Diegetic Representation of Feedback in Open Games

We improve the framework of open games with agency by showing how the players' counterfactual analysis giving rise to Nash equilibria can be described in the dynamics of the game itself (hence diegetically), getting rid of devices such as equilibrium predicates. This new approach overlaps almost completely with the way gradient-based learners are specified and trained. Indeed, we show feedback propagation in games can be seen as a form of backpropagation, with a crucial difference explaining the distinctive character of the phenomenology of non-cooperative games. We outline a functorial construction of arena of games, show players form a subsystem over it, and prove that their 'fixpoint behaviours' are Nash equilibria.Comment: In Proceedings ACT 2022, arXiv:2307.1551

Characterisation of a non-pathogenic and non-protective infectious rabbit lagovirus related to RHDV

The existence of non-pathogenic RHDV strains was established when a non-lethal virus named rabbit calicivirus (RCV) was characterised in 1996 in Italy. Since then, different RNA sequences related to RHDV have been detected in apparently healthy domestic and wild rabbits, and recently a new lagovirus was identified in Australia. We have characterised from seropositive healthy domestic rabbits a non-lethal lagovirus that differs from RHDV in terms of pathogenicity, tissue tropism and capsid protein sequence. Phylogenetic analyses have revealed that it is close to the Ashington strain and to the RCV, but distinct. We proved experimentally that it is infectious but non-pathogenic and demonstrated that, contrary to the other described non-pathogenic lagoviruses, it induces antibodies that do not protect against RHDV. Our results indicate the existence of a gradient of cross-protection between circulating strains, from non-protective, partially protective to protective strains, and highlight the extent of diversity within the genus Lagovirus

