A SCSI bus extender apparatus coupling a primary SCSI bus to a secondary SCSI bus includes a mechanism for detecting and resolving contention between a substantially simultaneous SELECTION operation on the primary bus and a RESELECTION operation on the secondary bus. The inventive method contemplates the bus extender arbitrating for control of the primary bus after a conflict is detected, and releasing control of the secondary bus if control of the primary bus is obtained. A target device on the secondary bus can then rearbitrate for control of the secondary bus. Once the target device controls the secondary bus, it can direct a RESELECTION signal to the bus extender, which responsively directs the signal to an initiator device on the primary bus. If the bus extender is unable to gain control of the primary bus after a conflict is detected, the SELECTION operation is allowed to proceed and the target device reattempts to assert the RESELECTION operation thereafter.

The well recognized Small Computer System Interface ("SCSI") standards of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI X3.131-1986) specify the electrical, mechanical and logical characteristics of an input/output (I/O) bus interface for coupling physically small computers with other small computers and peripheral devices. Such peripheral devices may include, for example, disk drives, tape drives, printers, compact disk read-only memories, and scanners. The SCSI standards are available from the American National Standards Institute, Inc., New York, N.Y., U.S.A., and are incorporated herein by reference.
The SCSI standards generally specify an I/O bus, which commonly is referred to as a "SCSI bus." Instead of requiring a separate bus controller, a SCSI bus utilizes a SCSI bus protocol, specified by the SCSI standards, that is implemented distributively within either central processing units, host adapters of computers on the bus, and/or controllers of peripheral devices on the bus.
The SCSI bus protocol facilitates information transfer between devices connected to the bus. More particularly, the bus protocol includes an addressing mechanism for identifying the devices on the bus, and specifies connection-control signals for transferring data between an initiating device i.e., "initiator" and an intended recipient device i.e., "target". The connection-control signals first arbitrate for control of the SCSI bus, and then establish a connection between an initiator and a target when the initiator controls the SCSI bus. A process designated by the standard as SELECTION occurs when an initiator (typically a host computer) establishes a connection by a signaling a device that is to become a target. Conversely, a process designated by the standard as RESELECTION occurs when a target notifies an initiator that an existing connection is to be reestablished for the purpose of continuing a transfer.
In general, any peripheral device having a controller complying with the SCSI standards can function properly when connected to a SCSI bus. Accordingly, the standards have lead to a proliferation of the types and sources of commercially-available peripheral devices that may be used with conventional computer systems complying with the SCSI standards. Moreover, computer systems complying with the standards can easily be configured and reconfigured by end users to meet specific computing needs, and to incorporate evolving peripheral device technologies.
While many conventionally implemented SCSI bus interfaces are suitable for their intended purposes, most generally are limited to supporting no more than fifteen peripheral devices. This limit presents a significant drawback in the art. Furthermore, as systems employing SCSI buses have expanded and become more powerful, the need has increased for more storage capacity and the ability to connect more peripheral devices to the bus. For instance, the need for more storage often is particularly acute in multi-user computer systems.
A known approach for increasing the number of SCSI peripheral devices that may be connectable to a SCSI bus is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,274,783, House et al., assigned to Digital Equipment Corp. of Maynard, Mass., the subject matter of which is incorporated herein, in its entirety, by reference. House et al. discloses a bus extender for connecting a secondary SCSI bus to a single port on a main SCSI bus. In this manner, one or more host computers on the primary bus can be interconnected to one or more peripheral devices on the secondary bus. Since the bus extender interface complies with SCSI standards, any of a variety of types of commercially-available peripheral devices having SCSI controllers can be supported on the secondary bus.
The bus extender employs a first transceiver coupled to the main SCSI bus, a second transceiver coupled to the secondary bus, and signal transfer and logic circuitry for controlling the operation of the transceivers and passing signals between the transceivers. The logic circuitry also performs the address translation necessary for inter-bus communication.
The bus extender disclosed in House et al. takes advantage of the dual-tier, hierarchal addressing system, specified by the SCSI standards, to direct messages from initiators on the main bus to targets on the secondary bus. In the addressing mechanism employed by the House device, each device connected to either the main or secondary bus is identified by a unique device identification code ("ID"). In addition, each device on the secondary bus is associated with an auxiliary identification, which in the SCSI standards is referred to as the logical unit number (LUN).
For purposes of communication, the bus extender has an ID on both the main and secondary buses. Whenever connection-control signals on either the main or secondary buses reference the ID of the extender, the extender responds and attempts to establish the connection necessary to transfer information to the ultimate recipient on the specified bus.
During a SELECTION, the extender first converts the LUN field data of the connection-control signals received over the primary bus to the ID of the target on the secondary bus, and then supplies its auxiliary-bus ID as the initiator ID in the auxiliary-bus connection control signals. The extender then attempts to establish a communication link with the target device via connection-control signals on the secondary bus by using the target ID generated by the extender. Analogously, during a RESELECTION, the extender converts the target ID contained in the auxiliary-bus connection-control signals into LUN field data, supplies the extender's own main-bus ID as the target attempting RESELECT, and then uses the ID of the initiator of the earlier SELECTION, which the extender has stored (e.g., in a suitable latch), for directing the RESELECTION message to the initiator.
Once a communication link for SELECTION or RESELECTION has been established between the initiator and the target, the extender transfers message data signals e.g., COMMAND, STATUS, DATA-IN, and DATA-OUT between the main and secondary buses directly and without modification. The extender therefore intervenes only when the communication link is being established and not when the actual information is transferred.
Problems arise with the House bus extender, however, when there is a simultaneous SELECTION and RESELECTION by an initiator on the main bus and target on the secondary bus. Such situation is referred to as a SELECTION and RESELECTION conflict. As described at column 12, lines 13-21 of House et al., the bus extender attempts to resolve such conflict by causing an unexpected bus free state on the primary bus. According to the SCSI standards, an initiator that detects an unexpected bus free condition at this point should assume that the target wishes to perform a RESELECTION. In practice, however, many initiator implementations, behave unpredictably and often treat this condition as a fatal error. Accordingly, a need exists for an improved bus extender that is capable of resolving SELECTION and RESELECTION conflicts in a manner that causes neither deadlock nor error conditions.

Method and apparatus for resolving over lapping selection and reselection operations of SCSI bus protocols


Stack up type low capacitance overvoltage protective device is composed of a substrate; a conductive low electrode layer formed on the substrate; a voltage sensitive material layer formed on the conductive lower electrode layer; and a conductive upper electrode layer formed on the voltage sensitive material layer.

