Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: pressure - balanced structures are commonly observed in space plasmas . they are often associated with the nonlinear saturation of the mirror instability ( mi ) @xcite which , being of subcritical type @xcite , permits the persistence of non - zero solutions below threshold @xcite . furthermore , near the mi threshold , the dynamics of weakly nonlinear mirror modes are governed by an asymptotic equation of gradient type [ 5 , 6 ] . this property implies an irreversible character of the mirror modes behavior , associated with ion landau damping , where the free energy can only decrease in time . in this framework , above the threshold , the mirror modes have a blow - up behavior with a possible saturation at an amplitude level comparable to that of the ambient field . below threshold , all stationary ( localized ) structures were predicted to be unstable . the main goal of this paper is to study stationary localized structures resulting from the balance of magnetic and ( both parallel and perpendicular ) thermal pressures , whose simplest description is provided by anisotropic mhd . isotropic mhd equilibria are classically governed by the grad - shafranov ( gs ) equation [ 7 , 8 , 9 ] . we here revisit this approach in the case of anisotropic electron and ion fluids where the perpendicular and parallel pressures are given by equations of state appropriate for the static character of the solutions . however , the mhd stationary equations , at least in the two - dimensional geometry , turn out to be ill - posed . as a consequence , these equations require some regularization . as done in a similar context of pattern formation [ 10 ] , an additional linear term involving a square laplacian for nonlinear mirror modes , regularization can originate from finite larmor radius ( flr ) corrections , which are not retained in the present analysis based on the drift kinetic equation ( see , e.g. [ 5 , 6 ] ) . the paper is organized as follows . in section 2 , the anisotropic grad - shafranov equations are revisited when the gyrotropic pressures depend only on the local magnetic field amplitude that , as shown in the forthcoming sections , is specific for nonlinear mirror modes . in this case , as well known [ 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 ] , the parallel component of the equation is satisfied identically . in section 3 , we show that in the two - dimensional geometry , the problem is expressed in a variational form with a free energy given by the space integral of the parallel tension . in section 4 , it is shown that the equations of state resulting from an adiabatic approximation of the drift kinetic description , require a regularization due to an overestimate of the contributions from the particles with a large magnetic moment . we discuss in particular the small - amplitude regime and show that the pressure - balanced structures are then governed by the kpii equation which possesses lump solutions . numerical simulations reproduce these special structures , that turn out to be unstable . computation of stable so- lutions lead to large - amplitude purely one - dimensional solutions that appear to be sensitive to the regulariza- tion process , an indication that the regime can not be captured by the drift kinetic approximation and that fi- nite larmor corrections and trapped particles are to be retained . section 5 is the conclusion . * gyrotropic pressure balance*. we start from the pressure balance equation for a static gyrotropic mhd equilibrium@xmath0 ,   \label{mhd}\]]where the current @xmath1 is defined from the maxwell equation as * *  * * @xmath2 , and the pressure tensor @xmath3 is assumed to be gyrotropic . the solvability conditions read @xmath4 and @xmath5 .    in terms of the tension tensor @xmath6 , eq . ( [ mhd ] ) takes the divergence form @xmath7 . here @xmath8 is the unit vector along magnetic field and @xmath9 and @xmath10 , where the perpendicular and parallel pressures @xmath11 and @xmath12 are the sum of the contributions of the various particle species @xmath13 . they are expressed as @xmath14 and @xmath15 , in terms of the distribution functions @xmath16 , which satisfy the stationary drift kinetic equations @xmath17where @xmath18 denotes the gradient along magnetic field , @xmath19 the parallel component of the particle velocity , @xmath20 the electric potential , and @xmath21 the adiabatic invariant ( magnetic moment ) which plays the role of a parameter . these equations are supplemented by the quasi - neutrality condition @xmath22 , that allows one to eliminate the electric potential . we consider partial solutions of the stationary kinetic equations ( kineticeqs ) which are expressed in terms of two integrals of motion : the energy of the particles @xmath23 and their magnetic moment @xmath24 . besides these integrals , the solution can depend on the integral which is a label to each magnetic field line @xcite . the choice @xmath25 , as it will be shown in section 3 , can be matched with the solution found perturbatively for weakly nonlinear mirror modes @xcite . in this case the parallel and perpendicular pressures for the individual species and also the total pressures are functions of @xmath26 only . we write @xmath27 and @xmath28 . as seen in the next subsection , this property plays a very central role in the forthcoming analysis . * identity along @xmath29*. the anisotropic pressure balance equation reads @xcite@xmath30 \frac{(\mathbf{b}\cdot \nabla ) % \mathbf{b}}{4\pi }   \nonumber \\ & & \qquad + \mathbf{b}(\mathbf{b}\cdot \nabla ) \left ( \frac{p_{\perp } -p_{\vert } } { b^{2}}\right ) = 0 . \label{pressure_balance}\end{aligned}\]]projection along the magnetic field gives @xmath31which coincides with eq . ( 9.2 ) of shafranov review @xcite . it is possible to prove that the solvability condition ( parallel - projection ) reduces to an identity by means of  both stationary kinetic equations ( [ kineticeqs ] ) and the quasi - neutrality condition ( see , for instance , @xcite ) . since the pressures depend on @xmath26 only , eq . ( [ parallel - projection ] ) reduces to @xmath32    the existence of this identity means that for stationary states only two scalar equations survive . together with the condition @xmath33 , they provide a closed system of three equations for the three components of the magnetic field .    defining @xmath34 , the perpendicular component of eq . ( [ pressure_balance ] ) reads @xmath35 \frac{% \big [ \left [ \nabla \times \mathbf{b}\right ] \times \mathbf{b}\big ] } { 4\pi } % = 0 ,   \label{perp - equilibrium}\end{aligned}\ ] ] which coincides with eq . ( 9.3 ) of shafranov s review @xcite . * the two - dimensional problem*. in two dimensions , we define the stream function @xmath36 ( or vector potential ) , such that @xmath37 , @xmath38 . in terms of @xmath36 and @xmath39 , @xmath40 \times \mathbf{b}\big ] = \mathbf{e% } _ { x}\big ( -\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial b_{z}^{2}}{\partial x}-\frac{\partial \psi } { \partial x}\delta \psi \big )   \nonumber \\ & & \qquad + \mathbf{e}_{y}\big ( -\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial b_{z}^{2}}{\partial y}-\frac{\partial \psi } { \partial y}\delta \psi \big ) -\mathbf{e}_{z}\left\ { \psi , b_{z}\right\},\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath41 denotes the jacobian . furthermore , @xmath42 , where @xmath43 and @xmath44 .    in eq . ( [ perp - equilibrium ] ) , we now separate the @xmath45-components : @xmath46 b^{2 } \\ & & \quad + \frac{1}{4\pi } \left [ 1+\frac{4\pi } { b^{2}}(p_{\perp } -p_{\vert } ) % \right ] \left ( -\frac{1}{2}\nabla b_{z}^{2}-\nabla \psi \delta \psi \right ) = 0 . \nonumber\end{aligned}\]]equation for @xmath47 component , due to identity ( [ identity3 ] ) , can be written as @xmath48   \nonumber \\ & & + \frac{1}{4\pi } \left [ 1+\frac{4\pi } { b^{2}}(p_{\perp } -p_{\vert } ) \right ] ( \mathbf{b}_{\perp } \cdot \nabla ) b_{z}=0.\end{aligned}\ ] ] in terms of @xmath49 , after integration , it leads to @xmath50interestingly , in the isotropic case ( @xmath51 , we have @xmath52 in a full agreement with the grad - shafranov reduction @xcite . furthermore , because the projection of the full equation on @xmath29 is equal zero , in the 2d case where the fields are functions of @xmath53 and @xmath54 only , the projection of eq . ( [ perp ] ) on @xmath55 vanishes identically . therefore the relevant information is obtained by taking the vector product of eq . ( [ perp ] ) with @xmath55 , in the form @xmath56 \delta \psi . \label{analog}\end{aligned}\]]this equation is supplemented by relation ( [ b - z1 ] ) . equation ( [ analog ] ) can be viewed as analogous to grad - shafranov equation , the main difference being that the pressures are here prescribed as functions of the magnetic field amplitude . therefore , eq . ( [ analog ] ) does not reduce in the isotropic case to grad - shafranov equation , as seen from identity ( [ identity3 ] ) . we now consider the purely two - dimensional geometry where @xmath57 . in this regime , @xmath58 and eq . ( [ analog ] ) reduces to @xmath59 + \big [ 1+\frac{4\pi } { b^{2}}% ( p_{\perp } -p_{\vert } ) \big ] \delta \psi . \label{psi}\]]by means of eq . ( [ identity3 ] ) , it is easily checked that @xmath60therefore , eq . ( [ psi ] ) takes the form@xmath61 \nabla \psi \right\ } = 0   \label{eq - psi}\]]and thus derives from the variational principle @xmath62 with @xmath63 . it rewrites @xmath64 , where the function @xmath65 is found by integrating @xmath66due to identity ( [ identity3 ] ) , we have @xmath67it follows that all the two - dimensional stationary states in anisotropic mhd are stationary points of the functional @xmath68 . its density is a function of @xmath69 only . in the special case of cold electrons , this free energy turns out to identify with the hamiltonian of the static problem @xcite . equations similar to ( [ eq - psi ] ) arise in the context of pattern structures in thermal convection . as shown in ercolaniindiknewellpassot , such equations represent integrable hydrodynamic systems . as in the usual one - dimensional gas dynamics , these systems display breaking phenomena where the solution looses its smoothness at finite distance , due to the formation of folds . as a consequence , these models require some regularization . for patterns , the authors of ercolaniindiknewellpassot supplement in the equation an additional linear term involving a square laplacian . in our case , this procedure corresponds to the replacement of @xmath68 by @xmath70 , with a constant @xmath71 . in plasma physics , regularization can originate from finite larmor radius ( flr ) corrections , which are not retained in the present analysis based on the drift kinetic equation ( see , e.g. @xcite ) . * equations of state and their regularization*. to specify the model , we consider stationary mirror structures which result from the non - linear development of the mirror instability ( mi ) , one of the slowest instabilities in plasma physics . the characteristic frequencies of mirror modes are much smaller the ion gyro - frequency , which suggests to use ( at least at sufficiently large scales ) a description based on the drift approximation for the particle distribution functions which , for stationary states , reduces to eq . ( [ kineticeqs ] ) .    