Symmetries, group actions, and entanglement
工业工程专业英语词汇

工业工程专业英语词汇industrial engineering:工业工程accredited:认可的、授权的accrue:增值acoustics:声学acquisition:并购address:处理、针对、重点提出affiliate:隶属于aggregation:总体、集合体Agile Manufacturing (AM):敏捷制造aircraft:飞机,航空器align:适应alliance:联盟ample:足够的、充裕的anatomical:解剖的ancillary:辅助的、附属的anthropometry:人体测量学appropriation: 占用artificial material:人工材料ASME: American Society of Mechanical Engineers:美国机械工程师协会assembly line:装配线assess:评估assiduity:勤奋、刻苦audit:审计automatic pallet changer:自动托盘转换装置automation:自动化ballistic:自然带弧形的bar code:条形码batch production:批量生产bench:工作台bill:清单bin:箱子biomechanical:生物力学的blade:刀片、叶片brand new:全新的budget-oriented:面向预算的capacity:生产能力capital turnover:资金周转capital:资金carbon-filament:钨丝causal method:因果法cause and effect diagram:因果图cellular layout:单元式布局certification:认证change over :换模checksheet:检查表chronological:严密逻辑的chuck:卡盘circulate:循环、流通civil engineering:土木工程clamp:夹住closed loop:闭环CNC machine tools:计算机数控机床cockpit:飞机座舱、驾驶员座舱cognitive:认知的coil feeder:卷料进料器Communication Techniques in Logisticscompetitiveness:竞争力component:零件、组件、部件comprehensive interest:综合利益Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems (CIMS):计算机集成制造系统computerized numerical controlconsecutive: 连续的continous improvement:持续改进continuous improvement:持续改进conveyor:输送机convoluted:复杂的、回旋的、弯曲的coordination:协调corkscrew: 螺丝刀cost-effective:有成本效益的、划算的crank:曲柄critical examination technique:关键检测技术crossbar:十字杠culminate:达到顶点curricula: 课程(or curriculum)customer satisfaction:顾客满意cutback:缩减cylindrical:圆柱的prismatic:棱柱的dam:水坝decision-making:决策defective:有瑕疵的,有缺陷的definable:可定义的demonstrate:示范、说明dependent demand: 相关需求discipline:学科discrete:离散的dispersion:分散性distribution:配送、分销division:部门、分配、分开drill press:钻床drop delivery:堕送装置due date:交货期dye:染料earning:收益、利润E-business:电子商务economic and knowledge-based era:知识经济时代economic batch quantity:经济批量economic globalization:经济全球化ECRS(eliminate combine rearrange simplify):取消、合并、重排、简化EDM: electron discharge machining:放电加工effectiveness:效果efficiency:效率ejector:斜槽、导轨electrical engineering:电气工程electricity: 电、电学、电流、电气electronic data interchange:电子数据交换E-Manufacturing:网络化制造engulf:吞没EOS:电子订货系统electronic ordering system ergonomically:工效学地ergonomics:工效学exaggerated:过大的、许多的explosion:爆炸法eyestrain:视觉疲劳,眼睛疲劳fabrication:制造facility:设备、设施factory layout:工厂布局family:簇fatigue:疲劳fatigue:疲劳feat:合适的feed grinding machine: 进给式磨床feedback:反馈feedback:反馈file:锉刀final product:最终产品fish bone diagram:鱼骨图fitness for use:适用性fixed position layout:定位布局fixture:固定设备、夹具flapped operation:节拍式加工flexible manufacturing system:柔性制造系统flow diagram:线路图flow process chart:流程程序图fluctuate: 波动forcible:强制的、有说服力的forearm:前臂upper arm:大臂trunk:躯干torso forecast:预测forge:锻造forge:锻造formulate:阐述、制定fortification:防御工事forward-looking:有远见的foundry:铸造friction: 摩擦frustration:挫折fuel:燃料fully automated:全自动化gang process chart:联合程序图garment industry:制衣业gauge:计量器general packet radio servicegeographic information systemsgeometry:几何形状GIS:地理信息系统GPRS:通用分组无线业务GPS:全球定位系统global positioning systemgravity feed:重力自流进料group technology:成组技术hand in hand :合作hardware:硬件harmonious society:和谐社会haul: 拖、拉health-care delivery: 卫生保健服务high-tech:高科技hindrance:妨碍histogram:直方图hoist:起重机human factor:人因human-centered design:以人为中心设计hybrid layout:混合式布局hypotenuse:斜边(hypothesis:假设)identical:相同的idleness:空闲IE engineers:工业工程师(IEs)IE graduates:工业工程毕业生(IEs)impede:妨碍,阻止implicitly:隐含地incentive:鼓励inclined plane:斜面inclusive design:全方位设计inconsistency:不一致independent demand: 独立需求independent variable:自变量inevitable:不可避免的inspection:检测Institute of Industrial Engineers:工业工程师学会(IIE)instructor:讲师、教练instrument:仪器、器械intangible:无形的integrated equipment:集成设备interchangeability:互换性interface:界面、接口intermediary:中间人intermittent:间歇的internal combustion engine:内燃机International Accreditation Forum:国际认证论坛International Organization for Standardization:国际标准化组织(ISO)inventory control:库存控制Inventory:库存inventory:清单、库存invoicing:开发票item:物料项目jig:夹具job shop production:车间任务型生产judgment method:判断方法jumbled:混合的、混乱的knuckle:指关节wrist:腕关节elbow:肘关节lag:落后,延迟lathe:车床layout:布局lead time:提前期Lean Production (LP):精益生产literature:文献loading:装载locomotive:火车头logistics:物流long and short-term memory:长短时记忆lot for lot:批对批lot size:批量low-volume, high-variety production:多品种、小批量生产lubricant:润滑剂luggage:行李machine cell:机器单元machine tool:机床magnetism:磁学maintainability:可维护性maintaining:维护malfunction:故障manipulate:处理,使用,操纵man-machine process chart:人机程序图manufacturing industry:制造业manufacturing resources planning:制造资源计划market share:市场占有率master production scheduling:主生产计划material handling :物料搬运material requirements planning:物料需求计划mechanical engineering:机械工程mechanized:机械化的mental demand:脑力需求metal-working job shop :金工车间method study:方法研究methodology:方法metrics:度量military:军事的milling machine:铣床mission:使命、任务、目标MIT: 麻省理工学院Massachusetts Institute of Technology molecular:分子的momentum:动量monetary:货币的、金融的morale:士气、纪律motion analysis:动作分析motion economy principles:动作经济原则motivation:激励multi-disciplinary:多学科性质的muscle:肌肉muscle:肌肉musculoskeletal disorder:肌骨失调navigation:导航netting:净需求计算normative:标准的notch: V型凹槽、切口nutrition:营养observe value:观察值offset:偏置法operation analysis:作业分析operation management:运作管理operation process chart: 工艺程序图opportunity:缺陷机会order fulfillment: 订单执行order lots:订单批量、订货量orient:定向otiose:无效的、多余的outlets:品牌直销购物中心overengineer:高于工程要求的package:包装pallet:托盘parameter:参数pareto chart:排列图part period cover:零件周期批量participation:参与partition:分割parts feeder:送料器physical science :自然科学(natural science )physiology:生理学pivot:轴、支点、中心点plot:以图的形式表示Pmts: predetermined motion time system:预定动作时间系统portable powered tool:便携式电动工具portray:描绘POS:销售时点系统point of sale systempositioning device:定位装置positioning:定位potentiality:潜能practitioner:开业者pre-assessment:预评估precondition :前提prediction:预言preliminary:预备的、初级的pre-positioned:预放在工作位置上proceed:行进、继续进行process analysis:程序分析process layout:工艺布局procurement:采购product layout:产品布局product life cycle: 产品生命周期production line:生产线production planning:生产计划production process:生产过程production scheduling:生产调度production system:生产系统productive:有生产价值的、多产的productivity :生产率profitability:收益率psychology:心理学pull production:拉动式生产Pythagorean theorem:勾股定理qualitative method:定性方法quality of conformance:符合性质量quality of design:设计质量quantitative method:定量方法rapid changeover:快速换模raw material:原材料rectangular:矩形的cube:立方体registrar:注册人员reliability:可靠性repetition:重复、复制品repetitive strain injury:重复性劳损replenishment:补充、补给reproach:责备、谴责reputation:声誉requirement:需求reservation:预定resharpen:重磨retailer:零售商revenue:收入、税收RFID:无线射频技术radio frequency identification rough cut capacity:粗能力计划saturation:饱和scatter diagram:散布图scheduling:调度、排程scheme:计划、设计screwdriver:螺丝刀seasonal patterns:季节模式semi-automatic(automated):半自动化seminar:研讨班sensory:感觉的service system:服务系统setup time:生产准备时间Shakespeare industry :莎士比亚产业sheet:薄板状的shroud:罩、遮蔽物simple lever:单杠杆simultaneously:同时地six sigma methodology: 六西格玛法socialize joint distribution:社会化共同配送specialization: 专业化specialty:专业specification:规范specs:规范、规格stamp:冲压standard data:标准资料standard deviation:标准偏差standardization: 标准化static electricity:静电学statistic:统计的statistical:统计学的steam engine:蒸汽机stock:库存store :仓库strategic planning:战略规划Stratford-on-Avon, as we all know, has only one industry-William Shakespeare-but there are two distinctly separate and increasingly hostile branches.subassembly:组件、部件substandard:低于标准的suite:软件包supply chain:供应链symmetrical:对称、匀称synchronous:同步的synthesize:综合tangible:有形的team spirit:团队精神Technical Committee(TC)176:品质保证技术委员会template:模板template:模型thermal process:热处理thermal:热量的,热的third-party logistics:第三方物流threbligs:动素time study:时间研究time-series analysis:时间序列分析tolerance:容许偏差tote bin:搬运箱trade-off: 权衡transaction:业务、交易transformation:转换transmission:传送transportation:运输trivial:琐碎的tune:调整turbine:涡轮机、汽轮机two-hand process chart:双手程序图underengineer:低于工程要求的unloading:卸载unpredictable:不可预测的user-centered:用户为中心的variable:变量vessel:管道vibration:振动vicinity:邻近visionary:远景warehouse:仓库warehouse:仓库、仓储weld:焊接wholesaler:批发商work measurement:作业测定work piece:工件work related upper limb disorder:工作引起的上肢功能障碍work sampling:工作抽样work unit:工件workhead:工作台、机台workholder:工件夹具work-in-process:在制品workshop:车间、研讨会workstation:工作站。
管理学常用英文单词-含音标

管理学常用词汇A 11access discrimination ['æksɛs] [dɪ,skrɪmɪ'neʃən]进入歧视action research ['ækʃən] ['risɝtʃ] 动作研究;行为研究adjourning [ə'dʒɝnɪŋ] 解散期;解散阶段;中止阶段adhocracy [æd'hɔkrəsi] 无固定结构的管理方式或组织;临时委员会组织;administrative principle [əd'mɪnɪstretɪv] ['prɪnsəpl] 管理原则advanced negotiation[əd'vænst] [nɪ,ɡoʃɪ'eʃən]高级谈判alignment[ə'laɪnmənt] 结盟artifacts ['a:rtifækts]人工环境artificial intelligence [,ɑrtɪ'fɪʃl] [ɪn'tɛlɪdʒəns] 人工智能、巧匠avoiding learning [ə'vɔɪdɪŋ] ['lɜːnɪŋ]规避性学习ambidextrous approach [,æmbɪ'dekstrəs] [ə'prɔtʃ]双管齐下策略B 9balance sheet ['bæləns] [ʃit]资产负债表bias['baɪəs] 偏见BCG matrix( BCG:Boston Consulting Group['bɔstən] [kən'sʌltɪŋ] [gru ːp]) ['metrɪks] 波士顿矩阵,波士顿咨询集团矩阵bona fide occupation qualifications [,bəunə'faidi] [,ɑkju'peʃən] [,kw ɑləfə'keʃən] 善意职业资格审查bounded rationality ['baʊndɪd] [,ræʃən'æləti]有限理性bounded rationality perspective ['baʊndɪd] [,ræʃən'æləti] [pə'spekt ɪv]有限理性方法bureaucracy [bjʊ'rɑkrəsi]官僚机构benchmarking ['bentʃ,mɑ:kiŋ] 标杆管理;标记;确定基准点boundary-spanning roles ['baʊndri] ['spæniŋ] [rolz] 跨超边界作用C 42capturing value through pricing['kæptʃɚrɪŋ] ['vælju] [θru] ['praɪsɪŋ] 通过定价获取价值change agent [tʃendʒ] ['edʒənt] 变革推动者,促变者challenge ['tʃælɪndʒ]挑战chaos theory ['keɑs] ['θiəri] 混沌理论charismatic leaders [,kærɪz'mætɪk] ['lidɚz]魅力型领导者charity principle ['tʃærəti] ['prɪnsəpl] 博爱原则closing bell['klozɪŋ] [bɛl]收盘corporate social responsibility ['kɔrpərət] ['soʃl] [rɪ,spɑnsə'bɪləti]企业的社会责任competitive strategy[kəm'pɛtətɪv] ['strætədʒi]竞争战略;竞争策略confrontation [,kɑnfrənfrʌn'teʃən] 对话, 对抗;面对;对质confrontation meeting [,kɑnfrən'teʃən] ['mitɪŋ] 碰头会consortia [kən'sɔ:tɪə] 企业联合、联盟、合作coercive power [kəʊ'ɜːsɪv] ['paʊə] 强制权,强制力cohesiveness [ko'hisɪvnɪs] 凝聚力collaborative management [kə'læbəretɪv] ['mænɪdʒmənt]合作型管理comparable worth ['kɑmpərəbl] [wɝθ]可比价值;同值同酬competitive benchmarking [kəm'petɪtɪv] ['bentʃ,mɑ:kiŋ]竞争性基准competitive strategy[kəm'pɛtətɪv] ['strætədʒi]竞争策略constancy of purpose ['kɑnstənsi] [əv] ['pɜːpəs] 永久性目标contingency approach [kən'tɪndʒənsi] [ə'protʃ] 权变理论;权变方法;随机应变法corporate governance['kɔrpərət] ['gʌvɚnəns]企业管治corporate social performance ['kɔrpərət] ['səʊʃ(ə)l] [pə'fɔːm(ə)ns]企业社会绩效;公司社会表现corporate social responsibility ['kɔrpərət] ['səʊʃ(ə)l] [rɪ,spɑnsə'bɪləti]公司社会责任corporate social responsiveness ['kɔrpərət] ['səʊʃ(ə)l] [rɪ'spɑnsɪvnɪs]公司社会反应critical incident ['krɪtɪkl] ['ɪnsɪdənt] 危机事故;关键事件current assets ['kʌr(ə)nt] ['æset s] 流动资产current liabilities ['kʌr(ə)nt] [,laɪə'bɪləti]流动负债; 经常性贷款culture strength ['kʌltʃə] [streŋθ]文化强度; 文化力creative department [krɪ'etɪv] [dɪ'pɑrtmənt] 创造性部门creation of value[krɪ'eʃən] [əv] ['vælju]价值创造craft technology [kræft] [tɛk'nɑlədʒi]工艺技术、技艺性技术contextual dimension [kən'tɛkstʃuəl] [daɪ'mɛnʃən]关联性维度continuous process production [kən'tɪnjʊəs] ['prɑsɛs] [prə'dʌkʃən]连续加工生产collectivity stage [,kɑlɛk'tɪvəti] [stedʒ] 集体化阶段clan control [klæn] [kən'trol] 小团体控制clan culture [klæn] ['kʌltʃɚ] 小团体文化coalition [,koə'lɪʃən] 联合;结合,合并;联合团体collaborative [kə'læbəretɪv] 协作网络centrality [sɛn'træləti] 中心;中央;向心性;集中性centralization [,sɛntrəlɪ'zeʃən]集权化;中央集权管理charismatic authority [,kærɪz'mætɪk] [ə'θɔrəti] 魅力型权威、竭尽忠诚的权力customer insight['kʌstəmɚ] ['ɪn'saɪt]消费者洞察力;客户需求D 18decentralization [dɪ'sɛntrəlaɪ'zeʃən]分权;非集权化decision premise [dɪ'sɪʒn] ['premɪs]决策前提democracy management [də'mɑkrəsi] ['mænɪdʒmənt] 民主管理departmentalization [di:pɑ:t,mentəlai'zeiʃən]部门化; 部门划分designing effective organization[dɪ'zaɪnɪŋ] [ɪ'fɛktɪv] [,ɔrɡənə'zeʃən]设计有效的组织development structure[dɪ'vɛləpmənt] ['strʌktʃɚ]发展结构dialectical inquiry methods [,daɪə'lɛktɪkl] ['ɪŋkwaɪri] ['mɛθədz]辩证探求法differentiation strategy [,dɪfərenʃɪ'eɪʃn] ['strætədʒi] 差别化战略;差异化竞争战略differential rate system ['dɪfə'rɛnʃəl] [ret] ['sɪstəm] 差别报酬系统direct interlock [də'rɛkt] ['ɪntɚlɑk] 直接交叉divisional form [də'vɪʒənl] [fɔrm] 事业部模式division of labor [də'vɪʒən] [əv] ['lebɚ] 劳动(力)分工downward mobility ['daʊnwɚd] [mo'bɪləti] 降职流动、社会地位的下降dynamic engagement [daɪ'næmɪk] [ɪn'ɡedʒmənt]动态融合dynamic network [daɪ'næmɪk] ['nɛtwɝk] 动态网络domain [do'men] 领域;;域名;产业;地产dual-core approach ['dʊəl] [kɔr] [ə'protʃ] 二元核心模式dynamics