1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to stack up type low capacitance overvoltage protective device, in particular to stack up type low capacitance overvoltage protective device formed on a substrate and having a construction of a double layered electrode with a voltage sensitive material interposed therebetween.
2. Description of the Prior Art
It is a well known fact that an overvoltage will definitely cause a severe damage to an electrical system. To cope with increasing destructive threat to the speedy and more sophisticated present low voltage system, the intensification for protection to a low voltage system having aforesaid trend becomes more and more important.
Following the increase of system frequency, it is important to reduce the inherent capacitance of an overvoltage protective element as low as possible so as to speed up its response time, by this reasons it is the present tendency to reduce the capacitance of the overvoltage protective device as low as possible to meet the requirement, at the same time, to keep its critical break down voltage to an impulse or surge wave in a low value, but to keep its discharge voltage, ie, the IR drop between its terminal at a proper level such that the follower power current can be interrupted thereby potential stress across the equipment is protected to the lowest feasible value.
There are a plurality of materials known already to be relevantly applicable for use as overvoltage protection materials, among them zinc oxide with property of variable resistance is a preferable selection. There was an element disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,726,991 having a structure that an insulation layer with a thickness smaller than several hundreds A (angstroms) covered with a conductive or a semiconductive powder. In addition, there have been disclosed a plurality of analogous voltage sensitive materials made of mixed powders of various conductive, semiconductive or nonconductive materials with a binder, for example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,685,026, 3,685,028, 4,977,357, 5,068,634, 5,260,848, 5,294,374, 5,393,596 and 5,807,509. All these materials are usable for the present invention.
A chip type laminated variable resistor is one of the widely used element, but it has an inherent disadvantage of having relatively higher capacitance, although its capacitance may be reduced to as low as approximately 3 pF by adjusting its construction. Yet the aforesaid critical breakdown voltage and clamping voltage are relatively brought up. A specially constructed semiconductor diode is another choice of the overvoltage protective device, but its capacitance is still not able to overcome the threshold value of below 10 pF.
The structure of the low capacitance overvoltage protective device is characterized by that there is a microgap formed between the two electrodes at both ends of the device with a voltage sensitive material filled therein. Therefore, obtaining a very low capacitance below 1 pF by the fact that the area of the electrode is so small. There are two already known structures of such device: The first one disclosed by U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,023,028 and 5,974,661 formed by common printed circuit board (PCB) fabrication process is shown in FIG. 1 wherein it is composed of a substrate 100 made of an insulation sheet material; a right and a left separated electrode layers 112 and 111 generally formed of copper foil on the insulated substrate 100; a voltage sensitive material layer 120 formed on the right and left electrode layers 112,111 and therebetween; and a main protecting layer 130 covering the electrode layers 111,112 and on the material layer 120. The second one disclosed by U.S. Pat. No. 6,013,358 is formed by thick film printing process is shown in FIG. 2, wherein it is composed of a ceramic substrate 200; a buffer glass material layer 220 divided with minor gaps by cutting formed on the substrate 200; a right and a left electrode layers 232, 231 formed by printing process on the glass material layer 220, these two electrode layers 232, 231 being separating and covering partially the glass material layer 220; a voltage sensitive material layer 240 formed on the electrode layers 232, 231 and extending into the buffer glass material layer 220; and a protecting layed 250 formed on the uppermost part of the whole construction. This overvoltage protective device formed with thick film printing process must employ a special cutting microgaps process to form its essential structure. Although these two devices fabricated with aforementioned process can easily attain a low capacitance property for its main structure, yet there are following inherent shortcomings concerning their fabrication processes:
1. In the PCB process, there is an inherent limitation that the gap distance can not be formed as small as desireously possible to obtain favorably low critical break down voltage and discharge voltage.
2. The stack up structure can be relatively easily formed with thick film printing process incorporated with special cutting process for forming the microgaps than with the former PCB process, but special preparation of extra tools is needed to carry out the cutting process which results in exorbitantly high production cost. Besides, the burrs inadvertently produced on the cutting surfaces between the electrodes may result in a point discharge therebetween and lower the yield rate of production. If slows down the cutting process for evading such an unexpected result, the production cost further rises up.
Aiming at the above depicted problems, the present invention is to propose a newly developed construction and fabrication process for a stack up type low capacitance overvoltage protective device capable of solving those problems which the conventional techniques encounter.
It is an object of the present invention to provide a stack up type low capacitance overvoltage protective device whose low capacitance character can be attained through controlling surface area of printed stack up elements and thickness of a voltage sensitive material layer, the capacitance can be reduced to as low as below 1 pF.
It is another object of the present invention that the thickness of the voltage sensitive material layer can be adjusted by the printing tools and printing parameters so as to keep both the critical breakdown voltage and the clamping voltage of the overvoltage protective device at a reasonably low level.
It is a further object of the present invention that this overvoltage protective device can be fabricated by thick film process so that mass production can be expected with a low production cost by utilizing commonly equipment. Also, it is expected to eliminate point discharge phenomenon by forming surfaces of two adjacent electrodes as smooth as possible.
To achieve these and other objects of the present invention, the stack up type low capacitance overvoltage protective device is composed of a ceramic substrate, a separated conductive lower electrode layer and a conductive upper electrode lead wire layer both formed by printing process on the substrate; a voltage sensitive material layer stacked up on the conductive lower electrode layer by printing process; and a conductive upper electrode layer stacked up on both the conductive upper electrode lead wire layer and the voltage sensitive material layer by printing process. In this version, the construction of a main structure for the present invention is completed, afterward a protective layer is enclosed over this main structure.
The objects, advantages and features of the present invention will become more readily appreciated and understood from a consideration of the following detailed description of preferred embodiments when taken together with the accompanying drawings appended below.


Disclosed are plugging mixtures for a ceramic wall flow filter, comprising an aluminum titanate precursor reactive batch composition including an alumina source, a silica source, and a titania source; a sintering aid; an organic binder; and a liquid vehicle. Also disclosed are ceramic wall flow filters comprised of end plugs formed from the plugging mixtures of the present invention and methods for the manufacture thereof.

1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to the manufacture of porous ceramic particulate filters, and more particularly to improved materials and processes for sealing selected channels of porous ceramic honeycombs to form wall-flow ceramic filters therefrom.
2. Technical Background
Ceramic wall flow filters are finding widening use for the removal of particulate pollutants from diesel or other combustion engine exhaust streams. A number of different approaches for manufacturing such filters from channeled honeycomb structures formed of porous ceramics are known. The most widespread approach is to position cured plugs of sealing material at the ends of alternate channels of such structures which can block direct fluid flow through the channels and force the fluid stream through the porous channel walls of the honeycombs before exiting the filter. Illustrative of this approach is U.S. Pat. No. 6,809,139, which describes the use of sealing materials comprising cordierite-forming (MgO—Al2O3—SiO2) ceramic powder blends and thermosetting or thermoplastic binder systems to form such plugs.
For most of their manufacturing history, Diesel Particulate Filters have been comprised of cordierite (magnesium alumino silicate) as the base ceramic material. However, cordierite has potential short comings when uncontrolled regeneration of the filter occurs during normal operation. Namely, the material typically melts at about 1435° C. and it has a relatively low heat capacity. In extreme cases this can cause melting of the filter matrix, and failure of the filter. To this end, aluminum titanate has been proposed as a viable alternate ceramic material for forming ceramic wall flow filters due to its higher melt temperature and relatively high heat capacity compared to cordierite. However, because aluminum titanate material is generally incompatible with cordierite, there is a need in the art for a plugging material that is compatible with aluminum titanate.

Plugging material for aluminum titanate ceramic wall flow filter manufacture


Disclosed is an attenuation reduction structure for high-frequency connection pads of a circuit board with an insertion component. The circuit board includes at least one pair of differential mode signal lines formed thereon. A substrate has upper and lower surfaces respectively provided with at least one pair of upper connection pads and lower connection pads. A first metal layer is formed on the lower surface of the substrate. The first metal layer includes an attenuation reduction grounding pattern structure. The attenuation reduction grounding pattern structure includes a hollow area and at least one protruded portion. The protruded portion extends from the first metal layer in a direction toward the lower connection pads.

1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to an attenuation reduction structure for circuit board, and in particular to an attenuation reduction structure for high-frequency signal connection pads of a circuit board with an insertion component.
2. The Related Arts
In various electronic devices that are used contemporarily, due to the amount of data transmitting through signal lines getting increasingly large, the number of signal lines involved is also getting larger and the frequency of the transmitted signal is higher. Differential mode signal transmission techniques have been widely used to suppress electromagnetic interference (IMF). For example, USB (Universal Serial Bus), LVDS (Low Voltage Differential signaling), and EPD (Embedded Display Port) have all widely adopted such techniques of signal transmission in order to suppress IMF.
Although the differential mode signal transmission can greatly overcome problems occurring in the transmission of signals, poor designs may still result in issues concerning signal reflection, dissipation of electromagnetic waves, missing or failure of transmission and reception of signals, and waveform distortion of signals. These problems of signal transmission are even worse for flexible circuit boards having a reduced substrate thickness. The causes of such problems include: poor matching of characteristic impedance in the longitudinal extension direction of differential mode signal lines, poor control of excessive parasitic capacitive effect between the differential mode signal lines and a grounding layer, poor control of excessive parasitic capacitive effect between a high-frequency connection pad zone and a grounding layer, and characteristic impedances of differential mode signal lines and a high-frequency connection pad zone being not matched.
Heretofore, various techniques have been proposed to overcome the impedance matching problems of differential mode signal lines of a flexible circuit board. However, at the site of connection between differential mode signal lines and a high-frequency connection pad zone formed on a flexible circuit board and the neighboring area thereof, the line widths of the differential mode signal lines (which are extremely small) and signal conduction pins of a connector and size specification of components (which are of a relatively large size compared to the line widths of the signal lines) impose limitations to the solution of such problems. Thus, it is an issue for those involved in this art to overcome the deficiency of the known techniques.

