Forensic tool mark comparisons: Tests for the null hypothesis of different sources

If a striated tool such as a screw driver is used to commit a crime, often there is a tool mark left behind as evidence. It is then the job of a forensic tool mark examiner to compare this crime scene tool mark to tool marks made by a suspect\u27s tool to determine if they match, i.e were made by the same tool. Forensic tool mark examiners say that these striated tool marks are comprised of \u27class\u27 and \u27individual\u27 characteristics where class characteristics are traits common to a large number of tools such as the width of a screwdriver head and individual characteristics are traits unique to a specific tool such as imperfections and wear patterns in the surface of a screwdriver. Examiners first compare marks according to their class characteristics and if they match, they continue to compare the individual characteristics. If the class characteristics do not match, it is concluded the marks were not made by the same tool. Many of the algorithms being developed to remove the subjective nature of an examiner\u27s comparison ignore the distinction between class and individual characteristics and attempt to directly compare the marks visually, or by applying some quantitative similarity index. We have developed a procedure for comparing tool marks that initially decomposes a digitized tool mark into class and individual components and applies a fixed width window correlation separately to each component. Based on the offsets (or registration) producing the maximized correlation (optimal offsets) and the correlation at the remaining offsets, we formulate hypothesis tests (Different Tool vs. Common Tool) with test statistics and p-values based on the distance between the optimal offsets for the two components, or by setting a threshold for correlations between the individual component series. Additionally, we have developed a simulation based approach for a test based on the maximized correlation between two tool marks. Finally, we review the method of Chumbley et al. (2010) and propose possible improvements

Genetic inactivation of the polycomb repressive complex 2 in T cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia

T cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) is an immature hematopoietic malignancy driven mainly by oncogenic activation of NOTCH1 signaling(1). In this study we report the presence of loss-of-function mutations and deletions of the EZH2 and SUZ12 genes, which encode crucial components of the Polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2)(2,3), in 25% of T-ALLs. To further study the role of PRC2 in T-ALL, we used NOTCH1-dependent mouse models of the disease, as well as human T-ALL samples, and combined locus-specific and global analysis of NOTCH1-driven epigenetic changes. These studies demonstrated that activation of NOTCH1 specifically induces loss of the repressive mark Lys27 trimethylation of histone 3 (H3K27me3)(4) by antagonizing the activity of PRC2. These studies suggest a tumor suppressor role for PRC2 in human leukemia and suggest a hitherto unrecognized dynamic interplay between oncogenic NOTCH1 and PRC2 function for the regulation of gene expression and cell transformation

International Social Survey Programme: Social Networks and Social Resources - ISSP 2017

