\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{latexsym}

\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}
\pagestyle{fancy}
\fancyhead[L]{ }
\fancyhead[C]{Please, do not put anything in the header}
\fancyhead[R]{ }
\fancyfoot[L]{ }


\begin{document}
\begin{center}
\textbf{TITLE OF THE PAPER NOT EXCEEDING 60 CHARACTERS}
\end{center}

\begin{center}
\textbf{Amelie A. Authoress}*\textbf{, Anastasius B. M'Author}**
\end{center}

\begin{center}
* HBS -- Higher Bicycling School,\\
Main Square, 00-000 Very New Town
\end{center}

\begin{center}
** Research, Development {\&} Science Institute, \\
Doubtful St. 45/42, Smalltown on River
\end{center}

The paper presents the research problem, which must absolutely be solved. 
Formal problem formulations are formulated, and then transformed into other, 
more appropriate forms. A short survey of the existing (and lacking) 
literature of the subject shows that there is, actually, nothing to write 
(home) about. Thus, a different subject is proposed, which will be taken up 
by the authors in the consecutive publications of the present authors, 
tracing new development and research paths.

\section{Introduction}

Many problems of contemporary world arises the interest not only of the 
scientists, but also of (some) other representatives of the human species 
(see Winnstone, 2000). Hence, questions abound, while sensible answers by no 
means.

That is why problems should be formulated very carefully, especially when 
taking the form of questions, since it is exactly the diversity of 
formulations that constitutes one of the sources of the uncertainty, 
indefiniteness and unknowing that haunt us. The present authors decided to 
take up this issue and display it for the unprepared Reader in the possibly 
most adequate way.

Let us emphasise, simultaneously, that in view of the shortness of the 
present novel text the authors do not leave any room for doubt (neither for 
themselves, nor for the venerable Readers).

\section{Formulations of problems}

The problems that we face, both practical and theoretical (the face-to-face 
position with respect to any given scholar does not compromise the 
generality of the considerations herein), taken up in conformity with the 
understanding presented already by McPhapherty (1929), and then developed in 
McPhapherty and Goulds (1937), can have various forms (shapes). These forms 
can be canonical, normal, regular, standard, primal, dual, adjoint, minimal, 
and yet many others, on which a Reader can read more in quite different 
references, especially in the works of Newmann, e.g. Newmann (1999a,b). And 
so, one of the basic forms taken by the problems we are facing is the one, 
known from both scientific and scholarly literature, and from real life (as 
distinct from unreal life, not to be confounded with virtual life):

$Q*$ = max {\{}$Q(A_{1})$,$Q(A_{2})$, $Q(A_{3})${\}} (1)

where $Q$ is a certain (the issue of the degree of certainty or uncertainty of 
certain elements of the theory will for the sake of simplicity be omitted 
here) function of net satisfaction, while $A_{i}$ is an $i$-th strategy in the 
face of the problem, in this only apparently special case $i$=1, 2, 3. Let us 
only mention that already Stephenssohn, Trickler and Spoilster (1965) 
distinguish $A_{i}$ for $i$=1: ``I undertake''$, i$=2: ``I do not undertake'' and 
$i$=3: ``I do neither undertake nor do not undertake, nor am I wooed to declare 
anything'', thereby becoming the true predecessors of the \textit{neutrologics}. The typology of 
the possible cases is (shortly) presented in Table 1.

\begin{table}[htbp]
\caption{Possible cases of quasi-optimum strategies with \\ respect to problem forms}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|p{60pt}|l|l|l|l|l|p{30pt}|}
\hline
Forms \par  (shapes) \par Strategies& 
Explicit& 
Implicit& 
Unknown& 
Routine& 
Usual& 
Emer\-gency \\
\hline
I undertake& 
$A_{1}$& 
$A_{1}$& 
$A_{1}$& 
$A_{1}$& 
$A_{1}$& 
$A_{0}$ \\
\hline
I do not \newline undertake& 
$A_{2}$& 
$A_{2}$& 
$A_{0}$& 
$A_{1}$& 
$A_{1}$& 
$A_{-1}$ \\
\hline
I avoid& 
$A_{3}$ & 
$A_{0}$ & 
$A_{0}$ & 
$A_{3}$ & 
$A_{3}$ & 
$A_{-3}$ \\
\hline
I quit& 
$A_{4}$ & 
$A_{4}$ & 
$A_{2}$ & 
$A_{1}$ & 
$A_{1}$ & 
$A_{-3}$ \\
\hline
I enter& 
$A_{1}$ & 
$A_{1}$ & 
$A_{0}$ & 
$A_{1}$ & 
$A_{1}$ & 
$A_{0}$ \\
\hline
I enter\newline and quit& 
$A_{1}$ & 
$A_{2}$ & 
$A_{2}$ & 
$A_{1}$ & 
$A_{1}$ & 
$A_{3}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}\end{center}
Source: own elaboration of the authors
\label{tab1}

\end{table}


The data provided in Table 1 originate from a broader publication of the 
present authors, now under preparation, and are, naturally, quite loosely 
associated with the previously given formulation (1). Attention should 
especially be paid to the essentially expanded range of the values of index 
$i$, which takes now the values from --3 to +4, which constitutes a significant 
step forward in the analysis conducted, and has quite serious theoretical 
implications (negative indexing of strategies as a natural extension of the 
natural indexing). Altogether, this table constitutes an adequate 
illustration of our situation in the face of a problem (or problems) and its 
formulations.

Taking into account the already mentioned in this paper considerable 
limitation of its volume (i.e. first of all its length) we leave further 
considerations to the Reader, who, after having been introduced into the 
subject area, should be able to manage without our continued assistance.

\section{Summary}

Problems are what we face. Their formulations are what we perceive. It is 
them that constitute the object of our considerations, analyses and finally, 
in many cases, even decisions (although, at this point, we better take a 
far-reaching precaution). As of now, take a look at the forms (shapes). In 
the subsequent reports the authors shall take a look and broaden.

\section{Acknowledgements}
The authors would like to thank their associates for current consultations, 
their families for the necessary moral support, and farther as well as 
closer neighbours for their patience. We would also like to thank the 
reviewers very cordially for the legible and short remarks.

\section{References}

McPhapherty J. (1929) Report from joint research. Research and 
Implementation Institute UNAMERE, Cowslip, Report 123B/29.

McPhapherty J. and Goulds A. (1937) \textit{Whys and What-fors. Some of the Essential Questions But No Answers}. Kurtzenweiler {\&} Co., 
Niedersteinfels.

Newmann S. (1999a) On a certain practical problem applied to another one. 
\textit{Advances of Science and Practice}, \textbf{XXVIII}, 2, 7-77.

Newmann S. (1999b) On a certain practical problem applied to quite yet 
another one. \textit{Annals of General and Specific Science}, \textbf{96}, 15, 2345-2467.

Stephenssohn F., Trickler U., Spoilster W. (1965) \textit{Why Can't We Act Reasonably?} Independent and 
Scientific Publishers, Wynnamoores.

Winnstone A.B. (2000) The irresolvable problems and their solutions. In: S. 
Editorius, ed., \textit{Is the Universe Like This or Not?} "Cosmos" Publishers, Main Place.

\end{document}
