Variations of biochemical and hematic parameters following Taoist qigong practice

Qigong is an ancient Chinese psychosomatic discipline which employs specially designed body movements to achieve mind-body integration, preserve health, and pursue longevity. The Taoist school of qigong, one of the main traditions within this Chinese discipline, has a particular approach that emphasizes naturalness for the achievement of those goals. Albeit diverse methods of qigong have already been shown to display significant psychobiological effects, Taoist qigong has been scarcely investigated to date. Thus, this research was carried out with the aim of shedding light on the effects of Taoist qigong on biochemical and hematic parameters measured shortly after practice. Forty five naive subjects participated in the study, twenty-eight in the experimental group and the rest in the control group. Experimental subjects underwent a qigong training program consisting of three half-hour guided sessions per week, for the period of one month. Blood samples for the quantification of biochemical and hematic parameters were drawn from all subjects the day before the experiment commenced and one hour after the last session of practice concluded. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was performed as statistical analyses. Our results showed that after completing the qigong program, experimental subjects displayed lower levels of serum albumin, as well as lower values of Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin (MCH) and Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin Concentration (MCHC), when compared to control. These findings, therefore, reveal that the practice of Taoist qigong for a short period of one month exerted a peculiar biochemical and hematimetric influence, which suggests interesting psychobiological and clinical implications.Universidad de Málaga. Campus de Excelencia Internacional Andalucía Tec

Psychometric characteristics of the Spanish version of instruments to measure neck pain disability

Background: The NDI, COM and NPQ are evaluation instruments for disability due to NP. There was no Spanish version of NDI or COM for which psychometric characteristics were known. The objectives of this study were to translate and culturally adapt the Spanish version of the Neck Disability Index Questionnaire (NDI), and the Core Outcome Measure (COM), to validate its use in Spanish speaking patients with non-specific neck pain (NP), and to compare their psychometric characteristics with those of the Spanish version of the Northwick Pain Questionnaire (NPQ). Methods: Translation/re-translation of the English versions of the NDI and the COM was done blindly and independently by a multidisciplinary team. The study was done in 9 primary care Centers and 12 specialty services from 9 regions in Spain, with 221 acute, subacute and chronic patients who visited their physician for NP: 54 in the pilot phase and 167 in the validation phase. Neck pain (VAS), referred pain (VAS), disability (NDI, COM and NPQ), catastrophizing (CSQ) and quality of life (SF-12) were measured on their first visit and 14 days later. Patients' self-assessment was used as the external criterion for pain and disability. In the pilot phase, patients' understanding of each item in the NDI and COM was assessed, and on day 1 test-retest reliability was estimated by giving a second NDI and COM in which the name of the questionnaires and the order of the items had been changed. Results: Comprehensibility of NDI and COM were good. Minutes needed to fill out the questionnaires [median, (P25, P75)]: NDI. 4 (2.2, 10.0), COM: 2.1 (1.0, 4.9). Reliability: [ICC, (95%CI)]: NDI: 0.88 (0.80, 0.93). COM: 0.85 (0.75,0.91). Sensitivity to change: Effect size for patients having worsened, not changed and improved between days 1 and 15, according to the external criterion for disability: NDI: -0.24, 0.15, 0.66; NPQ: -0.14, 0.06, 0.67; COM: 0.05, 0.19, 0.92. Validity: Results of NDI, NPQ and COM were consistent with the external criterion for disability, whereas only those from NDI were consistent with the one for pain. Correlations with VAS, CSQ and SF-12 were similar for NDI and NPQ (absolute values between 0.36 and 0.50 on day 1, between 0.38 and 0.70 on day 15), and slightly lower for COM (between 0.36 and 0.48 on day 1, and between 0.33 and 0.61 on day 15). Correlation between NDI and NPQ: r = 0.84 on day 1, r = 0.91 on day 15. Correlation between COM and NPQ: r = 0.63 on day 1, r = 0.71 on day 15. Conclusion: Although most psychometric characteristics of NDI, NPQ and COM are similar, those from the latter one are worse and its use may lead to patients' evolution seeming more positive than it actually is. NDI seems to be the best instrument for measuring NP-related disability, since its results are the most consistent with patient's assessment of their own clinical status and evolution. It takes two more minutes to answer the NDI than to answer the COM, but it can be reliably filled out by the patient without assistance

