Synonyms containing impartial correct
We've found 1,554 synonyms:
kor-ekt′, v.t. to make right: to remove faults: to punish: to counterbalance: to bring into a normal state.—adj. made right or straight: free from faults: true.—adjs. Correct′able, Correct′ible.—adv. Correct′ly.—n. Correc′tion, amendment: punishment: bodily chastisement.—adjs. Correc′tional, Correct′ive, tending, or having the power, to correct.—ns. Correc′tioner (Shak.), one who administers correction; Correct′ive, that which corrects; Correct′ness; Correct′or, he who, or that which, corrects: a director or governor.—adj. Correct′ory, corrective.—Under correction, subject to correction—often used as a formal expression of deference to a superior authority. [L. corrigĕre, correctum—cor, inten., regĕre, to rule.]
— Chambers 20th Century Dictionary
|Substantive due process|
Substantive due process
In United States constitutional law, substantive due process is a principle allowing courts to protect certain fundamental rights from government interference, even if procedural protections are present or the rights are not specifically mentioned elsewhere in the US Constitution. Courts have identified the basis for such protection from the due process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, which prohibit the federal and state governments, respectively, from depriving any person of "life, liberty, or property, without due process of law". Substantive due process demarcates the line between the acts that courts hold to be subject to government regulation or legislation and the acts that courts place beyond the reach of governmental interference. Whether the Fifth or Fourteenth Amendments were intended to serve that function continues to be a matter of scholarly as well as judicial discussion and dissent.Substantive due process is to be distinguished from procedural due process. The distinction arises from the words "of law" in the phrase "due process of law". Procedural due process protects individuals from the coercive power of government by ensuring that adjudication processes, under valid laws, are fair and impartial. Such protections, for example, include sufficient and timely notice on why a party is required to appear before a court or other administrative body, the right to an impartial trier of fact and trier of law, and the right to give testimony and present relevant evidence at hearings. In contrast, substantive due process protects individuals against majoritarian policy enactments that exceed the limits of governmental authority: courts may find that a majority's enactment is not law and cannot be enforced as such, regardless of whether the processes of enactment and enforcement were actually fair.The term was first used explicitly in 1930s legal casebooks as a categorical distinction of selected due process cases, and by 1952, it had been mentioned twice in Supreme Court opinions. The term "substantive due process" itself is commonly used in two ways: to identify a particular line of case law and to signify a particular political attitude toward judicial review under the two due process clauses.Much substantive due process litigation involves legal challenges about unenumerated rights that seek particular outcomes instead of merely contesting procedures and their effects. In successful cases, the Supreme Court recognizes a constitutionally based liberty and considers laws that seek to limit that liberty to be unenforceable or limited in scope. Critics of substantive due process decisions usually assert that there is no textual basis in the Constitution for such protection and that such liberties should be left under the purview of the more politically accountable branches of government.
In international law, the attitude of impartiality during periods of war adopted by third states toward a belligerent and subsequently recognized by the belligerent, which creates rights and duties between the impartial states and the belligerent. In a United Nations enforcement action, the rules of neutrality apply to impartial members of the United Nations except so far as they are excluded by the obligation of such members under the United Nations Charter.
— Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms
Orthoepy means the doctrine of correct pronunciation within a specific oral tradition. The term is from the Greek ὀρθοέπεια, from ὀρθός orthos "correct" and ἔπος epos "speech." The antonym is cacoepy "bad or wrong pronunciation". The pronunciation of the word orthoepy itself varies widely; the OED recognizes the variants /ˈɔːθəʊˌiːpi/, /ˈɔːθəʊˌɛpi/, /ˈɔːθəʊɨpi/, /ɔːˈθəʊɨpi/ for British English and /ɔˈθoʊəpi/ for American English. The tetrasyllabic pronunciation is sometimes indicated with a diaresis, orthoëpy. In English grammar, orthoepy is the study of correct pronunciation prescribed for Standard English. This is Received Pronunciation specifically, but other standards have emerged since the early 20th century. In ancient Greek, ὀρθοέπεια orthoepeia had the wider sense of "correct diction", i.e. the correct pronunciation not just of individual words but of entire passages, especially of poetry, and the distinction of good poetry vs. bad poetry; the archaic English term for this subject is orthology, and in this sense its opposite is solecism. The study of orthoepeia by the Greek sophists of the 5th century BC, especially Prodicus and Protagoras, also included proto-logical concepts.
