QR-RLS algorithm for error diffusion of color images

Printing color images on color printers and displaying them on computer monitors requires a significant reduction of physically distinct colors, which causes degradation in image quality. An efficient method to improve the display quality of a quantized image is error diffusion, which works by distributing the previous quantization errors to neighboring pixels, exploiting the eye's averaging of colors in the neighborhood of the point of interest. This creates the illusion of more colors. A new error diffusion method is presented in which the adaptive recursive least-squares (RLS) algorithm is used. This algorithm provides local optimization of the error diffusion filter along with smoothing of the filter coefficients in a neighborhood. To improve the performance, a diagonal scan is used in processing the image, (C) 2000 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers. [S0091-3286(00)00611-5]

A922 Sequential measurement of 1 hour creatinine clearance (1-CRCL) in critically ill patients at risk of acute kidney injury (AKI)

Meeting abstrac

Effectiveness of manual therapies: the UK evidence report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The purpose of this report is to provide a succinct but comprehensive summary of the scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of manual treatment for the management of a variety of musculoskeletal and non-musculoskeletal conditions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The conclusions are based on the results of systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), widely accepted and primarily UK and United States evidence-based clinical guidelines, plus the results of all RCTs not yet included in the first three categories. The strength/quality of the evidence regarding effectiveness was based on an adapted version of the grading system developed by the US Preventive Services Task Force and a study risk of bias assessment tool for the recent RCTs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>By September 2009, 26 categories of conditions were located containing RCT evidence for the use of manual therapy: 13 musculoskeletal conditions, four types of chronic headache and nine non-musculoskeletal conditions. We identified 49 recent relevant systematic reviews and 16 evidence-based clinical guidelines plus an additional 46 RCTs not yet included in systematic reviews and guidelines.</p> <p>Additionally, brief references are made to other effective non-pharmacological, non-invasive physical treatments.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Spinal manipulation/mobilization is effective in adults for: acute, subacute, and chronic low back pain; migraine and cervicogenic headache; cervicogenic dizziness; manipulation/mobilization is effective for several extremity joint conditions; and thoracic manipulation/mobilization is effective for acute/subacute neck pain. The evidence is inconclusive for cervical manipulation/mobilization alone for neck pain of any duration, and for manipulation/mobilization for mid back pain, sciatica, tension-type headache, coccydynia, temporomandibular joint disorders, fibromyalgia, premenstrual syndrome, and pneumonia in older adults. Spinal manipulation is not effective for asthma and dysmenorrhea when compared to sham manipulation, or for Stage 1 hypertension when added to an antihypertensive diet. In children, the evidence is inconclusive regarding the effectiveness for otitis media and enuresis, and it is not effective for infantile colic and asthma when compared to sham manipulation.</p> <p>Massage is effective in adults for chronic low back pain and chronic neck pain. The evidence is inconclusive for knee osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, myofascial pain syndrome, migraine headache, and premenstrual syndrome. In children, the evidence is inconclusive for asthma and infantile colic.</p