of synergy[daɪ'næmɪks] [əv] ['sɪnɚdʒi]协力优势E 28effective decision making[ɪ'fɛktɪv] [dɪ'sɪʒn] ['mekɪŋ]有效决策制定effective leadership[ɪ'fɛktɪv] ['lidɚʃɪp]有效领导effective conflict resolution[ɪ'fɛktɪv] ['kɑnflɪkt] [rezə'luːʃ(ə)n]高效冲突管理electronic data-processing(EDP) [ɪ,lɛk'trɑnɪk] ['detə] ['prɑsɛsɪŋ]]电子数据处理employee-oriented style [ɪm'plɔɪi] ['orɪɛntɪd] [staɪl] 员工导向型风格empowerment [ɪm'paʊɚmənt] 许可,授权encoding [ɪn'kodɪŋ] 解码; 编码end-user computing ['end,ju:zə] [kəm'pjʊtɪŋ]终端用户计算系统enter ['ɛntɚ]进入;参加enterprise ['ɛntɚ,praɪz]企业entrepreneurship [,ɑntrəprə'nɝʃɪp] 企业家精神equity ['ɛkwəti]平等;相等equity theory ['ɛkwəti] ['θiəri] 公平理论espoused value [ɪ'spaʊzid] ['vælju]信仰价值ethics['eθɪks] 伦理学;伦理观;道德标准ethnocentric manager [,ɛθno'sɛntrɪk] ['mænɪdʒɚ] 种族主义的管理者expectancy theory [ɪk'spɛktənsi] ['θiəri] 期望理论expense budget [ɪk'spɛns] ['bʌdʒɪt] 费用预算;支出预算expense center [ɪk'spɛns] ['sɛntɚ]费用中心external audit [ɪk'stɝnl] ['ɔdɪt] 外部审计; 独立审计external stakeholders [ɪk'stɝnl] ['stekholdɚ] 外部利益相关者extreme circumstances[ɪk'strim] ['sɝkəmstæns iz]极端情况extrinsic rewards [ɛks'trɪnsɪk] [rɪ'wɔrdz] 外部奖励;外部报酬ethic ombudsperson ['ɛθɪk] [,ɔmbudz'pɝsn] 伦理巡视官external adaption [ɪk'stɝnl] [ə'dæpʃən] 外部适应性elaboration stage [ɪ,læbə'reʃən] [stedʒ] 精细阶段entrepreneurial stage [,ɑntrəprə'njʊrɪəl] [stedʒ] 创业阶段escalating commitment ['ɛskəletɪŋ] [kə'mɪtmənt] 顽固认同F 14family group ['fæməli] [gruːp] 家族集团;家族企业financing growth[fɪ'nænsɪŋ] [ɡroθ]财务增长financial management [faɪ'nænʃl] ['mænɪdʒmənt] 财务管理;金融管理financial statement [faɪ'nænʃl] ['stetmənt] 财务报表flat hierarchies [flæt] ['haɪə,rɑrkiz] 扁平型结构flexible budget ['flɛksəbl] ['bʌdʒɪt] 弹性预算force-field theory [fɔrs] [fild] ['θiəri] 场力理论formal authority ['fɔrml] [ə'θɔrəti] 正式授权;正式权限;合法权力formal systematic appraisal ['fɔrml] ['sɪstə'mætɪk] [ə'prezl] 正式的系统评估franchise ['fræntʃaɪz] 特许经营权formalization stage [,fɔməlɪ'zeʃən] [stedʒ] 规范化阶段functional grouping ['fʌŋkʃənl] ['ɡrupɪŋ] 职能组合formal channel of communication ['fɔrml] ['tʃænl] [əv] [kə,mjunɪ'keʃən] 正式沟通渠道fundamentals [,fʌndə'mɛntl] 基本面;基本原理G 16game theory [geɪm] ['θiəri] 博弈论general financial condition ['dʒɛnrəl] [faɪ'nænʃl] [kən'dɪʃən] 一般财务状况geocentric manager [,dʒio'sɛntrɪk] ['mænɪdʒɚ] 全球化管理者geographic and cultural boundaries[,dʒiə'ɡræfɪk] [ənd] ['kʌltʃərəl] ['baʊndri]地理和文化界限global brand['ɡlobl] [brænd]全球品牌global enterprise['ɡlobl] ['ɛntɚ'praɪz]全球化企业global market ['ɡlobl] ['mɑrkɪt]全球市场;国际市场globalization [,ɡləubəlai'zeiʃən] 全球化gossip chain ['ɡɑsɪp] [tʃen] 传言链grapevine ['ɡrepvaɪn] 小道消息;秘密情报网;传言网global strategic partnership ['ɡlobl] [strə'tidʒɪk] ['pɑrtnɚʃɪp] 全球战略伙伴关系general environment ['dʒɛnrəl] [ɪn'vaɪrənmənt] 一般环境;总体环境generalist ['dʒɛnrəlɪst] 通才;多面手;全面战略geographic grouping [,dʒiə'ɡræfɪk] ['ɡrupɪŋ] 区域组合global company ['ɡlobl] ['kʌmpəni] 跨国公司;全球公司global geographic structure ['ɡlobl] [,dʒiə'ɡræfɪk] ['strʌktʃɚ]全球区域结构H 11Hawthorne effect [hɔθən] [ɪ'fɛkt] 霍桑效应heuristic principles [hjʊ'rɪstɪk] ['prɪnsəpl] 启发性原理hierarchy ['haɪərɑrki] 科层制度high ambition[haɪ] [æm'bɪʃən]更高志向、雄心壮志high commitment[haɪ] [kə'mɪtmənt]高承诺high performance[haɪ] [pɚ'fɔrməns]高效能hiring specification ['haiəriŋ] ['spɛsəfə'keʃən] 招聘细则horizontal linkage model ['hɔrə'zɑntl] ['lɪŋkɪdʒ] ['mɑdl] 横向联系模型hybrid structure ['haɪbrɪd] ['strʌktʃɚ] 混合结构high-velocity environments [haɪ] [və'lɑsəti] [ɪn'vaɪrənmənts] 高速环境human resources['hjumən] [ri'zɔ:siz]人力资源I 23impoverished management [ɪm'pɑvərɪʃt] ['mænɪdʒmənt] 放任式管理 I income statement ['ɪnkʌm] ['stetmənt] 损益表information transformation ['ɪnfɚ'meʃən] [,trænsfɚ'meʃən] 信息转换infrastructure ['ɪnfrə'strʌktʃɚ] 基础设施integrative process ['ɪntɪɡretiv] ['prɑsɛs] 整合过程intelligent enterprises [ɪn'tɛlɪdʒənt] ['ɛntɚ,praɪz]智能企业;智慧型企业internal audit [ɪn'tɝnl] ['ɔdɪt] 内部审计internal stakeholder [ɪn'tɝnl] ['stekholdɚ] 内部相关者internship ['ɪntɝnʃɪp]实习intrapreneurship [,ɪntrəprɛ'nɝʃɪp]内部企业家精神intrinsic reward [ɪn'trɪnsɪk] [rɪ'wɔrd]内在报酬; 内在奖励inventory ['ɪnvəntɔri] 库存, 存货internal integration [ɪn'tɝnl] ['ɪntə'greʃən] 内部整合interorganization relationship [,ɪntɚ'ɔrɡənə'zeʃən l [rɪ'leʃən'ʃɪp] 组织间的关系intergroup conflict ['ɪntɚ'grʊp] ['kɑnflɪkt] 团体间冲突intergroup dynamics ['ɪntɚ'grʊp] [daɪ'næmɪks] 组间动力interlocking directorate [,intə'lɔkiŋ] [də'rɛktərət] 交叉董事会institutional perspective [,ɪnstɪ'tuʃənl] [pɚ'spɛktɪv] 制度视角;机构的观点intuitive decision making [ɪn'tuɪtɪv] [dɪ'sɪʒn] ['mekɪŋ]直觉决策idea champion [aɪ'diə] ['tʃæmpɪən] 构思倡导者incremental change [ɪnkrə'məntl] [tʃendʒ] 渐进式变革; 递增量informal organizational structure [ɪn'fɔrml] [,ɔɡənɪ'zeʃənəl] ['strʌkt ʃɚ]非正式组织结构informal performance appraisal [ɪn'fɔrml] [pɚ'fɔrməns] [ə'prezl]非正式业绩评价J 6job description [dʒɒb] [dɪ'skrɪpʃən]工作说明;职务描述job design[dʒɒb] [dɪ'zaɪn] 工作设计,职务设计job enlargement [dʒɒb] [ɪn'lɑrdʒmənt] 职务扩大化job enrichment [dʒɒb] [ɪn'rɪtʃmənt] 职务丰富化job rotation [dʒɒb] [ro'teʃən] 职务轮换job specialization [dʒɒb] [,spɛʃəlɪ'zeʃən]职务专业化K 2key performance areas [kiː] [pɚ'fɔrməns] ['ɛrɪəz]关键业务区key result areas [kiː] [rɪ'zʌlt] ['ɛrɪəz]关键绩效区L 18labor productivity index ['lebɚ] [,prodʌk'tɪvəti] ['ɪndɛks] 劳动生产力指数laissez management [lei'sei'] ['mænɪdʒmənt]自由化管理large batch production [lɑrdʒ] [bætʃ] [prə'dʌkʃən]大批量生产lateral communication ['lætərəl] [kə,mjunɪ'keʃən] 横向沟通leadership decision ['lidɚʃɪp] [dɪ'sɪʒn]领导决策leadership style ['lidɚʃɪp] [staɪl] 领导风格leadership in teams ['lidɚʃɪp] [ɪn] [timz]团队管理;团队领导力leading a turnaround['lidɪŋ] ['tɝnəraʊnd] 领导转变;管理转变least preferred co-worker(LPC) [list] [prɪ'fɝd] [,kəu'wə:kə] 最不喜欢的同事legitimate power [lɪ'dʒɪtɪmət] ['paʊɚ]合法权力liability ['laɪə'bɪləti] 债务;负债liaison [lɪ'ezɑn] 联络者line authority [laɪn] [ə'θɔrəti] 直线职权liquidity [lɪ'kwɪdəti] 流动性liaison role [lɪ'ezɑn] [rol] 联络员角色long-linked technology [lɔŋ] ['lɪŋkt] technology 纵向关联技术losses from conflict [lɔsiz] [frɒm] ['kɑnflɪkt]冲突带来的损失low-cost leadership [ləʊ] [kɔst] ['lidɚʃɪp] 低成本领先M 21management by objective ['mænidʒmənt] [baɪ] [əb'dʒɛktɪv]目标管理Managerial Grid [,mænə'dʒɪrɪəl] [ɡrɪd] 管理方格matrix bosses ['metrɪks] [bɔsiz] 矩阵主管management champion ['mænɪdʒmənt] ['tʃæmpɪən] 管理倡导者materials-requirements planning(MRP) [mə'tiəriəlz] [ri'kwaiəmənts] ['plænɪŋ]物料需求计划Maslow’s hierarchy of needs ['mæzləu] ['haɪərɑrki] [əv] [nid] 马斯洛需求层次论marketing argument ['mɑrkɪtɪŋ] ['ɑrɡjumənt] 管理文化多元化营销观market segmentation['mɑrkɪt][,sɛɡmɛn'teʃən]市场划分;市场细分multiculturalism [,mʌltɪ'kʌltʃərəlɪzm] 文化多元主义multi-divisional firm ['mʌlti] [də'vɪʒənl] [fɝm] 多部门公司moral rules ['mɔrəl] [rulz]道德准则management by walking around(MBWA) ['mænɪdʒmənt] [baɪ] ['wɔkɪŋ] [ə'raʊnd]走动式管理matrix structure ['metrɪks] ['strʌktʃɚ]矩阵结构multinational enterprise(MNE) [,mʌltɪ'næʃnəl] ['ɛntɚ'praɪz]跨国公司moral relativism ['mɔrəl] ['rɛlətɪvɪzəm] 道德相对主义mechanistic system [,mɛkə'nɪstɪk] ['sɪstəm] 机械式组织middle-of-the-road management ['mɪdl] [əv] [ðə] [rod] ['mænɪdʒmənt]中庸式管理meso theory ['mɛso] ['θiəri] 常态理论multi-domestic strategy ['mʌlti] [də'mɛstɪk] ['strætədʒi] 多国化战略mediating technology ['miːdɪeɪtɪŋ] [tɛk'nɑlədʒi] 调停技术motivation[,motə'veʃən] 动机;积极性;推动N 9naïve relativism [naɪ'iv] ['rɛlətɪvɪzəm] 朴素相对主义need-achievement [nid] [ə'tʃivmənt] 成就需要net asset [nɛt] ['æsɛt]净资产norming ['nɔ:miŋ] 规范化norms [nɔ:ms] 规范non-programmed decisions [nɑn 'proɡrəmd] [dɪ'sɪʒnz]非程序化决策non-substitutability [nɑn,səbstə,tjutə'biləti]非替代性non-routine technology [nɑn rʊ'tin] [tɛk'nɑlədʒi] 非例行技术niche [nitʃ] 领地; 壁龛;合适的职业;小众O 14off-the-job training ['ɔfðə'dʒɔb ] ['trenɪŋ ] 脱产培训on-the-job training ['ɑnðə'dʒɔb ] ['trenɪŋ ] 在职培训operation[,ɑpə'reʃən]运营operational budget ['ɑpə'reʃənl] ['bʌdʒɪt] 运营预算order backlog ['ɔrdɚ] ['bæklɔɡ] 订单储备organic system [ɔr'gænɪk] ['sɪstəm] 有机系统organizational development(OD) [,ɔɡənɪ'zeʃənəl] [dɪ'vɛləpmənt]组织发展organizational hierarchies [,ɔɡənɪ'zeʃənəl] ['haɪə,rɑrki] 组织层级;组织架构organizing for innovation['ɔrgə,naɪz ɪŋ] [fɔː] [,ɪnə'veʃən]组织创新orientation [orɪɛn'teʃən] 定位outcome interdependence ['aʊt'kʌm] [,ɪntɚdɪ'pɛndəns]结果的相互依赖性outplacement services ['aʊtplesmənt] ['sə:visis] 外延服务overconfidence['ovɚ'kɑnfɪdəns] 过分相信;自负organization ecosystem [,ɔ:ɡənai'zeiʃən] ['ɛko,sɪstəm] 组织生态系统P 27paradox of authority ['pærədɑks] [əv] [ə'θɔrəti]权威的矛盾paradox of creativity ['pærədɑks] [əv] [,krie'tɪvəti] 创造力的矛盾paradox of disclosure ['pærədɑks] [əv] [dɪs'kloʒɚ] 开放的矛盾paradox of identify ['pærədɑks] [əv], [aɪ'dɛntɪfaɪ] 身份的矛盾paradox of individuality ['pærədɑks] [əv] [,ɪndɪ,vɪdʒu'æləti] 个性的矛盾paradox of regression ['pærədɑks] [əv] [rɪ'ɡrɛʃən] 回归的矛盾partial productivity ['pɑrʃəl] [,prodʌk'tɪvəti] 部分生产率participative management [pɑ:'tisipə,tiv] ['mænɪdʒmənt] 参与式管理path-goal model [pæθ] [ɡol] ['mɑdl] 路径目标模型peer recruiter [pɪr] [rɪ'krʊtɚ] 同级招聘political action committees(PACs) [pə'lɪtɪkl] ['ækʃən] [kə'mitiz]政治活动委员会polycentric manager [pɑlɪ'sɛntrɪk] ['mænɪdʒɚ]多中心管理者portfolio framework [pɔrt'folɪo] ['fremwɝk] 业务组合框架portfolio investment [pɔrt'folɪo] [ɪn'vɛstmənt] 资产组合投资positive reinforcement ['pɑzətɪv] [,riɪn'fɔrsmənt] 正强化production flexibility [prə'dʌkʃən] [,flɛksə'bɪləti] 生产柔性profitability [,prɑfɪtə'bɪləti] 收益率; 赢利能力;利益率programmed decisions ['proɡr æ md] [dɪ'sɪʒən]程序化决策psychoanalytic view ['saɪko,ænl'ɪtɪk] [vju]精神分析法paradigm ['pærə'daɪm] 范式; 典范personal ratios ['pɝsənl] ['reʃoz]人员比例pooled dependence [puld] [dɪ'pɛndəns]集合性依存professional bureaucracy [prə'feʃənəl] [bjʊ'rɑkrəsi]专业官僚机构problem identification ['prɑbləm] [aɪ'dɛntəfə'keʃən]问题识别problemistic search ['prɔbləmistik] [sɝtʃ]问题搜寻population ecology model [,pɔpju'leiʃən] [ɪ'kɑlədʒi] ['mɑdl]种群生态模型public financing['pʌblɪk] [fɪ'nænsɪŋ]公共融资Q 4quality ['kwɑləti]质量quality circle ['kwɑləti] ['sɝkl] 质量圈question mark ['kwɛstʃən] [mɑːk] 问题类市场quid pro quo ['kwidprəu'kwəu] 交换物; 补偿物;相等物;交换条件;让步条件R 11rational approach ['ræʃnəl] [ə'protʃ] 理性方法rational model ['ræʃnəl] ['mɑdl] 理性模型rational-legal authority ['ræʃnəl] ['ligl] [ə'θɔrəti]理性—合法权威rational model of decision making ['ræʃnəl] ['mɑdl] [əv] [dɪ'sɪʒn] ['mek ɪŋ]理性决策模式realistic job preview(RJP) [,riə'lɪstɪk] [dʒɒb] ['pri'vjʊ]实际工作预览; 述评;reciprocal interdependence [rɪ'sɪprəkl] [,ɪntɚdɪ'pɛndəns] 相互依存性resource dependence ['risɔrs] [dɪ'pɛndəns] 资源依赖理论retention [rɪ'tɛnʃən] 保留reward system[rɪ'wɔrd] ['sɪstəm]薪酬体系routine technology [rʊ'tin] [tɛk'nɑlədʒi] 例行技术rules [rulz] 规则;条例S 39semivariable cost [,sɛmaɪ'vɛərɪəbl] [kɔst] 准可变成本sense of potency [sɛns] [əv] ['potnsi]力量感sensitivity training ['sɛnsə'tɪvəti] ['trenɪŋ]敏感性训练sexual harassment ['sɛʃʊəl] [hə'ræsmənt] 性骚扰short-run capacity changes ['ʃɔ:t'rʌn] [kə'pæsəti] [tʃendʒ] 短期生产能力变化single-strand chain ['sɪŋɡl] [strænd] [tʃen] 单向传言链situational approach [sɪtʃʊ'eʃənəl] [ə'protʃ] 情境方法situational force [sɪtʃʊ'eʃənəl] [fɔrs] 情境力量; 情境压力situational leadership theory [sɪtʃʊ'eʃənəl] ['lidɚʃɪp] ['θiəri] 情境领导理论sliding-scale budget ['slaɪdɪŋ] [skel] ['bʌdʒɪt] 移动规模预算small-batch production [smɔl] [bætʃ] [prə'dʌkʃən] 小规模生产sociotechnical approaches ['soʃiə 'tɛknɪkl] [ə'protʃiz]社会科技方法span of management [spæn] [əv] ['mænɪdʒmənt]管理幅度staff authority [stæf] [ə'θɔrəti] 参谋职权; 辅助权限standing plan ['stændɪŋ] [plæn]长设计划step budget [stɛp] ['bʌdʒɪt] 分步预算stewardship principle ['stuɚdʃɪp] ['prɪnsəpl] 管家原则stimulus ['stɪmjələs] 刺激storming ['stɔrmɪŋ] 激荡期;调整阶段strategic acquisitions[strə'tidʒɪk] [,ækwɪ'zɪʃən]战略并购strategic human resources[strə'tidʒɪk] ['hjumən] [ri'zɔ:siz]战略人力资源strategic maketing [strə'tidʒɪk] ['mɑrkɪtɪŋ]战略市场营销strategic management [strə'tidʒɪk] ['mænɪdʒmənt] 战略管理strategic partnering [strə'tidʒɪk] ['pɑrtnɚɪŋ]战略伙伴关系strategy formulation ['strætədʒi] [,fɔrmjə'leʃən] 战略制定strategy implementation ['strætədʒi] [,ɪmpləmɛn'teʃən] 战略实施strategic control [strə'tidʒɪk] [kən'trol] 战略控制strategic contingencies [strə'tidʒɪk] [kən'tɪndʒənsiz] 战略权变satisficing ['sætisfaisiŋ] 满意;满意法;满意度subsystems [sʌb 'sɪstəmz]子系统subunits [sʌb'junɪt] 子单位synergy ['sɪnɚdʒi]协同system boundary ['sɪstəm] ['baʊndri]系统边界structure dimension ['strʌktʃɚ] [daɪ'mɛnʃən] 结构性维度sequential interdependence [sɪ'kwɛnʃl] [,ɪntɚdɪ'pɛndəns]序列性依存; 相互依存self-directed team[,self di'rektid] [tim]自我管理型团队specialist ['spɛʃəlɪst] 专家;专门战略strategy and structure changes ['strætədʒi] [ənd] ['strʌktʃɚ] [tʃendʒz]战略与结构变革symptoms of structural deficiency ['sɪmptəm] [əv] ['strʌktʃərəl] [dɪ'f ɪʃənsi]结构无效的特征T 17tall hierarchies [tɔl] ['haɪə,rɑrki] 高长型科层结构task force or project team [tæsk] [fɔrs] [əv] ['prɒdʒekt] [tim] 任务小组或项目团队task independence [tæsk] [,ɪndɪ'pɛndəns]任务的内部依赖性task management [tæsk]['mænɪdʒmənt] 任务型管理task-oriented style [tæsk] ['orɪɛntɪd] [staɪl] 任务导向型管理风格team process [tim] ['prɑsɛs] 团队进程;团队合作total productivity ['totl] [,prodʌk'tɪvəti] 总生产率total quality management ['totl] ['kwɑləti] ['mænɪdʒmənt]全面质量管理trade agreement [treid] [ə'grimənt] 贸易协定;雇用合同;劳资协议training positions ['trenɪŋ] [pə'zɪʃənz]挂职培训training program ['trenɪŋ] ['proɡræm]培训程序transactional leaders [trænz'ækʃənl] ['lidɚz]交易型领导transformational leaders [,trænzfə'meʃənəl] ['lidɚz]变革型领导treatment discrimination ['tritmənt] [dɪ,skrɪmɪ'neʃən] 歧视待遇two-factory theory [tu] ['fæktri]['θiəri] 双因素理论two-boss employees [tu] [bɔs] [,ɛmplɔɪ'iz]双重主管员工technical or product champion ['tɛknɪkl] [ɔr] ['prɑdʌkt] ['tʃæmpɪən] 技术或产品的倡导者U 2unfreezing [ʌn'friz] 解冻unit production ['junɪt] [prə'dʌkʃən]单位产品V 11variation [,vɛrɪ'eʃən]变化;[生物] 变异,变种variety [və'raɪəti]变量valence ['veləns] 效价variable costs ['vɛrɪəbl] [kɔsts] 可变成本vertical communication ['vɝtɪkl] [kə,mjunɪ'keʃən] 纵向沟通vertical integration ['vɝtɪkl] ['ɪntə'greʃən] 纵向一体化vestibule training ['vɛstɪbjul] ['trenɪŋ] 仿真培训volume flexibility ['vɑljum] [,flɛksə'bɪləti] 产量的可伸缩性vertical linkage ['vɝtɪkl] ['lɪŋkɪdʒ]纵向连接venture team ['vɛntʃɚ] [tim] 风险团队value based leadership ['vælju] [best] ['lidɚʃɪp] 基于价值的领导W 7win-lose situation [wɪn] [luz] [,sɪtʃu'eʃən] 输赢情境win-win situation ['wɪn'wɪn] [,sɪtʃu'eʃən] 双赢情境workforce literacy ['wɝkfɔrs] ['lɪtərəsi]员工的读写能力work in progress [wɝk] [ɪn] ['prɑɡrɛs]在制品work flow redesign [wɝk] [flo] [,ridɪ'zaɪn] 工作流程再造成work flow automation [wɝk] [flo] [,ɔtə'meʃən]工作流程自动化whistle blowing ['wɪsl] ['bloɪŋ]揭发;举报Z 2zero-sum ['ziro'sʌm]零和;零和博弈zone of indifference(area of acceptance) [zon] [əv] [ɪn'dɪfrəns](['ɛr ɪə] [əv] [ək'sɛptəns])无差异区域(可接受区域)。
