Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

DV

Domestic violence (DV), also termed (IPV), constitutes a range of abusive acts—including physical assaults, , , , and economic deprivation—perpetrated by one individual against a current or former romantic partner or family member to exert power and control. These behaviors often form patterns rather than isolated incidents, with severity varying from minor aggression to life-threatening harm, and empirical surveys indicate lifetime victimization rates of approximately 25% for women and 14% for men experiencing severe physical or by an intimate partner . Prevalence data reveal disparities in outcomes and , with women facing higher risks of severe physical and hospitalization, while men report comparable or higher rates of certain psychological aggression and minor physical acts; meta-analyses of conflict tactics scales consistently document bidirectional violence in 40-70% of cases, challenging unidirectional narratives that predominate in and . Risk factors include prior exposure, , and socioeconomic stressors, though causal pathways emphasize individual agency over deterministic societal excuses, with peer-reviewed longitudinal studies underscoring that mutual aggression often escalates conflicts rather than stemming solely from patriarchal structures. Notable controversies surround intervention models like the Duluth approach, which presumes male dominance motives and has been critiqued for inefficacy and gender bias in empirical evaluations, alongside systemic issues in legal systems where unsubstantiated allegations disproportionately affect men in custody disputes, as evidenced by data and victim surveys underreporting female-perpetrated harm. Prevention efforts, informed by randomized trials, highlight the limitations of awareness campaigns alone, advocating instead for targeted behavioral interventions addressing mutual accountability and in high-conflict dynamics.

In law, government, and society

Domestic violence

Domestic violence, commonly abbreviated as DV in legal and contexts, encompasses a pattern of coercive behaviors within intimate or familial relationships aimed at establishing dominance, including physical assaults, psychological intimidation, , and economic control. In criminal codes across jurisdictions such as U.S. states, DV serves as a designation for offenses like or perpetrated against spouses, cohabitants, or partners, often triggering enhanced penalties, mandatory arrests, and specialized processes. The U.S. (VAWA), enacted in 1994, formalized federal responses by allocating funding for victim services, hotlines, and prosecutions, primarily targeting female victims of male-perpetrated violence, though subsequent reauthorizations have broadened scope to include same-sex relationships. Empirical research from population-based surveys challenges unidirectional narratives framing predominantly as aggression against women. The National Family Violence Surveys (NFVS), conducted in 1975 and 1985 using the , documented annual prevalence rates of severe physical assaults at approximately 3-4% for women and 2-3% for men as victims, with mutual violence occurring in about 50% of affected couples, indicating bidirectional patterns rather than isolated perpetrator-victim dynamics. A 2000 by John Archer, reviewing 82 studies on heterosexual partner aggression, confirmed overall gender symmetry in the frequency of physical acts (with women slightly more likely to engage in minor aggression), though men caused more injuries due to average differences. The Centers for Control and Prevention's National Intimate Partner and Survey (NISVS, 2016-2017 data) reports lifetime psychological aggression by intimate partners at 48.4% for women and 48.8% for men, alongside severe physical violence rates of 24.3% for women versus 13.8% for men, underscoring substantial victimization often underrepresented in and . Causal analyses prioritize individual and behavioral risk factors over purely structural explanations like . Meta-analyses link heavy and use to elevated IPV perpetration odds ( r=0.20-0.30), with substances impairing impulse control and escalating conflicts independently of gender. Personality disorders, including borderline, , and narcissistic types, predict both perpetration and victimization, with odds ratios up to 2-3 times higher in affected individuals, as shown in reviews of clinical and community samples. These findings contrast with ideologically driven accounts prevalent in and , which systemic left-leaning biases in those institutions amplify by downplaying and male victims—evident in VAWA's gendered funding allocations that direct over 90% of resources to women despite comparable self-reported experiences—potentially distorting interventions toward one-sided models. While VAWA and analogous laws have demonstrably reduced reported incidents through shelter expansions and restraining orders (e.g., 64% drop in U.S. reports since 1994), controversies persist over unintended consequences. Critics argue that regimes and low evidentiary thresholds for protective orders incentivize exaggerated or false claims, disproportionately affecting men in custody disputes, though verified false allegation rates range from 2-10% in prosecutorial . Empirical rigor demands acknowledging bidirectional realities and multifaceted causes to avoid epistemic errors from narrative-driven oversight of male victims or mutual dynamics, as perpetuated by sources favoring paradigms over family violence research traditions.