Humoral immune response to different routes of myxomatosis vaccine application

[EN] The aim of our study was to monitor the dynamics of the serological response to different application routes of live attenuated myxomatosis vaccine. The study included 42 Californian breed rabbits, aged 3 mo, of both sexes. They were separated into 7 groups: 6 experimental and 1 control. All experimental groups were vaccinated on day 0 with a single dose of myxomatosis vaccine (min 103.3 tissue culture infective dose 50 [TCID50], max 105.8 TCID50). Three of the groups were injected with monovalent attenuated myxomatosis vaccine using different types of application: intradermal (i.d.), intramuscular (i.m.) and subcutaneous (s.c.). The other 3 groups were injected with bivalent attenuated vaccine against myxomatosis and rabbit haemorrhagic disease; again the routes of administration were i.d., i.m. and s.c.. There were no clinical signs or serious side effects after vaccination. The serological response was evaluated on days 7, 15 and 30 with a monoclonal antibody based-competition enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (cELISA). More rapid and potent humoral response was detected in groups with i.d. inoculation in comparison to i.m. and s.c. routes. Vaccination with monovalent vaccine against myxomatosis induced higher antibody titre in comparison to bivalent vaccine. Our study showed that the vaccine application route and the type of vaccine used influence the speed and intensity of antibody response.Manev, I.; Genova, K.; Lavazza, A.; Capucci, L. (2018). Humoral immune response to different routes of myxomatosis vaccine application. World Rabbit Science. 26(2):149-154. doi:10.4995/wrs.2018.7021SWORD149154262Alfonso M., Pagès-Manté A. 2003. Serological response to Myxomatosis vaccination by different inoculation systems on farm rabbits. World Rabbit Sci. 2003, 11: 145-156. https://doi.org/10.4995/wrs.2003.504Barcena J., Morales M., Vázquez B., Boga J., Parra F., Lucientes J., Pagès-Manté A., Sánchez-Vizcaino J., Blasco R., Torres J. 2000. Horizontal Transmissible Protection against Myxomatosis and Rabbit Hemorrhagic Disease by Using a Recombinant Myxoma Virus. J. Virol., 74, 1114-1123.Bertagnoli S., Gelfi J., Gall G., Boilletot E., Vautherot J., Rasschaert D., Laurent S., Petit F., Boucraut-Baralon C., Milon A. 1996. Protection against myxomatosis and rabbit viral hemorrhagic disease with recombinant myxoma viruses expressing rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus capsid protein. J. Virol., 70: 5061-5066.Best S., Kerr P. 2000. Coevolution of Host and Virus: The Pathogenesis of Virulent and Attenuated Strains of Myxoma Virus in Resistant and Susceptible European Rabbits. Virology, 267, 36-48. https://doi.org/10.1006/viro.1999.0104Bhanuprakash V., Hosamani M., Venkatesan G., Balamurugan V., Yogisharadhya R., Singh R. 2012. Animal poxvirus vaccines: a comprehensive review Expert Rev. Vaccines, 11, 1355-1374. https://doi.org/10.1586/erv.12.116Calvete C., Estrada R., Lucientes J., Osacar J., Villafuerte R., 2004. Effects of vaccination against viral haemorrhagic disease (VHD) and myxomatosis on long-term mortality rates of European wild rabbits. Vet. Rec., 155: 388-392.Dalton K., Nicieza I., Gullón J., Inza M., Petralanda M., Arroita Z., Parra F. 2012. Analysis of Myxomatosis outbreaks on Spanish rabbit farms. In Proc.: 10th World Rabbit Congress, September 3 - 6, 2012, Sharm El- Sheikh, Egypt, 1203-1207.Dalton K., Nicieza I., de Llano D., Gullón J., Inza M., Petralanda M., Arroita Z., Parra F. 2015. Vaccine breaks: Outbreaks of myxomatosis on Spanish commercial rabbit farms. Vet. Microbiol., 178, 208-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2015.05.008Dan M., Baraitareanu S., Danes D., 2014. Serosurveillance of Myxomatosis by Competitive ELISA. Bulletin UASVM Veterinary Medicine. 71, 266-267.Day M., Fenner F., Woodroofe G., McIntyre G.A. 1956. Further studies on the mechanism of mosquito transmission of Myxomatosis in the European rabbit. J. Hyg. Cambridge, 54:258-283.Farsang A., Makranszki L., Dobos-Kovacs M., Virag G., Fabian K., Barna T., Kuclsar G., Kucsera L., Vetesi F. 2003. Occurrence of atypical myxomatosis in central Europe: clinical and virological examinations. Acta Vet. Hung., 51, 493-501. https://doi.org/10.1556/AVet.51.2003.4.7Fenner F., Ratcliffe F. 1965. Myxomatosis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. Ferreira C., Ramírez E., Castro F., Ferreras P., Alves P., Redpath S., Villafuerte R. 2009. Field experimental vaccination campaigns against myxomatosis and their effectiveness in the wild. Vaccine, 27: 6998-7002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.09.075Jeklova E., Leva L., Matiasovic J., Kovarcik K., Kudlackova H., Nevorankova Z., Psikal I., Faldyna M. 2007. Characterisation of immunosuppression in rabbits after infection with myxoma virus, Vet. Microbiol., 129: 117-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2007.11.039Kerr P.J. 1997. An ELISA for Epidemiological Studies of Myxomatosis: Persistance of Antibodies to Myxoma Virus in European Rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Wildlife Res., 24: 53-65.https://doi.org/10.1071/WR96058Kerr P.J. 2012. Myxomatosis in Australia and Europe: A model for emerging infectious diseases. Antivir. Res., 93: 387-415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.antiviral.2012.01.009Kim, Y.C., Jarrahian, C., Zehrung, D., Mitragotri, S., Prausnitz , M.R. 2012. Delivery Systems for Intradermal Vaccination. Curr. Top. Microbiol., 351: 77-112. https://doi.org/10.1007/82_2011_123King A., Adams M., Carstens E., Lefkowitz E. 2012. Virus Taxonomy. Classification and Nomenclature of Viruses. Ninth Report of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses, 291-309.Lavazza A., Graziani M., Tranquillo V.M., Botti G., Palotta C., Cerioli M., Capucci L. 2004. Serorological evaluation of the immunity induced in commercial rabbits by vaccination for Myxomatosis and RHD, In Proc.: 8th World Rabbit Congress, September 7-10, 2004, Puebla, Mexico, 569-575.Le Normand B., Chatellier S., Devaud I., Delvecchio A., Lavazza A., Capucci L. 2015. Evaluation de l'immunité humorale consécutive à la vaccination avec Dervaximyxo SG33 chez des lapines reproductrices vaccinées à différents stades du cycle productif. 16e Journées de la Recherche Cunicole. Le Mans, France. 17-20.Lemiere S. 2000. Combined vaccination against myxomatosis and VHD: an innovative approach, In: 7th World Rabbit Congress, Valencia, 4-7th July, Spain, World Rabbit Sci., 8 suppl 1. Vol. B:289-297.Levin C., Perrin H., Combadiere B. 2015. Tailored immunity by skin antigen-presenting cells. Hum. Vacc. Immunother., 11: 27-36. https://doi.org/10.4161/hv.34299Marlier D. 2010. Vaccination strategies against myxomavirus infections: are we really doing the best? Tijdschr Diergeneesk., 135: 194-198.Marlier D., Mainil J., Boucraut-Baralon C., Linden A., Vindevogel H. 2000. The efficacy of two vaccination schemes against expérimental infection with a virulent amyxomatous or a virulent nodular myxoma virus strain. J. Comp. Path. Vol. 122, 115-122. https://doi.org/10.1053/jcpa.1999.0346Marshall I., Regnery C. 1960. Myxomatosis in a California brush rabbit (Sylvilagus bachmani). Nature, 188: 73-74. http://doi.org/10.1038/188073b0Morimoto M. 2009. General Physiology of Rabbits. In: Houdebine LM., Fan J. (eds) Rabbit Biotechnology. Springer, Dordrecht. OIE. 2014. Myxomatosis. Chapter 2.6.1. (NB: Version adopted in May 2014). Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals http://www.oie.int/fileadmin/Home/fr/Health_standards/tahm/2.06.01_MYXO.pdf Accessed June 2018.Panchanathan V., Chaudhri G., Karupiah G. 2008. Correlates of protective immunity in poxvirus infection: where does antibody stand? Immunol. Cell Biol., 86, 80-86. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.icb.7100118Rouco C, Moreno S, Santoro S. 2016. A case of low success of blind vaccination campaigns against myxomatosis and rabbit haemorrhagic disease on survival of adult European wild rabbits. Prev. Vet. Med., 133: 108-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.09.013Spibey N., McCabe V., Greenwood N., Jack S., Sutton D., van der Waart L. 2012. Novel bivalent vectored vaccine for control of myxomatosis and rabbit haemorrhagic disease. Vet. Rec., 170: 309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.10036