Attenuation reduction structure for high frequency signal connection pads of circuit board with insertion component


A method of controlling the speed of a right front wheel and a left front wheel on a work machine includes receiving a speed command based at least partially on an operator input and monitoring at least one wheel steering angle of at least one front wheel. A first front wheel speed command may be determined based at least partially on the at least one wheel steering angle. In addition, a second front wheel speed command may be determined based at least partially on the at least one wheel steering angle. The first front wheel speed command and the second front wheel speed command may be output to independently control the speed of the right and the left front wheels.

Typical motor graders have all-wheel drive capability with one or more front motors for driving the front wheels and a separate rear transmission for driving the rear wheels. The transmission and the clutch for the front motors typically include a free-wheel capability, meaning that the front wheels are allowed to rotate at a speed faster than they are being driven by the front motors. Therefore, when the rear motor drives faster than the front motors, the front wheels roll freely and will not drag. This is important because the front wheels provide steering capability to the motor grader, and if the front wheels drag, the motor grader's ability to turn is limited.
Although the front and rear wheels typically rotate at the same speed during straight ahead travel, when turning, one or both of the front wheels are required to rotate faster than the rear wheels. In fact, a full turning motor grader may have front wheel speeds that are up to 50% faster than the rear wheel speeds. When this occurs, the front wheels may rotate faster than the driving front motors, thereby causing free-wheeling. Whenever the front wheels are free-wheeling, they are not providing traction into the turn, which can reduce the steerability of the motor grader, and increase the turning radius. Motor graders having a tandem arrangement of rear wheel sets resist turning more than those with a single rear wheel set. Accordingly, the problems associated with free-wheeling on a motor grader with tandem rear wheel sets may be even greater.
One system for driving front wheels on a motor grader is disclosed in U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2002/0027025 (the '025 publication) to Kobayashi et al. The '025 publication discloses a system for rotating the front wheels faster than the rear wheels based on the turning radius and the revolution number of the rear wheels. The system measures a front wheel steering angle and an articulation angle, and controls the speed of the front wheels based on the measured factors. However, the '025 publication discloses that a single pump drives both front wheels. Further, the '025 publication discloses an open loop system that cannot compensate one wheel independent of the other to increase traction in a turn. Such a system may result in a loss of traction from at least one front wheel during a turn.
This disclosure is directed to a system and method for independently controlling the front wheel speeds of a work machine by independently adjusting the desired front wheel speeds based on a steering angle or a combination of steering and articulation angles, for example.

Front-wheel drive steering compensation method and system


This invention disclosure is an electrical outlet receptacle containing the high voltage AC side and low voltage DC power supply used typically for charging and/or powering portable electronic devices. The charge connector for interfacing with the portable device is contained in a removable module. Furthermore the removable module may contain a retractable charge cord or charge cords, charge status indicator lights, power supply switches, and it also may contain a portion of the power supply control circuitry to provide the particular power and signaling required to interface with the specific portable device. The other portion of the power supply and control circuitry would be contained in the fixed portion of the receptacle and/or the electrical box. Finally there may be additional heat sinks to provide enough thermal dissipation from the power supply.

1. Field of the Invention
The present application is related to an AC electrical receptacle containing charging connectors for portable electronic devices where said charging portion of the electrical receptacle can be easily upgradeable to future portable electronic device charging and power standards by use of a removable module.
2. Technical Background
The past several years has seen a proliferation of portable electronic devices. Smart phones, tablets, laptops, game pads, cameras, portable lights, and electronic toys to name a few. One commonality amongst all these portable electronic devices is the need to recharge their respective batteries. Several strategies by portable electronic device manufactures for charging said batteries have been removable batteries and a charging adapter which plug into an AC high voltage wall electrical receptacle, a charging adapter with proprietary plug to attach to the portable electronic device, a charging adapter with standardized plug such as micro USB to attach to the portable electronic device for charging, and inductive charging pad to wirelessly charge the portable electronic device while in close proximity to the portable electronic device. The drawback of all these approaches is the adapter and charge cord required. Adapters and charge cords have the down side of easily being lost by the user, incompatibility between one adapter and a different portable electronic device, incompatibility between the adapter and future similar portable electronic devices, and safety issue of the 'wall wart' style adapter being easy to bump and partially expose the high voltage prongs.
Inventors have come up with solutions which address some concerns but not all. Current state of the art approaches include electrical receptacles containing USB type A connector or connectors and an associated low voltage switching power supply used for powering the USB type A plugs. However that technology implementation does not eliminate the issue of requiring a charge cord to connect from the USB plug in the electrical receptacle to the portable electronic device. These charge cords can easily be lost. Another issue is unsightliness if one keeps the charge cord plugged into the electrical receptacle at all times. Furthermore current technology implementations do not address future compatibility where the portable electronic device may require different power or signaling requirements. Current technology does not address the safety issue of young children attempting to plug wires into outlets—a young child may not distinguish between the USB type A socket and high voltage AC socket.
Other proposed inventions include a retractable charge cord inside the electrical receptacle. However since the charge cord is part of the electrical receptacle and not part of a removable module, the electrical receptacle will not work with portable electronic devices with different style charge connectors. Since all electrical receptacles are 'hard wired' to a building's high voltage wiring and replacing it may require a municipal electrical permit and an electrician to perform the work, both which are costly and time consuming. Also the future compatibility issue remains where even if the same plug style is included in future portable electronic devices, the power requirement and signaling protocol required by the portable electronic device may be different. Furthermore, retractable charge cords can easily break if one pulls on them with excessive force rendering the electrical receptacle broken and an expensive electrician service call to replace said electrical receptacle.
Another drawback with current electrical receptacles with built in low power supplies is the limited amount of low voltage DC power said electrical receptacle can provide due to thermal constraints. Power supplies have two inherent constraints. First, no power supply is 100% efficient and the un-efficient portion of the power is converted into heat which must be dissipated by the electrical receptacle. Second, there is a limited amount of heat which can be dissipated inside a wall electrical box. For example, an 80% efficiency 100 Watt power supply would need to dissipate 25 Watts which exceeds the power dissipation capability of a traditional electrical box while remaining within industry standards of acceptable temperatures within said electrical box.
Hence there is a need for an invention which solves the aforementioned issues of appearance, safety, upgradability to future charging standards, repair of components of limited life span, and thermal limitations.
3. Background Art
U.S. Pat. No. 8,758,031 "Electrical wiring device with high current USB charging capabilities"

Electrical box having a removable module with a charging connector


Brightness irregularities that develop in a light emitting device due to is persion among pixels in the threshold values of TFTs used for supplying electric current to light emitting devices become obstacles to improved image quality of the light emitting device. As an image signal input to a pixel from a source signal line, a desired electric potential is applied to a gate electrode of a TFT for supplying electric current to an EL device, through a TFT having its gate and drain connected to each other. A voltage equal to the TFT threshold value is produced between the source and the drain of the TFT 105. An electric potential in which the image signal is offset by the amount of the threshold value is therefore applied to the gate electrode of the TFT. Further, TFTs are disposed in close proximity to each other within the pixel, so that dispersions in the TFT characteristics do not easily develop. A desired drain current can thus be supplied to the EL device even if there is dispersion in the threshold values of the TFTs among pixels, because this is offset by the threshold value of the TFT.

In recent years, the development of display devices using light emitting devices including electroluminescent (EL) devices has been conducted actively. The light emitting device has high visibility because it emits light for itself. It does not need a back light that is needed in liquid crystal display devices (LCD), and thus it is suitable for forming items that have a low profile and have nearly no limits to the field of view.
Here, the EL device is a device having a light emitting layer that can obtain luminescence generated by applying an electric filed. The light emitting layer has light emission (fluorescence) in returning from the singlet excited state to the ground state, and light emission (phosphorescence) in returning from the triplet excited state to the ground state. In the invention, the light emitting device may have any light emission forms above.
The EL device is configured in which the light emitting layer is sandwiched between a pair of electrodes (an anode and a cathode), forming a laminated structure in general. Typically, a laminated structure of the anode/hole transport layer/emissive layer/electron transport layer/cathode is exemplary. Furthermore, there are the other structures laminated between an anode and a cathode in the order of the hole injection layer/hole transport layer/light emitting layer/electron transport layer, or hole injection layer/hole transport layer/light emitting layer/electron transport layer/electron injection layer. As the EL device structure used for the light emitting device in the invention, any structure described above may be adapted. Moreover, fluorescent pigment may be doped into the light emitting layer.
In the specification, the entire layers disposed between the anode and the cathode are collectively called the EL layer in the EL element. Accordingly, the hole injection layer, the hole transport layer, the light emitting layer, the electron transport layer, and the electron injection layer are all included in the EL element. The light emitting element formed of the anode, the EL layer, and the cathode is called EL element.