6西格玛绿带培训教材(1)

DAY 5 (Analyze Phase分析階段):
4 (或)海量资料下载 点同职场助手频道 (或)海量ቤተ መጻሕፍቲ ባይዱ料下载 提供管理培训讲座光盘,VCD5元 压缩DVD光盘10元起, DVD光盘10元起 提供管理培训讲座光盘,VCD5元/盘,压缩DVD光盘10元起,非刻录光盘
DAY2 第二天(Variance Reduction降低变差的理解):
- The power of Plato chart and the 80/20 rules柏拉圖表的功能和80/20的規則 - Construction of a Plato Chart using computer - flow diagram and its associated symbols流程圖和其制作符號含義 - Two 实例of flow diagram (using a common scenario)兩個流程圖的實例(使用通用的情節) - Barriers that hinder 6西格玛implementation阻礙開展執行六西格瑪的因素 ------------------------------------Break---------------------------------------------- What is FMEA 什么是FMEA - Example of FMEA關于FMEA的實例 - Group exercise on FMEA of barriers to 6西格玛implementation - FMEA presentations關于FMEA的介紹 ------------------------------------Lunch---------------------------------------------- Concept of precision and accuracy對准確和准確的理解(Cp和Ca) - How does it link to the mean and 标准偏差(如何將平均值和標准偏差聯系起來) - Precision and accuracy example (i.e. Selection of fund manager准確和精確的實際例子 -Catapult exercise I彈弓拋物發射器的思維練習一 ------------------------------------Break---------------------------------------------- Introducing concept of variance reduction (i.e. PF/CE/CNX/FMEA/SOP)介紹降低變差的觀念 -Variance reduction 脑力风暴exercise for Catapult用彈弓發射器進行降低變差的腦力風暴練習 -Catapult exercise II彈弓拋物發射器思維練習二 - Computation of Catapult exercise result after variance reduction評估計算彈弓發射器游戲中的 數據來了解降低變差的含義 - Discussion of variance contributors討論降低變差的意義 -第二天wrap up 在以上學習中通過彈弓發射器游戲的了解﹐在游戲中掌握了解在六西格瑪中(Variance
项目管理工具与方法中英文版

xiex 最新资料,WORD文档,可下载编辑!目录TABLE OF CONTENTS背景Background了解本指南Understanding This Guide八模块企业发展阶梯The 8 Module Business Development Ladder模块一:了解你的企业Module 1: Understanding What Business You Are In概述Overview ......................................................................................................................................主要学习目标Key Learning Objectives ..............................................................................................工具Tools .............................................................................................................................................典型的模块一程序Typical Module 1 Program...................................................................................需完成的任务Tasks to Be Completed................................................................................................. 模块二:了解顾客、市场和产品Module 2: Understanding the Customers,Markets and Products概述Overview ......................................................................................................................................主要学习目标Key Learning Objectives (30)工具Tools .............................................................................................................................................典型模块二程序Typical Module 2 Program.......................................................................................需完成的任务Tasks to Be Completed................................................................................................. 模块三:确定商业模式Module 3: Defining the Business Model概述Overview ......................................................................................................................................主要学习目标Key Learning Objectives ..............................................................................................工具Tools .............................................................................................................................................典型的模块三程序Typical Module 3 Program...................................................................................需完成的任务Tasks to Be Completed.................................................................................................需完成的任务Tasks to Be Completed................................................................................................. 模块四:员工授权Module 4: Team Empowerment46对企业业绩进行管理Managing Organisational Performance ............................................................主要学习目标Key Learning Objectives ..............................................................................................工具Tools .............................................................................................................................................需完成的任务Tasks to Be Completed................................................................................................. 模块五:市场营销战略计划Module 5: Strategic Marketing Plan概述Overview ......................................................................................................................................主要学习目标Key Learning Objectives ..............................................................................................工具Tools .............................................................................................................................................典型的模块五程序Typical Module 5 Program...................................................................................需完成的任务Tasks to Be Completed................................................................................................. 模块六:企业系统化Module 6: Business Independence 114概述Overview ......................................................................................................................................主要学习目标Key Learning Objectives ..............................................................................................工具Tools ........................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。
THE MICROECONOMICS OF EFFICIENT GROUP BEHAVIOR -- idetification

Econometrica,Vol.77,No.3(May,2009),763–799THE MICROECONOMICS OF EFFICIENT GROUP BEHAVIOR:IDENTIFICATION1B Y P.-A.C HIAPPORI AND I.E KELANDConsider a group consisting of S members facing a common budget constraint p ξ=1:any demand vector belonging to the budget set can be(privately or publicly)consumed by the members.Although the intragroup decision process is not known,it is assumed to generate Pareto-efficient outcomes;neither individual consumptionsnor intragroup transfers are observable.The paper analyzes when,to what extent,andunder which conditions it is possible to recover the underlying structure—individualpreferences and the decision process—from the group’s aggregate behavior.We showthat the general version of the model is not identified.However,a simple exclusion as-sumption(whereby each member does not consume at least one good)is sufficient toguarantee generic identifiability of the welfare-relevant structural concepts.K EYWORDS:Collective model,household behavior,nonparametric identification, exterior differential calculus,labor supply,public goods.1.INTRODUCTIONGroup Behavior:The“Black Box”and BeyondC ONSIDER A GROUP consisting of S members.The group has limited resources; specifically,its global consumption vectorξmust satisfy a standard market budget constraint of the form p ξ=y(where p is a vector of prices and y is to-tal group income).Any demand vector belonging to the global budget set thus defined can be consumed by the members.Some of the goods can be privately consumed,while others may be publicly used.The decision process within the group is not known and is only assumed to generate Pareto-efficient outcomes.2 Finally,the intragroup allocation of resources or consumptions is not observ-able.In other words,the group is perceived as a“black box”;only its aggregate behavior,summarized by the demand functionξ(p y),is recorded.The goal 1This paper presented at seminars in Chicago,Paris,T el Aviv,New Y ork,Banff and London. We thank the participants for their comments.Also,we are indebted to the editor,Eddie Dekel, two anonymous referees,and especially Ian Preston for valuable suggestions.This research re-ceivedfinancial support from the NSF(Grant SBR0532398).2We view efficiency as a natural assumption in many contexts,and as a natural benchmark in all cases.For instance,the analysis of household behavior often takes the“collective”point of view,where efficiency is the basic postulate.Other models,in particular in the literature on firm behavior,are based on cooperative game theory in a symmetric information context,where efficiency is paramount(see,for instance,the“insider–outsider”literature and,more generally, the models involving bargaining between management and workers or unions).The analysis of intragroup risk sharing,starting with T ownsend’s(1994)seminal paper,provides other interest-ing examples.Finally,even in the presence of asymmetric information,first best efficiency is a natural benchmark.For instance,a large part of the empirical literature on contract theory tests models involving asymmetric information against the null of symmetric information andfirst best efficiency(see Chiappori and Salanie(2000)for a recent survey).©2009The Econometric Society DOI:10.3982/ECTA5929764P.