Diversity Visa

The Diversity Visa (DV) program, enacted through the , authorizes up to 55,000 immigrant visas each to promote from countries with historically low admission rates to the , defined as those sending fewer than 50,000 immigrants over the prior five years. After statutory deductions—typically 5,000 visas reserved for and Central Americans under prior adjustments—the effective annual allocation stands at approximately 50,000 visas. The program's lottery system selects entrants randomly via computer-generated draws, without regard to skills, , or employment sponsorship, distinguishing it from other U.S. categories. Eligibility requires principal applicants to be natives of qualifying low-immigration countries and to possess either a high school education or its equivalent, or at least two years of work experience within the past five years in an occupation requiring a minimum of two years of training, as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor's O*NET system. Spouses and unmarried children under 21 may be included in entries, but entrants must demonstrate these qualifications during processing. Ineligible nationalities include those from high-immigration countries like (mainland-born), , and , though exceptions apply if a or was born in a qualifying country. The application process begins with free electronic submissions during a designated annual registration period, conducted solely through the official State Department website at dvprogram.state.gov. For the DV-2026 program, entries were accepted from October 2 to November 7, 2024, followed by random selection announcements in May 2025; selected entrants then submit DS-260 forms, undergo interviews, and must obtain by September 30, 2026, or the opportunity expires. No fees apply for entry or selection notification, though subsequent processing incurs standard immigrant costs. The system receives approximately 22 million entries annually, yielding odds of selection below 1%, with about 100,000-130,000 initial selectees notified before attrition from ineligibility or processing failures reduces the final issuances to the cap. DV recipients contribute to the U.S. through labor market participation, with indicating that in immigrant sources correlates with gains and wage increases for native workers in certain sectors. However, data from household surveys show that legal immigrant households, including DV beneficiaries, exhibit welfare usage rates around 52%, higher than native-born households, attributable in part to lower initial skill levels and family-based chain migration among recipients. Crime statistics for immigrants overall, encompassing DV entrants, demonstrate lower offending rates compared to U.S.-born individuals, as evidenced by arrest data analyses from states like . Integration outcomes vary by cohort origin, with fiscal projections noting net contributions over time from legal immigrants despite upfront costs.

In science, technology, and engineering

Digital video

Digital Video (DV) is a family of digital video recording formats standardized in 1995 by a consortium led by Sony and Panasonic, designed as a successor to analog consumer formats such as Hi8 and VHS. The format records standard-definition video at a nominal bitrate of 25 Mbps using intra-frame compression, where each video frame is compressed independently without reliance on adjacent frames, facilitating straightforward editing without generational loss. This compression scheme employs discrete cosine transform (DCT) and quantization at a 5:1 ratio for 4:1:1 chroma subsampling in NTSC or 4:2:0 in PAL, storing data on 1/4-inch metal evaporated tape cassettes. DV's FireWire (IEEE 1394) interface enabled direct transfer to computers, supporting non-linear editing workflows that bypassed analog dubbing artifacts. The consumer variant, MiniDV, utilized small cassettes (typically 60-120 minutes recording time) in compact camcorders, with global sales peaking in the late to early at approximately 15 million units annually before prices dropped below $1,000 and adoption surged. Professional extensions included Sony's DVCAM (introduced 1996), which increased track pitch for better durability and supported locked audio to prevent drift, and Panasonic's DVCPRO (also known as D-9), offering higher bitrates like 50 Mbps in DVCPRO50 for enhanced color sampling (4:2:2). These variants maintained with standard DV cassettes but prioritized robustness for broadcast and use. By the mid-2000s, DV faced displacement from high-definition tape formats like HDV (launched 2003, using compression on MiniDV cassettes at 19 Mbps) and tapeless systems such as Panasonic's P2 cards (introduced circa 2004 with the AG-HVX200 , employing DVCPRO-HD at 100 Mbps). File-based recording on solid-state drives (SSD) and hard disk drives (HDD) further accelerated the shift, offering instant random access, reduced mechanical failure risks, and scalable storage without tape threading delays. DV's engineering legacy lies in democratizing acquisition and enabling efficient non-linear , as intra-frame encoding preserved frame integrity during cuts. However, susceptibility to dropouts from oxide shedding, bit rot, or environmental factors (e.g., humidity-induced degradation at 10-20% quality loss per 10-25 years) necessitated for long-term archiving, contrasting with the inherent of file-based media. By the , DV production ceased as solid-state and rendered tape obsolete for new workflows.