The International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) is a continuous programme of cross-national collaboration running annual surveys on topics important for the social sciences. The programme started in 1984 with four founding members - Australia, Germany, Great Britain, and the United States – and has now grown to almost 50 member countries from all over the world. As the surveys are designed for replication, they can be used for both, cross-national and cross-time comparisons. Each ISSP module focuses on a specific topic, which is repeated in regular time intervals. Please, consult the documentation for details on how the national ISSP surveys are fielded. The present study focuses on questions about social relations and social network.People with selected jobs of different branches in circle of close friends, relatives and acquaintances (e.g. bus / lorry driver, senior executive of a large company, home or office cleaner, etc.); opinion on social justice (too large income differences in the country, differences in people´s standard of living should be small in fair societies, responsibility of the government to reduce income differences, social benefits cause laziness); responsibility for the provision of health care for the sick, and care for older people (government, private companies/ for-profit organisations, non-profit organisations/ charities/ cooperatives, religious organisations, family, relatives or friends); frequency of activities of groups for leisure, sports or culture, of politial parties, politicial groups or associations, and of charitable or religious organisations that do voluntary work; opinion on personal influence in government decisions; first contact person to ask for help in household or garden, in household when ill, in depression, in giving advice in family problems, in enjoying a pleasant social occasion with (close family member, more distant family member, close friend, neighbour, workmate, someone else, no one); contact person or organisation to borrow a large sum of money, to find a job with administrative problems or official paperwork, to find a place to live, to look after oneself if seriously ill (family members or close friends, other persons, private companies, public services, non-profit or religious organisations, other organisations, no person or organisation); frequency of feeling companionship lacking, of isolation from others, and of feeling left out (past four weeks); how often people try to take advantage and how often try to be fair; people can be trusted vs. can´t be too careful in dealing with people; trust in national courts and in major private companies; willingness to help (duty of adult children to look after their elderly parents, take care of yourself and your family first, before helping other people, people who are better off should help friends who are less well off); pressure from family members about the personal way of life; too many demands from family, relatives and friends; frequency of angry or upset reaction of important people in life. Social activities: frequency of going out with friends or acquaintances; frequency of making new friendships or acquaintances at these occasions; number of people in contact with on a typical weekday; frequency of face-to-face contacts with these people; frequency of contact with different relatives (parent, sibling, adult child, other family member), and close friend the respondent is most frequently in contact with; amount of contact with all family members and close friends via the internet; self-rating of general health status; frequency of impairments in the last 4 weeks (felt unhappy and depressed, felt difficulties unable to overcome); easy to accomplish own goals; life satisfaction. Optional questions: Friendship should be useful; favours should be reciprocated; frequency of domination of one person in conversations with friends; frequency of consideration who sits near whom at meetings with friends; frequency of contact with the person from home town or the region of origin most frequently in contact with; frequency of contact with the person from religious community most frequently in contact with. Demography: sex; age; year of birth; years in school; education (country specific); highest completed education level; work status; hours worked weekly; employment relationship; number of employees; supervision of employees; number of supervised employees; type of organisation: for-profit vs. non-profit and public vs. private; occupation (ISCO/ILO-08); main employment status; living in steady partnership; trade union membership; religious affiliation or denomination (country specific); groups of religious denominations; attendance of religious services; top-bottom self-placement; vote participation in last general election; country specific party voted for in last general election; party voted for (left-right); self-assessed affiliation to ethnic group 1 and 2 (country specific); number of children in the household; number of toddlers in the household; size of household; earnings of respondent (country specific); household income (country specific); father´s and mother´s country of birth; marital status; place of living: urban – rural; region (country specific). Additional obligatory background variables: difficulties to make ends meet from total houshold´s income; language skills: number of languages in how the respondent is able to hold a conversation. Information about spouse/ partner on: work status; hours worked weekly; employment relationship; supervision of employees; occupation (ISCO/ILO-08); main employment status. Supplementary optional background variable: highest completed education level of spouse/ partner. Additionally encoded: respondent-ID number; date of interview (year, month, day); case substitution flag; flag variable indicating partially completed interviews; mode of data collection; weight; Country ISO 3166 Code, Country/Sample ISO 3166 Code, Country Prefix ISO 3166 Code.Das International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) ist ein länderübergreifendes, fortlaufendes Umfrageprogramm, das jährlich Erhebungen