-A.CHIAPPORI AND I.EKELANDof the present paper is to provide answers to the following,general question: When is it possible to recover the underlying structure—namely,individual preferences,the decision process,and the resulting intragroup transfers—from the group’s aggregate behavior?In the(very)particular case where the group consists of only one member, the answer is well known:individual demand uniquely defines the underly-ing preferences.Not much is known in the case of a larger group.However, recent results in the literature on household behavior suggest that,surpris-ingly enough,when the group is small,the structure can be recovered under reasonably mild assumptions.For instance,in the model of household labor supply proposed by Chiappori(1988a,1988b,1992),two individuals privately consume leisure and some Hicksian composite good.The main conclusion is that the two individual preferences and the decision process can generically be recovered(up to an additive constant)from the two labor supply functions. This result has been empirically applied by(among others)Fortin and Lacroix (1997)and Chiappori,Fortin,and Lacroix(2002),and extended by Chiap-pori(1997)to household production and by Blundell,Chiappori,Magnac, and Meghir(2007)to discrete participation decisions.Fong and Zhang(2001) considered a more general model where leisure can be consumed both pri-vately and publicly.Although the two alternative uses are not independently observed,they can in general be identified under a separability restriction, provided that the consumption of another exclusive good(e.g.,clothing)is ob-served.Altogether,these results suggest that there is information to be gained on the contents of the black box.In a companion paper(Chiappori and Ekeland (2006)),we investigated the properties of aggregate behavior stemming from the efficiency assumption.We concluded that when the group is small enough, a lot of structure is imposed on collective demand by this basic assumption: there exist strong,testable,restrictions on the way the black box may operate. The main point of the present paper is complementary.We investigate to what extent and under which conditions it is possible to recover much(or all)of the interior structure of the black box without opening it.Wefirst show that in the most general case,there exists a continuum of observationally equivalent models,that is,a continuum of different structural settings generating identical observable behavior.This negative result implies that additional assumptions are required.We then provide examples of such assumptions and show that they are sur-prisingly mild.Essentially,it is sufficient that each agent in the group be ex-cluded from consumption of(at least)one commodity.Moreover,when a “distribution factor”(see below)is available,this requirement can be reduced to the existence of an assignable good(i.e.,a private good for which individ-ual consumptions are observed).Under these conditions,the welfare-relevant structure is nonparametrically identifiable in general(in a sense,that is,made clear below),irrespective of the total number of commodities.We conclude thatMICROECONOMICS OF GROUP BEHAVIOR765 even when decision processes or intragroup transfers are not known,much can be learned about them from the sole observation of the group’s aggre-gate behavior.This conclusion generalizes the earlier intuition of Chiappori (1988a,1988b,1992);it shows that the results obtained in these early contri-butions,far from being specific to the particular settings under consideration, were in fact general.Identifiability and IdentificationFrom a methodological perspective,it may be useful to define more pre-cisely what is meant by“recovering the underlying structure.”The structure, in our case,is defined by the(strictly convex)preferences of individuals in the group and the decision process.Because of the efficiency assumption,for any particular cardinalization of individual utilities,the decision process is fully summarized by the Pareto weights corresponding to the outcome at stake.The structure thus consists of in a set of individual preferences(with a particular cardinalization)and Pareto weights(with some normalization,e.g.,the sum of Pareto weights is taken to be1).Whether the underlying structure can be recovered from the group’s aggre-gate behavior raises two different issues.One,usually called the identifiability problem,is whether the demand functionξ(p y)uniquely defines preferences and Pareto weights,possibly within a specific class(e.g.,differentiable func-tions or utilities of a particular functional form).A second and independent issues deals with the possibility of recovering the functionξ(p y)from avail-able data;it involves specific econometric problems,such as endogeneity,mea-surement errors,or the introduction of unobserved heterogeneity.The present paper deals only with the former question;that is,we want tofind conditions under which the standard,integrability result of consumer theory(whereby an individual demand function uniquely identifies the underlying preferences) extends to a nonunitary setting.It is important to note that our approach is fundamentally nonparametric,in the sense that uniqueness obtains in a very large class of functions(typically,twice differentiable mappings).While most existing,empirical work on the topic is parametric,we argue that the conclu-sions drawn from parametric estimations are much more reliable when the underlying model is nonparametrically identifiable,since otherwise any recom-mendation made on the basis of the empirical results crucially relies on the arbitrary choice of a particular functional form.33Of course,this discussion should not be interpreted too strictly.In the end,identifying as-sumptions are(almost)always needed.The absence of nonparametric identifiability,thus,should not necessarily be viewed as a major weakness.We believe,however,that it justifies a more cau-tious interpretation of the estimates.More importantly,we submit,as a basic,methodological rule that an explicit analysis of nonparametric identifiability is a necessaryfirst step in any consis-tent empirical strategy—if only to suggest the most adequate identifying assumptions.Applying this approach to collective models is indeed the main purpose of this paper.766P.-A.CHIAPPORI AND I.EKELANDDistribution FactorsAn important tool to achieve identifiability is the presence of distribution fac-tors;see Bourguignon,Browning,and Chiappori(2009).These are defined as variables that can affect group behavior only through their impact on the deci-sion process.Think,for instance,of the choices as resulting from a bargaining process.T ypically,the outcomes will depend on the members’respective bar-gaining positions;hence,any factor of the group’s environment that may in-fluence these positions(EEPs in McElroy’s(1990)terminology)potentially af-fects the outcome.Such effects are of course paramount,and their relevance is not restricted to bargaining in any particular sense.In general,group behavior depends not only on preferences and budget constraint,but also on the mem-bers’respective“power”in the decision process.Any variable that changes the powers may have an impact on observed collective behavior.In many cases,distribution factors are readily observable.An example is pro-vided by the literature on household behavior.In their study of household la-bor supply,Chiappori,Fortin,and Lacroix(2002)used the state of the mar-riage market,as proxied by the sex ratio by age,race,and state,and the legis-lation on divorce as particular distribution factors affecting the intrahousehold decision process and thereby its outcome,that is,labor supplies.They found, indeed,that factors more favorable to women significantly decrease(resp.in-crease)female(resp.male)labor ing similar tools,Oreffice(2007) concluded that the legalization of abortion had a significant impact on intra-household allocation of power.In a similar context,Rubalcava and Thomas (2000)used the generosity of single parent benefits and reached identical conclusions.Thomas,Contreras,and Frankenberg(1997),using an Indone-sian survey,showed that the distribution of wealth by gender at marriage—another candidate distribution factor—has a significant impact on children’s health in those areas where wealth remains under the contributor’s control.4 Duflo(2000)has derived related conclusions from a careful analysis of a re-form of the South African social pension program that extended benefits to a large,previously not covered black population.She found that the recipient’s gender—a typical distribution factor—is of considerable importance for the consequences of the transfers on children’s health.Whenever the aggregate group demand is observable as a function of prices and distribution factors,one can expect that identifiability may be easier to ob-tain.This is actually known to be the case in particular situations.For instance, Chiappori,Fortin,and Lacroix(2002)showed how the use of distribution fac-tors allows a simpler and more robust estimation of a collective model of labor supply.In the present paper,we generalize these results by providing a general analysis of the estimation of collective models in different contexts,with and without distribution factors.4See also Galasso(1999)for a similar investigation.MICROECONOMICS OF GROUP BEHAVIOR 767The ResultsOur main conclusions can be summarized as follows:•In its most general formulation,the model is not identifiable.Any given aggregate demand that is compatible with efficiency can be derived either from a model with private consumption only or from a model with public consumption only.Moreover,even when it is assumed that all consump-tions are private (or that they are all public or that some commodities are privately and other publicly consumed),in the absence of consumption ex-clusion there exists a continuum of different structural models that generate the same aggregate demand.•A simple exclusion assumption is in general sufficient to guarantee full,non-parametric identifiability of the welfare-relevant structure.Specifically,we define the collective indirect utility of each member as the utility level that member ultimately reaches for given prices,household income,and possibly distribution factors,taking into account the allocation of resources prevail-ing within the household.We show the following result:if each agent of the group is excluded from consumption of (at least)one commodity,then,in general,the collective indirect utility of each member can be recovered (up to some increasing transform),irrespective of the total number of commodi-ties.Our general conclusion,hence,is that one consumption exclusion per agent is sufficient to identify all welfare-relevant aspects of the collective model.Moreover,when distribution factors are available,one assignable good (i.e.,a private good for which individual consumptions are observed)only is suf-ficient for identifiability.Section 2describes the model.The formal structure of the identifiability problem is analyzed in Section 3.Sections 4–6consider the case of two-person groups.Section 4characterizes the limits to identifiability in a general context.Identification under exclusivity or generalized separability assumptions is dis-cussed in Section 5and applied to specific economic frameworks in Section 6.Section 7briefly discusses the extension to the general case of S -person groups.2.THE MODEL2.1.PreferencesWe consider an S -person group.There exist N commodities,n of which are privately consumed within the group while the remaining K =N −n commodities are public.Purchases 5are denoted by the vector x ∈R N .Here,x =( s x s X),where x s ∈R n denotes the vector of private consumption by agent s and X ∈R K is the household’s public consumption.6The correspond-5Formally,purchases could include leisure;then the price vector includes the wages—or virtual wages for nonparticipants.6Throughout the paper,x i s denotes the private consumption of commodity i by agent s .768P.