Suchergebnisse

1. Kŭndae chisik kwa kyemong chŏngsin / Hŏ Chae-yŏng -- 2. Kŭndae ŭi chisigin yuhyŏng kwa yuhak tamnon ŭi hyŏngsŏng / Hŏ Chae-yŏng -- 3. Kŭndae kyemonggi yuhaksaeng yŏksa / Kim Hye-ryŏn -- 4. Kŭndae kyemonggi yuhaksaeng ŭi sŏngkyŏk kwa kyemong hwaltong / Yun Kŭm-sŏn -- 5. Ilche kangjŏmgi ŭi yuhak tamnon pyŏnhwa / Sŏ Min-jŏng.

We may dare to ask about rationale behind the recent devotion caused by Artificial Intelligence (AI). Whether it could be produced by the fear or, by contrast, it stems from the inner ignorance and uncertainty that blind us by attempting to give a quick explanation to a massive technological disruption directly caused by COVID19. AI is not a new phenomenon as such, despite the fact that what it could be new is the way AI is already interfering in citizens' daily life functions and services shaping them with a deep intensity as a result of the processing capacity of AI. Nonetheless, (i) little is known so far about the relationship between AI and governance, or what is worst, (ii) AI is being deployed without considering democratic accountability and far from our public eye and scrutiny. Acknowledging the complexity of such topic, this article constructively aims to analyse the ongoing technopolitical transformations occurring in the aftermath of the coronavirus crisis for the governance model of the Basque Country. This article is targeted to the political left (either Basque or Spanish nationalist) in pursuit of avoid delaying the work that should be implemented in response to questions, challenges, and policies for XXI. century algorithmic governance. The article concludes through three-intertwined-layer approach: (i) the first approach lists AI functional uses; (ii) the second approach presents brefly several AI projects being currently developed in different European countries; (iii) ultimately, a strategic roadmap lead to stakeholders in the Basque Country is outlined.

Readmission which reflects capacity to manage patients and general level of medical services has been known for one of the causes of medical expenditure due to inefficient service. Compared to disease-specific readmission, hospital wide readmission (HWR) is relatively easy to understand, and has merit to get over limitation of collateral medical services assessment; therefore, a growing interest in development and usage of readmission indicator as quality of care indicator focusing on all-disease is detected. In this study, we investigate current state of risk standardized readmission rate indicator used in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada, and examine the considerations when using readmission rate as quality indicator in Korea. Differences in risk-adjustment methods were showed among countries. The United States do not control race not to hide socio-demographic factors on readmission. Canada shows differentiation compared to other countries about reflecting community factors. All three-countries utilize readmission rate as monitoring quality of care rather than incentives or penalty due to the fact that readmission rate could not represent the whole quality of hospital and has a limitation at controlling socio-economic factors. Therefore, for usage readmission rate as quality indicator in Korea, preparing readmission classification standard for Korean medical environment and additional methods for acquiring information by using discharge summary is need. Moreover, continued discussion with clinical specialists is needed for obtain clinical reliability and validity. ; open

I. Japan's national strategy for breaking-away from the postwar regime : trade-off and transaction between security and history -- II. Analysis of software diversity research trends in strengthening cyber security capabilities -- III. China's South China Sea policy after the International Arbitration -- IV. European and Russian responses to Korean Peninsula crisis : prospects and policy implications