Nim is a mathematical game of strategy in which two players take turns removing objects from distinct heaps. On each turn, a player must remove at least one object, and may remove any number of objects provided they all come from the same heap. Variants of Nim have been played since ancient times. The game is said to have originated in China, but the origin is uncertain; the earliest European references to Nim are from the beginning of the 16th century. Its current name was coined by Charles L. Bouton of Harvard University, who also developed the complete theory of the game in 1901, but the origins of the name were never fully explained. The name is probably derived from German nimm meaning "take [imperative]", or the obsolete English verb nim of the same meaning. Nim can be played as a misère game, in which the player to take the last object loses. Nim can also be played as a normal play game, which means that the person who makes the last move wins. This is called normal play because most games follow this convention, even though Nim usually does not. Normal play Nim is fundamental to the Sprague-Grundy theorem, which essentially says that in normal play every impartial game is equivalent to a Nim heap that yields the same outcome when played in parallel with other normal play impartial games.
im-pär′shal, adj. not favouring one more than another: just: (Shak.) partial.—ns. Impartial′ity, Impar′tialness, quality of being impartial: freedom from bias.—adv. Impar′tially.
— Chambers 20th Century Dictionary
Segmint Inc. is a leading provider of digital marketing solutions. Our advanced analytics engine, campaign management tool, and advertising delivery platform anticipates customer needs and spending to deliver targeted online advertising campaigns across the digital spectrum. By making customer data actionable, Segmint enables clients to engage their customers, optimize marketing spend, and achieve unparalleled speed to market by delivering the correct message to the correct customer at the correct time.
Rajyavardhana, also known as Rajya Vardhan, was the eldest son of Prabhakarvardhana and member of the Pushyabhuti dynasty. He ascended the throne after his father's death and was succeeded by his younger brother, Harsha. Contemporary information regarding the life of Rajyavardhana is limited in scope and utility. He is mentioned by Xuanzang, the Chinese traveller, and in Harshacharita, a seventh-century CE work by the poet and bard Bāṇabhaṭṭa. Neither offer impartial accounts and they differ in substantive details. The military historian Kaushik Roy describes Harshacharita as "historical fiction" but with a factually correct foundation.Rajyavardhana was the elder of two sons of Prabhakarvardhana and his queen, Yasomati. The couple also had a daughter, Rajyashri, who married Grahavarman, a member of the Maukhari ruling family at Kannauj. Prabhakarvardana was the powerful ruler of the Thanesar region around 585-606 CE, although exact dates are uncertain. The historian Ramesh Chandra Majumdar says he died and was succeeded by Rajyavardhana in 604 CE but Kaushik Roy gives 606 CE as the year, and some sources say 605. Prabhakarvardhana had expanded his territory by defeating rulers in Gujarat, Gandhara and Sind, and he had also resisted the invasion of the Huna people. He died while his sons were fighting the Hunas.The marriage alliance of Grahavarman and Rajyashri had strengthened ties between the families to a point that Shashanka, the ruler of the Gauda kingdom in Bengal, found unacceptable. He retaliated by allying with the Malava kingdom and the forces appear to have launched a successful surprise attack on the Maukhari capital at Kannauj. Grahavarman was killed and Rajyashri captured at this time, which caused Rajyavardhana to retaliate in turn. He commanded a 10,000-strong cavalry force that was successful in defeating the Malava ruler, with the main army of infantry and war elephants supporting it under the charge of his younger brother, Harsha.Rajyavardhana's success was against an advance guard of his enemy. He died later in 606 as he made his way onwards to press an action at Kannauj itself. He was perhaps murdered by Shashanka, who may have invited him to a meeting with treachery in mind, although the only sources for this claim are Bāṇabhaṭṭa and Xuanzang, who both had reasons to write unfavourably of Shashanka.Harsha succeeded Rajyavardhana as ruler of Thanesar and vowed to avenge his brother's death.
Randomized polynomial time is the complexity class of computational complexity theory, problems for which a probabilistic Turing machine exists with these properties: ⁕It always runs in polynomial time in the input size ⁕If the correct answer is NO, it always returns NO ⁕If the correct answer is YES, then it returns YES with probability at least 1/2. In other words, the algorithm is allowed to flip a truly random coin while it is running. The only case in which the algorithm can return YES is if the actual answer is YES; therefore if the algorithm terminates and produces YES, then the correct answer is definitely YES; however, the algorithm can terminate with NO regardless of the actual answer. That is, if the algorithm returns NO, it might be wrong. Some authors call this class R, although this name is more commonly used for the class of recursive languages. If the correct answer is YES and the algorithm is run n times with the result of each run statistically independent of the others, then it will return YES at least once with probability at least 1 − 2−. So if the algorithm is run 100 times, then the chance of it giving the wrong answer every time is lower than the chance that cosmic rays corrupted the memory of the computer running the algorithm. In this sense, if a source of random numbers is available, most algorithms in RP are highly practical.