Semiconductor device and driving method thereof

Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd.


Methods and systems are provided for radio frequency (RF) coils for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) systems. In one embodiment, a system comprises: a radio frequency (RF) coil array for a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) system, including: a flexible shell including an inner layer; and a plurality of flexible RF coils embedded within the inner layer, with each RF coil of the plurality of RF coils including two distributed capacitance wire conductors. In this way, the RF coil array may deform in order to conform to a body of a patient.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a medical imaging modality that can produce images of an interior of a patient without x-ray radiation or other types of ionizing radiation. An MRI system is a medical imaging device utilizing a superconducting magnet to create a strong, uniform, static magnetic field within a designated region (e.g., within a passage shaped to receive a patient). When a body of a patient (or portion of the body of the patient) is positioned within the magnetic field, nuclear spins associated with the hydrogen nuclei that form water within tissues of the patient become polarized. The magnetic moments associated with these spins become aligned along the direction of the magnetic field and result in a small net tissue magnetization in the direction of the magnetic field. MRI systems additionally include magnetic gradient coils that produce spatially-varying magnetic fields of smaller magnitudes relative to a magnitude of the uniform magnetic field resulting from the superconducting magnet. The spatially-varying magnetic fields are configured to be orthogonal to each other in order to spatially encode the region by creating a signature resonance frequency of the hydrogen nuclei at different locations in the body of the patient. Radio frequency (RF) coil assemblies are then used to create pulses of RF energy at or near the resonance frequency of the hydrogen nuclei. The pulses of RF energy are absorbed by the hydrogen nuclei, thereby adding energy to the nuclear spin system and adjusting the hydrogen nuclei from a rest state to an excited state. As the hydrogen nuclei relax back to the rest state from the excited state, they release the absorbed energy in the form of an RF signal. This signal is detected by the MRI system and is transformed into an image using reconstruction algorithms.
In order to detect the RF signals emitted by the body of the patient, a local RF coil assembly (which may be referred to as an RF coil array) is often positioned proximate to one or more anatomical features to be imaged by the MRI system. An image quality of images produced by the MRI system is dependent on a distance of the local RF coil assembly from the origin of the signals received by the local RF coil assembly (such as the one or more anatomical features).


Systems and methods for a data processor implemented system monitor for enabling persons to turn over the allocation their investment assets, and/or receive assistance concerning how to receive disbursements from investments, in a manner that is free from or ameliorates the traditional conflicts of interest in previous systems. The systems and methods are adapted to ameliorate the tension between other functions where the compensation may be affected by asset allocation. The systems and methods collect, monitor, and direct information from persons who hold indicative data (e.g., employers), to provide professional asset allocation services including automatic allocation, rebalancing, and reallocation of investment assets, on a regular basis; as well as assistance in determining how much to save or how to receive disbursements in a manner that ameliorates conflicts of interest, which, in the case of employee benefit plans, is consistent with the regulatory restraints of ERISA.

