14 research outputs found

    Streamlines for Motion Planning in Underwater Currents

    Full text link
    Motion planning for underwater vehicles must consider the effect of ocean currents. We present an efficient method to compute reachability and cost between sample points in sampling-based motion planning that supports long-range planning over hundreds of kilometres in complicated flows. The idea is to search a reduced space of control inputs that consists of stream functions whose level sets, or streamlines, optimally connect two given points. Such stream functions are generated by superimposing a control input onto the underlying current flow. A streamline represents the resulting path that a vehicle would follow as it is carried along by the current given that control input. We provide rigorous analysis that shows how our method avoids exhaustive search of the control space, and demonstrate simulated examples in complicated flows including a traversal along the east coast of Australia, using actual current predictions, between Sydney and Brisbane.Comment: 7 pages, 4 figures, accepted to IEEE ICRA 2019. Copyright 2019 IEE

    Design and baseline characteristics of the finerenone in reducing cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in diabetic kidney disease trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Among people with diabetes, those with kidney disease have exceptionally high rates of cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality and progression of their underlying kidney disease. Finerenone is a novel, nonsteroidal, selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist that has shown to reduce albuminuria in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) while revealing only a low risk of hyperkalemia. However, the effect of finerenone on CV and renal outcomes has not yet been investigated in long-term trials. Patients and Methods: The Finerenone in Reducing CV Mortality and Morbidity in Diabetic Kidney Disease (FIGARO-DKD) trial aims to assess the efficacy and safety of finerenone compared to placebo at reducing clinically important CV and renal outcomes in T2D patients with CKD. FIGARO-DKD is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, event-driven trial running in 47 countries with an expected duration of approximately 6 years. FIGARO-DKD randomized 7,437 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate >= 25 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and albuminuria (urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio >= 30 to <= 5,000 mg/g). The study has at least 90% power to detect a 20% reduction in the risk of the primary outcome (overall two-sided significance level alpha = 0.05), the composite of time to first occurrence of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure. Conclusions: FIGARO-DKD will determine whether an optimally treated cohort of T2D patients with CKD at high risk of CV and renal events will experience cardiorenal benefits with the addition of finerenone to their treatment regimen. Trial Registration: EudraCT number: 2015-000950-39; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02545049

    Tuning of extended state observer with neural network-based control performance assessment

    Full text link
    The extended state observer (ESO) is an inherent element of robust observer-based control systems that allows estimating the impact of disturbance on system dynamics. Proper tuning of ESO parameters is necessary to ensure a good quality of estimated quantities and impacts the overall performance of the robust control structure. In this paper, we propose a neural network (NN) based tuning procedure that allows the user to prioritize between selected quality criteria such as the control and observation errors and the specified features of the control signal. The designed NN provides an accurate assessment of the control system performance and returns a set of ESO parameters that delivers a near-optimal solution to the user-defined cost function. The proposed tuning procedure, using an estimated state from the single closed-loop experiment produces near-optimal ESO gains within seconds

    Log-GPIS-MOP: A Unified Representation for Mapping, Odometry and Planning

    Full text link
    Whereas dedicated scene representations are required for each different task in conventional robotic systems, this paper demonstrates that a unified representation can be used directly for multiple key tasks. We propose the Log-Gaussian Process Implicit Surface for Mapping, Odometry and Planning (Log-GPIS-MOP): a probabilistic framework for surface reconstruction, localisation and navigation based on a unified representation. Our framework applies a logarithmic transformation to a Gaussian Process Implicit Surface (GPIS) formulation to recover a global representation that accurately captures the Euclidean distance field with gradients and, at the same time, the implicit surface. By directly estimating the distance field and its gradient through Log-GPIS inference, the proposed incremental odometry technique computes the optimal alignment of an incoming frame and fuses it globally to produce a map. Concurrently, an optimisation-based planner computes a safe collision-free path using the same Log-GPIS surface representation. We validate the proposed framework on simulated and real datasets in 2D and 3D and benchmark against the state-of-the-art approaches. Our experiments show that Log-GPIS-MOP produces competitive results in sequential odometry, surface mapping and obstacle avoidance

    1999 Annual Selected Bibliography Mapping Asian America: Cyber-Searching the Bibliographic Universe

    No full text

    Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

    No full text
    In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field

    Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

    No full text

    Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

    No full text
    In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field
    corecore