in order to specify these distribution functions , we need to connect the initial state ( where both ions and electrons species are assumed bimaxwellian ) with the stationary distribution functions . in the weakly nonlinear regime that develops near threshold , the transition from the initial homogeneous state to the weakly nonlinear one is slow in time , so that , to leading order , the distribution function @xmath16 as a function of @xmath24 and @xmath72 retains its form during the evolution @xcite . therefore , the function @xmath73 can be determined by matching with the initial distribution function @xmath74 ,   % \label{bi - maxwell } $ ] which corresponds to @xmath75 and @xmath76 , where @xmath77 . here @xmath78 and @xmath79 are the initial perpendicular and transverse temperatures , @xmath80 the initial homogeneous magnetic field , and @xmath81 the parallel thermal velocity . as a result of the matching , we get @xcite @xmath82 . \label{g - alpha}\]]note that this function has the boltzmann form with respect to @xmath72 but display , at fixed @xmath72 , an exponential growth relatively to @xmath83 when @xmath84 , a necessary condition for mi . such a growth , however , leads to a singular behavior of the pressures as functions of @xmath26 . indeed , for the distribution function ( g - alpha ) , the parallel pressure is @xcite:@xmath85where @xmath86 , @xmath87 is the parameter characterizing the anisotropy of distribution function @xmath88 , and @xmath89 in the case of a proton - electron plasma . the singularities at @xmath90 correspond to the magnetic field @xmath91 in the limiting case of cold electrons , @xmath92 displays a pole singularity . here , @xmath93 and the anisotropy parameter @xmath94 correspond to ions only . such an equation of state was previously derived by a quasi - normal closure of the fluid hierarchy prs06 . the above singularities are presumably related to an overestimated contribution from large @xmath24 , corresponding either to small @xmath26 or to large a transverse kinetic energy . in both cases , the applicability of the drift approximation breaks down and we are thus led to introduce some cut - off type correction near @xmath95 . in a simple variant , we take @xmath96 at @xmath97 , with some positive constant @xmath98 , and @xmath99 retains its original form ( [ g - alpha ] ) for @xmath100 . for cold electrons case , the parallel ion pressure is modified into @xmath101 with @xmath102,\ ] ] where @xmath103 - 1}{\exp [ -r(b_{0}-b_{s})]-1},\ ] ] @xmath104 is a ( small ) constant , and @xmath105 . noticeably , regularization leads to a non - singular positive pressure for all @xmath26 , including when @xmath106 . the modification for @xmath107 in the case of hot electrons is not specified here because the expressions are algebraically much more cumbersome but do not involve any additional difficulty .    * kp soliton*. we now show that the functional @xmath68 we previously introduced has the meaning of a free energy . in the weakly nonlinear regime near the mi threshold , the temporal behavior of the mirror modes can be described by a 3d model @xcite , that in the present 2d geometry reads @xmath108 with the free energy @xmath109 d\mathbf{r . } \label{f-3d}\]]here @xmath110 denotes the dimensionless magnetic field fluctuations and @xmath111 the distance from mi threshold . the third term in @xmath112 originates for the flr corrections , and @xmath113 is a nonlinear coupling coefficient which is positive for bi - maxwellian distributions . in eq . ( asymp ) , the operator @xmath114 is a positive definite operator ( in the fourier representation it reduces to @xmath115 ) , so that eq . ( asymp ) has a generalized gradient form . let us now show that this result can be obtained from the functional @xmath116 defined in ( [ free - general ] ) . we isolate the perturbation @xmath117 in the stream function @xmath118 with @xmath119 as @xmath120 , so that the mean magnetic field @xmath121 is directed along the @xmath54-axis . we then expand eq . ( [ free - general ] ) in series with respect to @xmath110 . for the sake of simplicity , we restrict the analysis to the case of cold electrons . the expansion of the integrand @xmath122 in @xmath112 has then the form @xmath123 \nonumber \\ & & \qquad = n_{0}t_{\parallel } [ \left ( \beta _ { \vert } ^{-1}-1\right ) + u\left ( a+2\beta _ { \vert } ^{-1}-1\right )   \nonumber \\ & & \qquad + u^{2}\left ( -a^{2}+a+\beta _ { \vert } ^{-1}\right ) -u^{3 } a^{2}\left ( a-1\right ) + .... ]   \label{expansion}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we use the usual notation @xmath124 .    as well known ( see , e.g. @xcite ) , near threshold , mi develops in quasi - transverse directions relative to @xmath121 . this means that , in the 2d geometry , @xmath125 and , with a good accuracy , @xmath110 coincides with @xmath126 . however , in the expansion of @xmath127 , it is necessary to keep the second term , quadratic with respect to @xmath128 . the linear term in expansion of @xmath68 vanishes and the quadratic terms is given by @xmath129 \varphi _ { x}^{2}+\big [ a-1+\frac{2}{\beta } _ { \vert } \big ] \varphi _ { y}^{2}\big \ } dxdy.\]]where the factor @xmath130 defines the mi threshold @xmath131 ( that the present equations of state accurately reprocuces ) . it is also seen that for @xmath132 , @xmath133 , in agreement with the quasi - one - dimensional development of mi near threshold . in this case , @xmath134 coincides with the quadratic term in ( [ f-3d ] ) , up to a simple rescaling and to the flr contribution , furthermore , the cubic term in ( [ expansion ] ) gives the nonlinear coupling coefficient @xmath135 . as a consequence , @xmath68 , introduced in the previous section , reduces to the free energy of the asymptotic model . the temporal equation for @xmath128 has also the generalized gradient form originating from ( [ asymp ] ) , @xmath136 for which the associated stationary equation reads @xmath137where the linear operator @xmath138 is elliptic or hyperbolic depending on the sign of @xmath139 . for @xmath140 ( above threshold ) , this operator is hyperbolic , while below threshold it is elliptic and thus invertible in the class of functions vanishing at infinity . remarkably , in the latter case , eq . ( [ stat - phi ] ) identifies with the soliton for kp equation called lump . in standard notations , lump is indeed a solution of the stationary kp - ii equation , @xmath141where @xmath142 is the lump velocity . when comparing this equation with ( stat - phi ) we see that @xmath143 plays the role of the lump velocity @xmath144 and @xmath145 . the lump solution was first discovered numerically by petviashvili petviashvili using the method now known as the petviashvili scheme ( see the next section ) . the analytical solution was later on obtained in bimmz . in our notation , it reads@xmath146 ^{2}}.\]]this function vanishes algebraically at the infinity like @xmath147 . in the center region @xmath148 , the magnetic field displays a hole with a minimum at @xmath149 equal to @xmath150 . in the outer region , the magnetic lump has two symmetric humps with maximum values @xmath151 at @xmath152 and @xmath153 comes from the hole region , providing a negative value to @xmath154 , in complete agreement with @xcite .    * numerical solutions  the methods*. in the 2d case , our regularized model equation for stationary pressure - balanced structures has a variational form @xmath155 -\partial _ { y } \left [ \frac{\varphi _ { y}}{(1+u)}\frac{dg}{du}\right]+\nu \delta ^{2}\varphi = 0 . \label{variational_form_reg}\ ] ] clearly , eq . ( [ variational_form_reg ] ) describes stationary points @xmath156 of the functional @xmath157\,dx\,dy$ ] , with some constant parameter @xmath158 . ( in this expression and everywhere below we use dimensionless variables ) . we applied two numerical methods to solve eq . ( [ variational_form_reg ] ) . the first one is a generalization of the well known gradient method which corresponds to a dissipative dynamics along an auxiliary time - like variable @xmath159 of the form @xmath160 , with a positively definite linear operator @xmath161 . it is clear that attractors in the phase space of the above dynamical system are stable solutions of eq . ( [ variational_form_reg ] ) . unstable solutions however can not be found by this method . furthermore , the linear part of eq . ( [ variational_form_reg ] ) is of the form @xmath162 . the coefficient @xmath163 is proportional to @xmath164 ( introduced in the previous section ) and @xmath165 is positive within the adiabatic approximation . when these two are positive , the operator @xmath166 is elliptic and it is possible to employ the so - called petviashvili method @xcite . it is a specific method for finding localized solutions of equations of the form @xmath167 , $ ] with a positively definite linear operator @xmath168 and a nonlinear part @xmath169 $ ] . note that in our case the fourier image of @xmath168 is @xmath170 in its simplest form , the iteration scheme of the petviashvili method reads @xmath171)\left ( \frac{\int \varphi _ { n}\widehat{m}\varphi _ { n}\,dx\,dy}{\int \varphi _ { n}n[\varphi _ { n}]\,dx\,dy% } \right ) ^{-\gamma } , \]]where @xmath172 is a positive parameter in the range @xmath173 . the corresponding multiplier strongly affects the structure of attractive regions in the phase space . it is worth noting that if the operator @xmath174 is hyperbolic , solutions of the problem are not localized with respect to both @xmath53 and @xmath54 coordinates , and will be periodic or more generally quasiperiodic @xcite .    , @xmath175 , @xmath176 ( in units of @xmath80 ) , and @xmath177 . the value @xmath178 prescribes an aspect ratio @xmath179.,scaledwidth=45.0% ]     +   +     * the results*. we performed computations with both numerical methods using fast fourier transform numerical routines for the evaluation of the linear operators . periodic boundary conditions for a computational square @xmath180 were assumed . for the gradient method , we used the simplest first - order euler scheme for stepping along @xmath181 , with @xmath182 . the operator @xmath183 was taken in a form giving stable computation , namely @xmath184 $ ] . as for the petviashvili method , the value @xmath185 was used , leading , after an erratic transient , to a convergence of the iterations to unstable solutions of the variational equation ( [ variational_form_reg ] ) . the main results of our computations can be formulated as follows . there do exist unstable localized solutions of eq . ( [ variational_form_reg ] ) , which are similar to the lump solutions of kpii equation , when written in terms of @xmath186 ( fig . [ lump ] ) . for asymptotically small @xmath164 , they accurately coincide with kp solutions , independently of the electron temperature , as it should be . such low - amplitude stationary states do not depend on the particular choice of the regularization of @xmath187 . no other kinds of solutions were found with the petviashvili method . when the gradient method is used , large amplitudes @xmath188 are achieved in many cases , and the final result turns out to be dependent on the choice of the parameters @xmath189 and @xmath104 in the regularized function @xmath65 . without regularization , no smooth stationary state is approached . instead , a singularity occurs . differently , when a regularized @xmath65 with parameters @xmath190 and @xmath191 is used , the final state identifies with a one - dimensional stripe in the form of a magnetic hole , as shown in fig . [ stripe ] that also displays typical stages of the `` gradient '' evolution . in all simulations , the magnetic field in the stripe was smaller than the ` singular ' magnetic field @xmath192 given by eq . ( [ singularb ] ) . for increasing @xmath189 , the magnetic field in the stripe tends to decrease , down to 0 . for initial conditions in the form of a slightly perturbed 2d lump , the final result is always a one - dimensional stripe of hole type , which demonstrates the instability of the 2d lump , in full agreement with the analytical prediction @xcite .    in no cases stable 2d structures localized both in @xmath53 and @xmath54 directions were found . instead , the gradient method showed that stable structures can only be one - dimensional , transverse to the magnetic field . an initial localized perturbation of sufficiently high amplitude develops into an increasingly long structure along the @xmath54 axis , and eventually reaches the boundary of the computational domain . the question arises whether the 1d shock solutions obtained in @xcite ( for which @xmath193 ) would identify with the present solution when @xmath194 , a limit which is unreachable in the present numerics . it is possible that the presence of the bi - laplacian regularization leads to overshooting in the shock solution , resulting in the convergence towards solutions where @xmath195 . a detailed analysis was presented for the grad - shafranov equations describing static force - balanced mirror structures with anisotropic pressures given by equations of state derived from drift kinetic equations , when assuming an adiabatic evolution from bi - maxwellian initial conditions . it turns out that in two dimensions , the problem is amenable to a variational formulation with a free energy provided by the space integral of the parallel tension . slightly below the mirror instability threshold , small amplitude solutions associated to kpii lumps are obtained and shown to be unstable . differently , when considering stable subcritical structures , the drift kinetic approximation breaks down , as the deep magnetic holes obtained by a gradient method appear to be strongly sensitive to the regularization process , an effect which in a more realistic description could be provided by flr corrections and/or particle trapping . the authors thank the referees for valubable remarks . this work was supported by cnrs pics programme 6073 and rfbr grant 12 - 02 - 91062-cnrs - a . t.p . and p.l.s . benefited from support from insu - cnrs pnst . the work of e.k . and was also supported by the ras presidium program `` fundamental problems of nonlinear dynamics in mathematical and physical sciences '' and grant nsh 6170.2012.2 . h. grad , _ notes on magneto - hydrodynamics i - iii : general fluid equations _ , cims , new york university , doc . nyo-6486-i(iii ) ( 1956 ) ; h. grad and h. rubin , _ proceedings of the second united nations international conference on the peaceful uses of atomic energy ( un , geneva ) _ , vol 31 , session a-5 , p/386 , pp . 190 - 197 ( 1958 ) .
Abstract:

Answer: based on grad - shafranov - like equations , a gyrotropic plasma where the pressures in the static regime are only functions of the amplitude of the local magnetic field is shown to be amenable to a variational principle with a free energy density given by the parallel tension . this approach is used to demonstrate that small- amplitude static holes constructed slightly below the mirror instability threshold identify with lump solitons of kpii equation and turn out to be unstable . it is also shown that regularizing effects such as finite larmor radius corrections can not be ignored in the description of large - amplitude mirror structures .


Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: this paper presents a post - mortem analysis of the english and spanish lexical sample tasks of senseval-2 . two closely related questions are considered . first , to what extent did the competing systems did systems tend to be redundant and have success with many of the same test instances , or were they complementary and able to disambiguate different portions of the instance space ? second , how much did the difficulty of the test instances vary ? are there test instances that proved unusually difficult to disambiguate relative to other instances ? we address the first question via a series of pairwise comparisons among the participating systems that measures their agreement via the kappa statistic . we also introduce a simple measure of the degree to which systems are complementary called _ optimal combination_. we analyze the second question by rating the difficulty of test instances relative to the number of systems that were able to disambiguate them correctly . nearly all systems that received official scores in the spanish and english lexical sample tasks of senseval-2 are included in this study . there are 23 systems included from the english lexical sample task and eight from the spanish . table [ tab : sum ] lists the systems and shows the number of test instances that each disambiguated correctly , both by part of speech and in total . lrrrr & + & & & & +   + & 1754 & 1806 & 768 & 4328 ( 1.00 ) +   + jhu_final & 1196 & 1022 & 562 & 2780 ( 0.64 ) + smuls & 1219 & 1016 & 528 & 2763 ( 0.64 ) + kunlp & 1171 & 1040 & 513 & 2724 ( 0.63 ) + cs224n & 1198 & 945 & 527 & 2670 ( 0.62 ) + lia & 1177 & 966 & 510 & 2653 ( 0.61 ) + talp & 1149 & 927 & 495 & 2571 ( 0.59 ) + duluth3 & 1137 & 840 & 497 & 2473 ( 0.57 ) + umcp & 1081 & 891 & 487 & 2459 ( 0.57 ) + ehu_all & 1069 & 891 & 480 & 2440 ( 0.56 ) + duluth4 & 1065 & 806 & 476 & 2346 ( 0.54 ) + duluth2 & 1056 & 795 & 483 & 2334 ( 0.54 ) + lesk_corp & 960 & 804 & 454 & 2218 ( 0.51 ) + duluthb & 1004 & 729 & 467 & 2200 ( 0.51 ) + uned_ls_t & 987 & 699 & 469 & 2155 ( 0.50 ) + common & 880 & 728 & 453 & 2061 ( 0.48 ) + alicante & 427 & 866 & 486 & 1779 ( 0.41 ) + uned_ls_u & 781 & 519 & 437 & 1736 ( 0.40 ) + clr_ls & 602 & 393 & 272 & 1267 ( 0.29 ) + iit2 & 541 & 348 & 166 & 1054 ( 0.24 ) + iit1 & 516 & 337 & 182 & 1034 ( 0.24 ) + lesk & 467 & 328 & 182 & 977 ( 0.23 ) + lesk_def & 438 & 159 & 108 & 704 ( 0.16 ) + random & 303 & 153 & 155 & 611 ( 0.14 ) +   + & 799 & 745 & 681 & 2225 ( 1.00 ) +   + jhu & 560 & 478 & 546 & 1584 ( 0.71 ) + cs224 & 520 & 443 & 526 & 1489 ( 0.67 ) + umcp & 482 & 435 & 479 & 1396 ( 0.63 ) + duluth8 & 494 & 382 & 494 & 1369 ( 0.62 ) + duluth7 & 470 & 374 & 480 & 1324 ( 0.60 ) + duluth9 & 445 & 359 & 446 & 1250 ( 0.56 ) + duluthy & 411 & 325 & 434 & 1170 ( 0.53 ) + alicante & 269 & 381 & 468 & 1118 ( 0.50 ) +    [ tab : sum ] assessing agreement among systems sheds light on whether their combined performance is potentially more accurate than that of any of the individual systems . if several systems are largely in agreement , then there is little benefit in combining them since they are redundant and will simply reinforce one another . however , if some systems disambiguate instances that others do not , then they are complementary and it may be possible to combine them to take advantage of the different strengths of each system to improve overall accuracy .    