The present disclosure relates generally to an innovative investment program, which is designed to improve investment performance for investors, including participants in Benefit Plans, by automatically determining appropriate savings levels and automatically allocating, rebalancing and reallocating investment assets (which generally include taxable and tax-deferred assets, and may include assets in Benefit Plans, once an investor so directs or in cases where a third party can direct on behalf of the investor, without receiving direction from the investor) for investors, while eliminating or, at least, ameliorating the conflict of interest that would otherwise exist between a provider of automatic allocation services and persons (e.g., money managers, registered investment advisors, etc.) that would normally benefit from such automatic services. The innovative investment program includes, but is not limited to, systems and methods that are computer housed software programs for collecting, monitoring and directing data from persons, who hold investors' indicative data, including, but not limited to, sponsors of pension plans, money managers, and affiliates of such persons.
The field of individual savings, including retirement savings, has been greatly impacted by the vigorous growth of the stock market and retirement plans that offer individual accounts. Both of these recent phenomena generally require the individual investor to both determine how much to save and how to invest savings, including directing the investment of the assets allocated in his or her individual savings account or similar account. Considering the continuing erosion of traditional Benefit Plan pension plans (which are managed on behalf of individuals and, in this regard, require no action from such individuals), the approaching retirement of the baby-boom generation, and the growing interest in Social Security reform, effective savings, including the effective use of the Benefit Plan, as defined hereinafter, is a cornerstone of an effective retirement policy for the United States of America, or any other country facing the above challenges, and is believed will have a staggering impact on future national and state policy as well as future national and state budget allocation decisions.
In the case of Employee Benefit Plans ("Benefit Plans" are arrangements, including trusts or other vehicles associated with such arrangements, which hold assets generally designed to be saved until after termination of employment, including, but not limited to, employer-sponsored 401(k) plans, and individual retirement plans and annuities and other similar plans), Benefit Plan sponsors and public policy officials have been very concerned about the effective "utilization" of Benefit Plans and the implications thereof with respect to the future of at least Social Security for some time. Investments in employee education, expanded investment choices, lifestyle funds, retirement planning software, online advice tools, etc. have all been produced with the goal of improving the overall national savings rates, including Benefit Plan utilization (i.e., raising participation rates, generally increasing salary deferral levels and establishing/maintaining appropriate asset allocation).
Unfortunately, the above-described methods are yet to achieve the desired results. Despite investments in the above described methods, most individuals, including many participants in self-directed, individual account plans, do not even participate, and when most individuals do participate, most individuals do not appropriately save and invest, including a failure to participate in 401(k) plans, nor do they save sufficient amounts, as reported in O. S. Mitchell, J. F. Moore, 1998, "Can Americans Afford to Retire? New Evidence on Retirement Saving Adequacy," Journal of Risk & Insurance 65(3), 371–400, and/or most individuals do not appropriately allocate their assets, including assets in their retirement accounts, to adequately provide for their future retirement income needs.
As is known, individual investors as opposed to institutional investor populations can roughly be divided into two groups as follows:
Financially "Involved":
The "financially involved," as defined in the present application, are believed to already be doing better than the average Benefit Plan participant but are generally not yet saving or allocating their saving in an optimal manner. The financially involved presently save in greater (and generally more appropriate) amounts and are believed to generally appreciate additional tools and information and would apparently benefit from these and additional services, though not as to the same extent as the financially uninvolved apparently would benefit.
Financially "Uninvolved":
The "financially uninvolved," as defined in the present application are believed responsible for the bulk of the investment shortcoming problem, as the participation of the financially uninvolved in employer sponsored pension or savings vehicles, (including Benefit Plans savings) and asset allocation behavior is inconsistent with that which would be implemented by a qualified financial professional. The financially uninvolved do not appreciate tools and information and appear to simply want to be handed a solution for retirement investing with the least amount of their personal involvement as possible.
Drastically improving the resulting problems described above (including under utilization of employer sponsored Benefit Plans) requires meeting the needs of the "financially uninvolved," which typically represents well over sixty percent (60%) of the employee population. Recent studies indicate that, in the case of section 401(k) Employee Benefit Plans, the financially uninvolved group's 401(k) participation and investment decisions vary tremendously with the way that the 401(k) participation and investment options are presented to the plan participants. The findings from these studies strongly suggest that current 401(k) Employee Benefit Plans are not optimally designed to meet the needs of the "financially uninvolved" segment of Employee Benefit Plan eligible employees.
Specifically, it is presently believed that the problems described above for both the financially involved and the financially uninvolved result from the fact that currently, individuals are either: 1) too involved in the process of selecting investments and frequently do so by choosing investments based on the recent performance of individual investment vehicles; 2) do not save appropriate amounts to meet their goals, including retirement; or 3) more often, they feel they do not have the time, interest, and/or expertise to make appropriate investments or structure appropriate savings plans.
The above described individual-investor behavior is in contrast to institutional investors, who recognize the importance of appropriately funding for future liabilities, and then determine an appropriate funding policy and asset allocation model to best fund future liabilities, and only then select investment vehicles based on the ability to implement the model allocation-thus recognizing that money management (e.g., security selection) is of secondary importance for passive, long-term investors.
The process described above as used by individuals typically results in inadequate funding levels (low savings rates) and inappropriate investment including suboptimal allocations. Specifically, it is presently believed that the problems described above for both the financially involved and the financially uninvolved result from the fact that, currently, the process of carrying out the necessary steps to appropriately save, as outlined above, is still too overwhelming for even the financially involved, much less the financially uninvolved.
It is presently believed that one of the possible reasons for the inadequate savings situations, as describe above, is that saving for the future is typically something that is put off until tomorrow, especially by financially uninvolved investors and especially, by individual Benefit Plan participants in the absence of effective investment assistance. In the case of Employee Benefit Plans lack of participation by eligible employees, it has been and is presently a persistent problem that Benefit Plan sponsors face with the implementation of Benefit Plans. Benefit Plan sponsors are all too familiar with employees who always intend to enroll in the Benefit Plan, but somehow never quite get around to submitting the authorization that will enable the Benefit Plan sponsor to deduct the contributions (savings) from the employees pay on a regular basis. Various academic studies and consulting reports indicate that somewhere between one-quarter and one-third of 401(k)-eligible employees do not participate in their company-sponsored 401(k) Benefit Plan. (See, for example, Poterba, Venti and Wise (1994), Andrews (1992), and Bassett, Fleming and Rodrigues (1998) for academic studies and Fidelity Investments (1999) for a consulting report.
One of the main reasons given by individual investors for nonparticipation in Benefit Plans for which they are eligible is that the process of optimally making a decision to start any savings plan, including participation in a 401(k) plan is complicated, as viewed by the average potential Benefit Plan participant or eligible participant. Studies by psychologists have shown that increasing the complexity of a decision-making task leads individuals to defer making a decision or to procrastinate and such appears to be prevalent among the average potential Benefit Plan participants.
It is presently believed that there are at least two sources of complexity in starting any savings program, such as, for example, Benefit Plans, including making the initial decision to "opt in" as a plan participant and then making an optimal 401(k) Benefit Plan investment allocation decision. First, the shear number of possible investment allocation options to be evaluated by individual investors is enormous. Each individual investor must first choice what fraction of their compensation or other income to contribute (savings) to the Benefit Plan. With respect to 401(k) Benefit Plans, generally a range of from one percent (1%) to fifteen percent (15%) of an employee's compensation is offered as possible options. Each individual investor must then close how to allocate their contribution (savings). In the case of 401(k) Benefit Plans, there are between, on average, ten or more investment options that are available. Outside a 401(k) Benefit Plan, the investment allocation options are, as a practical matter, unlimited. Even in most 401(k) Benefit Plans there are, quite literally, an infinite number of investment allocation combinations available.
For the "financially uninvolved" employees, a second source of complexity is learning how to evaluate the myriad of 401(k) Benefit Plan investment allocation options that are available. For example, despite significant investments in employee education, studies show year after year that more than fifty percent (50%) of employees do not even know what a "money market fund" is, much less have the knowledge to intelligently choose from among the myriad of 401(k) Benefit Plan investment allocation options that are available.
Thus, individual investors may rationally postpone making a decision on savings, including 401(k) Benefit Plan participation, most likely because the cost in time and effort of gathering the information necessary to make an intelligent choose from among the myriad of 401(k) Benefit Plan investment allocation options that are available may exceed the sort-term benefit from making such a decision, as viewed by large numbers of individual investors.
Recently, some Benefit Plan sponsors have reversed the above described retirement savings procrastination simply by using automatic enrollment in 401(k) Benefit Plans. Under automatic enrollment, individual employees who do not actively request to be excluded from a Benefit Plan are enrolled and a default contribution deferral amount (savings) is automatically deducted from their paycheck (usually 3% of pay) and contributed (saved) to their 401(k) Benefit Plan. The default deferral amount is invested in a default investment vehicle, usually something conservative, such as, for example, a money market or other relatively stable value fund. Individual employees who do not wish to participate in the available 401(k) Benefit Plan must actively submit their election to "opt-out" (rather than to "opt-in") the company sponsored Benefit Plan.
Results to date of such an automatic enrollment policy show that automatic enrollment appears to be a "win-lose" approach to changing 401(k) Benefit Plan savings behavior with the "win" aspect being that automatic enrollment has dramatically increases participation. For example, using automatic enrollment, McDonald's has managed to achieve a ninety five percent (95%) enrollment, an astonishing number for a largely unskilled workforce. Participation in the 401(k) plan at J.C. Penney Co. jumped to eighty nine percent (89%) of its 257,000 employees, from the low seventy percent (low 70%), a year after the retailer launched its automatic enrollment participation policy. Additionally, Hewlett-Packard increased the enrollment of new workers in the company 401(k) plan from under fifty percent (50%) to ninety eight percent (98%) by implementing an automatic enrollment policy.