Everyday norms have become more permissive over time and vary across cultures

Data availability: All data and materials generated and/or analyzed in this study, including the raw data underlying the figures and tables, are available at OSF (https://osf.io/sh4rb/, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SH4RB).Code availability: The R syntax for all analyses are available at OSF (https://osf.io/sh4rb/, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SH4RB).Every social situation that people encounter in their daily lives comes with a set of unwritten rules about what behavior is considered appropriate or inappropriate. These everyday norms can vary across societies: some societies may have more permissive norms in general or for certain behaviors, or for certain behaviors in specific situations. In a preregistered survey of 25,422 participants across 90 societies, we map societal differences in 150 everyday norms and show that they can be explained by how societies prioritize individualizing moral foundations such as care and liberty versus binding moral foundations such as purity. Specifically, societies with more individualistic morality tend to have more permissive norms in general (greater liberty) and especially for behaviors deemed vulgar (less purity), but they exhibit less permissive norms for behaviors perceived to have negative consequences in specific situations (greater care). By comparing our data with available data collected twenty years ago, we find a global pattern of change toward more permissive norms overall but less permissive norms for the most vulgar and inconsiderate behaviors. This study explains how social norms vary across behaviors, situations, societies, and time.Funders that supported this research include the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation (grant no. 2022.0191; Pontus Strimling), the Higher School of Economics Basic Research Program (Ekaterina Nastina and Natalia Soboleva), NextGenerationEU (contract no. BG-RRP-2.004-0007-С01; Kristina Stoyanova), the John Templeton Foundation (grant no. 62631; Robert M. Ross), the Australian Research Council (grant no. DP180102384; Robert M. Ross), the Youth Innovation Promotion Association, Chinese Academy of Sciences (grant no. 2023095; Junhui Wu), Open University of Israel (grant no. 48766; Ravit Nussinson), JSPS KAKENHI (grant no. JP21K02983; Toko Kiyonari); Narodowe Centrum Nauki (grant no. 2019/35/B/HS6/01421; Katarzyna Growiec), National Research and Development Fund (grant no. NKFIH-OTKA-K 135963; Marta Fulop), Australian National University (Samantha K. Stanley), the Swedish Research Council (grant no. 2023-01306; Giulia Andrighetto), Shota Rustaveli National Science Foundation (grant no. FR-22-15319; Vladimer Gamsakhurdia), The Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia (grant no. 7744418; Bojana M. Dinić), CIS—Centro de Investigação e Intervenção Social (CIS-ISCTE) through funds allocated by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) (grant no. UIDB/03125/2020, https://doi.org/10.54499/UIDB/03125/2020: Ricardo B. Rodrigues), Czech Science Foundation (grant no. GA23-06170S; Sylvie Graf and Martina Hřebíčková), the Ministry of Science, Technological Development and Innovations of the Republic of Serbia (contract no. 451-03-66/2024-03; Ivana Pedović), Linköping University (Maria Luisa Mendes Teixeira). Open access funding provided by Mälardalen University

Application of an Integrated risk management system (IRMS) to an international construction project

Integrated Risk Management System (IRMS) is a decision support tool designed to support users at all phases of risk management and to assist cost estimation in the bid preparation stage, especially in international construction projects. IRMS process model consists of four integrated phases such as risk identification, risk rating and response development, risk analysis, and finally, risk revising and monitoring. A hierarchical risk breakdown structure is provided in the system which facilitates systematic risk identification process. Risk coding option embedded in the system creates a common language between the project participants. IRMS carries out an iterative risk rating and response generation process as an input for Monte Carlo Simulation. Moreover, IRMS is designed to store and retrieve risk information from a corporate memory that helps learning from projects. IRMS also allows multi-user risk rating. It increases the awareness of project participants on the magnitude of risks and helps visualization of risk scenarios by its effective reporting options. It can be used throughout the project life cycle and risk scenarios can be revised as the project proceeds. In this paper, application of IRMS prototype is illustrated by a real case study. The example project is a hydro electric power plant project (HEPP) which has been carried out by an international consortium in Turkey. Performance, shortcomings and benefits of IRMS are discussed by referring to experiences gained as a result of this application

Titulação de aloanticorpos anti-a e anti-b em gatos domésticos sem raça definida em Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil

A probabilidade de ocorrência de reação transfusional em um felino depende da prevalência local dos tipos sanguíneos felinos e dos títulos de aloanticorpos. A determinação dos títulos de aloanticorpos auxilia na estimativa do risco e da severidade de reação transfusional, após transfusão não compatível, em uma população de gatos. O objetivo deste trabalho foi determinar a titulação de aloanticorpos e o risco de possível reação transfusional, em felinos domésticos sem raça definida, da cidade de Porto Alegre. Foram selecionados aleatoriamente 100 gatos clinicamente saudáveis, sem raça definida e sem parentesco entre si e sem histórico de transfusão prévia. Amostras de sangue foram coletadas da veia jugular e a titulação de aloanticorpos foi determinada no soro de gatos com tipo sanguíneo previamente definido. O risco estimado foi calculado de acordo com estudos prévios. No presente trabalho, 82,5 e 100% dos gatos do tipo A e B, respectivamente, apresentaram titulação variada de aloanticorpos. Com base nos títulos encontrados, verificou-se que uma transfusão de sangue, do tipo A ou AB, em gatos do tipo B apresenta risco de 33,3% de reação aguda severa e de 66,7% de reação aguda leve, nos receptores felinos. A transfusão de sangue do tipo AB ou B em gatos do tipo A apresenta risco de reação aguda severa em 1,0%; reação aguda leve em 37,1% e destruição prematura dos eritrócitos em 44,3% dos receptores felinos