Power minimization based robust OFDM radar waveform design for radar and communication systems in coexistence.

This paper considers the problem of power minimization based robust orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) radar waveform design, in which the radar coexists with a communication system in the same frequency band. Recognizing that the precise characteristics of target spectra are impossible to capture in practice, it is assumed that the target spectra lie in uncertainty sets bounded by known upper and lower bounds. Based on this uncertainty model, three different power minimization based robust radar waveform design criteria are proposed to minimize the worst-case radar transmitted power by optimizing the OFDM radar waveform, which are constrained by a specified mutual information (MI) requirement for target characterization and a minimum capacity threshold for communication system. These criteria differ in the way the communication signals scattered off the target are considered: (i) as useful energy, (ii) as interference or (iii) ignored altogether at the radar receiver. Numerical simulations demonstrate that the radar transmitted power can be efficiently reduced by exploiting the communication signals scattered off the target at the radar receiver. It is also shown that the robust waveforms bound the worst-case power-saving performance of radar system for any target spectra in the uncertainty sets

Combinatorial formulas for Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomials with respect to W-graph ideals

In \cite{y1} Yin generalized the definition of $W$-graph ideal $E_J$ in weighted Coxeter groups and introduced the weighted Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomials $\left \{ P_{x,y} \mid x,y\in E_J\right \}$, where $J$ is a subset of simple generators $S$. In this paper, we study the combinatorial formulas for those polynomials, which extend the results of Deodhar \cite{v3} and Tagawa \cite{h1}.Comment: 16 page

Artemisinin derivatives + praziquantel <i>vs.</i> praziquantel in the treatment of schistosomiasis.

1<p>PZQ (praziquantel 40 mg/kg once);</p>2<p>ART (artesunate 4 mg/kg/day, given once per day over 3 days);</p>3<p>ART (artesunate 4 mg/kg) daily for three consecutive days;</p>4<p>ART (artesunate 200mg) on the first day and (100 mg) daily for a further 4 days;</p>5<p>PZQ (praziquantel 1 day, 3×20 mg/kg);</p>6<p>ART (artemether 6 mg/kg once);⁷PZQ (praziquantel 6 days, 3×20 mg/kg). n.d: data not described.</p

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Artemisinin Based Therapies for the Treatment and Prevention of Schistosomiasis

<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Chemotherapy based on repeated doses of praziquantel is still the most effective control strategy against Schistosomiasis, however artemisinin derivatives emerged as a family of compounds with schistomicide activity. The aim of the present work is to compare the efficacy of artemisinin-based therapies in the treatment and prophylaxis of human schistosomiasis. The design of this work involved a quantitative systematic review and meta-analysis.</p> <h3>Methodology/Principal Findings</h3><p>Retrieval of published studies was carried out through an electronic search of the PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, Cochrane Library and CINAHL databases. This included reports comparing the therapeutic efficacy of artesunate alone, artesunate <em>plus</em> sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and a combination of artemisinin derivatives <em>plus</em> praziquantel against praziquantel alone on different types of schistosomiasis. Moreover, studies on artesunate and artemether used as preventive drugs were also analyzed against placebo. The primary outcome measure for schistosomiasis treatment was “parasitological cure”, whereas for the prophylaxis the outcome evaluated was “infection rate”. Our results show that patients treated with artesunate alone have significantly lower cure rates than those treated with praziquantel (OR = 0.27 (95% C.I. 0.13–0.53; p<0.001)) and that the combined therapy of artesunate <em>plus</em> sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine is also significantly less effective than praziquantel treatment (OR = 0.14 (95% C.I. 0.02–0.92; p = 0.04)). However, the combination of an artemisinin derivatives <em>plus</em> praziquantel showed a higher cure rate than praziquantel monotherapy with OR = 2.07 (95% C.I. 1.27–3.36; p = 0.003). Finally, chemoprophylaxis with either artesunate (RR = 0.11 (95% C.I. 0.06–0.22; p<0.001)) or artemether (RR = 0.25 (95% C.I. 0.16–0.40; p<0.001)) was significantly better than a placebo in both cases.</p> <h3>Conclusions/Significance</h3><p>This meta-analysis confirms that artemisinin derivatives used in combination with praziquantel have the potential to increase the cure rates in schistosomiasis treatment, but not artesunate alone. It is also confirmed that repeated doses of artemisinin derivatives play a prophylactic role, significantly reducing the incidence of <em>Schistosoma japonicum</em> infections compared with placebo.</p> </div

Flow diagram showing the selection process of studies included in the meta-analysis.

<p>Flow diagram showing the selection process of studies included in the meta-analysis.</p

Subgroup meta-analysis comparing Artemether <i>vs</i>. placebo for chemoprophylaxis against schistosomiasis.

<p>The mid-points of the lines represent the relative risk and the end-points of the lines show the corresponding 95% C.I. Intermediate diamond symbols are combined relative risks for each subgroup and the diamond at the bottom is the overall combined relative risk. The vertical line emphasizes an relative risk = 1 (no difference) and the dashed vertical line shows the value of the overall relative risk. Relative risk <1 indicates a protective effect of artemether. The original reports are labeled as follows: author name, year, and location, number of dosis and interval of administration, for details see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0045867#pone-0045867-t005" target="_blank">table 5</a>.</p

Artesunate + sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine <i>vs.</i> praziquantel in the treatment of schistosomiasis.

1<p>ART: (artesunate 100 mg/day) + S (sulfadoxine 250 mg/day) + P (pyrimethamine 12.5 mg/day) over three days;</p>2<p>PZQ (praziquantel 40 mg/kg once);</p>3<p>ART (artesunate 4 mg/kg/day over three days) + SP (sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine 25mg/kg );</p>4<p>ART(artesunate 4 mg/kg/day over three days) + S (sulfadoxine 25mg/kg) + P (pyrimethamine 12.5 mg/day).</p

Artemether prophylaxis <i>vs.</i> placebo in schistosomiasis due to <i>S. haematobium</i>, <i>S. mansoni</i> and <i>S. japonicum</i>.

1<p>ART: artemether (6 mg/kg); n.d: data not described.</p

Meta-analysis comparing artesunate <i>vs</i>. placebo for chemoprophylaxis against schistosomiasis japonica.

<p>The mid-points of the lines represent the relative risk and the end-points of the lines show the corresponding 95% C.I. The diamond at the bottom is the overall relative risk. The vertical line emphasizes an relative risk = 1 (no difference) and the dashed vertical line shows the value of the overall relative risk. Relative risk <1 indicates a protective effect of artesunate. The original reports are labeled with author name, year, and location, number of dosis and interval of administration (for details see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0045867#pone-0045867-t004" target="_blank">table 4</a>).</p

Forest plot of the random-effects subgroup meta-analysis comparing parasitological cure by artesunate <i>plus</i> sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine <i>vs.</i> praziquantel.

<p>Points represent odds ratios with their corresponding 95% C.I. Intermediate diamonds are combined odds ratios for each subgroup and the diamond at the bottom is the overall combined odds ratio. The vertical line emphasizes an odds ratio = 1 (no difference) and the dashed vertical line shows the value of the overall combined odds ratio. The original reports are labeled with author name, year and location (for details see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0045867#pone-0045867-t003" target="_blank">table 3</a>).</p