|
It is currently 01 Apr 2023, 22:09 |
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
03:00 PM PDT
-05:00 PM PDT
04:00 PM EDT
-05:00 PM EDT
03:00 PM EDT
-04:00 PM EDT
06:00 PM PDT
-07:00 PM PDT
12:00 PM EDT
-01:00 PM EDT
04:00 PM PDT
-05:00 PM PDT
08:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
11:00 AM EDT
-02:00 PM EDT
13 Feb 2020, 21:00
| FROM ISB Admissions Blog: Family Business Updates: February 14, 2020 |
|
Dr Reddy’s to buy Wockhardt’s domestic branded ops, Baddi plant for ₹1,850 cr – https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/dr-reddy-s-to-buy-wockhardt-s-domestic-branded-ops-baddi-plant-for-rs-1-850-cr/amp-11581492602925.html GMR Airports will build and operate new airport in Greece –https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/gmr-airports-will-build-and-operate-new-airport-in-greece-11581350613741.html D-mart | Radhakishan Damani: DMart’s now bigger than Bajaj Finserv, Nestle; owner Damani 6th richest in India –https://m.economictimes.com/markets/stocks/news/dmarts-now-bigger-than-bajaj-finserv-nestle-owner-damani-6th-richest-in-india/articleshow/74073379.cms Haldiram’s IPO soon? With $1 billion sales, India’s homegrown food company has this plan – https://www.financialexpress.com/indust ... 2410/lite/ |
13 Feb 2020, 21:01
| FROM ISB PGP Admissions Director Blog: Family Business Updates: February 14, 2020 |
|
Dr Reddy’s to buy Wockhardt’s domestic branded ops, Baddi plant for ₹1,850 cr – https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/dr-reddy-s-to-buy-wockhardt-s-domestic-branded-ops-baddi-plant-for-rs-1-850-cr/amp-11581492602925.html GMR Airports will build and operate new airport in Greece –https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/gmr-airports-will-build-and-operate-new-airport-in-greece-11581350613741.html D-mart | Radhakishan Damani: DMart’s now bigger than Bajaj Finserv, Nestle; owner Damani 6th richest in India –https://m.economictimes.com/markets/stocks/news/dmarts-now-bigger-than-bajaj-finserv-nestle-owner-damani-6th-richest-in-india/articleshow/74073379.cms Haldiram’s IPO soon? With $1 billion sales, India’s homegrown food company has this plan – https://www.financialexpress.com/indust ... 2410/lite/ |
20 Feb 2020, 10:00
20 Feb 2020, 10:01
27 Feb 2020, 21:00
27 Feb 2020, 21:01
05 Mar 2020, 21:00
05 Mar 2020, 21:01
12 Mar 2020, 22:00
12 Mar 2020, 22:01
19 Mar 2020, 23:00
19 Mar 2020, 23:01
26 Mar 2020, 21:00
26 Mar 2020, 21:01
29 Mar 2020, 22:00
| FROM ISB Admissions Blog: Light at the End of the Corona Tunnel |
 On top of everyone’s mind is when will the COVID-19 nightmare end? Based on the modelling done by Rajesh Singh and B. Adhikari, illustrated in the figure above, which is making waves in the governmental and corporate circles in the country, there seems to be light at the end of the tunnel. Of course, hopefully we humans will come out of this experience chastised. What are these scenarios presented in the article by Rajesh Singh and B. Adhikari? The Prime Minister of India has taken an incredibly bold step to lock down the country. He did this in two stages: the first was a one-day ‘dress rehearsal’ titled ‘Janata Curfew’ on Sunday, March 22, 2020. Given the gravity of COVID-19, none of us were naïve to believe that this day lockout would be full and final, and the saga would end with that day of voluntary confinement, interspaced with five minutes of applauding the COVID-19 warriors who were battling it out on the front lines. It was merely ‘testing the waters’ and preparing the nation for a prolonged lockdown. Sure enough, two days later, starting from the midnight of March 24, 2020, the country had to brace down for a total lockdown. The Prime Minister was at his communicative best during the 8 pm national live broadcast on March 24, hours before the lockdown, appealing to people as an elder in their respective families. He mentioned that this would be much harsher and more long-drawn than the trailer that preceded it. The short duration to enforcement (just four hours) was to ensure that people do not indulge in hoarding. He tried to assuage the blow by stating that essential commodities and services would continue. He also announced a war chest of Rs. 15,000 cr. to bolster the health system in the country to deal with this unprecedented crisis. This was followed quickly a few days later by an announcement of Rs. 1.7 lakh crores bail-out package by the Finance Minister. The perhaps unanticipated consequence was massive re-migration to native villages and towns by migrant workers, with ensuing heart-rending saga of sufferings. The Prime Minister addressed this in his monthly Mann ki baat, apologising to those who may be angry with the lockdown, but stating that it was inevitable. To arrest further mass re-migration, the government has advised all states to stop the migrations. How successful they will be in this endeavour, only time will tell. While these appear to be knee-jerk reactions to the evolving scenarios, it is to be expected, as there is no collective memory in the country on how to deal with these ‘maha maaris’ that the Prime Minister repeatedly referred to in his March 24 address to the nation. What all of us are concerned with is