Moreover, while automatic enrollment appears to substantially increase the overall 401(k)-participation rate, automatic enrollment also has another important effect of equalizing participation rates across various demographic subgroups. The effects are largest among the groups with the lowest participation rates under the previous regime of affirmative elections, particularly blacks and Hispanics, the young, and employees with lower levels of compensation.
As the United State's personal savings rate—savings as a percentage of disposable income—fell to a quarterly low of about three tenths of one percent (0.3%) in the first quarter 2000, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issued two rulings (Revenue Rulings 2000-8 & 2000-33) in 2000 approving automatic enrollment for employees already on payrolls and for participants in 403(b) retirement plans for nonprofit and educational workers and for 457 plans for government workers.
Noting that 75 million Americans do not participate in a retirement pension plan and have little or no other retirement savings, Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers and Labor Secretary Alexis Herman issued a joint statement praising automatic enrollment as a "promising method of encouraging participation by those who disproportionately have been missing the benefits of a regular, disciplined approach to retirement savings. We encourage employers to consider adopting automatic enrollment."
Beyond a genuine desire to help employees save for retirement, companies have pragmatic reasons to offer automatic enrollment to their 401(k) Benefit Plans. Utilizing automatic enrollment has proven to be an effective means for increasing the contribution level for non-highly compensated employees so that these companies' 401(k) Benefit Plans meet discrimination tests and, thereby, allow highly compensated employees to maximize their contributions to the companies' 401(k) Benefit Plans.
However, as is usually the case, there is always a down side. In the situation described above, the "lose" aspect of automatic enrollment being that automatic enrollment has apparently generated a tremendous amount of employee Benefit Plan participant inertia. The same inertia that kept and continues to keep eligible employees from initially signing up as 401(k) Benefit Plan participants, also keeps employees from taking maximum advantage of the 401(k) Benefit Plan after the employees are automatically enrolled in the 401(k) Benefit Plan. A substantial percentage of 401(k) Benefit Plan participants hired under an automatic enrollment policy exhibit "default behavior"—sticking to both the default contribution level and the default investment allocation, both of which is usually less than optimal with respect to future impact on the individuals or national budgetary policy.
For example, a study conducted by Hewitt Associates and released in July 2000 [See, for example, Hewitt Associates (in conjunction with Harvard University and the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania). "Enrolling Employees in 401(k) Plan Not A Cure All looked at the participation and default behavior of more than 53,000 eligible employees hired before and after automatic enrollment was initiated at two U.S. companies (Companies A and B) over a one to two-year period. Both companies automatically enrolled employees in conservative stable value funds at a two percent (2%) to a three percent (3%) percent contribution rate. As reported in the study, more than half of the eligible employees remained at the companies' conservative default elections for both contribution level and investment allocation.
Further, after the automatic enrollment program was implemented, an average of sixty three percent (63%) of eligible employees hired under automatic enrollment at Company A contributed at the default rate; fifty seven percent (57%) percent invested in the default fund and fifty one percent (51%) remained at both default elections. At Company B, an average of sixty two percent (62%) of eligible employees participating under automatic enrollment contributed at the default rate; sixty seven percent (67%) invested in the default fund and fifty eight percent (58%) remained at both default elections.
Similarly, the Madrian and Shea (2000) study (See, for example, Madrian, Brigitte C.; Shea, Dennis F. "The Power of Suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) Participation and Savings Behavior," NBER Working Paper No. W7682, May 2000) found that an average of seventy five percent (75%) of Benefit Plan participants hired under automatic enrollment contributed at the default rate of three percent (3%); eighty percent (80%) invested in the default money market fund and about sixty one percent (61%) did nothing to change their savings/investment behavior from the default specified by the plan sponsor or company if no other action was taken.
The good news for the automatic enrollment policy is that 401(k) Benefit Plan participation is much higher under the Benefit Plan automatic enrollment policy than when an affirmative election by an individual plan participant is required in order for an eligible individual employee to actively participate in the Benefit Plan. It is believed that the best explanation for the low participation rate of new hires, in the absence of an automatic enrollment policy, is that the decision to participate in the Benefit Plan is complicated, which leads individual employees to defer making a decision and to procrastinate with respect to making a definite decision. Utilization of an automatic enrollment policy apparently decreases the perceived complexity of the 401(k) Benefit Plan participation decision by decoupling the participation decision from the savings and investment decision.
The bad news, however, is that roughly sixty percent (60%) of the employees that have been automatically enrolled subsequently did nothing to increase their fairly low three percent (3%) contribution rate or to reallocate their contributions away from the default investment option to a more individually appropriate investment or to recognize the importance of appropriately individual funding for future liabilities, and then determine an appropriate individual funding policy and asset allocation model to best fund individually perceived future liabilities, and only then select investment vehicles based on the ability to implement the individual model allocation—thus recognizing that money management (i.e., security selection) is of secondary importance for passive, long-term investors. Again, complexity-induced procrastination appears to best explain why roughly sixty percent (60%) of automatic enrollees—the financially uninvolved—fail to change the initial default investment choices to more individually appropriate investment(s).
The "financially uninvolved," it is believed, have a much greater tendency to stick with the status quo investment(s) (when one is available) as financial decisions become more difficult. Additionally, it is highly likely that the "financially uninvolved" view the default contribution rate and investment allocation under automatic enrollment as including an implicit approval by their employer, who sponsors the Benefit Plan, of such investment decision as being the appropriate investment decision for them, the specific employee. In this respect the "financially uninvolved" may be correct in that, absent an affirmative election, one or more plan fiduciaries (typically including in this type of activity, the plan sponsor acting as a fiduciary) is responsible under the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974 or "ERISA" (which is the law that is generally applicable to private sector retirement plans) for the default investment allocation.
The results from an automatic Benefit Plan enrollment policy also have implications for the design of public policies to encourage savings that have long term budget and budget deficit impact. The above described results of the present automatic Benefit Plan enrollment policy implementation strongly suggest that, if Social Security reform were to include the adoption of partially self-directed individual accounts, as proposed by the Bush Administration, a substantial percentage of individuals would end up with the default plan investments as specified by the Federal Government. In both cases, getting the default investment allocation "right" will have a tremendous impact on the distribution of retirement savings available to individual Benefit Plan participants. If the default investment allocation is not optimized, citizens, in general, and Benefit Plan participants in particular, will most likely have less retirement income, pay less tax and, as a result, create additional financial demands and stress on the government because, as a result of less optimum investment allocation during the life of a Benefit Plan participant, the government will collect less revenue and, thus, have less income at the same time government will most likely be experiencing increased demand for services from persons with inadequate retirement income. In this regard, existing evidence indicates that the negative effect caused by the increased demand for services from persons with inadequate retirement income would tend to be concentrated among persons who are the least advantaged members of United States society, and, as a result, the social strains resulting from such members, who have not fared well in optimizing their investment allocation, could be expected to increase. (See, for example, "Investment Without Education, The Disparate Impact of Women And Minorities in Self-Directed Defined Contribution Plans," by Jane Elizabeth Zaglein published in 2001 in the Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal at 5 Empl. Rts. & Employ. Pol'y J. 223.)
Thus, in order to convert the present automatic Benefit Plan enrollment policy from an apparent win-lose proposition to a win—win proposition, a viable way must be developed to move "financially uninvolved" employees out of the default investment option(s) and into investment option(s) having individual appropriate contribution rates and investment allocations without compromising the Benefit Plan sponsors' need for freedom from any significant possibility of litigation by reason of providing asset allocation and savings assistance to Benefit Plan employees, which has been a considerable obstacle in the past.
Another problem that has surfaced is that Benefit Plan sponsors are increasingly concerned that by the Benefit Plan sponsors increasing the initial contribution rate, employees may be induced to opt-out of 401(k) Benefit Plan participation, and just as there has been and is participation inertia, there will be non-participant inertia as well.
The above-mentioned studies show that a majority of eligible employees who fail to act on deciding whether and how much to participate in a Benefit Plan will also be likely not to decide on how to optimally invest their contributions in an individually appropriate investment vehicle to achieve an individually appropriate investment allocation. Under the facts outlined by IRS revenue Ruling 98-30, if a Benefit Plan participant has made a no-investment election, then the Benefit Plan can invest the contributions in a balanced fund that includes both diversified equity and fixed income investment vehicles.
Many Benefit Plan sponsors are wary of choosing default fund allocations that includes equities because they are concerned that the Benefit Plan sponsors will be blamed if the investment returns fall or are negative during adverse market periods. Consequently, most automatic Benefit Plan enrollments use conservative investments (e.g., money market find or stable value find) as the Benefit Plan default allocation.
Additionally, IRS included a warning in IRS revenue Ruling 98-30 ruling that the Department of Labor will not consider the Benefit Plan participant or beneficiary to have exercised the type of control over Benefit Plan investment choices that is necessary to justify relaxing fiduciary responsibilities in the ERISA section 404(c) Benefit Plan regulations. In this case, the fact that the Benefit Plan participant or beneficiary is merely told of the Benefit Plan investments that will, in the absence of instructions to the contrary, be made on his or her behalf cannot be considered control of the Benefit Plan investment decision by the Benefit Plan participant. Therefore, other Benefit Plan fiduciaries will not be relieved of responsibility for the results of the Benefit Plan investment by reason of ERISA section 404(c).
