Self-Averaging, Distribution of Pseudo-Critical Temperatures and Finite Size Scaling in Critical Disordered Systems

The distributions $P(X)$ of singular thermodynamic quantities in an ensemble of quenched random samples of linear size $l$ at the critical point $T_c$ are studied by Monte Carlo in two models. Our results confirm predictions of Aharony and Harris based on Renormalization group considerations. For an Ashkin-Teller model with strong but irrelevant bond randomness we find that the relative squared width, $R_X$, of $P(X)$ is weakly self averaging. $R_X\sim l^{\alpha/\nu}$, where $\alpha$ is the specific heat exponent and $\nu$ is the correlation length exponent of the pure model fixed point governing the transition. For the site dilute Ising model on a cubic lattice, known to be governed by a random fixed point, we find that $R_X$ tends to a universal constant independent of the amount of dilution (no self averaging). However this constant is different for canonical and grand canonical disorder. We study the distribution of the pseudo-critical temperatures $T_c(i,l)$ of the ensemble defined as the temperatures of the maximum susceptibility of each sample. We find that its variance scales as $(\delta T_c(l))^2 \sim l^{-2/\nu}$ and NOT as $\sim l^{-d}. We find that$R_\chi$is reduced by a factor of$\sim 70$with respect to$R_\chi (T_c)$by measuring$\chi$of each sample at$T_c(i,l)$. We analyze correlations between the magnetization at criticality$m_i(T_c,l)$and the pseudo-critical temperature$T_c(i,l)$in terms of a sample independent finite size scaling function of a sample dependent reduced temperature$(T-T_c(i,l))/T_c$. This function is found to be universal and to behave similarly to pure systems.Comment: 31 pages, 17 figures, submitted to Phys. Rev.

The global response to the COVID-19 pandemic: how have immunology societies contributed?

The COVID-19 pandemic is shining a spotlight on the field of immunology like never before. To appreciate the diverse ways in which immunologists have contributed, Nature Reviews Immunology invited the president of the International Union of Immunological Societies and the presidents of 15 other national immunology societies to discuss how they and their members responded following the emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Transformative reparations: changing the game or more of the same?

The traditional aim of reparations is to place the victim back in the position they would have been in had the harm not occurred. Academics and practitioners have criticised this traditional approach to reparations for serious crimes and human rights violations as failing to address socio-economic disparities and unequal power structures. The recent transformative reparations theories grew out of the belief that it is ineffectual to place marginalised victims back in positions of marginalisation following serious harm. The desire to transform the lives of victims as well as the power structures that sustain unequal relationships is compelling. As a result, this idea has been influential within academic and policy-making circles, and endorsed by the United Nations, the International Criminal Court, and regional and domestic jurisdictions. Despite this, it remains unclear what ‘transformation’ means in theory and in practice. The purpose of this article is to critically examine transformative reparations and explore whether the notion is in fact changing the game or rather more of the same. It questions the utility of the label ‘transformative’ and its suitability in specific contexts. It concludes that outside the international(ised) criminal context, and especially in the national and local context, there may be greater scope for reparations with transformative potential, but only when victims and affected communities play a central role in the decision-making, and when linked with other non-temporary, structural changes. Even under these circumstances, reparation authorities should be cautious of raising false expectations that reparations will be transformative

Bridging Scholarship and Practice: 20 Years of the Public International Law and Policy Group

When the Editor-in-Chief of the Utrecht Journal of International and European Law (UJIEL) approached us with the possibility of guest editing a special issue related to public international law and policy, we felt the timing could not have been better. As academics at Utrecht University with the Netherlands Institute of Human Rights and Montaigne Centre for Judicial Administration and Conflict Resolution, we felt that a theme linking the world of lawyers with that of policymakers was important in order to examine the role of law in protecting human rights and security. Moreover, as Senior Counsel with the Public International Law & Policy Group (PILPG), which celebrated its 20-year anniversary in 2016, we welcomed the idea to link academic scholarship with the work of PILPG. After all, PILPG’s founders, Professor Paul Williams and Professor Michael Scharf, have themselves acted as bridges between scholarship and practice for years. As a result, this special edition is not only intended to highlight the extraordinary work carried out by PILPG on issues of law and policy around the world, but also to emphasise the importance of linking scholarship with practice and addressing contemporary issues impacting the world in which we live. PILPG’s motto ‘lawyering peace’ requires reflection on the role that law can play in helping to bring about the peaceful resolution of serious problems affecting individuals and societies as a whole. This special edition of UJIEL, addressing a variety of themes, does just that

Intersections of Law and Culture at the International Criminal Court: Introduction

Islamic law covers a broad scope and articulates norms regarding crime and punishment as well as what would today be considered international law. In fact, Islamic law contains many techniques relating to preventing and punishing crime, victim remedies and reconciliation, making it relevant to the elucidation and application of international criminal law by the International Criminal Court (ICC). This relevance is pertinent as many of the States with situations being considered by the ICC’s Prosecutor have a Muslim-majority, such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Mali, Palestine and Sudan. Furthermore, around two-thirds of the Red Cross’ (ICRC) present operations relate to armed conflicts in Islamic contexts. However, the positive role that Islamic law can play in such conflicts is under-appreciated. Despite the salience of Islamic law for the ICC, recognition, engagement and understanding is only nascent. For example, the Court has not, to date, drawn upon Islamic law in its rulings in such situations. This chapter advocates the ICC’s use of or reference to Islamic law in relevant cases to promote the Court’s cultural legitimacy in Muslim communities and to foster the engagement of Muslim-majority States in the Rome Statute system

Transformative reparations: changing the game or more of the same?

The traditional aim of reparations is to place the victim back in the position they would have been in had the harm not occurred. Academics and practitioners have criticised this traditional approach to reparations for serious crimes and human rights violations as failing to address socio-economic disparities and unequal power structures. The recent transformative reparations theories grew out of the belief that it is ineffectual to place marginalised victims back in positions of marginalisation following serious harm. The desire to transform the lives of victims as well as the power structures that sustain unequal relationships is compelling. As a result, this idea has been influential within academic and policy-making circles, and endorsed by the United Nations, the International Criminal Court, and regional and domestic jurisdictions. Despite this, it remains unclear what ‘transformation’ means in theory and in practice. The purpose of this article is to critically examine transformative reparations and explore whether the notion is in fact changing the game or rather more of the same. It questions the utility of the label ‘transformative’ and its suitability in specific contexts. It concludes that outside the international(ised) criminal context, and especially in the national and local context, there may be greater scope for reparations with transformative potential, but only when victims and affected communities play a central role in the decision-making, and when linked with other non-temporary, structural changes. Even under these circumstances, reparation authorities should be cautious of raising false expectations that reparations will be transformative