-A.CHIAPPORI AND I.EKELANDing prices are(p P)∈R N=R n×R K and household income is y,giving the budget constraintp (x1+···+x S)+P X=yEach member has her/his own preferences over the goods consumed in the group.In the most general case,each member’s preferences can depend on other members’private and public consumptions;this allows for altruism,but also for externalities or any other preference interaction.The utility of mem-ber s is then of the form U s(x1 x S X).We shall say that the function U s is normal if it is strictly increasing in(x s X),twice continuously differentiable in (x1 x S X),and the matrix of second derivatives is negative definite.We shall see that identifiability does not obtain in the general setting of nor-mal utilities.Therefore,throughout most of the paper we use a slightly less general framework.Specifically,we concentrate on egoistic preferences,de-fined as follows:D EFINITION1:The preferences of agent s are egoistic if they can be repre-sented by a utility function of the form U s(x s X)In words,preferences are egoistic if each agent only cares about his private consumption and the household’s vector of public goods.Most of our results can be extended to allow for preferences of the caring type(i.e.,agent s max-imizes an index of the form W s(U1 U S);however,we will not discuss the identifiability of the W s.7Finally,we shall denote by z∈R d the vector of dis-tribution factors.2.2.The Decision ProcessWe now consider the mechanism that the group uses to decide what to buy. Note,first,that if the functions U1 U S represent the same preferences, then we are in a unitary model where the common utility is maximized under the budget constraint.The same conclusion obtains if one of the partners can act as a dictator and impose her(or his)preferences as the group’s maximand. Clearly,these are very particular cases.In general,the process that takes place within the group is more complex.Following the collective approach,we shall throughout the paper postulate efficiency,as expressed in the following axiom:7Each allocation that is efficient with respect to the W s must also be efficient with respect to the U s.The converse is not true(e.g.,an allocation which is too unequal may fail to be efficient for the W s),a property that has sometimes been used to achieve identification(see Browning and Lechène(2001)).MICROECONOMICS OF GROUP BEHAVIOR 769A XIOM 2—Efficiency:The outcome of the group decision process is Pareto-efficient ;that is ,for any prices (p P),income y ,and distribution factors z ,the consumption (x 1 x S X)chosen by the group is such that no other vector (¯x1 ¯x S ¯X)in the budget set could make all members better off ,one of them strictly so .The axiom can be restated as follows:There exist S scalar functions μs (p P y z)≥0 1≤s ≤S ,the Pareto weights,normalized by s μs =1,such that (x 1 x S X)solvesmax x 1 x S Xμs (p P y z)U s (x 1 x S X) (Pr)p (x 1+···+x S )+P X =yFor any given utility functions U 1 U S and any price–income bundle,the budget constraint defines a Pareto frontier for the group.From the efficiency axiom,the final outcome will be located on this frontier.It is well known that,for every (p P y z),any point on the Pareto frontier can be obtained as a so-lution to problem (Pr ):the vector μ(p P y z),which belongs to the (S −1)-dimensional simplex,summarizes the decision process because it determines the final location of the demand vector on this frontier.The map μdescribes the distribution of power.If one of the weights,μs ,is equal to 1for every (p P y z),then the group behaves as though s is the effective dictator.For intermediate values,the group behaves as though each person s has some de-cision power,and the person’s weight μs can be seen as an indicator of this power.8It is important to note that the weights μs will in general depend on prices p ,P ,income y ,and distribution factors z ,since these variables may in prin-ciple influence the distribution of power within the group,hence the location of the final choice over the Pareto frontier.Three additional remarks can be made:•While prices enter both Pareto weights and the budget constraint,distribu-tion factors matter only (if at all)through their impact on μ.•We assume throughout the paper the absence of monetary illusion.In par-ticular,the μs are zero-homogeneous in (p P y).•Following Browning and Chiappori (1998),we add some structure by assum-ing that the μs (p P y z)are continuously differentiable for s =1 S .8This interpretation must be used with care,since the Pareto coefficient μs obviously depends on the particular cardinalization adopted for individual preferences;in particular,μs >μt does not necessarily mean that s has more power than t .However,the variations of μs are significant,in the sense that for any given cardinalization,a policy change that increases μs while leaving μt constant unambiguously ameliorates the position of s relative to t .770P.-A.CHIAPPORI AND I.EKELANDFrom now on,we setπ=(p P)∈R N.2.3.Characterization of Aggregate DemandIn a companion paper(Chiappori and Ekeland(2006)),we derived neces-sary and sufficient conditions for a functionξ(π y z)to be the aggregate de-mand of an efficient S-member group.For the sake of completeness,we briefly restate these conditions.Let usfirst omit the dependence on distribution fac-tors,and normalize household income to1.Then we can make the following statements:•If a functionξ(π)is the aggregate demand of an efficient S-member group, then its Slutsky matrix can be decomposed as(1)S(π)=Σ(π)+R(π)where the matrixΣis symmetric and negative and the matrix R is of rank at most S−1.Equivalently,there exists a subspace R of dimension at least N−(S−1)such that the restriction of S(π)to R is symmetric and negative.•Conversely,if a“smooth enough”mapξ(π)satisfies Walras’lawπ ξ=y and condition(1)in some neighborhood of¯π,and if the Jacobian ofξat ¯πhas maximum rank,thenξ(π)can locally be obtained as the aggregate demand of an efficient S-member group;that is,one can(locally)recover S utility functions of the general form U s(x1 x S X)and S Pareto weights μs(π)≥0such thatξ(π)is the collective demand associated with problem (Pr).We then say thatξis S-admissible.Relation(1)was initially derived by Browning and Chiappori(1998);it is known as the(symmetric negative plus rank S−1)SNR(S−1)condi-tion.A natural question is whether more knowledge about intragroup consump-tion will generate stronger restrictions.Assume,for instance,that commodities are known to be privately consumed,so that the utility functions are of the form U s(x s);alternatively assume that consumption is exclusively public,so that the preferences are U s(X).Does the preceding result still hold when utilities are constrained to belong to these specific classes?Interestingly enough,the an-swer is positive.In fact,it is impossible to distinguish the two cases by only looking at the local structure of the aggregate demand.9In the paper men-tioned above,we proved that whenever a functionξis S-admissible,then it can be(locally)obtained as a Pareto-efficient aggregate demand for a group in which all consumptions are public,and it can also be(locally)obtained as a9Global conditions may however exist;see Cherchye,De Rock,and Vermeulen(2007a,2007b) for a revealed-preferences approach.MICROECONOMICS OF GROUP BEHAVIOR771 Pareto-efficient aggregate demand for a group in which all consumptions are private.Finally,the same paper provides necessary conditions on the effect of distri-bution factors.2.4.Identifiability:The General ProblemFollowing the discussion above,we now raise the question of identifiability: Q UESTION A—Identifiability:Take an arbitrary demand functionξ(π y z) satisfying the SNR(S−1)condition(1).Is there a unique family of preference relations on R N,represented by utility functions U s(x1 x S X)(unique up to an increasing transformation)and,for each cardinalization of preferences, a unique family of differentiable Pareto weightsμs(π y z),1≤s≤S,withμs=1,such thatξ(π y z)is the aggregate demand associated with prob-lem(Pr)?Question A refers to what could be called a nonparametric definition of identifiability,because uniqueness is required within the general set of well-behaved functions,rather than within the set of functions sharing a specific parametric form in which only afinite number of parameters can be varied.It should be clear that in the most general version of the model we consider, identifiability cannot obtain.A demand function that satisfies SNR(S−1)is compatible with(at least)two different structural models:one where all com-modities are privately consumed and one in which all consumption is pub-lic.Quite obviously,these models have very different welfare implications,al-though they generate the same aggregate demand.This suggests that more specific assumptions are needed.In what follows, we assume that each commodity is either known to be privately consumed or known to be publicly consumed.Also,preferences are egoistic in the sense de-fined above.While these assumptions are natural,we shall actually see that they are not sufficient.The nature of the indeterminacy is deeper than sug-gested by the previous remark.Even with egoistic preferences—and,as a mat-ter of fact,even when consumptions are assumed to be either all public or, alternatively,all private—it is still the case that a continuum of different struc-tural models generates the same group demand function.In other words,iden-tifying restrictions are needed that go beyond egoistic preferences.In the remainder of the paper,we analyze the exact nature of such restric-tions.Wefirst investigate the mathematical structure underlying the model.We then prove a general result regarding uniqueness in this mathematical frame-work.Finally,we derive the specific results of interest.772P.-A.CHIAPPORI AND I.EKELAND3.THE MATHEMATICAL STRUCTURE OF THE IDENTIFIABILITY PROBLEM3.1.The Duality Between Private and Public Consumption3.1.1.Basic IntuitionWith egoistic preferences,program(Pr)above becomes:max x1 x S Xμs(p P y z)U s(x s X)(Pr )p (x1+···+x S)+P X=yLet x1(p P y z) x S(p P y z) X(p P y z)denote its solution.The household demand function is then(x(p P y z) X(p P y z)),where x=s x s.In what follows,we repeatedly use the duality between private and public consumption,a standard tool in public economics.In the neighborhood of a point(p P y z)such that D P X is of full rank,we can consider the change in variablesψ:R n+K+1+d→R n+K+1+dψ(p P y z)=(p X(p P y z) y z)The economic motivation for such a change in variables is clear.A basic in-sight underlying the duality between private and public goods is that,broadly speaking,quantities play for public goods the role of prices for private goods and conversely.Intuitively,in the case of private goods,all agents face the same price but consume different quantities,which add up to the group’s demand; with public goods,agents consume the same quantity,but face different(Lin-dahl)prices,which add up to the market price if the allocation is efficient.This suggest that whenever the direct demand function x(p)is a relevant concept for private consumption,then the inverse demand function P(X)should be used for public goods.The change of variableψallows us to implement this intuition.In particular,instead of considering the demand function(x X)as a function of(p P y z),we shall often consider(x P)as a function of (p X y z)(then the public prices P are implicitly determined by the condi-tion that demand for public goods must be equal to X while private prices are equal to p,income is y,and distribution factors are z).While these two viewpoints are clearly equivalent(one can switch from thefirst to the second and back using the changeψ),the computations are much easier (and more natural)in the second case.Finally,for the sake of clarity,we omit distribution factors for the moment and consider functions of(p X y) only.3.1.2.Conditional Sharing RulesWe now introduce the notion of a conditional sharing rule.It stems from the following result:L EMMA3:For given(p P),let(¯x1 ¯x S ¯X)denote a solution to(Pr ).De-fineρs(p X y)=p ¯x s(p X y)for s=1 S.Then¯x s solvesmax x s U s(x s X)(Pr s)p x s≤ρsP ROOF:Assume not.Then there exists some xs such that p xs≤ρs andU s(xs X)>U s(x s X).But then the allocation(¯x1 xs¯x S ¯X)is feasi-ble and Pareto dominates(¯x1 ¯x S ¯X),a contradiction.Q.E.D. In words,an efficient allocation can always be seen as stemming from a two stage decision process.10At stage1,members decide on the public pur-chases X and on the allocation of the remaining income y−P X between the members;member s receivesρs.At stage2,agents each choose their vector of private consumption,subject to their own budget constraint and taking the level of public consumption as given.The conditional sharing rule is the vector (ρ1 ρS);it generalizes the notion of sharing rule developed in collective models with private goods only(see,for instance,Chiappori(1992))because it is defined conditionally on the level of public consumption previously chosen. Of course,if all commodities are private(K=0),then the conditional shar-ing rule boils down to the standard notion.In all cases,it satisfies the budget constraints ρs=y−P X(2)The conditional sharing rule can be expressed either as a function of(p P y z),as above,or,using the change in variableψ,as a function of(p X y z). In thefirst case,ρis one-homogeneous in(p P y);in the second case,ρis one-homogeneous in(p y).1110Needless to say,we are not assuming that the actual decision process is in two stages.The result simply states that any efficient group behaves as if it was following a process of this type.11With a slight notational abuse,we use the same notationρin both cases.This convention avoids tedious distinctions in a context in which confusions are easy to avoid.。