Finally, as noted above, many employees consider the Benefit Plan default investment as affirmative Benefit Plan investment advice received from the company or Benefit Plan sponsor. A person who provides Benefit Plan investment advice with respect to retirement assets under ERISA is acting in a fiduciary capacity, and such advice must comply with ERISA's general prudence requirements. Specifically, ERISA .sctn.404(a)(1)(B) states that "the fiduciary should act with the care, skill, prudence, and diligence under the circumstances then prevailing that a prudent man acting in a like capacity and familiar with such matters would use in the conduct of an enterprise of like character and with like aims." Thus, it appears highly questionable that a prudent expert would ever use a "one size fits all" investment selection approach for all individual Benefit Plan participants (such as investing in a money-market fund), given the clear known existence of the enormous individual differences in funding requirements, time horizon, risk tolerance, etc., and other factors related to making an optimum asset allocation and investment decision, including Benefit Plan asset allocation.
Moreover, prudent procedures generally require that an appropriate allocation of Benefit Plan investment asset classes be used that will yield the highest probability of meeting a particular Benefit Plan participant's long-term investment objectives without exceeding tolerances for short-term investment market volatility. Again, it is highly questionable that a prudent expert would recommend a conservative Benefit Plan investment allocation such as a money market fund for younger Benefit Plan participants, which when combined with a low Benefit Plan default contribution rate, will likely ultimately result in the realization of an inadequate amount of savings in order to fund future retirement income needs at an appropriate level without placing undue financial burdens on various government organizations and adversely impacting national budgetary considerations.
The Benefit Plan default investment allocation is important because a number of studies have concluded that Benefit Plan asset allocation decisions have the greatest impact on the overall long-term performance of a Benefit Plan investment portfolio. A recent study found that, for passive, long-term investors, asset allocation determines about one hundred percent (100%) of performance-regardless of whether one is measuring return variability across time, return variation between funds, or return amount. For the short-term investor, who trades more frequently, invests in individual securities, and practices market timing, asset allocation has less of an impact on returns. Thus, the impact of asset allocation on performance is directly correlated with investment behavior. (See for example, Roger G. Ibbotson and Paul D. Kaplan, "Does Asset Allocation Policy Explain 40%, 90%, or 100% of Performance?," Financial Analysts Journal, January/February 2000.)
It is believed that this study has particular significance for workers using 401(k)-type plans to save for retirement. A study of year-end 1998 data by the Employee Benefit Research Institute and the Investment Company Institute (ICI) found that approximately seventy-five percent (75%) of 401(k) participants had not changed their equity allocations in the previous two years. Thus, a substantial percentage of 401(k) participants exhibit long-term, passive investment behavior when managing their self-directed retirement assets. For the great majority of 401(k) participants (i.e., the "financially uninvolved"), asset allocation (rather than security selection or market timing) is the dominant determinant of performance on their individual plan accounts.
The problem with specifying a one-size-fits-all Benefit Plan default allocations is that, for individuals, appropriate Benefit Plan contribution levels and asset allocation determinations are based on the employee's unique needs and circumstances, which change over time as employees get closer to retirement and individual employee wealth increases. The Benefit Plan goal should be to devise appropriate long-term investment strategies that will assist employees with meeting both their short, intermediate and long term investment objectives with the least amount of unacceptable or inappropriate risk for their particular circumstances at a particular time. The risk an individual employee can afford not only depends on his/her attitude towards risk, but his/her total financial situation. The earning ability outside the employee's investments in the Benefit Plan is also important in determining the individual employee's capacity for risk. Employees with high earning abilities are able to take more investment risk, because they can, more easily recoup from poor performing investment and resulting financial losses than those employees with lower earning abilities can.
The first step in arriving at appropriate Benefit Plan default investment strategy is to coordinate a savings plan with an optimal portfolio that facilitates the Benefit Plan participant to appropriately find future retirement income needs. The criterion used for selecting the initial Benefit Plan investment allocation is based on cash flow needs and Human Capital; Human Capital being defined as the actuarial present value of future retirement savings, Benefit Plan pension income, and Social Security income. Thus, the variables important to the calculation of Human Capital include retirement savings (401(k), IRA, etc.), current and retirement age, mortality and life expectancy, gender, real long term interest rates, Benefit Plan pension income and Social Security income. Human Capital is usually the dominant asset for young and middle-aged employees as Benefit Plan financial assets would be a tiny fraction of their total wealth.
Thus, in accordance with the above, it is quite reasonable for younger employees to hold an all-stock investment Benefit Plan allocation, because of their ability to offset short-term losses through adjusting future Benefit Plan investment strategy, consumption and savings. As employees become older, the proportion of Human Capital in total wealth becomes smaller; therefore, over time the Benefit Plan investment allocation needs to be gradually adjusted to become less aggressive.
As previously discussed, it makes little sense to use automatic Benefit Plan procedures to enroll younger employees and increase their Benefit Plan contribution level over time, and then use the Benefit Plan's money market fund, or similar vehicle as the default Benefit Plan investment choice to invest their Benefit Plan contributions. Similarly, it may be imprudent to use the Benefit Plan's balanced fund, or similar vehicle as the default Benefit Plan choice for older employees, who may lack the ability to make up losses that may occur during adverse market conditions.
Another problem that has long been acknowledged relating to optimizing investment portfolios for Benefit Plan participants is that the entities and/or persons most capable of delivering an optimum investment solution typically have financial interests that may be or are inconsistent with that of the individuals who need investment allocation services. For example, in the case of entities that administer Benefit Plans, they are typically the same entities that traditionally manage the investments of the investment vehicles normally offered in connection with Benefit Plans. Such investment managers receive most (if not all) of their compensation as a percentage of assets managed, with such percentages varying according to the nature of the risk associated with the particular investment vehicles. For example, an international equity find would typically pay a manager a higher percentage resulting in a higher net profit than a domestic bond fund manager for finds having approximately the same assets under management. In the case of financial intermediaries (such as licensed securities brokers), they typically receive differing levels of initial and subsequent commissions depending on the investment they choose or advise a person to choose.
Similar or identical conflicts of interest also occur when determining how to invest at a time when persons are no longer working. For example, investors must choose at that time whether to purchase a stream of income (e.g., an annuity) in order to hedge against the risk of outliving the money that has been put aside for retirement. Persons who typically provide assistance with these decisions receive commissions when they sell annuities and therefore have or may have interests that could affect the quality of the assistance that they provide. Persons who manage investments for a person, and are compensated based on a percentage of the amount they manage, would have an incentive to recommend or otherwise cause a person to withdraw amounts as slowly as possible in order to maximize the income of the investment manager at the expense of the investors best interest.
These situations could lead to persons with inconsistent interests intentionally or unintentionally acting to cause amounts to be saved or invested so that these persons with inconsistent interests enjoy a higher income, a situation possibly not in the best interest of the individual Benefit Plan participant whose funds are being invested by the persons providing traditional services for the Benefit Plan.
Thus, there is a clear need for a new and innovative investment program that eliminates or at least significantly ameliorates this economic conflict of interest by, for example, providing for a separation between the entities or entity that determines how much to save and how the savings should be invested from other compensated functions such as the investment management. Such an investment program should provide compensation for the critical functions of determining how much an individual should save and how the savings should be invested in a manner that reduces or eliminates conflicts of interest including those that result from receiving compensation from other sources including compensation from investment management.
Such a new and innovative investment program should be implemented by separating or not separating the Benefit Plan allocation and savings function from the Benefit Plan money management function in such a way that conflicts are, if not eliminated, at least ameliorated. As is known, the substantial effect of conflicts on financial institutions has been documented in the Study (Conflicts of Interest and the Credibility of Underwriter Analyst Recommendations by Michaely and Wolmack published in 1999) that was cited before Congress in the hearings in Congress held on Jun. 14, 2001, by the Committee on Financial Services, Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises on "Analyzing the Analysts: Are Investors Getting Unbiased Information from Wall Street". By providing that the two functions may be separated so as to ameliorate or eliminate such conflicts, implementing such a new and innovative investment program would increase the likely and perceived quality of the Benefit Plan allocation services with a corresponding positive effect on the marketplace and individual Benefit Plan participant confidence, thus making optimum Benefit Plan savings more likely.
The above separation should also eliminate the need for artificial and less precise mechanisms to address issues such as fee leveling (charging the same fees for each investment vehicle), as these other methods do not precisely address the fundamental conflicts, which are variable profits, since the same fee may result in higher profits. The above separation should also eliminate offsets, or offsetting the cost of investment vehicles with higher fees by rebating a portion of the fees, directly or indirectly to a Benefit Plan, which also may cause certain functions to be more profitable and others to be underpaid because, like fee leveling, offsets only addresses the gross amount (and not the profits) of the fee paid.
Thus, there is a clear need for a new and innovative investment program that separates the Benefit Plan allocation and money management function, which would be a significant improvement over the aforementioned offset mechanisms, as the Benefit Plan allocation and money management function separation also addresses conflicts that can occur during both the Benefit Plan accumulation and disbursement modes for investing when the subject services (e.g., Benefit Plan asset allocation, Benefit Plan formulation/implementation of saving plans, and Benefit Plan formulation/implementation of distribution plans) are controlled by the same person.
