Portuguese Defiance: Analysing the Strenuous Relationship Between Drug Decriminalization and International Law

Article published in the Michigan State International Law Review

Characterising Chinese Hamster Ovary Cell Line Stability in Bioproduction of Therapeutic Proteins

No abstract

On the Assouad dimension of self-similar sets with overlaps

It is known that, unlike the Hausdorff dimension, the Assouad dimension of a self-similar set can exceed the similarity dimension if there are overlaps in the construction. Our main result is the following precise dichotomy for self-similar sets in the line: either the \emph{weak separation property} is satisfied, in which case the Hausdorff and Assouad dimensions coincide; or the \emph{weak separation property} is not satisfied, in which case the Assouad dimension is maximal (equal to one). In the first case we prove that the self-similar set is Ahlfors regular, and in the second case we use the fact that if the \emph{weak separation property} is not satisfied, one can approximate the identity arbitrarily well in the group generated by the similarity mappings, and this allows us to build a \emph{weak tangent} that contains an interval. We also obtain results in higher dimensions and provide illustrative examples showing that the `equality/maximal' dichotomy does not extend to this setting.Comment: 24 pages, 2 figure

A Participatory Mapping and Agent-Based Approach to Promote Coexistence Between Idaho Ranchers and Gray Wolves

This poster was presented at the 2016 Idaho EPSCoR Annual Meeting, October 19-21, in Couer d\u27Alene Idaho

A quantitative evaluation of physical and digital approaches to centre of mass estimation

Centre of mass is a fundamental anatomical and biomechanical parameter. Knowledge of centre of mass is essential to inform studies investigating locomotion and other behaviours, through its implications for segment movements, and on whole body factors such as posture. Previous studies have estimated centre of mass position for a range of organisms, using various methodologies. However, few studies assess the accuracy of the methods that they employ, and often provide only brief details on their methodologies. As such, no rigorous, detailed comparisons of accuracy and repeatability within and between methods currently exist. This paper therefore seeks to apply three methods common in the literature (suspension, scales and digital modelling) to three 'calibration objects' in the form of bricks, as well as three birds to determine centre of mass position. Application to bricks enables conclusions to be drawn on the absolute accuracy of each method, in addition to comparing these results to assess the relative value of these methodologies. Application to birds provided insights into the logistical challenges of applying these methods to biological specimens. For bricks, we found that, provided appropriate repeats were conducted, the scales method yielded the most accurate predictions of centre of mass (within 1.49 mm), closely followed by digital modelling (within 2.39 mm), with results from suspension being the most distant (within 38.5 mm). Scales and digital methods both also displayed low variability between centre of mass estimates, suggesting they can accurately and consistently predict centre of mass position. Our suspension method resulted not only in high margins of error, but also substantial variability, highlighting problems with this method