the kappa statistic @xcite is a measure of agreement between multiple systems ( or judges ) that is scaled by the agreement that would be expected just by chance . a value of 1.00 suggests complete agreement , while 0.00 indicates pure chance agreement . negative values indicate agreement less than what would be expected by chance . @xcite points out that it is difficult to specify a particular value of kappa as being generally indicative of agreement . as such we simply use kappa as a tool for comparison and relative ranking . a detailed discussion on the use of kappa in natural language processing is presented in @xcite .    to study agreement we have made a series of pairwise comparisons among the systems included in the english and spanish lexical sample tasks . each pairwise combination is represented in a 2 @xmath0 2 contingency table , where one cell represents the number of test instances that both systems disambiguate correctly , one cell represents the number of instances where both systems are incorrect , and there are two cells to represent the counts when only one system is correct . agreement does not imply accuracy , since two systems may get a large number of the same instances incorrect and have a high rate of agreement . tables [ tab : eng - kappa ] and [ tab : spa - kappa ] show the system pairs in the english and spanish lexical sample tasks that exhibit the highest level of agreement according to the kappa statistic . the values in the both  one  zero column indicate the percentage of instances where both systems are correct , where only one is correct , and where neither is correct . the top 15 pairs are shown for nouns and verbs , and the top 10 for adjectives . a complete list would include about 250 pairs for each part of speech for english and 24 such pairs for spanish . lcc & & +   + common lesk_corp & 0.49 0.06 0.44 & 0.87 + duluth2 duluth3 & 0.60 0.08 0.32 & 0.82 + lesk_corp umcp & 0.53 0.11 0.36 & 0.78 + duluth2 duluthb & 0.54 0.14 0.32 & 0.70 + iit1 iit2 & 0.24 0.13 0.63 & 0.69 + duluth3 duluthb & 0.56 0.15 0.29 & 0.68 + common umcp & 0.48 0.16 0.36 & 0.68 + ehu_all umcp & 0.55 0.17 0.29 & 0.64 + uned_ls_t uned_ls_u & 0.41 0.19 0.40 & 0.63 + duluth3 duluth4 & 0.55 0.18 0.27 & 0.61 + duluth2 duluth4 & 0.52 0.19 0.29 & 0.60 + duluth4 duluthb & 0.51 0.19 0.29 & 0.59 + ehu_all lesk_corp & 0.50 0.20 0.30 & 0.59 + cs224n duluth3 & 0.58 0.19 0.24 & 0.58 + cs224n duluth4 & 0.55 0.19 0.25 & 0.58 +   + common lesk_corp & 0.39 0.06 0.55 & 0.88 + duluth2 duluth3 & 0.43 0.07 0.50 & 0.85 + duluth3 duluth4 & 0.39 0.14 0.47 & 0.72 + duluth2 duluth4 & 0.38 0.15 0.47 & 0.69 + lesk_corp umcp & 0.38 0.17 0.44 & 0.65 + common umcp & 0.36 0.18 0.46 & 0.65 + cs224n duluth3 & 0.40 0.20 0.40 & 0.60 + cs224n duluth4 & 0.38 0.21 0.41 & 0.59 + cs224n duluth2 & 0.38 0.21 0.40 & 0.57 + uned_ls_t uned_ls_u & 0.24 0.20 0.55 & 0.56 + duluth3 lia & 0.39 0.23 0.38 & 0.54 + lesk_corp talp & 0.36 0.23 0.40 & 0.54 + cs224n lia & 0.41 0.24 0.35 & 0.53 + common talp & 0.34 0.24 0.42 & 0.52 + kunlp talp & 0.42 0.24 0.33 & 0.51 +   + common lesk_corp & 0.59 0.00 0.41 & 0.99 + duluth2 duluth3 & 0.63 0.03 0.34 & 0.93 + lesk_corp umcp & 0.58 0.07 0.35 & 0.86 + duluth2 duluthb & 0.59 0.07 0.35 & 0.86 + duluth3 duluthb & 0.60 0.07 0.34 & 0.86 + common umcp & 0.58 0.07 0.35 & 0.86 + duluth4 duluthb & 0.55 0.14 0.32 & 0.71 + duluth3 duluth4 & 0.57 0.14 0.30 & 0.71 + cs224n duluth3 & 0.60 0.13 0.27 & 0.70 + cs224n duluth2 & 0.59 0.14 0.27 & 0.70 +    [ tab : eng - kappa ]    lcc & & +   + duluth7 duluth8 & 0.57 0.11 0.32 & 0.76 + umcp duluth9 & 0.50 0.17 0.33 & 0.65 + duluth7 duluthy & 0.49 0.21 0.30 & 0.57 + umcp duluthy & 0.48 0.21 0.31 & 0.56 + duluth8 duluthy & 0.50 0.21 0.29 & 0.56 + umcp duluth8 & 0.50 0.23 0.27 & 0.51 + umcp duluth7 & 0.50 0.23 0.27 & 0.51 + cs224 umcp & 0.51 0.24 0.25 & 0.49 + duluth9 duluthy & 0.44 0.26 0.30 & 0.47 + duluth8 duluth9 & 0.47 0.27 0.27 & 0.45 + cs224 duluth9 & 0.47 0.27 0.26 & 0.44 + cs224 jhu & 0.55 0.25 0.20 & 0.43 + cs224 duluth8 & 0.51 0.27 0.22 & 0.42 + jhu umcp & 0.51 0.29 0.21 & 0.38 + jhu duluth8 & 0.53 0.28 0.19 & 0.37 +   + duluth7 duluth8 & 0.48 0.08 0.44 & 0.84 + duluth8 duluth9 & 0.44 0.14 0.42 & 0.72 + umcp duluth8 & 0.48 0.14 0.37 & 0.71 + umcp duluth9 & 0.46 0.16 0.38 & 0.69 + duluth7 duluth9 & 0.42 0.16 0.42 & 0.68 + umcp duluth7 & 0.47 0.16 0.37 & 0.68 + duluth8 duluthy & 0.44 0.16 0.39 & 0.67 + duluth9 duluthy & 0.42 0.18 0.40 & 0.65 + duluth7 duluthy & 0.43 0.18 0.39 & 0.64 + umcp duluthy & 0.46 0.19 0.35 & 0.61 + cs224 umcp & 0.49 0.19 0.32 & 0.61 + cs224 duluth8 & 0.44 0.25 0.32 & 0.50 + alicante umcp & 0.42 0.25 0.33 & 0.50 + cs224 duluth7 & 0.43 0.26 0.32 & 0.48 + cs224 jhu & 0.49 0.25 0.26 & 0.48 +   + duluth7 duluth8 & 0.69 0.06 0.25 & 0.85 + duluth7 duluthy & 0.60 0.14 0.26 & 0.68 + umcp duluthy & 0.60 0.15 0.26 & 0.67 + umcp duluth9 & 0.61 0.14 0.25 & 0.67 + duluth8 duluthy & 0.61 0.15 0.24 & 0.67 + umcp duluth8 & 0.64 0.15 0.21 & 0.64 + duluth9 duluthy & 0.56 0.18 0.26 & 0.60 + duluth8 duluth9 & 0.61 0.17 0.22 & 0.59 + umcp duluth7 & 0.62 0.17 0.21 & 0.59 + duluth7 duluth9 & 0.58 0.20 0.22 & 0.54 +    [ tab : spa - kappa ]    the utility of kappa agreement is confirmed in that system pairs known to be very similar have correspondingly high measures . in table [ tab : eng - kappa ] , duluth2 and duluth3 exhibit a high kappa value for all parts of speech . this is expected since duluth3 is an ensemble approach that includes duluth2 as one of its members . the same relationship exists between duluth7 and duluth8 in the spanish lexical sample , and comparable behavior is seen in table [ tab : spa - kappa ] .    a more surprising case is the even higher level of agreement between the most common sense baseline and the lesk corpus baseline shown in table 2 . this is not necessarily expected , and suggests that lesk corpus may not be finding a significant number of matches between the senseval contexts and the wordnet glosses ( as the lesk algorithm would hope to do ) but instead may be relying on a simple default in many cases .    in previous work @xcite we propose a 50 - 25 - 25 rule that suggests that about half of the instances in a supervised word sense disambiguation evaluation will be fairly easy for most systems to resolve , another quarter will be harder but possible for at least some systems , and that the final quarter will be very difficult for any system to resolve . this same idea could also be expressed by stating that the kappa agreement between two word sense disambiguation systems will likely be around 0.50 . in fact this is a common result in the full set of pairwise comparisons , particularly for overall results not broken down by part of speech . tables 2 and 3 only list the largest kappa values , but even there kappa quickly reduces towards 0.50 . these same tables show that it is rare for two systems to agree on more than 60% of the correctly disambiguated instances . lcc & & +   + kunlp smuls & 0.49 0.39 0.12 & 0.11 + smuls talp & 0.48 0.39 0.13 & 0.11 + cs224n kunlp & 0.48 0.39 0.13 & 0.11 + ehu_all smuls & 0.47 0.40 0.13 & 0.10 + cs224n talp & 0.48 0.39 0.14 & 0.13 + jhu_final kunlp & 0.49 0.37 0.14 & 0.16 + smuls umcp & 0.45 0.41 0.14 & 0.10 + kunlp lia & 0.48 0.38 0.14 & 0.14 + lia talp & 0.47 0.39 0.14 & 0.13 + jhu_final talp & 0.48 0.38 0.14 & 0.15 + duluth3 kunlp & 0.47 0.38 0.15 & 0.15 + cs224n ehu_all & 0.48 0.38 0.15 & 0.16 + ehu_all lia & 0.47 0.38 0.15 & 0.15 + ehu_all jhu_final & 0.48 0.36 0.16 & 0.19 + duluth3 talp & 0.47 0.38 0.16 & 0.17 +   + jhu_final kunlp & 0.34 0.46 0.20 & 0.06 + ehu_all jhu_final & 0.31 0.44 0.21 & 0.07 + ehu_all smuls & 0.31 0.44 0.21 & 0.07 + ehu_all kunlp & 0.33 0.41 0.22 & 0.13 + kunlp smuls & 0.36 0.43 0.22 & 0.13 + cs224n ehu_all & 0.29 0.45 0.22 & 0.05 + ehu_all lia & 0.30 0.44 0.22 & 0.08 + cs224n kunlp & 0.33 0.44 0.23 & 0.11 + alicante ehu_all & 0.26 0.47 0.23 & 0.03 + kunlp lia & 0.34 0.42 0.23 & 0.14 + jhu_final talp & 0.32 0.44 0.24 & 0.12 + duluth3 ehu_all & 0.26 0.46 0.24 & 0.05 + ehu_all talp & 0.30 0.41 0.24 & 0.13 + alicante jhu_final & 0.30 0.45 0.24 & 0.09 + jhu_final umcp & 0.30 0.45 0.24 & 0.09 +   + alicante jhu_final & 0.46 0.37 0.08 & 0.03 + alicante smuls & 0.41 0.41 0.09 & -0.04 + alicante cs224n & 0.42 0.40 0.09 & -0.01 + alicante kunlp & 0.41 0.39 0.11 & 0.03 + alicante lia & 0.41 0.39 0.11 & 0.03 + alicante duluth3 & 0.40 0.40 0.11 & 0.02 + alicante talp & 0.40 0.41 0.11 & 0.02 + alicante ehu_all & 0.41 0.39 0.11 & 0.05 + alicante umcp & 0.39 0.40 0.12 & 0.04 + alicante duluth2 & 0.39 0.40 0.12 & 0.03 +    [ tab : eng - opt ]    lcc & & +   + alicante jhu & 0.29 0.32 0.11 & 0.06 + alicante duluth7 & 0.27 0.34 0.12 & 0.03 + alicante duluthy & 0.25 0.35 0.12 & 0.01 + alicante duluth8 & 0.28 0.32 0.13 & 0.08 + alicante cs224 & 0.28 0.32 0.13 & 0.09 + alicante umcp & 0.26 0.33 0.14 & 0.06 + alicante duluth9 & 0.26 0.31 0.16 & 0.14 + jhu duluthy & 0.46 0.36 0.18 & 0.24 + jhu duluth7 & 0.51 0.29 0.19 & 0.35 + jhu duluth8 & 0.53 0.28 0.19 & 0.37 + cs224 jhu & 0.55 0.25 0.20 & 0.43 + jhu duluth9 & 0.46 0.34 0.20 & 0.29 + jhu umcp & 0.51 0.29 0.21 & 0.38 + cs224 duluth7 & 0.49 0.30 0.22 & 0.36 + cs224 duluth8 & 0.51 0.27 0.22 & 0.42 +   + jhu duluthy & 0.39 0.38 0.23 & 0.23 + jhu umcp & 0.48 0.27 0.25 & 0.44 + jhu duluth9 & 0.39 0.36 0.26 & 0.29 + jhu duluth8 & 0.42 0.32 0.26 & 0.35 + cs224 jhu & 0.49 0.25 0.26 & 0.48 + jhu duluth7 & 0.42 0.32 0.26 & 0.36 + alicante jhu & 0.45 0.26 0.29 & 0.47 + cs224 duluthy & 0.43 0.27 0.30 & 0.46 + alicante cs224 & 0.41 0.28 0.31 & 0.44 + alicante duluthy & 0.35 0.34 0.31 & 0.32 + cs224 umcp & 0.49 0.19 0.32 & 0.61 + cs224 duluth7 & 0.43 0.26 0.32 & 0.48 + cs224 duluth8 & 0.44 0.25 0.32 & 0.50 + cs224 duluth9 & 0.41 0.27 0.32 & 0.47 + alicante umcp & 0.42 0.25 0.33 & 0.50 +   + jhu duluth8 & 0.66 0.22 0.12 & 0.39 + jhu duluth7 & 0.64 0.24 0.12 & 0.36 + jhu duluthy & 0.56 0.31 0.12 & 0.25 + alicante jhu & 0.62 0.26 0.13 & 0.33 + jhu duluth9 & 0.59 0.29 0.13 & 0.29 + cs224 jhu & 0.70 0.16 0.13 & 0.51 + jhu umcp & 0.64 0.23 0.13 & 0.38 + alicante cs224 & 0.61 0.24 0.15 & 0.39 + cs224 