Generating ambiguity in the laboratory

This article develops a method for drawing samples from which it is impossible to infer any quantile or moment of the underlying distribution. The method provides researchers with a way to give subjects the experience of ambiguity. In any experiment, learning the distribution from experience is impossible for the subjects, essentially because it is impossible for the experimenter. We describe our method mathematically, illustrate it in simulations, and then test it in a laboratory experiment. Our technique does not withhold sampling information, does not assume that the subject is incapable of making statistical inferences, is replicable across experiments, and requires no special apparatus. We compare our method to the techniques used in related experiments that attempt to produce an ambiguous experience for the subjects.ambiguity; Ellsberg; Knightian uncertainty; laboratory experiments; ignorance; vagueness JEL Classications: C90; C91; C92; D80; D81

Generating Ambiguity in the Laboratory

This article develops a method for drawing samples from which it is impossible to infer any quantile or moment of the underlying distribution. The method provides researchers with a way to give subjects the experience of ambiguity. In any experiment, learning the distribution from experience is impossible for the subjects, essentially because it is impossible for the experimenter. We describe our method mathematically, illustrate it in simulations, and then test it in a laboratory experiment. Our technique does not withhold sampling information, does not assume that the subject is incapable of making statistical inferences, is replicable across experiments, and requires no special apparatus. We compare our method to the techniques used in related experiments that attempt to produce an ambiguous experience for the subjects

Caenorhabditis nomenclature

Genetic nomenclature allows the genetic features of an organism to be structured and described in a uniform and systematicway. Genetic features, including genes, variations (both natural and induced), and gene products, are assigned descriptorsthat inform on the nature of the feature. These nomenclature designations facilitate communication among researchers (in publications,presentations, and databases) to advance understanding of the biology of the genetic feature and the experimental utilizationof organisms that contain the genetic feature. The nomenclature system that is used for C. elegans was first employed by Sydney Brenner (1974) in his landmark description of the genetics of this model organism, and then substantially extended and modified in Horvitz et al., 1979. The gene, allele, and chromosome rearrangement nomenclature, described below, is an amalgamation of that from bacteria andyeast, with the rearrangement types from Drosophila. The nomenclature avoids standard words, subscripts, superscripts, and Greek letters and includes a hyphen (-) to separatethe gene name from gene number (distinct genes with similar phenotypes or molecular properties). As described by Jonathan Hodgkin, ‘the hyphen is about 1 mm in length in printed text and therefore symbolizes the 1 mm long worm’. These nomenclature propertiesmake C. elegans publications highly suitable for informatic text mining, as there is minimal ambiguity. From the founding of the CaenorhabditisGenetics Center (CGC) in 1979 until 1992, Don Riddle and Mark Edgley acted as the central repository for genetic nomenclature. Jonathan Hodgkin was nomenclature czar from 1992 through 2013; this was a pivotal period with the elucidation of the genome sequence of C. elegans, and later that of related nematodes, and the inception of WormBase. Thus, under the guidance of Hodgkin, the nomenclature system became a central feature of WormBase and the number and types of genetic features significantly expanded. The nomenclature system remains dynamic, with recentadditions including guidelines related to genome engineering, and continued reliance on the community for input. WormBase assigns specific identifying codes to each laboratory engaged in dedicated long-term genetic research on C. elegans. Each laboratory is assigned a laboratory/strain code for naming strains, and an allele code for naming genetic variation(e.g., mutations) and transgenes. These designations are assigned to the laboratory head/PI who is charged with supervisingtheir organization in laboratory databases and their associated biological reagents that are described on WormBase, in publications, and distributed to the scientific community on request. The laboratory/strain code is used: a) to identifythe originator of community-supplied information on WormBase, which, in addition to attribution, facilitates communicationbetween the community/curators and the originator if an issue related to the information should arise at a later date; andb) to provide a tracking code for activities at the CGC. The laboratory/strain designation consists of 2-3 uppercase letters while the allele designation has 1-3 lowercase letters.The final letter of a laboratory code should not be an “O” or an “I” so as not to be mistaken for the numbers “0” or “1” respectively.Additionally, allele designations should also not end with the letter “l” which could also be mistaken for the number “1.” These codes are listed at the CGC and in WormBase. Investigators generating strains, alleles, transgenes, and/or defining genes require these designations and should applyfor them at [email protected]. Information for several other nematode species, in addition to C. elegans, is curated at WormBase. All species are referred to by their Linnean binomial names (e.g,. Caenorhabditis elegans or C. elegans). Details of all the genomes available at WormBase and the degree of their curation can be found at www.wormbase.org/species/al

Evaluating the AdS dual of the critical O(N) vector model

We argue that the AdS dual of the three dimensional critical O(N) vector model can be evaluated using the Legendre transform that relates the generating functionals of the free UV and the interacting IR fixed points of the boundary theory. As an example, we use our proposal to evaluate the minimal bulk action of the scalar field that it is dual to the spin-zero ``current'' of the O(N) vector model. We find that the cubic bulk self interaction coupling vanishes. We briefly discuss the implications of our results for higher spin theories and comment on the bulk-boundary duality for subleading N.Comment: 17 pages, 1 figure, v2 references added, JHEP versio