whether this nightmare will ever end. This is where the research by Rajesh Singh and B. Adhikari, both from acclaimed institutions, gives us hope for better days. The figures above are self-explanatory. At the expense of redundancy, a quick interpretation of those figures: A 21-day lockout will not serve any purpose; the epidemic will rear its ugly head after 21 days, with vengeance [Figure (a)]. In panic, the natural reaction while seeing the upswing after 21 days, is to reintroduce another lockdown, albeit longer (28 days), with five days of intervening respite [Figure (b)] with ditto results at the end. Figure (c) takes us closer to the end goal of eradication, with an 18-day clampdown after a five day hiatus. However, the suffering will have to be endured till June 10, 2020, with total lockdown being 21+28+18 = 67 days, and 10 days respite in-between. The final alternative is to bite the bullet and go for total eradication in one painful burst of 49 days lockdown [Figure (d)]. Knowing the propensity of the federal government and their propensity to find total, yet bitter solutions rather than populist measures, we can expect the (d) scenario to play out. So ,friends, hold your horses! The end is in sight. Let’s continue to be optimistic and use the time to rejuvenate and redirect our lives to loftier heights. Post No. 1, D.V.R. Seshadri, March 28, 2020 |
29 Mar 2020, 22:01
| FROM ISB PGP Admissions Director Blog: Light at the End of the Corona Tunnel |
|
On top of everyone’s mind is when will the COVID-19 nightmare end? Based on the modelling done by Rajesh Singh and B. Adhikari, illustrated in the figure above, which is making waves in the governmental and corporate circles in the country, there seems to be light at the end of the tunnel. Of course, hopefully we humans will come out of this experience chastised. What are these scenarios presented in the article by Rajesh Singh and B. Adhikari? The Prime Minister of India has taken an incredibly bold step to lock down the country. He did this in two stages: the first was a one-day ‘dress rehearsal’ titled ‘Janata Curfew’ on Sunday, March 22, 2020. Given the gravity of COVID-19, none of us were naïve to believe that this day lockout would be full and final, and the saga would end with that day of voluntary confinement, interspaced with five minutes of applauding the COVID-19 warriors who were battling it out on the front lines. It was merely ‘testing the waters’ and preparing the nation for a prolonged lockdown. Sure enough, two days later, starting from the midnight of March 24, 2020, the country had to brace down for a total lockdown. The Prime Minister was at his communicative best during the 8 pm national live broadcast on March 24, hours before the lockdown, appealing to people as an elder in their respective families. He mentioned that this would be much harsher and more long-drawn than the trailer that preceded it. The short duration to enforcement (just four hours) was to ensure that people do not indulge in hoarding. He tried to assuage the blow by stating that essential commodities and services would continue. He also announced a war chest of Rs. 15,000 cr. to bolster the health system in the country to deal with this unprecedented crisis. This was followed quickly a few days later by an announcement of Rs. 1.7 lakh crores bail-out package by the Finance Minister. The perhaps unanticipated consequence was massive re-migration to native villages and towns by migrant workers, with ensuing heart-rending saga of sufferings. The Prime Minister addressed this in his monthly Mann ki baat, apologising to those who may be angry with the lockdown, but stating that it was inevitable. To arrest further mass re-migration, the government has advised all states to stop the migrations. How successful they will be in this endeavour, only time will tell. While these appear to be knee-jerk reactions to the evolving scenarios, it is to be expected, as there is no collective memory in the country on how to deal with these ‘maha maaris’ that the Prime Minister repeatedly referred to in his March 24 address to the nation. What all of us are concerned with is whether this nightmare will ever end. This is where the research by Rajesh Singh and B. Adhikari, both from acclaimed institutions, gives us hope for better days. The figures above are self-explanatory. At the expense of redundancy, a quick interpretation of those figures: A 21-day lockout will not serve any purpose; the epidemic will rear its ugly head after 21 days, with vengeance [Figure (a)]. In panic, the natural reaction while seeing the upswing after 21 days, is to reintroduce another lockdown, albeit longer (28 days), with five days of intervening respite [Figure (b)] with ditto results at the end. Figure (c) takes us closer to the end goal of eradication, with an 18-day clampdown after a five day hiatus. However, the suffering will have to be endured till June 10, 2020, with total lockdown being 21+28+18 = 67 days, and 10 days respite in-between. The final alternative is to bite the bullet and go for total eradication in one painful burst of 49 days lockdown [Figure (d)]. Knowing the propensity of the federal government and their propensity to find total, yet bitter solutions rather than populist measures, we can expect the (d) scenario to play out. So ,friends, hold your horses! The end is in sight. Let’s continue to be optimistic and use the time to rejuvenate and redirect our lives to loftier heights. Post No. 1, D.V.R. Seshadri, March 28, 2020 |