In theoretical computer science, correctness of an algorithm is asserted when it is said that the algorithm is correct with respect to a specification. Functional correctness refers to the input-output behaviour of the algorithm. A distinction is made between total correctness, which additionally requires that the algorithm terminates, and partial correctness, which simply requires that if an answer is returned it will be correct. Since there is no general solution to the halting problem, a total correctness assertion may lie much deeper. A termination proof is a type of mathematical proof that plays a critical role in formal verification because total correctness of an algorithm depends on termination. For example, successively searching through integers 1, 2, 3, … to see if we can find an example of some phenomenon — say an odd perfect number — it is quite easy to write a partially correct program. But to say this program is totally correct would be to assert something currently not known in number theory. A proof would have to be a mathematical proof, assuming both the algorithm and specification are given formally. In particular it is not expected to be a correctness assertion for a given program implementing the algorithm on a given machine. That would involve such considerations as limitations on computer memory.
set right, or made straight; hence, conformable to truth, rectitude, or propriety, or to a just standard; not faulty or imperfect; free from error; as, correct behavior; correct views
— Webster Dictionary
A ticket system, also known as a closed toll collection system, is a toll-collection system used on some toll roads in which a motorist pays a toll rate based on the distance traveled from their originating entrance to their destination exit. The correct toll is determined by requiring all users to take a ticket from a machine or from an attendant when entering the system. The ticket prominently displays the location (or exit number) from which it was issued and may contain a precomputed chart of toll rates for each exit. Upon arrival at the toll booth at the destination exit, the motorist presents the ticket to the toll collector, who determines the correct toll. If no ticket is presented (i.e. the ticket is lost), generally the highest possible toll is charged. Most ticket-based toll roads today use an electronic toll collection system as an alternative. In this case, sensors at both the entry and exit toll plazas read the vehicle's transponder and the correct toll is deducted from the user's account. First employed on the Pennsylvania Turnpike when it opened in 1940, the ticket system has been utilized on lengthy toll highways in which the exits are spread out over a distance on an average of 7 to 10 miles (11 to 16 km) per exit.
Linguistic prescription, or prescriptive grammar, is the attempt to establish rules defining preferred or correct usage of language. These rules may address such linguistic aspects as spelling, pronunciation, vocabulary, syntax, and semantics. Sometimes informed by linguistic purism, such normative practices may suggest that some usages are incorrect, inconsistent, illogical, lack communicative effect, or are of low aesthetic value. They may also include judgments on socially proper and politically correct language use.Linguistic prescriptivism may aim to establish a standard language, teach what a particular society perceives as a correct or best form, or advise on effective and stylistically felicitous communication. If usage preferences are conservative, prescription might appear resistant to language change; if radical, it may produce neologisms.Prescriptive approaches to language are often contrasted with the descriptive approach ("descriptivism"), employed in academic linguistics, which observes and records how language is actually used. The basis of linguistic research is text (corpus) analysis and field study, both of which are descriptive activities. Description, however, may include researchers' observations of their own language usage. In the Eastern European linguistic tradition, the discipline dealing with standard language cultivation and prescription is known as "language culture" or "speech culture".Despite being apparent opposites, prescription and description are often considered complementary, as comprehensive descriptive accounts must take into account and record existing speaker preferences, and a prior understanding of how language is actually used is necessary for prescription to be effective. Since the mid-20th century some dictionaries and style guides, which are prescriptive works by nature, have increasingly integrated descriptive material and approaches. Examples of guides updated to add more descriptive and evidence-based material include Webster's Third New International Dictionary (1961) and the third edition Garner's Modern English Usage (2009) in English, or the Nouveau Petit Robert (1993) in French. A partially descriptive approach can be especially useful when approaching topics of ongoing conflict between authorities, or in different dialects, disciplines, styles, or registers. Other guides, such as The Chicago Manual of Style, are designed to impose a single style and thus remain primarily prescriptive (as of 2017). Some authors define "prescriptivism" as the concept where a certain language variety is promoted as linguistically superior to others, thus recognizing the standard language ideology as a constitutive element of prescriptivism or even identifying prescriptivism with this system of views. Others, however, use this term in relation to any attempts to recommend or mandate a particular way of language usage (in a specific context or register), without, however, implying that these practices must involve propagating the standard language ideology. According to another understanding, the prescriptive attitude is an approach to norm-formulating and codification that involves imposing arbitrary rulings upon a speech community, as opposed to more liberal approaches that draw heavily from descriptive surveys; in a wider sense, however, the latter also constitute a form of prescriptivism.Mate Kapović makes a distinction between "prescription" and "prescriptivism", defining the former as "process of codification of a certain variety of language for some sort of official use", and the latter as "an unscientific tendency to mystify linguistic prescription".
a term formerly used for the part of phonology that dealt with the `correct' pronunciation of words and its relation to `correct' orthography
— Princeton's WordNet