领导力英语词汇大全了解领导力的相关英语词汇及领导力发展方法加深领导力话题讨论

领导力英语词汇大全了解领导力的相关英语词汇及领导力发展方法加深领导力话题讨论领导力是一个重要的概念,涉及到组织、管理以及与他人合作的能力。
在当今全球化的社会中,拥有良好的领导力是非常必要的。
本文将介绍一些与领导力相关的英语词汇,并探讨一些发展领导力的方法。
一、领导力英语词汇1. Leadership(领导力)这是最常用的词汇,指的是能够影响别人并推动组织向前发展的能力。
2. Vision(愿景)指的是领导者对未来的愿景和目标,以及为了实现这些目标而采取的策略和计划。
3. Communication(沟通)这是一种重要的领导力技能,包括有效地传达信息、倾听他人的观点并确保信息流动畅通。
4. Decision-making(决策)领导者需要在复杂的情况下做出明智的决策,这一决策过程通常涉及权衡不同的观点和利益。
5. Motivation(激励)指的是鼓舞和激发他人的动力,使他们能够为共同的目标努力工作。
6. Empowerment(授权)领导者通过授权他人,将责任和权力下放给团队成员,以激发他们的积极性和创造力。
7. Teamwork(团队合作)团队合作是领导者的一个重要职责,他们需要协调和管理团队成员,以实现共同的目标。
8. Conflict resolution(冲突解决)当团队成员之间出现分歧和冲突时,领导者需要采取适当的措施解决冲突,并维护团队的和谐。
9. Coaching(指导)领导者应该扮演着指导者的角色,帮助团队成员发现他们的潜力,并提供必要的支持和指导。
二、领导力发展方法1. 学习和发展领导者应该不断学习和发展自己的技能和知识。
他们可以通过参加专业培训、阅读相关书籍和文献以及与其他领导者交流来提高自己的领导力能力。
2. 自我反思领导者应该定期反思自己的做事方式和决策方式,找出自己的不足之处并加以改进。
他们可以通过与团队成员的沟通和反馈来了解自己的优点和改进的方向。
3. 培养良好的沟通技巧沟通是领导力的重要组成部分。
Quantum Groups and Noncommutative Geometry

a r X i v :h e p -t h /0006167v 1 21 J u n 2000QUANTUM GROUPS AND NONCOMMUTATIVE GEOMETRYShahn MajidSchool of Mathematical Sciences,Queen Mary and Westfield College University of London,Mile End Rd,London E14NS,UK November,1999Abstract Quantum groups emerged in the latter quarter of the 20th century as,on the one hand,a deep and natural generalisation of symmetry groups for certain integrable systems,and on the other as part of a generalisation of geometry itself powerful enough to make sense in the quantum domain.Just as the last century saw the birth of classical geometry,so the present century sees at its end the birth of this quantum or noncommutative geometry,both as an elegant mathematical reality and in the form of the first theoretical predictions for Planck-scale physics via ongoing astronomical measurements.Noncommutativity of spacetime,in particular,amounts to a postulated new force or physical effect called cogravity.I Introduction Now that quantum groups and their associated quantum geometry have been around for more than a decade,it is surely time to take stock.Where did quantum groups come from,what have they achieved and where are they going?This article,which is addressed to non-specialists (but should also be interesting for experts)tries to answer this on two levels.First of all on the level of quantum groups themselves as mathematical tools and building blocks for physical models.And,equally importantly,quantum groups and their associated noncommutative geometry in terms of their overall significance for mathematics and theoretical physics,i.e.,at a more conceptual level.Obviously this latter aspect will be very much my own perspective,which is that of a theoretical physicist who came to quantum groups a decade ago as a tool to unify quantum theory and gravity in an algebraic approach to Planck scale physics.This is in fact only one of the two main origins in physics of quantum groups;the other being integrable systems,which I will try to cover as well.Let me also say that noncommutative geometry has other approaches,notably the one of A.Connes coming out of operator theory.I will say something about this too,although,until recently,this has largely been a somewhat different approach.We start with the conceptual significance for theoretical physics.It seems clear to me that future generations looking back on the 20th century will regard the discovery of quantum mechanics in the 1920s,i.e.the idea to replace the coordinates x,p of classical mechanics bynoncommuting operators x,p,as one of its greatest achievements in our understanding of Nature, matched in its significance only by the unification of space and time as a theory of gravity.But whereas the latter was well-founded in the classical geometry of Newton,Gauss,Riemann and Poincar´e,quantum theory was something much more radical and mysterious.Exactly which variables in the classical theory should correspond to operators?They are local coordinates on phase space but how does the global geometry of the classical theory look in the quantum theory,what does it fully correspond to?The problem for most of this century was that the required mathematical structures to which the classical geometry might correspond had not been invented and such questions could not be answered.As I hope to convince the reader,quantum groups and their associated noncommutative geometry have led in the last decades of the20th century to thefirst definitive answers to this kind of question.There has in fact emerged a more or less systematic generalisation of geometry every bit as radical as the step from Euclidean to non-Euclidean,and powerful enough not to break down in the quantum domain.I do doubt very much that what we know today will be thefinal formulation,but it is a definitive step in a right and necessary direction and a turning point in the future development of mathematical and theoretical physics.For example,any attempt to build a theory of quantum gravity with classical starting point a smooth manifold–this includes loop-variable quantum gravity,string theory and quantum cosmology,is necessarily misguided except as some kind of effective approximation:smooth manifolds should come out of the algebraic structure of the quantum theory and not be a starting point for the latter. There is no evidence that the real world is any kind of smooth continuum manifold except as a macroscopic approximation and every reason to think that it is fundamentally not.I therefore doubt that any one of the above could be a‘theory everything’until it becomes an entirely algebraic theory founded in noncommutative geometry of some kind or other.Of course,this is my personal view.At any rate,I do not think that the fundamental importance of noncommutative geometry can be overestimated.First of all,anyone who does quantum theory is doing noncommutative geometry whether wanting to admit it or not,namely noncommutative geometry of the phase space.Less obvious but also true,we will see in Section II that if the position space is curved then the momentum space is by itself intrinsically noncommutative.If one gets this far then it is also natural that the position space or spacetime by itself could be noncommutative,which would correspond to a curved or nonAbelian momentum group.This is one of the bolder predictions coming out of noncommutative geometry.It has the simple physical interpretation as what I call cogravity,i.e.curvature or‘gravity’in momentum space.As such it is independent of i.e. dual to curvature or gravity in spacetime and would appear as a quite different and new physical effect.Theoretically cogravity can,for example,be detected as energy-dependence of the speed8185909510000500981200yearpapersFigure 1:Growth of research papers on quantum groupsof light.Moreover,even if cogravity was very weak,of the order of a Planck-scale effect,it could still in principle be detected by astronomical measurements at a cosmological level.Therefore,just in time for the new millennium,we have the possibility of an entirely new physical effect in Nature coming from fresh and conceptually sound new mathematics .Where quantum groups precisely come into this is as follows.Just as Lie groups and their associated homogeneous spaces provided definitive examples of classical differential geometry even before Riemann formulated their intrinsic structure as a theory of manifolds,so quantum groups and their associated quantum homogeneous spaces,quantum planes etc.,provide large (i.e.infinite)classes of examples of proven mathematical and physical worth and clear geomet-rical content on which to build and develop noncommutative differential geometry.They are noncommutative spaces in the sense that they have generators or ‘coordinates’like the non-commuting operators x ,p in quantum mechanics but with a much richer and more geometric algebraic structure than the Heisenberg or CCR algebra.In particular,I do not believe that one can build a theory of noncommutative differential geometry based on only one example such as the Heisenberg algebra or its variants (however fascinating)such as the much-studied noncommutative torus.One needs many more ‘sample points’in the form of natural and varied examples to obtain a valid general theory.By contrast,if one does a search of BIDS one finds,see Figure 1,vast numbers of papers in which the rich structure and applications of quantum groups are explored and justified in their own right (data complied from BIDS:published pa-pers since 1981with title or abstract containing ‘quantum group*’,‘Hopf alg*’,‘noncommutative geom*’,‘braided categ*’,‘braided group*’,‘braided Hopf*’.)This is the significance of quantum groups.And of course something like them should be needed in a quantum world where there is no evidence for a classical space such as the underlying set of a Lie group.Finally,it turns out that noncommutative geometry,at least of the type that we shall de-scribe,is in many ways cleaner and more straightforward than the special commutative limit. One simply does not need to assume commutativity in most geometrical constructions,including differential calculus and gauge theory.The noncommutative version is often less infinite,dif-ferentials are often more regularfinite-differences,etc.And noncommutative geometry(unlike classical geometry)can be specialised without effort to discrete spaces or tofinite-dimensional algebras.It is simply a powerful and natural generalisation of geometry as we usually know it. So my overall summary and prediction for the next millennium from this point of view is:•All geometry will be noncommutative(or whatever comes beyond that),with conventional geometry merely a special case.•The discovery of quantum theory,its correspondence principle(and noncommutative ge-ometry is nothing more than the elaboration of that)will be considered one of the century’s greatest achievement in mathematical physics,commensurate with the discovery of clas-sical geometry by Newton some centuries before.•Quantum groups will be viewed as thefirst nontrivial class of examples and thereby point-ers to the correct structure of this noncommutative geometry.•Spacetime too(not only phase space)will be known to be noncommutative(cogravity will have been detected).