A study of the stress wave factor technique for nondestructive evaluation of composite materials

The acousto-ultrasonic method of nondestructive evaluation is an extremely sensitive means of assessing material response. Efforts continue to complete the understanding of this method. In order to achieve the full sensitivity of the technique, extreme care must be taken in its performance. This report provides an update of the efforts to advance the understanding of this method and to increase its application to the nondestructive evaluation of composite materials. Included are descriptions of a novel optical system that is capable of measuring in-plane and out-of-plane displacements, an IBM PC-based data acquisition system, an extensive data analysis software package, the azimuthal variation of acousto-ultrasonic behavior in graphite/epoxy laminates, and preliminary examination of processing variation in graphite-aluminum tubes

Supporting a Thriving Bay Area Performing Arts Ecosystem: A Mid-Point Assessment of the Hewlett Foundation's Performing Arts Program

As one of the largest institutional funders of performing arts in the San Francisco Bay Area, the Hewlett Foundation's Performing Arts Program (Program) plays an important role in the arts ecosystem across California. The Performing Arts Program works to "ensure continuity and innovation in the performing arts through the creation, performance, and appreciation of exceptional works that enrich the lives of individuals and benefit communities through the Bay Area." Monitoring and evaluation are integral to the Strategic Framework. It outlines metrics, short (2013) and longterm (2017) growth targets, and activities and strategies for each component of the Program, taking into consideration economic conditions, the arts landscape in California and current demographic trends in the Bay Area. Program staff built in evaluation activities that would enable the Program to determine if its strategies are effective, to measure how much progress has been made toward its goals, and to identify opportunities for learning and improving outcomes. In 2015, the Foundation partnered with Informing Change and Olive Grove to conduct a mid-point assessment of the Program's six-year Strategic Framework. The evaluation centers on four core questions, each of which has additional sub-questions (see Appendix A for a full list of the questions and subquestions). In partnership with Program staff, Informing Change and Olive Grove developed a plan to assess these questions using a mixed-methods approach. A primary data source for this assessment is interviews that solicit insight and feedback from six types of constituents: grantees from all three of the Program's component areas, peer arts funders, community-based arts leaders, and artists and cultural entrepreneurs (Appendix A includes a list of all interview informants and Appendix B provides interview protocols). The interview informant sample includes individuals and organizations connected to the Program as grantees or partners, as well as other key leaders in the arts ecosystem that do not receive funding. This assessment also draws heavily upon quantitative analysis of data about the portfolio funding (i.e., GIFTS, the Foundation's grant tracking software), grantees' work (i.e., Cultural Data Project (CDP), Audience Research Collaborative (ARC) and Grantee Perception Report (GPR)), and arts education (i.e., California Department of Education (CDE)). A review of existing literature and research studies provided data on changes in different fields and contextual information (Appendix C provides references for all works cited)

Effective patient–clinician interaction to improve treatment outcomes for patients with psychosis: a mixed-methods design