Measurement of the Bottom-Strange Meson Mixing Phase in the Full CDF Data Set

We report a measurement of the bottom-strange meson mixing phase \beta_s using the time evolution of B0_s -> J/\psi (->\mu+\mu-) \phi (-> K+ K-) decays in which the quark-flavor content of the bottom-strange meson is identified at production. This measurement uses the full data set of proton-antiproton collisions at sqrt(s)= 1.96 TeV collected by the Collider Detector experiment at the Fermilab Tevatron, corresponding to 9.6 fb-1 of integrated luminosity. We report confidence regions in the two-dimensional space of \beta_s and the B0_s decay-width difference \Delta\Gamma_s, and measure \beta_s in [-\pi/2, -1.51] U [-0.06, 0.30] U [1.26, \pi/2] at the 68% confidence level, in agreement with the standard model expectation. Assuming the standard model value of \beta_s, we also determine \Delta\Gamma_s = 0.068 +- 0.026 (stat) +- 0.009 (syst) ps-1 and the mean B0_s lifetime, \tau_s = 1.528 +- 0.019 (stat) +- 0.009 (syst) ps, which are consistent and competitive with determinations by other experiments.Comment: 8 pages, 2 figures, Phys. Rev. Lett 109, 171802 (2012

The Use of Flagella and Motility for Plant Colonization and Fitness by Different Strains of the Foodborne Pathogen Listeria monocytogenes

The role of flagella and motility in the attachment of the foodborne pathogen Listeria monocytogenes to various surfaces is mixed with some systems requiring flagella for an interaction and others needing only motility for cells to get to the surface. In nature this bacterium is a saprophyte and contaminated produce is an avenue for infection. Previous studies have documented the ability of this organism to attach to and colonize plant tissue. Motility mutants were generated in three wild type strains of L. monocytogenes by deleting either flaA, the gene encoding flagellin, or motAB, genes encoding part of the flagellar motor, and tested for both the ability to colonize sprouts and for the fitness of that colonization. The motAB mutants were not affected in the colonization of alfalfa, radish, and broccoli sprouts; however, some of the flaA mutants showed reduced colonization ability. The best colonizing wild type strain was reduced in colonization on all three sprout types as a result of a flaA deletion. A mutant in another background was only affected on alfalfa. The third, a poor alfalfa colonizer was not affected in colonization ability by any of the deletions. Fitness of colonization was measured in experiments of competition between mixtures of mutant and parent strains on sprouts. Here the flaA and motAB mutants of the three strain backgrounds were impaired in fitness of colonization of alfalfa and radish sprouts, and one strain background showed reduced fitness of both mutant types on broccoli sprouts. Together these data indicate a role for flagella for some strains to physically colonize some plants, while the fitness of that colonization is positively affected by motility in almost all cases

The RNAi machinery controls distinct responses to environmental signals in the basal fungus Mucor circinelloides

BACKGROUND: RNA interference (RNAi) is a conserved mechanism of genome defence that can also have a role in the regulation of endogenous functions through endogenous small RNAs (esRNAs). In fungi, knowledge of the functions regulated by esRNAs has been hampered by lack of clear phenotypes in most mutants affected in the RNAi machinery. Mutants of Mucor circinelloides affected in RNAi genes show defects in physiological and developmental processes, thus making Mucor an outstanding fungal model for studying endogenous functions regulated by RNAi. Some classes of Mucor esRNAs map to exons (ex-siRNAs) and regulate expression of the genes from which they derive. To have a broad picture of genes regulated by the silencing machinery during vegetative growth, we have sequenced and compared the mRNA profiles of mutants in the main RNAi genes by using RNA-seq. In addition, we have achieved a more complete phenotypic characterization of silencing mutants.  RESULTS: Deletion of any main RNAi gene provoked a deep impact in mRNA accumulation at exponential and stationary growth. Genes showing increased mRNA levels, as expected for direct ex-siRNAs targets, but also genes with decreased expression were detected, suggesting that, most probably, the initial ex-siRNA targets regulate the expression of other genes, which can be up- or down-regulated. Expression of 50% of the genes was dependent on more than one RNAi gene in agreement with the existence of several classes of ex-siRNAs produced by different combinations of RNAi proteins. These combinations of proteins have also been involved in the regulation of different cellular processes. Besides genes regulated by the canonical RNAi pathway, this analysis identified processes, such as growth at low pH and sexual interaction that are regulated by a dicer-independent non-canonical RNAi pathway.  CONCLUSION: This work shows that the RNAi pathways play a relevant role in the regulation of a significant number of endogenous genes in M. circinelloides during exponential and stationary growth phases and opens up an important avenue for in-depth study of genes involved in the regulation of physiological and developmental processes in this fungal model

Analyzing factors that influence the folk use and phytonomy of 18 medicinal plants in Navarra

BACKGROUND: This article analyzes whether the distribution or area of use of 18 medicinal plants is influenced by ecological and cultural factors which might account for their traditional use and/or phytonymy in Navarra. This discussion may be helpful for comparative studies, touching as it does on other ethnopharmacological issues: a) which cultural and ecological factors affect the selection of medicinal plants; b) substitutions of medicinal plants in popular medicine; c) the relation between local nomenclature and uses. To analyze these questions, this paper presents an example of a species used for digestive disorders (tea and camomile: Jasonia glutinosa, J. tuberosa, Sideritis hyssopifolia, Bidens aurea, Chamaemelum nobile, Santolina chamaecyparissus...), high blood pressure (Rhamnus alaternus, Olea europaea...) or skin diseases (Hylotelephium maximum, H. telephium, Anagallis arvensis, A. foemina). METHODS: Fieldwork began on January 2004 and continued until December 2006. During that time we interviewed 505 informants in 218 locations in Navarra. Information was collected using semi-structured ethnobotanical interviews, and we subsequently made maps using Arc-View 8.0 program to determine the area of use of each taxon. Each map was then compared with the bioclimatic and linguistic map of Navarra, using the soil and ethnographic data for the region, and with other ethnobotanical and ethnopharmacological studies carried out in Europe. RESULTS: The results clearly show that ecological and cultural factors influence the selection of medicinal plants in this region. Climate and substrate are the most important ecological factors that influence the distribution and abundance of plants, which are the biological factors that affect medicinal plant selection. CONCLUSION: The study of edaphological and climatological factors, on the one hand, and culture, on the other, can help us to understand why a plant is replaced by another one for the same purposes, either in the same or in a different area. In many cases, the cultural factor means that the use of a species is more widespread than its ecological distribution. This may also explain the presence of synonyms and polysemies which are useful for discussing ethnopharmacological data

RNAi-Based Functional Genomics Identifies New Virulence Determinants in Mucormycosis

Mucorales are an emerging group of human pathogens that are responsible for the lethal disease mucormycosis. Unfortunately, functional studies on the genetic factors behind the virulence of these organisms are hampered by their limited genetic tractability, since they are reluctant to classical genetic tools like transposable elements or gene mapping. Here, we describe an RNAi-based functional genomic platform that allows the identification of new virulence factors through a forward genetic approach firstly described in Mucorales. This platform contains a whole-genome collection of Mucor circinelloides silenced transformants that presented a broad assortment of phenotypes related to the main physiological processes in fungi, including virulence, hyphae morphology, mycelial and yeast growth, carotenogenesis and asexual sporulation. Selection of transformants with reduced virulence allowed the identification of mcplD, which encodes a Phospholipase D, and mcmyo5, encoding a probably essential cargo transporter of the Myosin V family, as required for a fully virulent phenotype of M. circinelloides. Knock-out mutants for those genes showed reduced virulence in both Galleria mellonella and Mus musculus models, probably due to a delayed germination and polarized growth within macrophages. This study provides a robust approach to study virulence in Mucorales and as a proof of concept identified new virulence determinants in M. circinelloides that could represent promising targets for future antifungal therapies

First comprehensive contribution to medical ethnobotany of Western Pyrenees

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>An ethnobotanical and medical study was carried out in the Navarre Pyrenees, an area known both for its high biological diversity and its cultural significance.</p> <p>As well as the compilation of an ethnopharmacological catalogue, a quantitative ethnobotanical comparison has been carried out in relation to the outcomes from other studies about the Pyrenees. A review of all drugs used in the area has also been carried out, through a study of the monographs published by the institutions and organizations responsible for the safety and efficacy of medicinal plants (WHO, ESCOP, and the E Commission of the German Department of Health) in order to ascertain the extent to which the Navarre Pyrenees ethnopharmacology has been officially evaluated.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Fieldwork was carried out over two years, from November 2004 to December 2006. During that time we interviewed 88 local people in 40 villages. Information was collected using semi-structured ethnobotanical interviews and the data was analyzed using quantitave indexes: Ethnobotonicity Index, Shannon-Wiener's Diversity, Equitability and The Informant Consensus Factor. The official review has been performed using the official monographs published by the WHO, ESCOP and the E Commission of the German Department of Health.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The ethnobotanical and medical catalogue of the Navarre Pyrenees Area comprises 92 species, of which 39 have been mentioned by at least three interviewees. The quantitative ethnobotany results show lower values than those found in other studies about the Pyrenees; and 57.6% of the Pyrenees medical ethnobotany described does not figure in documents published by the above mentioned institutions.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The results show a reduction in the ethnobotanical and medical knowledge in the area of study, when compared to other studies carried out in the Pyrenees. Nevertheless, the use of several species that may be regarded as possible sources for pharmacological studies is reported here such as the bark of <it>Sambucus nigra</it>, the roots of <it>Fragaria vesca</it>, or the leaves of <it>Scrophularia nodosa</it>. These species are not currently approved by the WHO, ESCOP and the E Commission of the German Department of Health, institutions that, apart from encouraging the greater use of plants for medicinal purposes, may help in the design of development plans for these rural areas by validating their traditional medicine.</p

Evaluation in artificial intelligence: From task-oriented to ability-oriented measurement

The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1007/s10462-016-9505-7.The evaluation of artificial intelligence systems and components is crucial for the progress of the discipline. In this paper we describe and critically assess the different ways AI systems are evaluated, and the role of components and techniques in these systems. We first focus on the traditional task-oriented evaluation approach. We identify three kinds of evaluation: human discrimination, problem benchmarks and peer confrontation. We describe some of the limitations of the many evaluation schemes and competitions in these three categories, and follow the progression of some of these tests. We then focus on a less customary (and challenging) ability-oriented evaluation approach, where a system is characterised by its (cognitive) abilities, rather than by the tasks it is designed to solve. We discuss several possibilities: the adaptation of cognitive tests used for humans and animals, the development of tests derived from algorithmic information theory or more integrated approaches under the perspective of universal psychometrics. We analyse some evaluation tests from AI that are better positioned for an ability-oriented evaluation and discuss how their problems and limitations can possibly be addressed with some of the tools and ideas that appear within the paper. Finally, we enumerate a series of lessons learnt and generic guidelines to be used when an AI evaluation scheme is under consideration.I thank the organisers of the AEPIA Summer School On Artificial Intelligence, held in September 2014, for giving me the opportunity to give a lecture on 'AI Evaluation'. This paper was born out of and evolved through that lecture. The information about many benchmarks and competitions discussed in this paper have been contrasted with information from and discussions with many people: M. Bedia, A. Cangelosi, C. Dimitrakakis, I. GarcIa-Varea, Katja Hofmann, W. Langdon, E. Messina, S. Mueller, M. Siebers and C. Soares. Figure 4 is courtesy of F. Martinez-Plumed. Finally, I thank the anonymous reviewers, whose comments have helped to significantly improve the balance and coverage of the paper. This work has been partially supported by the EU (FEDER) and the Spanish MINECO under Grants TIN 2013-45732-C4-1-P, TIN 2015-69175-C4-1-R and by Generalitat Valenciana PROMETEOII2015/013.José Hernández-Orallo (2016). Evaluation in artificial intelligence: From task-oriented to ability-oriented measurement. Artificial Intelligence Review. 1-51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-016-9505-7S151Abel D, Agarwal A, Diaz F, Krishnamurthy A, Schapire RE (2016) Exploratory gradient boosting for reinforcement learning in complex domains. arXiv preprint arXiv:1603.04119Adams S, Arel I, Bach J, Coop R, Furlan R, Goertzel B, Hall JS, Samsonovich A, Scheutz M, Schlesinger M, Shapiro SC, Sowa J (2012) Mapping the landscape of human-level artificial general intelligence. AI Mag 33(1):25–42Adams SS, Banavar G, Campbell M (2016) I-athlon: towards a multi-dimensional Turing test. AI Mag 37(1):78–84Alcalá J, Fernández A, Luengo J, Derrac J, García S, Sánchez L, Herrera F (2010) Keel data-mining software tool: data set repository, integration of algorithms and experimental analysis framework. J Mult Valued Logic Soft Comput 17:255–287Alexander JRM, Smales S (1997) Intelligence, learning and long-term memory. Personal Individ Differ 23(5):815–825Alpcan T, Everitt T, Hutter M (2014) Can we measure the difficulty of an optimization problem? In: IEEE information theory workshop (ITW)Alur R, Bodik R, Juniwal G, Martin MMK, Raghothaman M, Seshia SA, Singh R, Solar-Lezama A, Torlak E, Udupa A (2013) Syntax-guided synthesis. In: Formal methods in computer-aided design (FMCAD), 2013, IEEE, pp 1–17Alvarado N, Adams SS, Burbeck S, Latta C (2002) Beyond the Turing test: performance metrics for evaluating a computer simulation of the human mind. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on development and learning, IEEE, pp 147–152Amigoni F, Bastianelli E, Berghofer J, Bonarini A, Fontana G, Hochgeschwender N, Iocchi L, Kraetzschmar G, Lima P, Matteucci M, Miraldo P, Nardi D, Schiaffonati V (2015) Competitions for benchmarking: task and functionality scoring complete performance assessment. IEEE Robot Autom Mag 22(3):53–61Anderson J, Lebiere C (2003) The Newell test for a theory of cognition. Behav Brain Sci 26(5):587–601Anderson J, Baltes J, Cheng CT (2011) Robotics competitions as benchmarks for AI research. Knowl Eng Rev 26(01):11–17Arel I, Rose DC, Karnowski TP (2010) Deep machine learning—a new frontier in artificial intelligence research. IEEE Comput Intell Mag 5(4):13–18Asada M, Hosoda K, Kuniyoshi Y, Ishiguro H, Inui T, Yoshikawa Y, Ogino M, Yoshida C (2009) Cognitive developmental robotics: a survey. IEEE Trans Auton Ment Dev 1(1):12–34Aziz H, Brill M, Fischer F, Harrenstein P, Lang J, Seedig HG (2015) Possible and necessary winners of partial tournaments. J Artif Intell Res 54:493–534Bache K, Lichman M (2013) UCI machine learning repository. http://archive.ics.uci.edu/mlBagnall AJ, Zatuchna ZV (2005) On the classification of maze problems. In: Bull L, Kovacs T (eds) Foundations of learning classifier system. Studies in fuzziness and soft computing, vol. 183, Springer, pp 305–316. http://rd.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/11319122_12Baldwin D, Yadav SB (1995) The process of research investigations in artificial intelligence - a unified view. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 25(5):852–861Bellemare MG, Naddaf Y, Veness J, Bowling M (2013) The arcade learning environment: an evaluation platform for general agents. J Artif Intell Res 47:253–279Besold TR (2014) A note on chances and limitations of psychometric ai. In: KI 2014: advances in artificial intelligence. Springer, pp 49–54Biever C (2011) Ultimate IQ: one test to rule them all. New Sci 211(2829, 10 September 2011):42–45Borg M, Johansen SS, Thomsen DL, Kraus M (2012) Practical implementation of a graphics Turing test. In: Advances in visual computing. Springer, pp 305–313Boring EG (1923) Intelligence as the tests test it. New Repub 35–37Bostrom N (2014) Superintelligence: paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford University Press, OxfordBrazdil P, Carrier CG, Soares C, Vilalta R (2008) Metalearning: applications to data mining. Springer, New YorkBringsjord S (2011) Psychometric artificial intelligence. J Exp Theor Artif Intell 23(3):271–277Bringsjord S, Schimanski B (2003) What is artificial intelligence? Psychometric AI as an answer. In: International joint conference on artificial intelligence, pp 887–893Brundage M (2016) Modeling progress in ai. AAAI 2016 Workshop on AI, Ethics, and SocietyBuchanan BG (1988) Artificial intelligence as an experimental science. Springer, New YorkBuhrmester M, Kwang T, Gosling SD (2011) Amazon’s mechanical turk a new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspect Psychol Sci 6(1):3–5Bursztein E, Aigrain J, Moscicki A, Mitchell JC (2014) The end is nigh: generic solving of text-based captchas. In: Proceedings of the 8th USENIX conference on Offensive Technologies, USENIX Association, p 3Campbell M, Hoane AJ, Hsu F (2002) Deep Blue. Artif Intell 134(1–2):57–83Cangelosi A, Schlesinger M, Smith LB (2015) Developmental robotics: from babies to robots. MIT Press, CambridgeCaputo B, Müller H, Martinez-Gomez J, Villegas M, Acar B, Patricia N, Marvasti N, Üsküdarlı S, Paredes R, Cazorla M et al (2014) Imageclef 2014: overview and analysis of the results. In: Information access evaluation. Multilinguality, multimodality, and interaction, Springer, pp 192–211Carlson A, Betteridge J, Kisiel B, Settles B, Hruschka ER Jr, Mitchell TM (2010) Toward an architecture for never-ending language learning. In: AAAI, vol 5, p 3Carroll JB (1993) Human cognitive abilities: a survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCaruana R (1997) Multitask learning. Mach Learn 28(1):41–75Chaitin GJ (1982) Gödel’s theorem and information. Int J Theor Phys 21(12):941–954Chandrasekaran B (1990) What kind of information processing is intelligence? In: The foundation of artificial intelligence—a sourcebook. Cambridge University Press, pp 14–46Chater N (1999) The search for simplicity: a fundamental cognitive principle? Q J Exp Psychol Sect A 52(2):273–302Chater N, Vitányi P (2003) Simplicity: a unifying principle in cognitive science? Trends Cogn Sci 7(1):19–22Chu Z, Gianvecchio S, Wang H, Jajodia S (2010) Who is tweeting on twitter: human, bot, or cyborg? In: Proceedings of the 26th annual computer security applications conference, ACM, pp 21–30Cochran WG (2007) Sampling techniques. Wiley, New YorkCohen PR, Howe AE (1988) How evaluation guides AI research: the message still counts more than the medium. AI Mag 9(4):35Cohen Y (2013) Testing and cognitive enhancement. Technical repor, National Institute for Testing and Evaluation, Jerusalem, IsraelConrad JG, Zeleznikow J (2013) The significance of evaluation in AI and law: a case study re-examining ICAIL proceedings. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on artificial intelligence and law, ACM, pp 186–191Conrad JG, Zeleznikow J (2015) The role of evaluation in ai and law. In: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on artificial intelligence and law, pp 181–186Deary IJ, Der G, Ford G (2001) Reaction times and intelligence differences: a population-based cohort study. Intelligence 29(5):389–399Decker KS, Durfee EH, Lesser VR (1989) Evaluating research in cooperative distributed problem solving. Distrib Artif Intell 2:487–519Demšar J (2006) Statistical comparisons of classifiers over multiple data sets. J Mach Learn Res 7:1–30Detterman DK (2011) A challenge to Watson. Intelligence 39(2–3):77–78Dimitrakakis C (2016) Personal communicationDimitrakakis C, Li G, Tziortziotis N (2014) The reinforcement learning competition 2014. AI Mag 35(3):61–65Dowe DL (2013) Introduction to Ray Solomonoff 85th memorial conference. In: Dowe DL (ed) Algorithmic probability and friends. Bayesian prediction and artificial intelligence, lecture notes in computer science, vol 7070. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–36Dowe DL, Hajek AR (1997) A computational extension to the Turing Test. In: Proceedings of the 4th conference of the Australasian cognitive science society, University of Newcastle, NSW, AustraliaDowe DL, Hajek AR (1998) A non-behavioural, computational extension to the Turing test. In: International conference on computational intelligence and multimedia applications (ICCIMA’98), Gippsland, Australia, pp 101–106Dowe DL, Hernández-Orallo J (2012) IQ tests are not for machines, yet. Intelligence 40(2):77–81Dowe DL, Hernández-Orallo J (2014) How universal can an intelligence test be? Adapt Behav 22(1):51–69Drummond C (2009) Replicability is not reproducibility: nor is it good science. In: Proceedings of the evaluation methods for machine learning workshop at the 26th ICML, Montreal, CanadaDrummond C, Japkowicz N (2010) Warning: statistical benchmarking is addictive. Kicking the habit in machine learning. J Exp Theor Artif Intell 22(1):67–80Duan Y, Chen X, Houthooft R, Schulman J, Abbeel P (2016) Benchmarking deep reinforcement learning for continuous control. arXiv preprint arXiv:1604.06778Eden AH, Moor JH, Soraker JH, Steinhart E (2013) Singularity hypotheses: a scientific and philosophical assessment. Springer, New YorkEdmondson W (2012) The intelligence in ETI—what can we know? Acta Astronaut 78:37–42Elo AE (1978) The rating of chessplayers, past and present, vol 3. Batsford, LondonEmbretson SE, Reise SP (2000) Item response theory for psychologists. L. Erlbaum, HillsdaleEvans JM, Messina ER (2001) Performance metrics for intelligent systems. NIST Special Publication SP, pp 101–104Everitt T, Lattimore T, Hutter M (2014) Free lunch for optimisation under the universal distribution. In: 2014 IEEE Congress on evolutionary computation (CEC), IEEE, pp 167–174Falkenauer E (1998) On method overfitting. J Heuristics 4(3):281–287Feldman J (2003) Simplicity and complexity in human concept learning. Gen Psychol 38(1):9–15Ferrando PJ (2009) Difficulty, discrimination, and information indices in the linear factor analysis model for continuous item responses. Appl Psychol Meas 33(1):9–24Ferrando PJ (2012) Assessing the discriminating power of item and test scores in the linear factor-analysis model. Psicológica 33:111–139Ferri C, Hernández-Orallo J, Modroiu R (2009) An experimental comparison of performance measures for classification. Pattern Recogn Lett 30(1):27–38Ferrucci D, Brown E, Chu-Carroll J, Fan J, Gondek D, Kalyanpur AA, Lally A, Murdock J, Nyberg E, Prager J et al (2010) Building Watson: an overview of the DeepQA project. AI Mag 31(3):59–79Fogel DB (1991) The evolution of intelligent decision making in gaming. Cybern Syst 22(2):223–236Gaschnig J, Klahr P, Pople H, Shortliffe E, Terry A (1983) Evaluation of expert systems: issues and case studies. Build Exp Syst 1:241–278Geissman JR, Schultz RD (1988) Verification & validation. AI Exp 3(2):26–33Genesereth M, Love N, Pell B (2005) General game playing: overview of the AAAI competition. AI Mag 26(2):62Gerónimo D, López AM (2014) Datasets and benchmarking. In: Vision-based pedestrian protection systems for intelligent vehicles. Springer, pp 87–93Goertzel B, Pennachin C (eds) (2007) Artificial general intelligence. Springer, New YorkGoertzel B, Arel I, Scheutz M (2009) Toward a roadmap for human-level artificial general intelligence: embedding HLAI systems in broad, approachable, physical or virtual contexts. Artif Gen Intell Roadmap InitiatGoldreich O, Vadhan S (2007) Special issue on worst-case versus average-case complexity editors’ foreword. Comput complex 16(4):325–330Gordon BB (2007) Report on panel discussion on (re-)establishing or increasing collaborative links between artificial intelligence and intelligent systems. In: Messina ER, Madhavan R (eds) Proceedings of the 2007 workshop on performance metrics for intelligent systems, pp 302–303Gulwani S, Hernández-Orallo J, Kitzelmann E, Muggleton SH, Schmid U, Zorn B (2015) Inductive programming meets the real world. Commun ACM 58(11):90–99Hand DJ (2004) Measurement theory and practice. A Hodder Arnold Publication, LondonHernández-Orallo J (2000a) Beyond the Turing test. J Logic Lang Inf 9(4):447–466Hernández-Orallo J (2000b) On the computational measurement of intelligence factors. In: Meystel A (ed) Performance metrics for intelligent systems workshop. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, pp 1–8Hernández-Orallo J (2000c) Thesis: computational measures of information gain and reinforcement in inference processes. AI Commun 13(1):49–50Hernández-Orallo J (2010) A (hopefully) non-biased universal environment class for measuring intelligence of biological and artificial systems. In: Artificial general intelligence, 3rd International Conference. Atlantis Press, Extended report at http://users.dsic.upv.es/proy/anynt/unbiased.pdf , pp 182–183Hernández-Orallo J (2014) On environment difficulty and discriminating power. Auton Agents Multi-Agent Syst. 29(3):402–454. doi: 10.1007/s10458-014-9257-1Hernández-Orallo J, Dowe DL (2010) Measuring universal intelligence: towards an anytime intelligence test. Artif Intell 174(18):1508–1539Hernández-Orallo J, Dowe DL (2013) On potential cognitive abilities in the machine kingdom. Minds Mach 23:179–210Hernández-Orallo J, Minaya-Collado N (1998) A formal definition of intelligence based on an intensional variant of Kolmogorov complexity. In: Proceedings of international symposium of engineering of intelligent systems (EIS’98), ICSC Press, pp 146–163Hernández-Orallo J, Dowe DL, España-Cubillo S, Hernández-Lloreda MV, Insa-Cabrera J (2011) On more realistic environment distributions for defining, evaluating and developing intelligence. In: Schmidhuber J, Thórisson K, Looks M (eds) Artificial general intelligence, LNAI, vol 6830. Springer, New York, pp 82–91Hernández-Orallo J, Flach P, Ferri C (2012a) A unified view of performance metrics: translating threshold choice into expected classification loss. J Mach Learn Res 13(1):2813–2869Hernández-Orallo J, Insa-Cabrera J, Dowe DL, Hibbard B (2012b) Turing Tests with Turing machines. In: Voronkov A (ed) Turing-100, EPiC Series, vol 10, pp 140–156Hernández-Orallo J, Dowe DL, Hernández-Lloreda MV (2014) Universal psychometrics: measuring cognitive abilities in the machine kingdom. Cogn Syst Res 27:50–74Hernández-Orallo J, Martínez-Plumed F, Schmid U, Siebers M, Dowe DL (2016) Computer models solving intelligence test problems: progress and implications. Artif Intell 230:74–107Herrmann E, Call J, Hernández-Lloreda MV, Hare B, Tomasello M (2007) Humans have evolved specialized skills of social cognition: the cultural intelligence hypothesis. Science 317(5843):1360–1366Hibbard B (2009) Bias and no free lunch in formal measures of intelligence. J Artif Gen Intell 1(1):54–61Hingston P (2010) A new design for a Turing Test for bots. In: 2010 IEEE symposium on computational intelligence and games (CIG), IEEE, pp 345–350Hingston P (2012) Believable bots: can computers play like people?. Springer, New YorkHo TK, Basu M (2002) Complexity measures of supervised classification problems. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 24(3):289–300Hutter M (2007) Universal algorithmic intelligence: a mathematical top $$\rightarrow$$ → down approach. In: Goertzel B, Pennachin C (eds) Artificial general intelligence, cognitive technologies. Springer, Berlin, pp 227–290Igel C, Toussaint M (2005) A no-free-lunch theorem for non-uniform distributions of target functions. J Math Model Algorithms 3(4):313–322Insa-Cabrera J (2016) Towards a universal test of social intelligence. Ph.D. thesis, Departament de Sistemes Informátics i Computació, UPVInsa-Cabrera J, Dowe DL, España-Cubillo S, Hernández-Lloreda MV, Hernández-Orallo J (2011a) Comparing humans and ai agents. In: Schmidhuber J, Thórisson K, Looks M (eds) Artificial general intelligence, LNAI, vol 6830. Springer, New York, pp 122–132Insa-Cabrera J, Dowe DL, Hernández-Orallo J (2011) Evaluating a reinforcement learning algorithm with a general intelligence test. In: Lozano JA, Gamez JM (eds) Current topics in artificial intelligence. CAEPIA 2011, LNAI series 7023. Springer, New YorkInsa-Cabrera J, Benacloch-Ayuso JL, Hernández-Orallo J (2012) On measuring social intelligence: experiments on competition and cooperation. In: Bach J, Goertzel B, Iklé M (eds) AGI, lecture notes in computer science, vol 7716. Springer, New York, pp 126–135Jacoff A, Messina E, Weiss BA, Tadokoro S, Nakagawa Y (2003) Test arenas and performance metrics for urban search and rescue robots. In: Proceedings of 2003 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, 2003 (IROS 2003), IEEE, vol 4, pp 3396–3403Japkowicz N, Shah M (2011) Evaluating learning algorithms. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeJiang J (2008) A literature survey on domain adaptation of statistical classifiers. http://sifaka.cs.uiuc.edu/jiang4/domain_adaptation/surveyJohnson M, Hofmann K, Hutton T, Bignell D (2016) The Malmo platform for artificial intelligence experimentation. In: International joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI)Keith TZ, Reynolds MR (2010) Cattell–Horn–Carroll abilities and cognitive tests: what we’ve learned from 20 years of research. Psychol Schools 47(7):635–650Ketter W, Symeonidis A (2012) Competitive benchmarking: lessons learned from the trading agent competition. AI Mag 33(2):103Khreich W, Granger E, Miri A, Sabourin R (2012) A survey of techniques for incremental learning of HMM parameters. Inf Sci 197:105–130Kim JH (2004) Soccer robotics, vol 11. Springer, New YorkKitano H, Asada M, Kuniyoshi Y, Noda I, Osawa E (1997) Robocup: the robot world cup initiative. In: Proceedings of the first international conference on autonomous agents, ACM, pp 340–347Kleiner K (2011) Who are you calling bird-brained? An attempt is being made to devise a universal intelligence test. Economist 398(8723, 5 March 2011):82Knuth DE (1973) Sorting and searching, volume 3 of the art of computer programming. Addison-Wesley, ReadingKoza JR (2010) Human-competitive results produced by genetic programming. Genet Program Evolvable Mach 11(3–4):251–284Krueger J, Osherson D (1980) On the psychology of structural simplicity. In: Jusczyk PW, Klein RM (eds) The nature of thought: essays in honor of D. O. Hebb. Psychology Press, London, pp 187–205Langford J (2005) Clever methods of overfitting. Machine Learning (Theory). http://hunch.netLangley P (1987) Research papers in machine learning. Mach Learn 2(3):195–198Langley P (2011) The changing science of machine learning. Mach Learn 82(3):275–279Langley P (2012) The cognitive systems paradigm. Adv Cogn Syst 1:3–13Lattimore T, Hutter M (2013) No free lunch versus Occam’s razor in supervised learning. Algorithmic Probability and Friends. Springer, Bayesian Prediction and Artificial Intelligence, pp 223–235Leeuwenberg ELJ, Van Der Helm PA (2012) Structural information theory: the simplicity of visual form. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeLegg S, Hutter M (2007a) Tests of machine intelligence. In: Lungarella M, Iida F, Bongard J, Pfeifer R (eds) 50 Years of Artificial Intelligence, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4850, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp 232–242. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-77296-5_22Legg S, Hutter M (2007b) Universal intelligence: a definition of machine intelligence. Minds Mach 17(4):391–444Legg S, Veness J (2013) An approximation of the universal intelligence measure. Algorithmic Probability and Friends. Springer, Bayesian Prediction and Artificial Intelligence, pp 236–249Levesque HJ (2014) On our best behaviour. Artif Intell 212:27–35Levesque HJ, Davis E, Morgenstern L (2012) The winog

Expression and function of G-protein-coupled receptorsin the male reproductive tract

This review focuses on the expression and function of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (mAChRs), α1-adrenoceptors and relaxin receptors in the male reproductive tract. The localization and differential expression of mAChR and α1-adrenoceptor subtypes in specific compartments of the efferent ductules, epididymis, vas deferens, seminal vesicle and prostate of various species indicate a role for these receptors in the modulation of luminal fluid composition and smooth muscle contraction, including effects on male fertility. Furthermore, the activation of mAChRs induces transactivation of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and the Sertoli cell proliferation. The relaxin receptors are present in the testis, RXFP1 in elongated spermatids and Sertoli cells from rat, and RXFP2 in Leydig and germ cells from rat and human, suggesting a role for these receptors in the spermatogenic process. The localization of both receptors in the apical portion of epithelial cells and smooth muscle layers of the vas deferens suggests an involvement of these receptors in the contraction and regulation of secretion.Esta revisão enfatiza a expressão e a função dos receptores muscarínicos, adrenoceptores α1 e receptores para relaxina no sistema reprodutor masculino. A expressão dos receptores muscarínicos e adrenoceptores α1 em compartimentos específicos de dúctulos eferentes, epidídimo, ductos deferentes, vesícula seminal e próstata de várias espécies indica o envolvimento destes receptores na modulação da composição do fluido luminal e na contração do músculo liso, incluindo efeitos na fertilidade masculina. Além disso, a ativação dos receptores muscarínicos leva à transativação do receptor para o fator crescimento epidermal e proliferação das células de Sertoli. Os receptores para relaxina estão presentes no testículo, RXFP1 nas espermátides alongadas e células de Sertoli de rato e RXFP2 nas células de Leydig e germinativas de ratos e humano, sugerindo o envolvimento destes receptores no processo espermatogênico. A localização de ambos os receptores na porção apical das células epiteliais e no músculo liso dos ductos deferentes de rato sugere um papel na contração e na regulação da secreção.Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) Escola Paulista de Medicina Departamento de FarmacologiaUNIFESP, EPM, Depto. de FarmacologiaSciEL