•At some point a future Einstein will combine the then-standard noncommutative geomet-rical ideas with some deep philosophical ideas and explain something really fundamental about our physical reality.In the fun spirit of this article,I will not be above putting down my own thoughts on this last point.These have to do with what I have called for the last decade the Principle of representation-theoretic self-duality[1].In effect,it amounts to extending the ideas of Born reciprocity,Mach’s principle and Fourier theory to the quantum domain.Roughly speaking, quantum gravity should be recast as gravity and cogravity both present and dual to each other and with Einstein’s equation appearing as a self-duality condition.The longer-term philosophical implications are a Kantian or Hegelian view of the nature of physical reality,which I propose in Section V as a new foundation for next millennium.We now turn to another fundamental side of quantum groups,which is at the heart of their other origin in physics,namely as generalised symmetry groups in exactly solvable lattice models. It leads to diverse applications ranging from knot theory to representation theory to Poisson geometry,all areas that quantum groups have revolutionised.What is really going on here in my opinion is not so much the noncommutative geometry of quantum groups themselves as a different kind of noncommutativity or braid statistics which certain quantum groups induce onany objects of which they are a symmetry.The latter is what I have called‘noncommutativity of the second kind’or outer noncommutativity since it not so much a noncommutativity of one algebra as a noncommutative modification of the exchange law or tensor product of any two independent algebras or systems.It is the notion of independence which is really being deformed here.Recall that the other great‘isation’idea in mathematical physics in this century(after ‘quantisation’)was‘superisation’,where everything is Z2-graded and this grading enters into how two independent systems are interchanged.Physics traditionally has a division into bosonic or force particles and fermionic or matter particles according to this grading and exchange behaviour.So certain quantum groups lead to a generalisation of that as braided geometry[2]or a process of braidification.These quantum groups typically have a parameter q and its meaning is a generalisation of the−1for supersymmetry.This in turn leads to a profound generalisation of conventional(including super)mathematics in the form of a new concept of algebra wherin one‘wires up’algebraic operations much as the wiring in a computer,i.e.outputs of one into inputs of another.Only,this time,the under or over crossings are nontrivial(and generally distinct)operations depending on q.These are the so-called‘R-matrices’.Afterwards one has the luxury of both viewing q in this way or expanding it around1in terms of a multiple of Planck’s constant and calling it a formal‘quantisation’–q-deformation actually unifies both ‘isation’processes.For example,Lorentz-invariance,by the time it is q-deformed[3],induces braid statistics even when particles are initially bosonic.In summary,•The notion of symmetry or automorphism group is an artifact of classical geometry and ina quantum world should naturally be generalised to something more like a quantum groupsymmetry.•Quantum symmetry groups induce braid statistics on the systems on which they act.In particular,the notion of bose-fermi statistics or the division into force and matter particles is an artifact of classical geometry.•Quantisation and the departure from bosonic statistics are two limits of the same phe-nomenon of braided geometry.Again,there are plenty of concrete models in solid state physics already known with quantum group symmetry.The symmetry is useful and can be viewed(albeit with hindsight)as the origin of the exact solvability of these models.These two points of view,the noncommutative geometrical and the generalised symmetry, are to date the two main sources of quantum groups.One has correspondingly two mainflavours or types of quantum groups which really allowed the theory to take off.Both were introduced at the mid1980s although the latter have been more extensively studied in terms of applicationsto date.They include the deformationsU q(g)(1)of the enveloping algebra U(g)of every complex semisimple Lie algebra g[4][5].These have as many generators as the usual ones of the Lie algebra but modified relations and,additionally, a structure called the‘coproduct’.The general class here is that of quasitriangular quantum groups.They arose as generalised symmetries in certain lattice models but are also visible in the continuum limit quantumfield theories(such as the Wess-Zumino-Novikov-Witten model on the Lie group G with Lie algebra g).The coordinate algebras of these quantum groups are further quantum groups C q[G]deforming the commutative algebra of coordinate functions on G.There is again a coproduct,this time expressing the group law or matrix multiplication.Meanwhile, the type coming out of Planck scale physics[6]are the bicrossproduct quantum groupsC[M]◮⊳U(g)(2)associated to the factorisation of a Lie group X into Lie subgroups,X=GM.Here the in-gredients are the conventional enveloping algebra U(g)and the commutative coordinate algebra C[M].The factorisation is encoded in an action and coaction of one on the other to make a semidirect product and coproduct◮⊳.These quantum arose at about the same time but quite independently of the U q(g),as the quantum algebras of observables of certain quantum spaces. Namely it turns out that G acts on the set M(and vice-versa)and the quantisation of those orbits are these quantum groups.This means that they are literally noncommutative phase spaces of honest quantum systems.In particular,every complex semisimple g has an associated complexification and its Lie group factorises G C=GG⋆(the classical Iwasawa decomposition) so there is an exampleC[G⋆]◮⊳U(g)(3)built from just the same data as for U q(g).In fact the Iwasawa decomposition can be understood in Poisson-Lie terms with g⋆the classical‘Yang-Baxter dual’of g.In spite of this,there is,even after a decade of development,no direct connection between the two quantum groups:gւց(4)U q(g)←?→C[G⋆]◮⊳U(g).They are both‘exponentiations’of the same classical data but apparently of completely different type(this remains a mystery to date.)Figure2:The landscape of noncommutative geometry todayAssociated to these twoflavours of quantum groups there are corresponding homogeneous spaces such as quantum spheres,quantum spacetimes,etc.Thus,of thefirst type there is a q-Minkowski space introduced in[7]as a q-Lorentz covariant algebra,and independently about a year later in[8]as2×2braided hermitian matrices.It is characterised by[x i,t]=0,[x i,x j]=0.(5) Meanwhile,of the second type there is a noncommutativeλ-Minkowski space with[x i,t]=λx i,[x i,x j]=0(6)which is the one that provides thefirst known predictions testable by astronomical measurements (by gamma-ray bursts of cosmological origin[9]).This kind of algebra was proposed as spacetime in[10]and in the4-dimensional case it was shown in[11]to be covariant under a Poincar´e quantum group of bicrossproduct form.These are clearly in sharp contrast.There are of course many more objects than these.q-spheres,q-planes etc.In Section IV we turn to the notion of‘quantum manifold’that is emerging from all these examples.Riemann was able to formulate the notion of Riemannian manifold as a way to capture known examples like spheres and tori but broad enough to formulate general equations for the intrinsic structure of space itself(or after Einstein,space-time).We are at a similar point now and what this ‘quantum groups approach to noncommutative geometry’is is more or less taking shape.It has the same degree of‘flabbiness’as Riemannian geometry(it is not tied to specific integrable systems etc.)while at the same time it includes the‘zoo’of already known naturally occurring examples,mostly linked to quantum groups.Such things as Ricci tensor and Einstein’s equation are not yet understood from this approach,however,so I would not say it is the last word.This approach is in fairly sharp contrast to‘traditional’noncommutative geometry as it was done before the emergence of quantum groups.That theory was developed by mathematiciansand mathematical physicists also coming from quantum mechanics but being concerned more with topological completions and Hilbert spaces.Certainly a beautiful theory of von-Neumann and C∗algebras emerged as an analogue of point-set topology.Some general methods such as cyclic cohomology were also developed in the1970s,with remarkable applications throughout mathematics[12].However,for concrete examples with actual noncommutative differential geometry one usually turned either to an actual manifold as input datum or to the Weyl algebra (or noncommutative torus)defined by relationsvu=e2πıθuv.(7)This in turn is basically the usual CCR or Heisenberg algebra[x,p]=ı (8)in exponentiated form.And at an algebraic level(i.e.until one considers the precise C∗-algebra completion)this is basically the usual algebra B(H)of operators on a Hilbert space as in quantum mechanics.Or at roots of unity it is M n(C)the algebra of n×n matrices.So at some level these are all basically one example.Unfortunately many of the tricks one can pull for this kind of example are special to it and not a foundation for noncommutative differential geometry of the type we need.For example,to do gauge theory Connes and M.Rieffel[13] used derivations for two independent vectorfields on the torus.The formulation of‘vector field’as a derivation of the coordinate algebra is what I would call the traditional approach to noncommutative geometry.For quantum groups such as C q[G]one simply does not have those derivations(rather,they are in general braided derivations).Similarly,in the traditional approach one defines a‘vector bundle’as afinitely-generated projective module without any of the infrastructure of differential geometry such as a principal bundle to which the vector bundle might be associated,etc.All of that could not emerge until quantum groups arrived(one clearly should take a quantum group asfiber).This is how the quantum groups approach differs from the work of Connes,Rieffel,Madore and others.It is also worth noting that string theorists have recently woken up to the need for a noncommutative spacetime but,so far at least,have still considered only this‘traditional’Heisenberg-type algebra.In the last year or two there has been some success in merging these approaches,however;a trend surely to be continued. By now both approaches have a notion of‘noncommutative manifold’which appear somewhat different but which have as point of contact the Dirac operator.Preliminaries.A full text on quantum groups is[14].To be self-contained we provide here a quick defiter on we will see many examples and various justifications for this concept. Thus,a quantum group or Hopf algebra is•A unital algebra H,1over thefield C(say)•A coproduct∆:H→H⊗H and counitǫ:H→C forming a coalgebra,with∆,ǫalgebra homomorphisms.•An antipode S:H→H such that·(S⊗id)∆=1ǫ=·(id⊗S)∆.Here a coalgebra is just like an algebra but with the axioms written as maps and arrows on the maps reversed.Thus the coassociativity and counity axioms are(∆⊗id)∆=(id⊗∆)∆,(ǫ⊗id)∆=(id⊗ǫ)∆=id.