BACKGROUND:At least 100,000 patients with schizophrenia receive care from community mental health teams (CMHTs) in England. These patients have regular meetings with clinicians, who assess them, engage them in treatment and co-ordinate care. As these routine meetings are not commonly guided by research evidence, a new intervention, DIALOG, was previously designed to structure consultations. Using a hand-held computer, clinicians asked patients to rate their satisfaction with eight life domains and three treatment aspects, and to indicate whether or not additional help was needed in each area, with responses being graphically displayed and compared with previous ratings. In a European multicentre trial, the intervention improved patients’ quality of life over a 1-year period. The current programme builds on this research by further developing DIALOG in the UK. RESEARCH QUESTIONS:(1) How can the practical procedure of the intervention be improved, including the software used and the design of the user interface? (2) How can elements of resource-oriented interventions be incorporated into a clinician manual and training programme for a new, more extensive ‘DIALOG+’ intervention? (3) How effective and cost-effective is the new DIALOG+ intervention in improving treatment outcomes for patients with schizophrenia or a related disorder? (4) What are the views of patients and clinicians regarding the new DIALOG+ intervention? METHODS:We produced new software on a tablet computer for CMHTs in the NHS, informed by analysis of videos of DIALOG sessions from the original trial and six focus groups with 18 patients with psychosis. We developed the new ‘DIALOG+’ intervention in consultation with experts, incorporating principles of solution-focused therapy when responding to patients’ ratings and specifying the procedure in a manual and training programme for clinicians. We conducted an exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial with 49 clinicians and 179 patients with psychosis in East London NHS Foundation Trust, comparing DIALOG+ with an active control. Clinicians working as care co-ordinators in CMHTs (along with their patients) were cluster randomised 1 : 1 to either DIALOG+ or treatment as usual plus an active control, to prevent contamination. Intervention and control were to be administered monthly for 6 months, with data collected at baseline and at 3, 6 and 12 months following randomisation. The primary outcome was subjective quality of life as measured on the Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life; secondary outcomes were also measured. We also established the cost-effectiveness of the DIALOG intervention using data from the Client Service Receipt Inventory, which records patients’ retrospective reports of using health- and social-care services, including hospital services, outpatient services and medication, in the 3 months prior to each time point. Data were supplemented by the clinical notes in patients’ medical records to improve accuracy. We conducted an exploratory thematic analysis of 16 video-recorded DIALOG+ sessions and measured adherence in these videos using a specially developed adherence scale. We conducted focus groups with patients (n = 19) and clinicians (n = 19) about their experiences of the intervention, and conducted thematic analyses. We disseminated the findings and made the application (app), manual and training freely available, as well as producing a protocol for a definitive trial. RESULTS:Patients receiving the new intervention showed more favourable quality of life in the DIALOG+ group after 3 months (effect size: Cohen’s d = 0.34), after 6 months (Cohen’s d = 0.29) and after 12 months (Cohen’s d = 0.34). An analysis of video-recorded DIALOG+ sessions showed inconsistent implementation, with adherence to the intervention being a little over half of the possible score. Patients and clinicians from the DIALOG+ arm of the trial reported many positive experiences with the intervention, including better self-expression and improved efficiency of meetings. Difficulties reported with the intervention were addressed by further refining the DIALOG+ manual and training. Cost-effectiveness analyses found a 72% likelihood that the intervention both improved outcomes and saved costs. LIMITATIONS:The research was conducted solely in urban east London, meaning that the results may not be broadly generalisable to other settings. CONCLUSIONS:(1) Although services might consider adopting DIALOG+ based on the existing evidence, a definitive trial appears warranted; (2) applying DIALOG+ to patient groups with other mental disorders may be considered, and to groups with physical health problems; (3) a more flexible use with variable intervals might help to make the intervention even more acceptable and effective; (4) more process evaluation is required to identify what mechanisms precisely are involved in the improvements seen in the intervention group in the trial; and (5) what appears to make DIALOG+ effective is that it is not a separate treatment and not a technology that is administered by a specialist; rather, it changes and utilises the existing therapeutic relationship between patients and clinicians in CMHTs to initiate positive change, helping the patients to improve their quality of life. FUTURE RESEARCH:Future studies should include a definitive trial on DIALOG+ and test the effectiveness of the intervention with other populations, such as people with depression. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN34757603. FUNDING:The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme

The LIFE2 final project report

Executive summary: The first phase of LIFE (Lifecycle Information For E-Literature) made a major contribution to understanding the long-term costs of digital preservation; an essential step in helping institutions plan for the future. The LIFE work models the digital lifecycle and calculates the costs of preserving digital information for future years. Organisations can apply this process in order to understand costs and plan effectively for the preservation of their digital collections The second phase of the LIFE Project, LIFE2, has refined the LIFE Model adding three new exemplar Case Studies to further build upon LIFE1. LIFE2 is an 18-month JISC-funded project between UCL (University College London) and The British Library (BL), supported by the LIBER Access and Preservation Divisions. LIFE2 began in March 2007, and completed in August 2008. The LIFE approach has been validated by a full independent economic review and has successfully produced an updated lifecycle costing model (LIFE Model v2) and digital preservation costing model (GPM v1.1). The LIFE Model has been tested with three further Case Studies including institutional repositories (SHERPA-LEAP), digital preservation services (SHERPA DP) and a comparison of analogue and digital collections (British Library Newspapers). These Case Studies were useful for scenario building and have fed back into both the LIFE Model and the LIFE Methodology. The experiences of implementing the Case Studies indicated that enhancements made to the LIFE Methodology, Model and associated tools have simplified the costing process. Mapping a specific lifecycle to the LIFE Model isn’t always a straightforward process. The revised and more detailed Model has reduced ambiguity. The costing templates, which were refined throughout the process of developing the Case Studies, ensure clear articulation of both working and cost figures, and facilitate comparative analysis between different lifecycles. The LIFE work has been successfully disseminated throughout the digital preservation and HE communities. Early adopters of the work include the Royal Danish Library, State Archives and the State and University Library, Denmark as well as the LIFE2 Project partners. Furthermore, interest in the LIFE work has not been limited to these sectors, with interest in LIFE expressed by local government, records offices, and private industry. LIFE has also provided input into the LC-JISC Blue Ribbon Task Force on the Economic Sustainability of Digital Preservation. Moving forward our ability to cost the digital preservation lifecycle will require further investment in costing tools and models. Developments in estimative models will be needed to support planning activities, both at a collection management level and at a later preservation planning level once a collection has been acquired. In order to support these developments a greater volume of raw cost data will be required to inform and test new cost models. This volume of data cannot be supported via the Case Study approach, and the LIFE team would suggest that a software tool would provide the volume of costing data necessary to provide a truly accurate predictive model

Natural language processing

Beginning with the basic issues of NLP, this chapter aims to chart the major research activities in this area since the last ARIST Chapter in 1996 (Haas, 1996), including: (i) natural language text processing systems - text summarization, information extraction, information retrieval, etc., including domain-specific applications; (ii) natural language interfaces; (iii) NLP in the context of www and digital libraries ; and (iv) evaluation of NLP systems

An interactive learning environment in geographical information systems

The Unigis Learning Station is a computer‐based learning management tool for the Postgraduate Diploma in Geographical Information Systems by distance learning (correspondence). Unigis is an international network of universities co‐operating in the delivery of such courses. The students on Unigis courses are mature mid‐career professionals who study in addition to undertaking full time jobs. The Learning Station offers these students information about the course, resources for independent study, a structured set of exercises, assessments and feedback opportunities, and an integrated and easy way to interact with other course software. Following a brief introduction to the Unigis curriculum, this paper discusses the design of the Learning Station. The roles the Learning Station adopts are outlined, and the range of multimedia and communications tools used discussed. Evaluation of the Learning Station is presented and the issued raised by this provide useful lessons for other computer‐based learning management tools, and the adaptation of the Learning Station to other teaching and learning situations

Bringing the OpenMI to LIFE Progress Report No. 4 - 31st March 2008 – 30th September 2008

The Water Framework Directive demands an integrated approach to water management. This requires the ability to predict how catchment processes will behave and interact in response to the activities of water managers and others. In most contexts, it is not feasible to build a single predictive model that adequately represents all the processes; therefore a means of linking models of individual processes is required. This is met by the FP5 HarmonIT project’s Open Modelling Interface and Environment (the OpenMI). The purpose of this project is to transform the OpenMI from a research output to a sustainable operational Standard. It will build the capacity to use the OpenMI and will demonstrate it under operational conditions. It will also develop, test and demonstrate the future support organisation for the OpenMI. Finally, information about the OpenMI will be disseminated to users