학위논문 (석사)-- 서울대학교 대학원 : 외교학과, 2012. 2. 신범식. ; 본 논문의 핵심 질문은 색깔 혁명 발생으로 민주화에 성공한 그루지야와 우크라이나의 이후 민주주의 발전 양상은 왜 달랐는가이다. 색깔 혁명 이후, 우크라이나의 민주주의는 진전을 보였지만, 그루지야는 그렇지 못했다. 본 연구는 색깔혁명 이후 미국과 러시아의 갈등 구도와 양국의 대(對) 그루지야, 우크라이나 정책이 각국의 국내 엘리트-대중 관계에서 엘리트 자율성, 그리고 민주화에 미친 영향에 주목하였다. 9.11 테러 이후 미국과 러시아는 협력 체제에 있었지만, 색깔 혁명의 발생으로 인해 양국은 갈등 구도에 들어서게 된다. 그루지야와 우크라이나는 미․러 갈등 구도의 중심에 있었다. 활용가능성의 요인으로 인해, 그루지야는 우크라이나보다 전략적 가치가 더 큰 곳이었다. 미․러 갈등 구도 속에서 그루지야 집권 엘리트들은 높은 엘리트 자율성을 가질 수 있었다. 미국은 그루지야에게 큰 경제 원조, 정치적 지원을 하였다. 또한 그루지야-러시아 관계 악화와 2008년 전쟁 발발은 정권의 권위주의 정책을 정당화하고 국내를 결집시키는 기제로 작용하여 그루지야 집권 엘리트들이 높은 자율성을 갖게 해주었고, 이는 민주화 저해로 이어졌다. 우크라이나는 그루지야와 반대였다. 미․러 갈등 구도 속에서 우크라이나 엘리트들은 낮은 자율성을 가졌다. 우크라이나의 집권 엘리트들은 서방과 러시아 양측 모두로부터 확고한 정치적, 경제적 지원을 얻을 수 없었다. 오히려 러시아의 정책으로 인해 국내의 반 오렌지, 대항 엘리트가 공고해지면서, 집권 엘리트의 자율성은 낮아졌다. 엘리트들의 낮은 자율성과 대중에 대한 높은 의존성은 대중 영합주의 정책과 정국 불안의 결과를 낳았으나, 이는 오렌지 혁명 이후 우크라이나 민주주의의 발전을 제한적으로나마 가능하게 해주었다. 본 연구는 민주화 연구에서 그동안 비교적 주목을 덜 받아온 국제적 요인을 다루고, 외교 정책, 국내 엘리트-대중 관계, 민주화의 연계를 통합적으로 보여준다는 점에서 함의가 있다. 본고는 많은 기존 연구들이 상정해 온, 민주화에 대한 서구 민주화 증진 정책의 긍정적 영향과 권위주의 국가의 부정적 영향이라는 단순한 명제의 한계를 드러내주고 있다. 또한 민주주의 지원 정책에서 민주화 단계별로 정책을 달리할 필요성에 대해서 시사한다. ; What caused the difference in democratic trajectories between Georgia and Ukraine after the Color Revolutions? Since the occurrence of the Color Revolutions, Georgia's democracy has laid in tatters, whereas Ukraine has achieved a relatively successful democracy. Georgia and Ukraine share similar domestic determinants which have been discussed in previous democratization literature. This study, however, focuses on the international factor as an explanation for the different democratic fates of democracy between the two countries. Comparing both countries, this thesis uses a framework that integrates international factors, elite autonomy in domestic elite-mass relations, and democratization. The study argues that international factors, specifically the foreign policies of the US and Russia, provide an explanation for the difference in democratic outcomes for the two countries. Following the events of September 11, 2001, US-Russian relations improved. However, the occurrence of the Color Revolutions caused deterioration in the ties between the two countries, and both started to adopt different foreign policies towards the post-Soviet region. Caught in the middle of this conflict between the two great powers were Georgia and Ukraine. The unconditional US support for Georgia and Russia's assertive policy towards Georgia which culminated in the Russian-Georgian War in 2008 enabled the Georgian elites to attain high elite autonomy, thus resulting in democratic stagnation for Georgia. In contrast, Ukraine did not garner the support of either the US or Russia; rather, it was pressured by Russia. The anti-Orange elites in Ukraine were effectively supported by Russia, and, thus, were able to function as a forceful political opposition to the incumbent elites. Therefore, the Ukrainian elites only garnered low autonomy, which resulted in democratic progress in Ukraine despite domestic political chaos. This study contributes to further understanding of the impact of international factors upon democratization. In addition, this thesis creates implications for democracy promotion policy. The conclusion of the thesis challenges the predominant assumption that Western democracy promotion is conducive to actually democratization, and that authoritarian countries' authoritarian promotion policy is harmful to democratization. In the process of democracy promotion policy, policymakers and implementers need both careful monitoring of the process of democratic assistance and coordination with other countries. ; Master