Estensione di un'infrastruttura per ambienti cooperativi di mixed reality: integrazione del framework Google ARCore e tecnologie mobile avanzate

La grande rivoluzione tecnologica che è avvenuta negli ultimi anni ha portato la realtà aumentata a essere uno degli argomenti di studio di maggior interesse. La convinzione di poter eseguire operazioni quotidiane coadiuvate da un insieme di elementi virtuali e digitali si è concretizzata nello sviluppo e rilascio di dispositivi fisici - quali visori - e kit di sviluppo software. Quest'ultimi, in particolare, hanno recentemente raggiunto una maturità tale da permettere a device di tutti i giorni, quali smartphone e tablet, di poter sfruttare tecniche avanzate di analisi delle immagini, consentendo di essere anch'essi il veicolo per esperienze di augmented e mixed reality. Ci stiamo avvicinando a una realtà in cui elementi digitali coesistono nel mondo reale e le persone sono in grado di percepirli e interagire con essi, in modo condiviso. In questo contesto emergente, la ricerca è indirizzata nello studio di un modello e/o infrastruttura, che permetta di sfruttare le potenzialità delle tecnologie oggi disponibili e possa essere un punto di riferimento nello sviluppo di sistemi di augmented e mixed reality. Su questo fronte, spicca il modello di augmented worlds, punto di partenza del lavoro di questa tesi. Infatti, dall'analisi di detto modello e dell'infrastruttura a esso associata, si propone una possibile estensione che permetta a un qualsiasi utente, dotato di smartphone o tablet, di accedere a esperienze cooperative di mixed reality, incapsulando le funzionalità di comprensione dell'ambiente e motion tracking, che sono tipiche nelle tecnologie software mobili odierne

Impact of Atopic Dermatitis and Chronic Hand Eczema on Quality of Life Compared With Other Chronic Diseases

n/