Doppler velocity

Doppler velocity measures the radial component of an object's motion relative to a by detecting the frequency shift in waves reflected or scattered from the , a direct consequence of the . This shift, Δf, arises from the relative motion altering the observed in the return signal; for non-relativistic speeds, the radial velocity v is approximated as v = (Δf × c) / (2 f₀), where c is the propagation speed of the wave ( for , sound in air or tissue for ) and f₀ is the transmitted . The factor of 2 accounts for the round-trip in backscattered signals, limiting measurement to the line-of-sight component only, independent of tangential motion. This principle applies across electromagnetic () and acoustic () systems, enabling precise velocimetry without physical contact. In meteorology, Doppler radar employs this technique to estimate wind velocities within precipitation, revealing storm dynamics such as rotation in supercells or tornadoes through velocity azimuth display patterns. Systems like those operated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration process phase changes in returned pulses to derive speeds, aiding severe weather forecasting. Medical applications utilize pulsed-wave Doppler ultrasound to quantify blood flow velocities in arteries and veins, typically ranging from 0.5 to 5 m/s, by analyzing frequency shifts in echoes from moving red blood cells; studies confirm high absolute accuracy under controlled conditions with proper beam alignment. In automotive radar for adaptive cruise control, frequency-modulated continuous-wave systems extract relative velocities via Doppler processing of phase differences across chirps, enabling vehicles to maintain safe distances by adjusting speed to match preceding traffic. Unlike broader velocimetry methods such as or GPS, Doppler velocity inherently isolates radial motion, requiring multiple sensors or assumptions for full vector reconstruction, which introduces potential errors in aliased high-speed scenarios if the is insufficient. Empirical validations, including inter-scanner comparisons, demonstrate reproducibilities within 10-20% for blood flow under angles below 60 degrees, though wall filters and angle corrections are critical to mitigate overestimation. This specificity underpins its utility in targeted diagnostics and monitoring, distinct from non-Doppler or clearance contexts.

Developed vetting

Developed Vetting (DV) is the highest level of clearance in the , required for roles involving substantial unsupervised access to assets or sensitive information that could cause exceptionally grave damage to if compromised. It applies to positions in organizations such as and , where individuals handle intelligence operations or classified materials posing risks of insider threats like . The process exceeds lower clearances like Security Check () by incorporating deeper scrutiny to assess , vulnerability to , and personal stability. The DV procedure mandates a check plus extensive inquiries spanning at least 10 years of the applicant's history, including detailed financial audits to detect unexplained wealth or debts that might indicate risks, formal interviews with the applicant, and consultations covering , , and relationships. It also examines family members, partners, and close associates for foreign influences or criminal ties, with a questionnaire requiring of travel, foreign contacts, and health issues potentially affecting judgment. policy stipulates a formal DV review every 7 years to maintain ongoing suitability, balancing thoroughness against procedural efficiency. In the United States, the closest equivalent is clearance with (SCI) access, which similarly involves polygraphs, financial reviews, and background investigations but emphasizes periodic reinvestigations every 5 years. DV's core objective is to mitigate human-sourced risks in high-stakes environments, as evidenced by its role in nations' counter- frameworks, where identifies vulnerabilities before access is granted. Historical analyses of espionage cases, such as Cold War-era infiltrations, underscore the causal link between inadequate prior and breaches, prompting refinements like enhanced focus on behavioral indicators. reforms in allied systems, including the U.S. Trusted Workforce 2.0 initiative, have integrated continuous evaluation—automated monitoring of records like criminal, financial, and travel data—to address static vetting's limitations, with the expanding this to over a million personnel by 2024 for real-time threat detection. processes have adopted similar elements, such as periodic aftercare, though critics note potential overreach into private life without proportionate evidence of universal efficacy in preventing all insider actions. Empirical outcomes remain classified, but procedural rigor correlates with reduced known compromises in vetted cohorts compared to pre-vetting eras.