duluth8 & 0.66 0.19 0.16 & 0.50 + cs224 duluth7 & 0.64 0.20 0.16 & 0.49 +    [ tab : spa - opt ]    crrrr & & & & +   + 0 & 59 ( 16 ) & 174 ( 6 ) & 29 ( 8) & 262 ( 8) + 1 & 51 ( 15 ) & 116 ( 10 ) & 26 ( 14 ) & 193 ( 12 ) + 2 & 59 ( 18 ) & 122 ( 12 ) & 41 ( 21 ) & 222 ( 15 ) + 3 & 64 ( 19 ) & 117 ( 16 ) & 29 ( 23 ) & 210 ( 18 ) + 4 & 84 ( 17 ) & 102 ( 16 ) & 28 ( 18 ) & 214 ( 17 ) + 5 & 76 ( 23 ) & 76 ( 18 ) & 24 ( 20 ) & 176 ( 21 ) + 6 & 53 ( 28 ) & 61 ( 30 ) & 23 ( 31 ) & 137 ( 29 ) + 7 & 51 ( 29 ) & 65 ( 22 ) & 23 ( 34 ) & 139 ( 27 ) + 8 & 62 ( 27 ) & 58 ( 34 ) & 18 ( 31 ) & 138 ( 30 ) + 9 & 47 ( 32 ) & 69 ( 28 ) & 17 ( 26 ) & 133 ( 29 ) + 10 & 62 ( 28 ) & 61 ( 32 ) & 18 ( 30 ) & 141 ( 30 ) + 11 & 55 ( 39 ) & 56 ( 26 ) & 21 ( 38 ) & 132 ( 34 ) + 12 & 80 ( 40 ) & 61 ( 41 ) & 22 ( 35 ) & 163 ( 40 ) + 13 & 86 ( 58 ) & 56 ( 34 ) & 21 ( 45 ) & 163 ( 48 ) + 14 & 125 ( 65 ) & 62 ( 49 ) & 33 ( 51 ) & 220 ( 59 ) + 15 & 131 ( 77 ) & 125 ( 99 ) & 36 ( 60 ) & 292 ( 84 ) + 16 & 141 ( 83 ) & 107 ( 117 ) & 61 ( 70 ) & 309 ( 92 ) + 17 & 133 ( 75 ) & 100 ( 162 ) & 86 ( 74 ) & 319 ( 101 ) + 18 & 92 ( 73 ) & 80 ( 203 ) & 102 ( 80 ) & 274 ( 113 ) + 19 & 97 ( 68 ) & 59 ( 170 ) & 49 ( 77 ) & 205 ( 100 ) + 20 & 65 ( 66 ) & 38 ( 192 ) & 30 ( 49 ) & 133 ( 96 ) + 21 & 42 ( 68 ) & 15 ( 155 ) & 17 ( 47 ) & 74 ( 79 ) + 22 & 29 ( 70 ) & 15 ( 73 ) & 7 ( 39 ) & 51 ( 67 ) + 23 & 10 ( 49 ) & 11 ( 52 ) & 7 ( 38 ) & 28 ( 47 ) +   + 0 & 50 ( 16 ) & 126 ( 12 ) & 52 ( 24 ) & 228 ( 16 ) + 1 & 81 ( 18 ) & 63 ( 17 ) & 32 ( 36 ) & 176 ( 21 ) + 2 & 63 ( 24 ) & 69 ( 18 ) & 42 ( 50 ) & 174 ( 28 ) + 3 & 63 ( 27 ) & 55 ( 23 ) & 39 ( 81 ) & 157 ( 39 ) + 4 & 74 ( 32 ) & 47 ( 23 ) & 43 ( 101 ) & 164 ( 47 ) + 5 & 94 ( 35 ) & 49 ( 28 ) & 35 ( 77 ) & 178 ( 42 ) + 6 & 87 ( 40 ) & 61 ( 39 ) & 57 ( 90 ) & 205 ( 53 ) + 7 & 182 ( 47 ) & 94 ( 46 ) & 88 ( 93 ) & 364 ( 58 ) + 8 & 105 ( 44 ) & 181 ( 62 ) & 293 ( 166 ) & 579 ( 111 ) +    [ tab : instbytrain ]    lr|lr & & & + collaborate - v ( 30 ) & 20.2 & circuit - n ( 85 ) & 10.7 + solemn - a ( 25 ) & 18.3 & sense - n ( 53 ) & 10.6 + holiday - n ( 31 ) & 17.7 & authority - n ( 92 ) & 10.5 + dyke - n ( 28 ) & 17.5 & replace - v ( 45 ) & 10.4 + graceful - a ( 29 ) & 17.3 & restraint - n ( 45 ) & 10.3 + vital - a ( 38 ) & 16.7 & live - v ( 67 ) & 10.2 + detention - n ( 32 ) & 16.5 & treat - v ( 44 ) & 10.1 + faithful - a ( 23 ) & 16.5 & free - a ( 82 ) & 10.0 + yew - n ( 28 ) & 16.1 & nature - n ( 46 ) & 10.0 + chair - n ( 69 ) & 16.0 & simple - a ( 66 ) & 9.8 + ferret - v ( 1 ) & 16.0 & dress - v ( 59 ) & 9.7 + blind - a ( 55 ) & 15.7 & cool - a ( 52 ) & 9.7 + lady - n ( 53 ) & 15.5 & bar - n ( 151 ) & 9.5 + spade - n ( 33 ) & 15.3 & stress - n ( 39 ) & 9.5 + hearth - n ( 32 ) & 15.1 & channel - n ( 73 ) & 9.2 + face - v ( 93 ) & 15.1 & match - v ( 42 ) & 9.0 + green - a ( 94 ) & 14.9 & natural - a ( 103 ) & 9.0 + fatigue - n ( 43 ) & 14.9 & serve - v ( 51 ) & 8.8 + oblique - a ( 29 ) & 14.3 & train - v ( 63 ) & 8.7 + nation - n ( 37 ) & 14.0 & post - n ( 79 ) & 8.7 + church - n ( 64 ) & 13.8 & fine - a ( 70 ) & 8.6 + local - a ( 38 ) & 13.6 & drift - v ( 32 ) & 7.7 + fit - a ( 29 ) & 13.4 & leave - v ( 66 ) & 7.7 + use - v ( 76 ) & 13.4 & play - v ( 66 ) & 7.5 + child - n ( 64 ) & 13.0 & wash - v ( 12 ) & 7.4 + wander - v ( 50 ) & 12.9 & keep - v ( 67 ) & 7.4 + begin - v ( 280 ) & 12.6 & work - v ( 60 ) & 7.0 + bum - n ( 45 ) & 12.5 & drive - v ( 42 ) & 6.8 + feeling - n ( 51 ) & 11.4 & develop - v ( 69 ) & 6.6 + facility - n ( 58 ) & 11.1 & carry - v ( 66 ) & 6.3 + colorless ( 35 ) & 11.1 & see - v ( 69 ) & 6.3 + grip - n ( 51 ) & 11.1 & strike - v ( 54 ) & 5.9 + day - n ( 145 ) & 11.0 & call - v ( 66 ) & 5.8 + mouth - n ( 60 ) & 11.0 & pull - v ( 60 ) & 5.7 + material - n ( 69 ) & 11.0 & turn - v ( 67 ) & 5.0 + art - n ( 98 ) & 10.7 & draw - v ( 41 ) & 4.7 + & & find - v ( 68 ) & 4.2 +    [ tab : eng - words ]    .difficulty of spanish word types [ cols= " < , > , < , > " , ]     [ tab : spa - words ] an _ optimal combination _ is the accuracy that could be attained by a hypothetical tool called an _ optimal combiner _ that accepts as input the sense assignments for a test instance as generated by several different systems . it is able to select the correct sense from these inputs , and will only be wrong when none of the sense assignments is the correct one . thus , the percentage accuracy of an optimal combiner is equal to one minus the percentage of instances that no system can resolve correctly . of course this is only a tool for thought experiments and is not a practical algorithm . an optimal combiner can establish an upper bound on the accuracy that could reasonably be attained over a particular sample of test instances . tables [ tab : eng - opt ] and [ tab : spa - opt ] list the top system pairs ranked by optimal combination ( 1.00 - value in zero column ) for the english and spanish lexical samples . kappa scores are also shown to illustrate the interaction between agreement and optimal combination . optimal combination is maximized when the percentage of instances where both systems are wrong is minimized . kappa agreement is maximized by minimizing the percentage of instances where one or the other system ( but not both ) is correct . thus , the only way a system pair could have a high measure of kappa and a high measure of optimal combination is if they were very accurate systems that disambiguated many of the same test instances correctly . system pairs with low measures of agreement are potentially quite interesting because they are the most likely to make complementary errors . for example , in table [ tab : spa - opt ] under nouns , the alicante system has a low level of agreement with all of the other systems . however , the measure of optimal combination is quite high , reaching 0.89 ( 1.00 - 0.11 ) for the pair of alicante and jhu . in fact , all seven of the other systems achieve their highest optimal combination value when paired with alicante . this combination of circumstances suggests that the alicante system is fundamentally different than the other systems , and is able to disambiguate a certain set of instances where the other systems fail . in fact the alicante system is different in that it is the only spanish lexical sample system that makes use of the structure of euro - wordnet , the source of the sense inventory . the difficulty of disambiguating word senses can vary considerably . a word with multiple closely related senses is likely to be more difficult than one with a few starkly drawn differences . in supervised learning , a particular sense of a word can be difficult to disambiguate if there are a small number of training examples available . table [ tab : instbytrain ] shows the distribution of the number of instances that are successfully disambiguated by a particular number of systems in both the english and spanish lexical samples . the value under the # column shows the number of systems that are able to disambiguate the number of noun , verb , adjective and total instances shown in the row . the average number of training examples available for the correct answers associated with these instances is shown in parenthesis . for example , the first line shows that there were 59 noun instances that no system ( of 23 ) could disambiguate , and that there were on average 16 training examples available for each of the correct senses for these 59 instances . two very clear trends emerge . first , there are a substantial number of instances that are not disambiguated correctly by any system ( 262 in english , 228 in spanish ) and there are a large number of instances that are disambiguated by just a handful of systems . in the english lexical sample , there are 1,277 test instances that are correctly disambiguated by five or fewer of the 23 systems . this is nearly 30% of the test data , and confirms that this was a very challenging set of test instances . there is also a very clear correlation between the number of training examples available for a particular sense of a word and the number of systems that are able to disambiguate instances of that word correctly . for example , table 6 shows that there were 174 english verb instances that no system disambiguated correctly . on average there were only 6 training examples for the correct senses of these instances . however , there were 28 instances that all 23 english systems were able to disambiguate . for these instances an average of 47 training examples were available for each correct sense . this correlation between instance difficulty and number of training examples may suggest that future senseval exercises provide a minimum number of training examples for each sense , or adjust the scoring to reflect the difficulty of disambiguating a sense with very few training examples . finally , we assess the difficulty associated with word types by calculating the average number of systems that were able to disambiguate the instances associated with that type . this information is provided for the english and spanish lexical samples in tables [ tab : eng - words ] and [ tab : spa - words ] . each word is shown with its part of speech , the number of test instances , and the average number of systems that were able to disambiguate each of the test instances . the verb _ collaborate _ is the easiest according to this metric in the english lexical sample . it has 30 test instances that were disambiguated correctly by an average of 20.2 of the 23 systems . the verb _ find _ proves to be the most difficult , with 68 test instances disambiguated correctly by an average of 4.2 systems . a somewhat less extreme range of values is observed for the spanish lexical sample in table [ tab : spa - words ] . the adjective _ claro _ had 66 test instances that were disambiguated correctly by an average of 7.6 of the 8 systems . the most difficult word was the verb _ conducir _ , which has 54 test instances that were disambiguated correctly by an average of 3.8 systems . this paper presents an analysis of the results from the english and spanish lexical sample tasks of senseval-2 . the analysis is based on the kappa statistic and a measure known as optimal combination . it also assesses the difficulty of the test instances in these lexical samples . we find that there are a significant number of test instances that were not disambiguated correctly by any system , and that there is some correlation between instance difficulty and the number of available training examples . this work has been partially supported by a national science foundation faculty early career development award ( # 0092784 ) .
Abstract:

Answer: this paper presents a comparative evaluation among the systems that participated in the spanish and english lexical sample tasks of senseval-2 . the focus is on pairwise comparisons among systems to assess the degree to which they agree , and on measuring the difficulty of the test instances included in these tasks .


Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: the performance of a network is a consequence of three factors  the hardware , the network protocols and the network topology . for some networked systems , like the wireless mesh networks , the topology can be controlled rather easily through the medium access layer , and it is thus practically possible to optimize the topology of the network . in this work , we investigate a scenario of static agents ( sensors , individuals with wi - fi devices , etc . ) , embedded in space , joining and leaving the system ( so called `` churn '' ) . our scenario is based on the following three assumptions . first , only new agents and neighbors of an agent leaving the network create new links . second , the power consumption of each agent is , for fairness and practical reasons , to be restricted . third , the agents are localized with uniform randomness over the unit square . from these starting points , we evaluate different simple attachment strategies to optimize several network - structural quantities , capturing efficiency of communication , scalability and robustness to failure . many of the previous studies on topological optimization of wireless networks have concerned static point patterns  @xcite , not ( as in our study ) systems under churn . nevertheless , these studies form a theoretical backdrop of ours . the simplest approach to connecting wireless agents in the plane is to let all agents within range be connected . assuming identical agents , one arrives at the unit disc graph model of wireless networks  @xcite . maintaining and routing information in a network with this architecture , however , is a waste of power and memory resources . many theoretical efforts in this area have been focusing on energy efficient , yet scalable topologies  a seminal work is  @xcite , where the `` yao graph '' was proposed . this graph is constructed by connecting each node to its closest neighbor in @xmath0 equiangular sectors . it has several topological features , such as ( almost surely ) full connectivity and scalable power consumption , which are desirable for wireless networks . subsequent studies have proposed improved proximity graphs , with localized construction algorithms more  @xcite or less  @xcite similar to the yao graph , and studied general features of minimum power topologies  @xcite . our approach is from a slightly different angle , taking more inspiration from the recent complex network literature  @xcite . these works discuss how dynamic properties of networks in general ( including communication performance in technological networks ) are related to network structure ( how the observed network topology differs from what is expected in a unconstrained random network model ) . this approach lends itself naturally to analyzing topics like point - to - point communication , and data distribution scenarios in large , to some extent random , systems . in this work we evaluate the possibility to optimize network topology in the case when connections cost power , and consequently , due to limitations of energy storage , agents maintaining long connections can keep only a limited number of neighbors .    in the next section , we give a precise description of the problem and our proposed attachment models and discuss related practical issues . we evaluate the proposed models considering a large set of performance measures in section  [ sec : numerical_results ] . finally , section  [ sec : summary ] concludes our work . we consider a set @xmath1 of @xmath2 agents spread out on the unit square . in our numerical study , the spatial distribution will be uniformly random , but generalizing to other point patterns is straightforward . at every time step , one random agent leaves the system and a new one enters ( at a random coordinate ) . the agents form a graph with bi - directional connections . for two agents @xmath3 and @xmath4 at coordinates @xmath5 and @xmath6 to be connected it costs both agents a power consumption of @xmath7 ( @xmath8 )  @xcite . in this work we focus on the limit @xmath9 . we assume the agents to be selfish and homogeneous in the sense that no agent @xmath3 accept a higher power - consumption @xmath10 ( where @xmath11 is @xmath3 s neighborhood ) , than @xmath12 . this also ensures scalable , total power consumption . we also assume a lower power limit @xmath13 , such that while an agent consumes less power than @xmath13 , it will attempt to create new links in the network ( unless creating any new link would result in a larger power consumption than @xmath12 ) . thus @xmath13 represents a minimal investment all agents agree to contribute with to the system . based on these precepts , we try to find simple attachment strategies ( rules for agents to select other agents to link to ) that optimize various objective functions . to assess unperturbed network performance , we measure the following quantities ( that will be discussed in greater detail in the section  [ sec : numerical_results ] ) .    * _ connectivity . _ we measure connectivity as the fraction of time steps when the graph is completely connected . this quantity should , in any functioning network , be very close to one . except when we explicitly study this quantity , we tune the parameters so that the graph is almost always connected . * _ power consumption and power efficiency . _ we consider the value of aggregate power consumption and the power efficiency ( the ratio of power consumption across the shortest multihop path and a direct link ) . low values are desirable for efficient communication . * _ diameter . _ @xmath14 . where @xmath15 is the _ distance _ ( the number of links in the shortest path ) between @xmath3 and @xmath4 . * _ average distance _ @xmath16 . the overhead in communication time grows with distance ; thus , a small diameter and short average distance are desirable . * _ spectral gap _ , @xmath17  the difference between the largest and second largest eigenvector of the adjacency matrix . this is an approximate measure of the link expander property  @xcite that embodies several desirable properties for wireless networks ( little redundancy , high robustness , efficient broadcast , etc . ) . since we do not construct an optimal network each time step , only update the network incrementally , it is important to monitor the effect of churn . indeed , this problem is similar to another important aspect  the robustness to failure and we measure it by the two quantities :    * the change , @xmath18 , of the diameter as a random node is deleted from the network . * the change , @xmath19 , of the average distance . we aim at finding simple , local attachment strategies optimizing these quantities  local in the sense that each agent follows its own rules . we will investigate two models , both having in common that they interpolate between situations where the power budget is spent only on short - range connections , to a situation where connections are made at random regardless of location . at every time step , a random agent @xmath20 is removed along with its connections @xmath21 and a new agent added . this can cause both the new agent and @xmath21 to have power consumptions below @xmath13 . all agents @xmath3 with @xmath22 try to attach to new agents @xmath4 . if adding a link @xmath23 would make either @xmath24 or @xmath25 larger than @xmath12 , or if @xmath23 already is a link in the graph , the link is not added . these properties are the same for both models . the differences between the models are :    * _ model a. _ with probability @xmath26 , attach @xmath3 to the closest possible agent , otherwise attach @xmath3 to a random agent . * _ model b. _ there are two kinds of agents  a fraction @xmath27 of them always attach to the closest possible agent , the rest attaches to a random agent . note that in the limits @xmath28 and @xmath29 , the models are identical . the main assumption of the proposed models is that the power consumption of an agent @xmath3 is proportional to @xmath10 , where @xmath11 is the set of agents connected to @xmath3 and @xmath7 . this requires transmission power control to be implemented at the agents . we motivate the assumption on power consumption as follows . first , once the network topology is defined , and if the traffic load in the network is balanced , both unicast and broadcast routing scenarios are likely to have a similar average usage of the connections . ( in a situation with heterogeneous agents of very different capacities and network positions , this would not hold . ) second , considering dynamic power control , the required transmission power depends on the transmission channel characteristics . in systems designed for tolerable outage probability it is sufficient to consider the distance - dependent path loss to set the required transmission power  @xcite . finally , we do not consider the energy spent for data reception and processing . these are distance independent additive values and consequently would not change the main conclusions of our study .    