01 Apr 2020, 05:00
| FROM ISB Admissions Blog: WOMEN IN TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION |
|
The early pioneers of technology and innovation were woman who, for the most part of history, were unheralded. Marie Curie, Ada Lovelace, Grace Hopper, Anita Borg, among many others, have worked on groundbreaking inventions and computations in the field of nuclear physics, human-computer interaction, astronomical crunching, programming language compilations, etc. Only now these contributions are being recognised and rightly attributed. It is fair to say that woman participation, by and large, is being encouraged and supported: with organisations taking conscious efforts for inclusion, with measures undertaken to address issues of pay parity, woman’s return to work, education for girls, etc. But this improvement is rather trivial. The tech community largely reeks of gender- (and minority) based inequalities in terms of opportunities and pay. The proportion of female executives considerably dwindles along the hierarchical ladder, and even more so in the STEM community. Gender inequality in technology and innovation is a stigma that calls for immediate action. Ongoing research at the Srini Raju Centre for IT and Networked Economy examines the biases against woman in technological innovation. The research was primarily motivated by the need to discern the under-representation of minorities, specifically, woman in patenting. The results highlight the presence of significant gender-based bias[1] in obtaining patents.[2]We create a measure of novelty in patent application and discuss the consequences of producing different technology for female over male inventors. Uniqueness or novelty of a patent application is calculated as its inverse similarity to those filed in the previous year in the same technological class. We observe that higher dissimilarity is rewarded with a higher rate of acceptance, higher maintainability, more citations, etc. Contrariwise, dissimilar patents with a high proportion of female inventors do not see equivalent acceptance. Our findings show that woman inventors face higher penalties – lower rates of patent acceptances, more days to grants, higher efforts for maintenance – for novelty. These costs hold true for patent applications in varied scenarios, such as:
Figure 1 illustrates the average number of male and female inventors for patent applications over years from 2002 to 2014. A significant increase in the number of inventors is observed, while the number of female inventors is constant. It is important to highlight the gap in patenting by women and men.  Figure 1: Average number of inventors by gender over time Figure 2 represents the average proportion of female inventors by year for different patent technological categories: Chemical, Food, Electrical & Electronic, Textiles, Mechanical, Others, Computers & Communications and Drugs & Medical, as defined by NBER.  Figure 2: Number of applications filed vs Number of Patent Issued by all Figure 3 shown below illustrates the probability patent acceptances for different team sizes as the proportion of female inventors for the given team increases. We see a reduction in the rate of patent issued as the proportion of female on an application increases.  Figure 3: Probability of patent being issued for different team sizes, with number of inventors = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Figure 4 below shows the average total citations received by applications for different team sizes as the proportion of female inventors for the given team increases. We see a reduction in the total citations as the proportion of female on an application increases.  Figure 4 demonstrates the total citations received by patents for different team sizes with increasing female proportion. Clearly there are biases against woman in technological innovation. These results have been supported by multiple gender-based studies. A lot of research has reiterated that women at an organisation’s innovation frontier can lead to improved business performance. Thus, their under-representation and lack of opportunities in the workforce subsumes a prejudice rooted in the society. Women, single handedly, have come a long way from disenfranchisement to multiple waves of feminism. It is only right that the entire community wholly devotes itself to creating a gender-equal workforce. 1Gender identification has been done using the API provide by https://genderize.io 2Only patents filed and granted at the United States Patent Office (USPTO) have been used for the study About the Author: Bhoomi Thakkar is a Research Associate at SRITNE. Follow us on twitter: #ISBSRITNE Follow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/sritne |
01 Apr 2020, 05:01
| FROM ISB PGP Admissions Director Blog: WOMEN IN TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION |
|