In arts, entertainment, and media

Described video

Described video, also known as or video description, is a feature that adds narrated verbal depictions of key visual elements—such as actions, expressions, settings, and on-screen text—inserted into natural pauses in the dialogue of television programs, films, and videos. This narration enables and low-vision audiences to follow visual content that would otherwise be inaccessible through audio alone, with descriptions typically lasting 3-7 seconds and timed precisely to avoid overlapping spoken lines. In , describers—often trained professionals— footage frame-by-frame to concise, objective descriptions focused on essential visuals, which are then recorded by voice actors and synchronized with the original audio track using specialized software. These scripts prioritize clarity and brevity, omitting subjective interpretations, and are integrated as a secondary selectable by users via or app settings. Empirical studies indicate that described video enhances comprehension and engagement for visually impaired viewers; for instance, a survey by the American Council of the found that 91% of respondents with visual impairments had used , reporting improved access to media content. Regulatory standards have standardized described video in broadcasting. In Canada, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) first required audio description for certain programming in 2001, with expanded policies in 2009 mandating it for prime-time and children's content on major networks, and further requirements phased in by 2019 for vertically integrated broadcasters. In the United States, the (FCC) adopted audio description rules under 47 CFR § 79.3 in 2000, requiring affiliates of the top four networks in the 25 largest markets to provide 50 hours per quarter of described programming, with expansions in 2023 adding 10 designated market areas annually until coverage reaches all markets by 2032. Adoption has extended to streaming platforms, including , which integrates described audio tracks for original and licensed content, allowing users to enable it via audio settings for narration of visuals like costumes and scenery. Historically, described video emerged in the late with services like the U.S. Descriptive Video Service providing tapes for distribution in the and ; by the , advancements include AI-assisted tools for automated generation and insertion, improving efficiency while maintaining human oversight for accuracy.

In religion, history, and language

Deo volente

Deo volente is a Latin phrase translating to " willing" or "with 's will," expressing submission to in human plans. It derives from the theological imperative in James 4:15 of the , which states: "Instead, you ought to say, 'If the wills, we will live and do this or that,'" emphasizing before over future outcomes. The phrase encapsulates a first-principles recognition of human contingency, where intentions are provisional absent certainty of divine permission. Historically, deo volente entered English usage among and in the , often abbreviated as "D.V." in , diaries, and legal documents to qualify future-oriented statements. For instance, settlers in invoked it routinely, reflecting a worldview prioritizing God's will over autonomous , as seen in letters ending with the phrase to signify reliance on . In literature and contracts, it appeared as a caveat, such as in 18th-century business agreements or travel narratives, underscoring empirical caution against overconfidence in predictions. The first documented popular English adoption dates to around 1763, though ecclesiastical Latin precedents trace earlier. In contemporary contexts, deo volente has declined in secular discourse amid broader cultural , with corpus analyses showing reduced frequency in non-religious texts since the , supplanted by neutral qualifiers like "if possible." It persists, however, in conservative Christian writings, sermons, and personal notations, where it reinforces doctrinal submission to God's foreknowledge, as in Reformed theology's emphasis on divine decree. Unlike the militant ("God wills it"), a Crusades-era implying divine for action, deo volente remains strictly providential, invoking passive rather than assertive of God's . This distinction highlights its role in fostering causal realism: human operates within, not against, unalterable divine .

Deus vult

"," Latin for "God wills it," originated as a during the , first proclaimed in response to Pope Urban II's sermon at the on November 27, 1095. Urban II urged Western European Christians to aid Eastern Christians against Seljuk Turk incursions and to reclaim , framing the campaign as a holy war with promises of spiritual rewards, which elicited the unified shout "!" from the assembled crowd, including knights and clergy. This acclamation, recorded in contemporary accounts like Robert the Monk's chronicle, symbolized divine sanction for the expedition and served to unify disparate feudal lords under a religious imperative rather than mere territorial ambition. The slogan played a pivotal empirical role in mobilizing armies for the (1096–1099), transforming rhetorical fervor into coordinated military action that overcame logistical challenges, such as the 3,000-mile march and sieges of and . Crusader forces, numbering around 12,000–15,000 combatants upon reaching the , captured on July 15, 1099, after a five-week involving siege towers and ladders, resulting in the establishment of like the Kingdom of , which endured until 1187. While successful in territorial expansion and temporarily securing routes, the campaign involved documented massacres of Muslim and Jewish inhabitants in —estimated at 10,000–70,000 deaths—reflecting the era's total warfare norms driven by religious zeal and reciprocal conquest dynamics, as Muslim rulers had previously desecrated holy sites and persecuted Christians. Revisionist narratives often downplay these faith-driven motivations, attributing the primarily to economic or power factors, yet primary sources emphasize theological imperatives as the causal engine for mass participation. In the , "Deus vult" resurged as an , initially in gaming communities around titles like , where players adopted it ironically to denote aggressive expansionism, before spreading to platforms like 4chan's /pol/ board and as a symbol of cultural preservation amid debates over and . Alt-right and identitarian groups appropriated it to evoke Western Christian and resistance to perceived civilizational threats, viewing it as a reclamation of historical against sanitized academic portrayals that minimize religious warfare's role in medieval Europe's survival and expansion. Critics, including extremism monitors, associate its modern use with and Crusader romanticism, citing instances like its appearance in 2016 election memes and tattoos on figures such as , arguing it glorifies conquest and exclusion. Defenders counter that such linkages stem from biased overreach by left-leaning institutions, which conflate historical symbolism with contemporary bigotry while ignoring the slogan's original context of defensive holy war against expansionist , and emphasize its non-racial, faith-based roots in preserving . This polarization underscores ongoing debates over causal realism in history: the ' religious motivations enabled improbable victories but also entrenched cycles of violence, with modern revivals highlighting tensions between empirical and progressive reinterpretations.

