-based implementation is lower than that of the A64-based implementation, it only slows down by 1.2 times compared to the 2.1 times slowdown observed in the A64-based implementation as the block size increases from SPARKLE256 to SPARKLE512. This is an advantage of the ASIMD-based implementation. Therefore, the ASIMD-based implementation is more efficient for SPARKLE variant block cipher or permutation designs with larger block sizes than the original SPARKLE, making it a useful resource.

• Journal of Gifted/Talented Education
• /
• v.11 no.3
• /
• pp.131-153
• /
• 2001

The importance of identifying gifted children during early childhood is becoming recognized. Nonetheless, most researchers preferred to study the primary and secondary levels where children are already and more clearly demonstrating what talents they have, and where more reliable predictions of gifted may be made. Comparatively lisle work has been done in this area. When we identify giftedness during early childhood, we have to consider the potential of the young children rather than on actual achievement. Giftedness during early childhood is still developing and less stable than that of older children and this prevents us from making firm and accurate predictions based on children's actual achievement. Dynamic assessment, based on Vygotsky's concept of the zone of proximal development(ZPD), suggests a new idea in the way the gifted young children are identified. In light of dynamic assessment, for identifying the potential giftedness of young children. we need to involve measuring both unassisted and assisted performance. Dynamic assessment usually consists of a test-intervene-retest format that focuses attention on the improvement in child performance when an adult provides mediated assistance on how to master the testing task. The advantages of the dynamic assessment are as follows: First, the dynamic assessment approach can provide a useful means for assessing young gifted child who have not demonstrated high ability on traditional identification method. Second, the dynamic assessment approach can assess the learning process of young children. Third, the dynamic assessment can lead an individualized education by the early identification of young gifted children. Fourth, the dynamic assessment can be a more accurate predictor of potential by linking diagnosis and instruction. Thus, it can make us provide an educational treatment effectively for young gifted children.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.31 no.5
• /
• pp.390-397
• /
• 2006

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and the consistency of four different electronic apex locators in an in vitro model. Fourty extracted premolars were used for the study. Four electronic apex locators (EAL) were Root ZX, Smarpex, Elements Diagnostic Unit (EDU), and E-Magic Finder Deluxe (EMF). After access preparation, the teeth were embedded in an alginate model and the length measurements were carried out at '0.5' and 'Apex' mark using four EALs. The file was cemented at the location of the manufacturers' instruction (Root ZX, EDU, EMF: 0.5 mark, SmarPex: Apex mark). The apical 4mm of the apex was exposed and the distance from the file tip to the major foramen was measured by Image ProPlus (${\times}100$). The distance from the file tip to the major foramen was calculated at 0.5 and Apex mark and the consistency of 0.5 and Apex mark was compared by SD and Quartile of Box plots. In this study, Root ZX and EMF located the apical constriction accurately within ${\pm}0.5 mm$ in 100%, whereas SmarPex and EDU located in 90% and in 70% respectively. For Root ZX and EMF, there was no significant difference between the consistency of 0.5 and Apex mark. However, for the EDU and SmarPex, Apex mark was more consistent than 0.5 mark. From the evaluation of the consistency in this study, for Root ZX and EMF, both 0.5 and Apex mark can be used as a standard mark. And for EDU and SmarPex, the Apex mark can be recommended to be used as a standard mark.