for the implementation of the attachment strategies described in section  [ sec : model_definition ] , the problems of distance - dependent neighbor selection and efficient access control to the shared wireless medium have to be solved .    if the network , for efficient higher layer protocols ( like geographic routing  @xcite ) , keeps information about the location of the nodes , then such information can also improve the proposed attachment models . if absolute node location information is not maintained , agents can select neighbors by discovering a given area via beaconing with increasing transmission power ( see for example  @xcite for detailed solutions ) . the medium access control is responsible for sharing the wireless medium in an efficient way . tdma , csma and mixed solutions are usually proposed , depending on the expected network load  @xcite . since the interference region of a connection depends on the distance of the transmitting and receiving agent , the construction of an optimal access control scheme is not trivial in the addressed scenario . an optimal access control should take the attachment model into account and schedule most local and random connections separately . the efficiency of the medium access control can potentially affect the network performance , which calls for extended future studies . in this section we will discuss results from our numerical simulations . unless otherwise stated , we use @xmath30 time steps for equilibration and @xmath30 time steps for measuring averages .     for our models . ( a ) shows results for model a , ( b ) for model b. @xmath31 , and ( c ) shows the size scaling for @xmath28 . the line in ( c ) represents growth proportional to @xmath32 . standard errors are smaller than the symbol size . ] many of the performance measures , like connectivity and network diameter are directly related to the number of connections the agents maintain  that is , the average degree . since the number of connections an agent can maintain in the considered case depends on the attachment strategy , we start investigating the average degree .    we can derive approximate results for the two extreme cases , @xmath28 and @xmath29 . for @xmath28 , each agent tries to connect to the closest available neighbor . assuming that all connections can be made and that the agents are uniformly spread out ( so that the number of agents @xmath33 within distance @xmath34 from point is @xmath35 ) , this means that the power consumption to attach to agents within a distance @xmath36 is @xmath37 for a given minimal power @xmath13 the number of agents within reach is @xmath38 or in other words , for @xmath39 the average degree @xmath40 . this relationship is confirmed in fig . [ fig : deg ] . in the opposite limit , @xmath29 , all agents attach to others at random . since the average distance to another , random , agent is independent of @xmath2 , then so is @xmath41 ( which also can be seen in fig .  [ fig : deg ] ) . the functional forms of @xmath41 , as functions of @xmath42 are strikingly different . even if @xmath41 itself is not a performance measure , it affects network performance ; therefore a stable response to the parameter values is beneficial . we note that the curves for model b has a smaller slope for small values of @xmath27 , whereas model a has larger magnitude of the derivative when @xmath26 is close to zero . the key to understanding the difference in degree between the two model is the observation that the number of long - range links is much lower in model b than in model a ( fig .  [ fig : deg ] ) . @xmath12 controls the power consumption so that it is relatively similar for both models . with the power consumption constrained , more power - expensive , random links leads to a sparser network . so why does model a have more random links ? new links are added until the power consumption reaches above @xmath13 . since the steps in power consumption are larger when a random connection is added , the chance that the last added link , for model a , is by random attachment is larger than @xmath26 . for model b , on the other hand , the chance the last added connection is long range is @xmath27 , so @xmath41 will be a linear combination of the @xmath43 and @xmath44 limits . therefore , for @xmath45 the number of long - range edges and the power consumption will be higher for model a than model b. these mechanisms can also be understood from our example figure , fig  [ fig : ex ] . to make this figure readable we use smaller values of @xmath2 and @xmath13 than in the rest of the paper . we also use a relatively large @xmath12 , making the @xmath41 more similar between the models at the expense of a more different power consumption . from this figure we see the difference in number of long - range links even more pronounced than in fig . [ fig : deg ] .    from fig . [ fig : deg](a ) and ( b ) we learn that the degree can be controlled continuously by the model parameters @xmath26 and @xmath27 . it would maybe be convenient for the discussion if we could neglect the model parameters and investigate the models in terms of some basic network quantity like @xmath41 . however , such an approach is complicated by the fact that , for @xmath46 , the average degree also depends on @xmath2 ( see fig . [ fig : deg](c ) and the above discussion ) . moreover , the size scaling of @xmath41 depends on @xmath26 and @xmath27 , going continuously ( but with different functional forms ) from @xmath47 for @xmath28 , to size independence for @xmath29 . for this reason we keep the control parameters @xmath42 as our main independent parameters in this investigation and do not go into details of functional forms when discussing the size dependence of performance measures .    , @xmath48 , @xmath49 , and @xmath50 . the dashed lines are formed by random attachment . the triangles in ( b ) are the agents with a random attachment strategy rather than attachment to the closest other node . ]     and @xmath13 ( panel ( a ) and ( b ) ) or @xmath12 for model a ( panel ( a ) and ( c ) ) and model b ( panel ( b ) and ( d ) ) . the fraction @xmath51 of time steps when the network is fully connected is measured and displayed as color scales so that the numbers at the color bars correspond to @xmath52 , white means that the network is almost always connected . in all panels we set @xmath53 and use @xmath54 . ]      a fundamental functional requirement is that the network should be connected . there is , in principle , nothing that guarantees connectivity in our construction algorithm . we investigate the connectivity , quantified as @xmath51  the fraction of time steps when the network is fully connected . since @xmath51 is close to one , we rather plot @xmath52 ( fig . [ fig : conn ] ) . the larger are values of the energy limits ( both @xmath13 and @xmath12 ) , the better is the connectivity  by consuming more power , the network can always be made connected  a trivial but necessary fact . in the white region of the density plot in fig . [ fig : conn ] , the network is fully connected more than 99.9% of simulation runs ( @xmath55 and thus @xmath56 ) . in the rest of this paper we will ( unless stated otherwise ) investigate a region of parameter space where the network is almost surely connected  @xmath57 and @xmath58 . as seen in fig . [ fig : conn ] , a qualitative difference between the two models is that the connectivity of model b is less dependent on @xmath27 than model a is dependent on @xmath26 . for a large range of @xmath27 ( fig . [ fig : conn](b ) ) , the network is connected almost regardless of @xmath13 . one explanation is the higher degrees of model b  adding links , increasing the degree , can connect , but not fragment , a network . the connectivity depending on the @xmath12 value ( fig . [ fig : conn](c ) and ( d ) ) shows different tendencies : model a becomes connected at lower @xmath12-values ( and consequently lower @xmath13-values ) . to explain this feature we evaluate the actual power consumption of the two models in the next section .     and @xmath27 . other parameter values are the same as in fig . [ fig : deg ] . standard errors are smaller than the symbol size . ]     for the two attachment schemes as a function of their respective control parameter . other parameter values are the same as in fig . [ fig : deg ] . standard errors are smaller than the symbol size . ] the power consumption of an agent is a stochastic variable in the interval @xmath59 $ ] , changing as agents join and leave the network . ( while in both models the agents try to allocate at least @xmath13 , we have to note that if an agent can not connect without raising the power consumption over @xmath12 , its power consumption will be below @xmath13 . ) if the average power consumption is higher , so more resources are invested in the infrastructure , one can expect the network properties to improve . therefore , to better be able to analyze our performance measures , we investigate the level of power consumption . fig .  [ fig : pow](a ) and ( b ) shows the average power consumption with @xmath57 and @xmath58 . the power consumption maximally fluctuates @xmath60 and it is always lower for model b. this difference increases with system size for all values except close to @xmath61 , meaning that performance advantages for model a in these limits , especially for larger systems , should be evaluated with this increased power consumption in mind . or , alternatively , a specific @xmath26-value can be translated to a ( higher ) @xmath27-value , corresponding to the same power consumption . why is the power consumption higher in model a ? again , we use fig .  [ fig : ex ] can give an illustration . above , we explained why , if @xmath45 , model a has larger fraction of long - range edges than model b. since the steps in power consumption is larger when adding random edges , if a random edge is the last one added , then the power consumption overshoots @xmath13 more . in sum , more randomly added links mean more overshoot and thus higher power consumption . power efficiency in multihop networks is often measured by the ratio @xmath62 of actual consumed power to the power needed for a direct connection , averaged over all vertex pairs ( scaling like the distance squared ) : @xmath63 where @xmath64 is the set of links forming the shortest path ( in number of hops ) between @xmath3 and @xmath4  @xcite . if the route between the source and the target is circuitous , @xmath62 might be much larger than one , but if it proceeds in several steps relatively straight towards the target , @xmath62 can be smaller than unity . indeed , the lower bound of @xmath62 is zero  assume @xmath3 and @xmath4 , at distance @xmath34 are connected by a straight path of @xmath65 equidistant links . then @xmath66 for all links along the path is @xmath67 , so the whole sum in the numerator equals @xmath68 , while the denominator is @xmath69 , giving a contribution @xmath70 from the node pair @xmath71 to @xmath62 . in fig . [ fig : ineff ] we plot this quantity for model a and b , and two different network sizes . the @xmath62-curves are monotonically increasing for both sizes and attachment models . both models have some regions of their parameter space where @xmath72 , which is the definition for being a _ power spanner _  @xcite . model b shows lower values of @xmath62 for a large region of its parameter space , which means that shortest path routes are straighter compared to the ones in model a , a results of the different distribution of long - range random connections .     values . panels ( a ) and ( b ) shows the average distance @xmath73 while ( c ) and ( d ) shows the diameter @xmath74 . other parameter values are the same as in fig . [ fig : deg ] . standard errors are smaller than the symbol size . ]      both for unicast and multicast communication , short distances ( in number of hops ) are beneficial , as they lead to lower delays  @xcite . in fig . [ fig : dist ] we investigate the average distances and diameter , corresponding to mean and extreme - case connections as a function of the model parameters @xmath26 and @xmath27 . for both model a and b , and both distance measures , the minima are attained for intermediate values of @xmath42 . in other words , a mix between random and short - range connections optimizes network distances . furthermore , the minimum occurs for low @xmath42-values , i.e.with larger proportion short - range connections compared with the random connections . the decreasing distances for @xmath75 can be understood as a `` small - world effect ''  we only need to introduce a few random links to a regular graph for it to go from algebraic to logarithmic distance scaling  @xcite . the increasing distances for larger @xmath42-values can be explained by the decreasing average degrees . comparing models a and b , we note that model a gives the smallest distances ( both average and maximal ) . if one increases the degree of a graph by adding links to it , its average distance can not increase . similarly , most network models have distances decreasing with the average degree . with that in mind , it is a little surprising that model a has both shortest distances and smallest average degree . this non - trivial , purely topological effect can only be related to the distribution of longer - range , random links . in model a , the long - range links are more evenly distributed out between the agents ( compared with model b where , at least one side of the every long - range link belong to one class of nodes ) . model a loses this advantage as more random links are inserted in the network , then the average and maximal distances increase together with the decreasing degree according to fig .  [ fig : deg ] . model b has the advantage that it is not as sensitive to @xmath27 as model a is to @xmath26 .    . standard errors are about the size of the symbols , but omitted for readability . ]      for multicast and broadcast communication , redundancy is an important topological factor . imagine a triangle between agents @xmath76 , @xmath77 and @xmath78 . a broadcast originating from @xmath76 reaches @xmath77 and @xmath78 in two steps . then , however , the link between @xmath77 and @xmath78 is redundant  both @xmath77 and @xmath78 already have the packet . if a graph has few such redundancies , it is said to have good expander properties . the usual way of defining this property is via the expansion factor @xmath79  the minimum over all subsets @xmath80 , smaller than half the entire vertex set , of the ratio between the size of the neighborhood of @xmath80 and the size of @xmath80  @xcite . @xmath79 is a computationally hard quantity . instead , we measure the spectral gap @xmath81  the difference between the leading and second largest eigenvalues of the adjacency matrix , which is known to be a lower bound to @xmath79 ( apart from a factor @xmath77 )  @xcite . in addition to efficient broadcast communication , large spectral gap also leads to two other desirable network properties . first , it reflects robustness . it is known that if the graph has a large spectral gap one needs to cut many links to split it into two disjoint subnetworks  @xcite . consequently , the spectral gap is a measure of resilience against a worst - case scenario of an adversary deliberately trying to disconnect different parts of the network  @xcite . second , networks with large spectral gaps are easier to synchronize  @xcite . this is especially relevant for synchronizing clocks of sensor networks  @xcite .    in fig . [ fig : xpndr ] , we plot the expander coefficient for the two models corresponding to fig . [ fig : dist ] . the best parameter range is for small @xmath42 . in contrast with the distance measures , the maximum @xmath81 for model b is network size dependent and does not always occur for an intermediate @xmath27-value . model a , on the other hand , has a maximum for small @xmath26-values . for both models there is a small @xmath42 value where @xmath81 is high and stable ( indeed accentuated ) as the system grows . this stable value is higher for model a , which indicates that model a can achieve higher performance than model b for the same system size . for intermediate @xmath42-values , @xmath82 seems to converge for model b , whereas it decreases ( roughly ) logarithmically for model a. because of this , in implementations where the system size is unknown _ a priori _ , and the model parameter is hard to control exactly , model b might be advantageous . model a also shows a second incipient peak for the larger sizes , much lower than the low-@xmath26 peak and probably uninteresting for practical applications .    . standard errors are smaller than the symbol size . ]      in addition to resilience to worst case attacks measured by the spectral gap , it is desirable that network graphs are robust to random failures . this is , in fact , similar to demand that the turnover of agents should not worsen our objective functions much . to investigate how random failures affect the network we measure @xmath19  the difference in average pathlength if a random node is disconnected from the network . from fig . [ fig : robu ] we can see that this quantity is also optimized at low @xmath42-values . but in contrast to the behavior of @xmath17 , @xmath83 is optimal for model a and a small @xmath27 ( around @xmath84 ) is optimal for model b ( @xmath54 ) . like other quantities , model b is less @xmath27-dependent than model a is @xmath26-dependent . both models have similar magnitude of @xmath19 . we have investigated the optimization of network topology of the medium access layer of wireless networks , and found that agents with simple but heterogeneous rules for finding neighbors are capable to form network with shorter average distances , better expander properties and relatively high robustness ( compared to random , or unit disc graph approaches ) . the two models we test have parameters controlling the ratio of long - range interactions . we find that close to ( but not at ) one end of parameter space ( where most connections are short ) is the region where optimal topologies exist .    for most score functions  average distance , diameter and spectral gap  our model a ( where agents attach to spatially close others with a probability @xmath26 , otherwise to random agents ) gives better values than our model b ( where there are two classes of agents , one making only short connections , one making only random connections ) . the good topological properties of model a are however outweighed by the effect of fast decreasing average degree as @xmath26 increases . model b , on the other hand , has the advantage that its performance is less dependent on the parameter value . li , p .- j . wang , y.  wang , and o.  frieder . sparse power efficient topology for wireless networks . in _ proceedings of the 35th annual hawaii international conference on system sciences _ , pages 38393848 , 2002 . s.  rhrup , c.  schindelhauer , m.  grnewald , and k.  volbert . performance of distributed algorithms for topology control in wireless networks . in _ in 17th international parallel and distributed processing symposium _ , page 2003 , 2008 .
Abstract:

Answer: in optimizing the topology of wireless networks built of a dynamic set of spatially embedded agents , there are many trade - offs to be dealt with . the network should preferably be as small ( in the sense that the average , or maximal , pathlength is short ) as possible , it should be robust to failures , not consume too much power , and so on . in this paper , we investigate simple models of how agents can choose their neighbors in such an environment . in our model of attachment , we can tune from one situation where agents prefer to attach to others in closest proximity , to a situation where distance is ignored ( and thus attachments can be made to agents further away ) . we evaluate this scenario with several performance measures and find that the optimal topologies , for most of the quantities , is obtained for strategies resulting in a mix of most local and a few random connections .