In recent years, tile topic indicated in the title has been the subject of a mmaber of important publications. While the relevant literature contains a wealth of fruitful ideas and ingenious methods, with a few exceptions the papers dealing with actual computer programs are essentially descriptive in nature; rigorous proofs that the proposed programs achieve the stated objectives are generally lacking. Accordingly, the validation of a program in this field by a mathematical proof seems to be, as a matter of principle, a worthwhile enterprise, and the present paper is aimed in this direction. Let us emphasize, however, that we really had no doubts regarding the validity of published programs. Rather, we felt that the full power of a new idea in this field can be appreciated and utilized only if that new idea is fully understood; we felt that such a degree of undeI~tanding can be achieved only if we study the idea until we can prove that it works.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
House et al. (1963) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: