Spectrum of 4d N=1N=1 SYM on the Lattice with Light Dynamical Wilson Gluinos.

We perform Monte Carlo investigations of the 4d ${\cal N}=1$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills (SYM) theory on the lattice with dynamical gluinos in the adjoint representation of the SU(2) gauge group. Our aim is to determine the mass spectrum of the low-lying bound states which is expected to be organised in supermultiplets in the infinite volume continuum limit. For this purpose we perform simulations on large lattices, up to an extension $L/r_0 \simeq 6$ where $r_0 \simeq 0.5 \rm fm$ is the Sommer scale parameter. We apply improved lattice actions: tree-level improved Symanzik (tlSym) gauge action and in the later runs a Stout-smeared Wilson fermion action. The gauge configuration samples are prepared by the Two-Step Polynomial Hybrid Monte Carlo (TS-PHMC) update algorithm.Comment: 7 pages, 1 figure, 1 table, presented at the XXVI International Symposium on Lattice Field Theory, July 14-19, 2008, Williamsburg, Virginia, US

Simulations of supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory

Results of a numerical simulation concerning the low-lying spectrum of four-dimensional N=1 SU(2) Supersymmetric Yang-Mills (SYM) theory on the lattice with light dynamical gluinos are reported. We use the tree-level Symanzik improved gauge action and Wilson fermions with stout smearing of the gauge links in the Wilson-Dirac operator. The configurations are produced with the Two-Step Polynomial Hybrid Monte Carlo (TS-PHMC) algorithm. We performed simulations on lattices up to a size of 24^3x48 at \beta=1.6. Using QCD units with the Sommer scale being set to r_0=0.5 fm, the lattice spacing is about a~0.09 fm, and the spatial extent of the lattice corresponds to 2.1 fm to control finite size effects. At the lightest simulated gluino mass our results indicate a mass for the lightest gluino-glue bound state, which is considerably heavier than the values obtained for its possible superpartners. Whether supermultiplets are formed remains to be studied in upcoming simulations.Comment: 7 pages, talk presented at The XXVII International Symposium on Lattice Field Theory, July 26-31 2009, Peking University, Beijing, Chin

Creating clear and informative image-based figures for scientific publications

Scientists routinely use images to display data. Readers often examine figures first; therefore, it is important that figures are accessible to a broad audience. Many resources discuss fraudulent image manipulation and technical specifications for image acquisition; however, data on the legibility and interpretability of images are scarce. We systematically examined these factors in non-blot images published in the top 15 journals in 3 fields; plant sciences, cell biology, and physiology (n = 580 papers). Common problems included missing scale bars, misplaced or poorly marked insets, images or labels that were not accessible to colorblind readers, and insufficient explanations of colors, labels, annotations, or the species and tissue or object depicted in the image. Papers that met all good practice criteria examined for all image-based figures were uncommon (physiology 16%, cell biology 12%, plant sciences 2%). We present detailed descriptions and visual examples to help scientists avoid common pitfalls when publishing images. Our recommendations address image magnification, scale information, insets, annotation, and color and may encourage discussion about quality standards for bioimage publishing

Creating clear and informative image-based figures for scientific publications.

Scientists routinely use images to display data. Readers often examine figures first; therefore, it is important that figures are accessible to a broad audience. Many resources discuss fraudulent image manipulation and technical specifications for image acquisition; however, data on the legibility and interpretability of images are scarce. We systematically examined these factors in non-blot images published in the top 15 journals in 3 fields; plant sciences, cell biology, and physiology (n = 580 papers). Common problems included missing scale bars, misplaced or poorly marked insets, images or labels that were not accessible to colorblind readers, and insufficient explanations of colors, labels, annotations, or the species and tissue or object depicted in the image. Papers that met all good practice criteria examined for all image-based figures were uncommon (physiology 16%, cell biology 12%, plant sciences 2%). We present detailed descriptions and visual examples to help scientists avoid common pitfalls when publishing images. Our recommendations address image magnification, scale information, insets, annotation, and color and may encourage discussion about quality standards for bioimage publishing