Other uses

Daily value

The Daily Value (DV) is a standardized reference amount of nutrients, expressed in grams, milligrams, or micrograms, established by the U.S. (FDA) to represent the recommended daily intake or upper limit for a based on a 2,000-calorie for the general population. The percent Daily Value (%DV) on Nutrition Facts labels indicates the proportion of a provided by a single serving of a or relative to this reference, enabling consumers to compare products and evaluate contributions to overall dietary needs. For instance, the DV for is set at 90 mg for adults and children aged 4 years and older. In 2016, the FDA updated the , revising DVs for several nutrients—including increasing the values for to 20 mcg, to 4,700 mg, and to 28 g—to align with evidence from sources like the Institute of Medicine and recent dietary intake data reflecting mean population requirements. These changes aimed to better inform consumers about nutrients linked to chronic disease risks, such as added sugars (now with a 50 g DV) and sodium (2,300 mg DV), without altering the core 2,000-calorie basis. The primary purpose of DV is to serve as a tool for assessing potential deficiencies or excesses in a , facilitating informed choices without prescribing individualized levels. However, as a population-averaged metric derived from Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs), it does not account for individual variations in requirements influenced by factors such as age, sex, activity level, genetics, or status; for example, pregnant women may need 85–120 mg of daily, exceeding the general 90 mg DV. Empirical studies on personalized underscore that responses to differ markedly among individuals, even among identical twins, highlighting limitations of uniform benchmarks like DV for optimizing outcomes.

Designated verifier

A designated verifier signature (DVS) is a variant of in which is restricted to a specific recipient designated by the signer, who uses a secret key to confirm the 's authenticity, while the remains indistinguishable from a generatable by the verifier itself, preventing transfer of conviction to third parties. This property ensures that only the intended verifier gains assurance of the message's origin, providing deniability for the signer and protecting against public disclosure of the process. DVS schemes achieve this through mechanisms like commitments, where the verifier's secret enables distinguishing real from simulated signatures, but public observation yields no such capability. The concept extends to designated verifier proofs, introduced by Jakobsson and in 1996, which allow a prover to convince a designated verifier of a statement's truth (e.g., knowledge of a ) via an interactive or non-interactive protocol, without enabling third-party verification or simulation detection. Security relies on computational assumptions such as the hardness of the problem, with proofs reducible to the inability of adversaries to distinguish real proofs from verifier-generated simulations under chosen-message attacks. Early constructions, including those for undeniable signatures, leverage these proofs to bind signers without universal verifiability, formalized in models capturing one-time verifiability and resistance to forgery by non-designated parties. Applications include privacy-preserving in scenarios like , where designated verifier proofs enable receipt-freeness by allowing voters to prove validity to auditors without transferable evidence that could coerce revotes. In zero-knowledge variants, such as designated-verifier zk-SNARKs, proofs convince only holders of secret verification states, supporting efficient in protocols or confidential transactions as of 2024 constructions. Formal security proofs for these primitives typically reduce unforgeability and simulation indistinguishability to standard assumptions like decisional Diffie-Hellman, distinguishing DVS from public-key signatures by prioritizing controlled verifiability over broad dissemination. Recent post-quantum adaptations, such as those based on hardness as of 2024, maintain these reductions while addressing quantum threats.