zu Themen durchführt, die für die Sozialwissenschaften wichtig sind. Das Programm begann 1984 mit vier Gründungsmitgliedern - Australien, Deutschland, Großbritannien und den Vereinigten Staaten - und ist inzwischen auf fast 50 Mitgliedsländer aus aller Welt angewachsen. Da die Umfragen auf Replikationen ausgelegt sind, können die Daten sowohl für länder- als auch für zeitübergreifende Vergleiche genutzt werden. Jedes ISSP-Modul konzentriert sich auf ein bestimmtes Thema, das in regelmäßigen Zeitabständen wiederholt wird. Details zur Durchführung der nationalen ISSP-Umfragen entnehmen Sie bitte der Dokumentation. Die vorliegende Studie konzentriert sich auf Fragen zu sozialen Beziehungen und sozialen Netzwerken.Personen mit ausgewählten Berufen aus verschiedenen Branchen im Freundes- und Verwandtenkreis (z.B. Busfahrer, Geschäftsführer eines Großunternehmens, Haus- oder Gebäudereiniger, etc.); Meinung zur sozialen Gerechtigkeit (zu große Einkommensunterschiede im Land, geringe Unterschiede im Lebensstandard in gerechten Gesellschaften, Verantwortung der Regierung zur Verringerung der Einkommensunterschiede, Sozialleistungen bewirken Faulheit); Verantwortung für die Gesundheitsversorgung von Kranken und die Betreuung älterer Menschen (Regierung, Privatunternehmen/profitorientierte-Organisationen, gemeinnützige Organisationen/Wohltätigkeitsorganisationen/Genossenschaften, religiöse Organisationen, Familie, Verwandte oder Freunde); Häufigkeit von Aktivitäten in Gruppen für Freizeit, Sport oder Kultur, in politischen Parteien, politischen Gruppen oder Verbänden sowie in gemeinnützigen oder religiösen Organisationen, die ehrenamtlich arbeiten; Meinung zum persönlichen Einfluss auf Regierungsentscheidungen; erster Ansprechpartner für Hilfe im Haushalt oder Garten, bei Krankheit, bei Depressionen, bei familiären Problemen, bei einem angenehmen gesellschaftlichen Anlass (nahes Familienmitglied, entfernteres Familienmitglied, enger Freund, Nachbar, Arbeitskollege, jemand anderer, niemand); Ansprechpartner bei finanziellen Problemen, bei der Arbeitsplatzsuche, bei administrativen Problemen, bei der Wohnungssuche und im Falle schwerer Krankheit (Familienmitglieder oder enge Freunde, andere Personen, Privatunternehmen, öffentliche Dienste, gemeinnützige oder religiöse Organisationen, andere Organisationen, keine Person oder Organisation); Häufigkeit des Gefühls von Einsamkeit, Isolation und Ausgeschlossensein in den letzten vier Wochen; Menschen versuchen, Vorteile zu nutzen vs. fair zu sein; Personenvertrauen vs. Vorsicht im Umgang mit Menschen; Vertrauen in nationale Gerichte und große Privatunternehmen; Hilfsbereitschaft (Pflicht erwachsener Kinder, sich um Eltern zu kümmern, zuerst um sich selbst und die eigene Familie kümmern, bevor man anderen hilft, besser Gestellte sollten schlechter gestellten Freunden helfen); Druck von Familienmitgliedern wegen persönlicher Lebensweise; zu viele Forderungen von Familie, Verwandten und Freunden; Häufigkeit wütender oder verärgerter Reaktionen von wichtigen Bezugspersonen. Soziale Aktivitäten: Häufigkeit des Ausgehens mit Freunden oder Bekannten; Häufigkeit neuer Freundschaften oder Bekanntschaften bei diesen Gelegenheiten; Anzahl der Kontaktpersonen an einem typischen Wochentag; Häufigkeit von persönlichen Kontakten mit diesen Personen; Häufigkeit des Kontakts mit verschiedenen Verwandten (Elternteil, Geschwisterteil, erwachsenes Kind, anderes Familienmitglied), und enge Freunde, mit denen der Befragte am häufigsten in Kontakt steht; Umfang des Kontakts mit allen Familienmitgliedern und engen Freunden über das Internet. Selbsteinschätzung des Gesundheitszustandes; Häufigkeit von Beeinträchtigungen in den letzten 4 Wochen (unzufrieden und deprimiert, unüberwindbare Schwierigkeiten); leicht, eigene Ziele zu erreichen; Lebenszufriedenheit. Optionale Fragen: Freundschaft sollte nützlich sein; Gefälligkeiten sollten erwidert werden; Häufigkeit der Dominanz einer Person bei Gesprächen mit Freunden; Häufigkeit der Berücksichtigung, wer bei Treffen mit Freunden in der Nähe von wem sitzt; Häufigkeit des Kontakts mit der Person aus der Heimatstadt oder der Herkunftsregion, mit der am häufigsten Kontakt besteht; Häufigkeit des Kontakts mit der Person aus der Religionsgemeinschaft, mit der am häufigsten Kontakt besteht. Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter; Geburtsjahr; Jahre der Schulbildung; Bildung (länderspezifisch); höchster Bildungsabschluss; Erwerbsstatus; Wochenarbeitszeit; Arbeitsverhältnis; Zahl der Beschäftigten (Unternehmensgröße); Weisungsbefugnis; Anzahl der Mitarbeiter für die Weisungsbefugnis besteht; Art des Unternehmens: Profit vs. Non-Profit und öffentlich vs. privat; Beruf (ISCO/ILO-08); Hauptbeschäftigungsstatus; Zusammenleben mit einem Partner; Gewerkschaftsmitgliedschaft; Religionszugehörigkeit oder Konfession (länderspezifisch); Konfessionsgruppen; Kirchgangshäufigkeit; subjektive Schichteinstufung (Selbsteinstufung auf einer Oben-Unten-Skala); Wahlbeteiligung bei der letzten allgemeinen Wahl und gewählte länderspezifische Partei; Links-Rechts-Einstufung der gewählten Partei; Selbsteinschätzung der Zugehörigkeit zu einer ethnischen Gruppe 1 und 2 (länderspezifisch); Anzahl der Kinder im Haushalt; Anzahl der Kleinkinder im Haushalt; Haushaltsgröße; Einkommen des Befragten (länderspezifisch); Familieneinkommen (länderspezifisch); Geburtsland von Vater und Mutter; Familienstand; Urbanisierungsgrad des Wohnortes; Region (länderspezifisch). Zusätzliche obligatorische Hintergrundvariablen: finanzielle Schwierigkeiten; Sprachkenntnisse: Anzahl der Sprachen, in denen der Befragte ein Gespräch führen kann. Informationen über Ehegatten/Partner zu folgenden Themen: Erwerbsstatus; wöchentliche Arbeitszeit; Arbeitsverhältnis; Weisungsbefugnis; Beruf (ISCO/ILO-08); Hauptbeschäftigungsstatus. Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: Befragten-ID; Datum des Interviews (Jahr, Monat, Tag); Kennzeichnungsvariable für die Ersetzung von Fällen; Kennzeichnungsvariable für teilweise durchgeführte Interviews; Art der Datenerhebung; Gewicht; Ländercode ISO 3166, Ländercode/Sample ISO 3166; Ländercode Präfix ISO 3166