The early pioneers of technology and innovation were woman who, for the most part of history, were unheralded. Marie Curie, Ada Lovelace, Grace Hopper, Anita Borg, among many others, have worked on groundbreaking inventions and computations in the field of nuclear physics, human-computer interaction, astronomical crunching, programming language compilations, etc. Only now these contributions are being recognised and rightly attributed. It is fair to say that woman participation, by and large, is being encouraged and supported: with organisations taking conscious efforts for inclusion, with measures undertaken to address issues of pay parity, woman’s return to work, education for girls, etc. But this improvement is rather trivial. The tech community largely reeks of gender- (and minority) based inequalities in terms of opportunities and pay. The proportion of female executives considerably dwindles along the hierarchical ladder, and even more so in the STEM community. Gender inequality in technology and innovation is a stigma that calls for immediate action. Ongoing research at the Srini Raju Centre for IT and Networked Economy examines the biases against woman in technological innovation. The research was primarily motivated by the need to discern the under-representation of minorities, specifically, woman in patenting. The results highlight the presence of significant gender-based bias[1] in obtaining patents.[2]We create a measure of novelty in patent application and discuss the consequences of producing different technology for female over male inventors. Uniqueness or novelty of a patent application is calculated as its inverse similarity to those filed in the previous year in the same technological class. We observe that higher dissimilarity is rewarded with a higher rate of acceptance, higher maintainability, more citations, etc. Contrariwise, dissimilar patents with a high proportion of female inventors do not see equivalent acceptance. Our findings show that woman inventors face higher penalties – lower rates of patent acceptances, more days to grants, higher efforts for maintenance – for novelty. These costs hold true for patent applications in varied scenarios, such as:
Figure 1 illustrates the average number of male and female inventors for patent applications over years from 2002 to 2014. A significant increase in the number of inventors is observed, while the number of female inventors is constant. It is important to highlight the gap in patenting by women and men. Figure 1: Average number of inventors by gender over time Figure 2 represents the average proportion of female inventors by year for different patent technological categories: Chemical, Food, Electrical & Electronic, Textiles, Mechanical, Others, Computers & Communications and Drugs & Medical, as defined by NBER. Figure 2: Number of applications filed vs Number of Patent Issued by all Figure 3 shown below illustrates the probability patent acceptances for different team sizes as the proportion of female inventors for the given team increases. We see a reduction in the rate of patent issued as the proportion of female on an application increases. Figure 3: Probability of patent being issued for different team sizes, with number of inventors = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Figure 4 below shows the average total citations received by applications for different team sizes as the proportion of female inventors for the given team increases. We see a reduction in the total citations as the proportion of female on an application increases. Figure 4 demonstrates the total citations received by patents for different team sizes with increasing female proportion. Clearly there are biases against woman in technological innovation. These results have been supported by multiple gender-based studies. A lot of research has reiterated that women at an organisation’s innovation frontier can lead to improved business performance. Thus, their under-representation and lack of opportunities in the workforce subsumes a prejudice rooted in the society. Women, single handedly, have come a long way from disenfranchisement to multiple waves of feminism. It is only right that the entire community wholly devotes itself to creating a gender-equal workforce. 1Gender identification has been done using the API provide by https://genderize.io 2Only patents filed and granted at the United States Patent Office (USPTO) have been used for the study About the Author: Bhoomi Thakkar is a Research Associate at SRITNE. Follow us on twitter: #ISBSRITNE Follow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/sritne |
02 Apr 2020, 21:00
02 Apr 2020, 21:01
|
|
||
Hi Guest,
Here are updates for you:
ANNOUNCEMENTS
YouTube, Instagram Live, & Chats This Week!
------------------------------------------------------ Mar
29
11:30am NY | 3:30pm London | 9pm Mumbai Ace Sentence Correction with Meaning Based Approach - The Secret Sauce for V41+ ------------------------------------------------------ Mar
30
11:30am NY | 3:30pm London | 9pm Mumbai The Ultimate GMAT Success - How Karn Scored GMAT 780 in 4 Months ------------------------------------------------------
AGSM at UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE
|
close