In this connection, there is also a need to insure that the above services, which have traditionally been paid for indirectly, e.g., from commissions paid for executing Benefit Plan stock trades or fees from Benefit Plan money management, are ameliorated, as this traditional payment may have contributed to the unacceptable current state of affairs, which finds that many persons will not obtain the benefit of the subject Benefit Plan services if they have to pay a separately stated fee for them, even though the subject Benefit Plan services clearly provide more value than other Benefit Plan services for which participants pay more (e.g., Benefit Plan asset management). Typically, when other services subsidize the subject Benefit Plan services, there is a temptation for Benefit Plan service providers to maximize their profits, often in a manner that is to the detriment of an individual Benefit Plan participant (e.g., churning or excessive trading), making it desirable to separate these Benefit Plan services from other Benefit Plan functions so that the fees for the Benefit Plan subject services can remain non-obvious, but that other Benefit Plan functions that subsidize these Benefit Plan services will not be utilized in a manner that disrupts the subject Benefit Plan services. This is believed to be significant because the subject Benefit Plan services will determine the great majority of an investor's investment returns.
In this regard, the new and innovative investment program should address the conflict of interest that could occur in connection with the following: the system commits investors, with a minimum of indicative data, to as automatically as is possible or practical, allocate a portion of the investors' future salary increases towards retirement savings, based on formulae originated and/or approved by a person or persons, possibly including a determination of what constitutes a minimum of indicative data, who are independent of persons who receive other compensation such as fees for Benefit Plan money management. Ideally, the new and innovative investment program should result in automatic Benefit Plan deductions from which Benefit Plan participants have to affirmatively elect to opt out of, if they wish to discontinue Benefit Plan participation and/or change their contribution to the Benefit Plan.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should automatically as is possible or practical allocate Benefit Plan investment assets to an optimal combination of asset classes on a regular basis, based on the unique facts and circumstances of each individual investor, either based on an election by the person whose assets are invested or by a third party who is independent of persons who earn variable fees and profits by reason of the allocation of the assets or the savings levels established, in order to systemically address and ameliorate any potential conflict of interest. The Benefit Plan allocation should result either from a single or multiple affirmative directions or in the case where a third party can act on behalf of the individual, with no direction from the individual.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should choose or assists persons in choosing an appropriate manner in which to receive Benefit Plan income during a time when they are no longer saving but instead consuming prior savings (e.g., at retirement).
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should provide for oversight of the conditions designed to eliminate or ameliorate conflicts of interest within the Benefit Plan.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should provide a guarantee, whereby professional Benefit Plan allocation is precisely implemented according to the criteria specified by the Independent expert and is guaranteed to those investors who participate in the investment program.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should in addition to using automatic Benefit Plan savings based on the unique characteristics of the individual Benefit Plan participant (which savings amounts are formulated or approved by the Independent expert), including automatic enrollment in pension plans, to provide appropriate savings, resulting in most cases a substantial boost in savings, and in the case of pension plans to increase Benefit Plan participation rates and then automatically tailor each investor's Benefit Plan investment plan to each investors unique circumstances, making appropriate changes on a regular basis, without obtaining an affirmative election from the Benefit Plan participant each time a change is made, while, in the case of pension plans, help address the needs of the employer who sponsors the Benefit Plan for participant investment safety.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should address the above indicated needs by utilizing safeguards that address the Benefit Plan conflicts of interest, thereby reducing the Benefit Plan sponsors' responsibility and exposure in selecting and monitoring the Benefit Plan investment program.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should address the problems resulting from the fact that currently, individual Benefit Plan participants are either: 1) too involved in the process of selecting Benefit Plan investments and frequently do so by choosing Benefit Plan investments based on the recent performance of individual Benefit Plan investment vehicles; 2) do not save appropriate amounts to meet their goals, including retirement; or 3) more often, feel that they do not have the time, interest, and/or expertise to make appropriate Benefit Plan investments or structure appropriate Benefit Plan savings plans.
The systems and methods of the investment program should solve the above problems by minimizing the input required by individuals and automating the Benefit Plan process to the greatest possible extent while eliminating or ameliorating the conflict of interest that normally exists between parties that provide these Benefit Plan services.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should enable a person who operates the Benefit Plan investment program to, offer a meaningful guarantee (e.g., no fees are owed if the investment program is not 100% effective) regarding its effectiveness. The guarantee can be that the allocations for investors will precisely match the criteria of the Independent Expert. No person who currently offers "investment advice" or "education" and is solvent has or could reasonably offer a meaningful guarantee.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should offer such a guarantee because they are granted discretionary investment management authority from the individual plan participant or a third party on behalf of an investor, and thus exercise control of the allocations on a regular basis. "Investment advisors" will not make such a guarantee because they are granted non-discretionary investment management authority, and thus do not exercise control of the allocations on a regular basis.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should result in limiting legal exposure by providing an automatic allocation based on the individual characteristics of participants and a formula established by an Independent Expert.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should provide a data processing system that reduces their input and enables individuals, including 401(k) participants, or persons acting on their own or their behalf, to turn over some or all of these decisions to others, including the ability to automatically enroll and commit employees in advance to allocate a portion of their future salary increases towards retirement savings, which participants have to opt out of if they wish to discontinue. The net result should be that individuals are more likely to achieve their goals mostly because it utilizes the natural tendency of most individuals to minimize their involvement (many take no action whatsoever) in formulating and implementing savings and investment plans.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should minimize individual involvement as such has a corollary benefit in that when individuals are too involved individuals tend to engage in excessive trading of their individual accounts. Research demonstrates that active trading, on the average, materially diminishes investment returns. If individuals are less involved, individuals are less likely to trade and are therefore more likely to enjoy greater investment returns.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should recognize a savings method, like automatic enrollment, that is grounded in findings about the psychology of decision-making. First, most workers realize they need to save more, but lack discipline. Second, restrictions on consumption are much easier to accept if they do not affect current consumption (i.e., they take effect in the future). For example, we all plan our exercise and dieting regimes to start next week or month. Third, people are very sensitive to perceived losses in their welfare. While we can imagine foregoing some gain, bearing a loss is much more difficult. And fourth, people tend to code gains and losses in nominal rather than real dollars, so, for example, a pay increase that is less than the rate of inflation may still be considered a gain rather than a loss.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should use the principles that current plan participants with low contribution rates (i.e., less than 3 percent) and new/existing employees who are not yet participating in the plan are automatically enrolled in a plan that asks for a modest commitment now that gradually increases their contribution level over a period of a few years. The amount should generally be a fixed percentage (e.g., 2–3%) or a proportion of the pay increase (e.g., ⅓ or a ½).
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should, by timing the increase to coincide with the pay increase, assure employees that their take home pay does not diminish. In fact, since the contribution to the saving plan is tax deductible, only part of the increased saving is out-of-pocket, and the actual change in the paycheck is likely to be unnoticeable. The increases continue until the worker reaches the appropriate tax sheltered contribution, or until the worker opts out of the plan.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should, once employees are in the plan and automatically use this savings method, recognize the inertia will help keep the employees in the plan, as the vast majority of employees will not notice the difference in take home pay, but in a few short years certainly notice the difference in their individual Benefit Plan account balance. In fact, since the contribution to the savings plan is tax deductible, only part of the increased savings is out-of-pocket, and the actual change in the paycheck is likely to be unnoticeable.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should use a data processing system that collects, monitors and directs information from individuals including pension plan participants, sponsors, recordkeepers and money managers, to optimally allocate investment assets, including but not limited to pension assets, for individual investors/plan participants based on their unique facts and circumstances, with a minimum of input from the individual including a single election or without an affirmative election from plan participants. Such allocation should be automatically used to invest individual investment assets, including assets in a 401(k) plan, which will be monitored and automatically adjusted over time by qualified experts, unless the individual elects to opt out of the automatic allocation plan with an affirmative investment election.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should be used in conjunction with the automatic enrollment and contribution methods discussed above. As such, it can be used by plans that use automatic enrollment for new employees, and for current employees who either do not currently participate in the plan or do participate in the plan but have not elected compensation reduction contributions of a minimum amount (e.g., at least 3 percent). In addition to 401(k) plans, the automatic allocation plan will be made available to 403(b) retirement plans, which serve millions of employees of public schools, educational and charitable organizations, and to 457(b) plans, which serve employees of state and local governments.
The systems and methods of the new and innovative investment program should insure that an appropriate allocation is made for each individual participant on a regular basis, the data processing system will include a relational database that will be continually updated with relevant employee indicative data (e.g., age, salary) and employer plan data (participation status, investment options, employer match, account balance, etc.), which is provided from outside sources including the employer and the plan recordkeeper. The data is used to feed the financial analytic engine that will automatically allocate an optimal investment portfolio on a regular basis—based on the participant's retirement income replacement needs and human capital value.

Systems and methods for improving investment performance