International Social Survey Programme: Social Networks and Social Resources - ISSP 2017

Social relations and social network. Topics: People with selected jobs of different branches in circle of close friends, relatives and acquaintances (e.g. bus / lorry driver, senior executive of a large company, home or office cleaner, etc.); opinion on social justice (too large income differences in the country, differences in people´s standard of living should be small in fair societies, responsibility of the government to reduce income differences, social benefits cause laziness); responsibility for the provision of health care for the sick, and care for older people (government, private companies/ for-profit organisations, non-profit organisations/ charities/ cooperatives, religious organisations, family, relatives or friends); frequency of activities of groups for leisure, sports or culture, of politial parties, politicial groups or associations, and of charitable or religious organisations that do voluntary work; opinion on personal influence in government decisions; first contact person to ask for help in household or garden, in household when ill, in depression, in giving advice in family problems, in enjoying a pleasant social occasion with (close family member, more distant family member, close friend, neighbour, workmate, someone else, no one); contact person or organisation to borrow a large sum of money, to find a job with administrative problems or official paperwork, to find a place to live, to look after oneself if seriously ill (family members or close friends, other persons, private companies, public services, non-profit or religious organisations, other organisations, no person or organisation); frequency of feeling companionship lacking, of isolation from others, and of feeling left out (past four weeks); how often people try to take advantage and how often try to be fair; people can be trusted vs. can´t be too careful in dealing with people; trust in national courts and in major private companies; willingness to help (duty of adult children to look after their elderly parents, take care of yourself and your family first, before helping other people, people who are better off should help friends who are less well off); pressure from family members about the personal way of life; too many demands from family, relatives and friends; frequency of angry or upset reaction of important people in life. Social activities: frequency of going out with friends or acquaintances; frequency of making new friendships or acquaintances at these occasions; number of people in contact with on a typical weekday; frequency of face-to-face contacts with these people; frequency of contact with different relatives (parent, sibling, adult child, other family member), and close friend the respondent is most frequently in contact with; amount of contact with all family members and close friends via the internet; self-rating of general health status; frequency of impairments in the last 4 weeks (felt unhappy and depressed, felt difficulties unable to overcome); easy to accomplish own goals; life satisfaction. Optional questions: Friendship should be useful; favours should be reciprocated; frequency of domination of one person in conversations with friends; frequency of consideration who sits near whom at meetings with friends; frequency of contact with the person from home town or the region of origin most frequently in contact with; frequency of contact with the person from religious community most frequently in contact with. Demography: sex; age; year of birth; years in school; education (country specific); highest completed education level; work status; hours worked weekly; employment relationship; number of employees; supervision of employees; number of supervised employees; type of organisation: for-profit vs. non-profit and public vs. private; occupation (ISCO/ILO-08); main employment status; living in steady partnership; trade union membership; religious affiliation or denomination (country specific); groups of religious denominations; attendance of religious services; top-bottom self-placement; vote participation in last general election; country specific party voted for in last general election; party voted for (left-right); self-assessed affiliation to ethnic group 1 and 2 (country specific); number of children in the household; number of toddlers in the household; size of household; earnings of respondent (country specific); household income (country specific); father´s and mother´s country of birth; marital status; place of living: urban – rural; region (country specific). Additional obligatory background variables: difficulties to make ends meet from total houshold´s income; language skills: number of languages in how the respondent is able to hold a conversation. Information about spouse/ partner on: work status; hours worked weekly; employment relationship; supervision of employees; occupation (ISCO/ILO-08); main employment status.Supplementary optional background variable: highest completed education level of spouse/ partner. Additionally encoded: respondent-ID number; date of interview (year, month, day); case substitution flag; flag variable indicating partially completed interviews; mode of data collection; weight; Country ISO 3166 Code, Country/Sample ISO 3166 Code, Country Prefix ISO 3166 Code