(9)The antipode plays a role that generalises the concept of group inversion.Other than that the only new mathematical structure that the reader has to contend with is the coproduct∆and its associated counit.There are several ways of thinking about the meaning of this depending on our point of view.If the quantum group is like the enveloping algebra U(g)generated by a Lie algebra g,one should think of∆as providing the rule by which actions extend to tensor products.Thus,U(g)is trivially a Hopf algebra with∆ξ=ξ⊗1+1⊗ξ,∀ξ∈g,(10)which says that when a Lie algebra elementξacts on tensor products it does so byξin the first factor and thenξin the second factor.Similarly it says that when a Lie algebra acts on an algebra it does so as a derivation.On the other hand,if the quantum group is like a coordinate algebra C[G]then∆expresses the group multiplication andǫthe group identity element e. Thus,if f∈C[G]the coalgebra is(∆f)(g,h)=f(gh),∀g,h∈Gǫf=f(e)(11)at least for suitable f(or with suitable topological completions).In other words it expresses the group product G×G→G by a map in the other direction in terms of coordinate algebras. From yet another point of view∆simply makes the dual H∗also into an algebra.So a Hopf algebra is basically an algebra such that H∗is also an algebra,in a compatible way,which makes the axioms‘self-dual’.For everyfinite-dimensional H there is a dual H∗.Similarly in the infinite-dimensional case.It said that in the Roman empire,‘all roads led to Rome’.It is remarkable that several different ideas for generalising groups all led to the same axioms.The axioms themselves werefirst introduced(actually in a super context)by H.Hopf in1947in his study of group cohomology but the subject only came into its own in the mid1980s with the arrival from mathematical physics of the large classes of examples(as above)that are neither like U(g)nor like C[G],i.e.going truly beyond Lie theory or algebraic group theory.Acknowledgements.An announcement of this article appears in a short millennium article[15] and a version more focused on the meaning for Planck scale physics in[16].II Quantum groups and Planck scale physicsThis section covers quantum groups of the bicrossproduct type coming out of Planck-scale physics[6]and their associated noncommutative geometry.These are certainly less well-developed than the more familiar U q(g)in terms of their concrete applications;one does not have inter-esting knot invariants etc.On the other hand,these quantum groups have a clearer physical meaning as models of Planck scale physics and are also technically easier to construct.Therefore they are a good place to start.Obviously if we want to unify quantum theory and geometry then a necessaryfirst step is to cast both in the same language,which for us will be that of algebra.We have already mentioned that vectorfields can be thought of classically as derivations of the algebra of functions on the manifold,and if one wants points they can be recovered as maximal ideals in the algebra, etc.This is the more of less standard idea of algebraic geometry dating from the late19th century and early on in the20th.It will certainly need to be modified before it works in the noncommutative case but it is a starting point.The algebraic structure on the quantum side will need more attention,however.II.A CogravityWe begin with some very general considerations.In fact there are fundamental reasons why one needs noncommutative geometry for any theory that pretends to be a fundamental one.Since gravity and quantum theory both work extremely well in their separate domains,this comment refers mainly to a theory that might hope to unify the two.As a matter of fact I believe that, through noncommutative geometry,this‘holy grail’of theoretical physics may now be in sight.Thefirst point is that we usually do not try to apply or extend our geometrical intuition to the quantum domain directly,since the mathematics for that has traditionally not been known. Thus,one usually considers quantisation as the result of a process applied to an underlying classical phase space,with all of the geometrical content there(as a Poisson manifold).But demanding any algebra such that its commutators to lowest order are some given Poisson bracket is clearly an illogical and ill-defined process.It not only does not have a unique answer but also it depends on the coordinates chosen to map over the quantum operators.Almost always one takes the Poisson bracket in a canonical form and the quantisation is the usual CCR or canonical commutation relations algebra.Maybe this is the local picture but what of the global geometry of the classical phase space?Clearly all of these problems are putting the cart before the horse:the real world is to our best knowledge quantum so that should comefirst.We should build models guided by the intrinsic(noncommutative)geometry at the level of noncommutative algebras and only at the end consider classical limits and classical geometry(and Poisson brackets)as emerging from a choice,where possible,of‘classical handles’in the quantum system.In more physical terms,classical observables should come out of quantum theory as some kind of limit and not really be the starting point;in quantum gravity,for example,classical geometry should appear as an idealisation of the expectation value of certain operators in certain states of the system.Likewise in string theory one starts with strings moving in classical spacetime, defines Lagrangians etc.and tries to quantise.Even in more algebraic approaches,such as axiomatic quantumfield theory,one still assumes an underlying classical spacetime and classical Poincar´e group etc.,on which the operatorfields live.Yet if the real world is quantum then phase space and hence probably spacetime itself should be‘fuzzy’and only approximately modeled by classical geometrical concepts.Why then should one take classical geometrical concepts inside the functional integral except other than as an effective theory or approximate model tailored to the desired classical geometry that we hope to come out.This can be useful but it cannot possibly be the fundamental‘theory of everything’if it is built in such an illogical manner.There is simply no evidence for the assumption of nice smooth manifolds other than now-discredited classical mechanics.And in certain domains such as,but not only,in Planck scale physics or quantum gravity,it will certainly be unjustified even as an approximation.Next let us observe that any quantum system which contains a nonAbelian global symmetry group is already crying out for noncommutative geometry.This is in addition to the more obvious position-momentum noncommutativity of quantisation.The point is that if our quantum system has a nonAbelian Lie algebra symmetry,which is usually the case when the classical system does, then from among the quantum observables we should be able to realise the generators of this Lie algebra.That is,the algebra of observables A should contain the algebra generated by the Lie algebra,A⊇U(g).(12)Typically,A might be the semidirect product of a smaller part with external symmetry g by the action of U(g)(which means that in the bigger algebra the action of g is implemented by the commutator).This may soundfine but if the algebra A is supposed to be the quantum analogue of the‘functions on phase space’,then for part of it we should regard U(g)‘up side down’not as an enveloping algebra but as a noncommutative space with g the noncommutative coordinates.In other words,if we want to elucidate the geometrical content of the quantum algebra of observables then part of that will be to understand in what sense U(g)is a coordinate algebra,U(g)=C[?].(13)Here?cannot be an ordinary space because its supposed coordinate algebra U(g)is noncom-mutative.。
ORGANIZATIONAL TRANSFORMATION CIS 654 - Select Term 组织变革的顺式654 -选择项

Instead of the focus on being on how well we operate, but how well we supply the needs and wants of the customer. Customer Satisfaction!!!
BPR Requires a Questioning of the Status Quo
Four key words in the definition
1. Dramatic (improvement)
A. Reduced cost B. Increased speed C. Greater accuracy D. Greater quality E. Etc…
2. Radical
A. Radical means going to the root of things. B. Instead of fixing what you have and what you are currently
Four key words in the definition
4. Redesign
A. How the work is done to produce the product or service and deliver it to the customer.
B. The starting point for organizational success is well-designed processes.
Examples
Federal Mogul (makes car parts)
To get contracts from car manufacturers they:
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。
(Received
2000)
Abstract. We address several problems concerning the geometry of the space of Hermitian operators on a finite-dimensional Hilbert space, in particular the geometry of the space of density states and canonical group actions on it. For quantum composite systems we discuss and give examples of measures of entanglement.
Let H be an n-dimensional Hilbert space with the Hermitian product x, y H being, by convention, C-linear with respect to y and anti-linear with respect to x. The unitary group U (H) acts on H preserving the Hermitian product and it consists of those complex linear operators A ∈ gl(H) on H which satisfy AA† = I , where A† is the Hermitian conjugate of A, i.e., Ax, y H = x, A† y H . The geometric approach to Quantum Mechanics is based on the realification HR of H considered as a K¨ ahler manifold (HR , J, g, ω ) with canonical structures: a complex structure J , a Riemannian metric g, and a symplectic form ω . The latter come from the real and the imaginary parts of the Hermitian product, respectively. After the obvious identification of the vectors tangent to HR with HR , all these structures are constant (do not depend on the actual point of HR ) and read J (x) = i · x, We have obvious identities J 2 = −I, ω (x, Jy ) = g(x, y ), g(Jx, Jy ) = g(x, y ), ω (Jx, Jy ) = ω (x, y ). g(x, y ) + i · ω (x, y ) = x, y
Exemplary OSID style
[Author and title]
2
The space so constructed is not linear and gives rise to interesting geometrical structures. To deal with these various non-linearities, recently [3], elaborating on previous geometrical approaches to quantum mechanics [4], we have considered the differential geometry of density states. This approach seems to be quite appropriate to deal with composite systems and the set of separable and entangled states which do not carry a linear structure. In this note we would like to further elaborate on some subtle points which we have encountered in our previous paper [3]. To make the paper self-contained we briefly recall the main results from our previous treatment. The paper is organized as follows: after introducing notations and conventions, in Section 3 we describe the basic geometric structures useful in description of the density states, in particular the invariant K¨ ahler structures on the orbits of unitary representations as well as an action of the general linear group on the dual of the Lie algebra of the unitary group. The description of this action in terms of the Kraus operators along with some of their properties is further elaborated in Sections 5 and 6, where a general linear group action on density states is discovered. In Section 7 we describe the geometry of the set of density states as a convex body, in particular we discuss the smoothness of its boundary. The rest of the paper is devoted to description of the composite systems: in Section 8 we describe the pure and mixed states of such systems in terms of the Segre imbedding and give a general prescription for the construction of entanglement measures. Examples of such constructions are given in Sections 9 and 10 for bipartite and multipartite systems. 2. Notations and conventions
Dipartimento di Scienze Fisiche, Universit` a “Federico II” di Napoli and Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Napoli, Complesso Universitario di Monte Sant Angelo, Via Cintia, I-80126 Napoli, Italy & E-mail marmo@na.infn.it
Marek Ku´ s
Center for Theoretical Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Aleja Lotnik´ ow 32/46, 02-668 Warszawa, Poland & E-mail marek.kus@.pl
Giuseppe Marmo
1.
Introduction
In his book [1], Dirac uses the description of the interference phenomena, via the superposition rule, to justify the requirement of linearity on the carrier space of states to deal with quantum evolution. However, the probabilistic interpretation of state vectors forces on us the identification of physical (pure) states with points of the complex projective space associated with the starting vector space of ”states”. With this identification a (global) linear structure is no more available, now interference phenomena will be described with the help of a connection (Pancharatnam connection) [2]. The Hermitian structure available on the starting Hilbert space of ”states” induces a K¨ ahlerian structure on the complex projective space. The induced action of the unitary group, projected from the one on the Hilbert space, allows for the imbedding of the complex projective space into the dual of the Lie algebra of the unitary group itself by means of the momentum map associated with the symplectic action of the group. Within this ambient space, by means of the available linear structure, it is possible to construct convex combinations of pure states (rank-one projectors) and build the totality of density states.