Intrinsic AGN SED & black hole growth in the Palomar--Green quasars

We present a new analysis of the PG quasar sample based on Spitzer and Herschel observations. (I) Assuming PAH-based star formation luminosities (L_SF) similar to Symeonidis et al. (2016, S16), we find mean and median intrinsic AGN spectral energy distributions (SEDs). These, in the FIR, appear hotter and significantly less luminous than the S16 mean intrinsic AGN SED. The differences are mostly due to our normalization of the individual SEDs, that properly accounts for a small number of very FIR-luminous quasars. Our median, PAH-based SED represents ~ 6% increase on the 1-243 micron luminosity of the extended Mor & Netzer (2012, EM12) torus SED, while S16 find a significantly larger difference. It requires large-scale dust with T ~ 20 -- 30 K which, if optically thin and heated by the AGN, would be outside the host galaxy. (II) We also explore the black hole and stellar mass growths, using L_SF estimates from fitting Herschel/PACS observations after subtracting the EM12 torus contribution. We use rough estimates of stellar mass, based on scaling relations, to divide our sample into groups: on, below and above the star formation main sequence (SFMS). Objects on the SFMS show a strong correlation between star formation luminosity and AGN bolometric luminosity, with a logarithmic slope of ~ 0.7. Finally we derive the relative duty cycles of this and another sample of very luminous AGN at z = 2 -- 3.5. Large differences in this quantity indicate different evolutionary pathways for these two populations characterised by significantly different black hole masses.Comment: Accepted for publication in MNRA

Job and Worker Turnover in German Establishments

We use a simple regression-based approach to measure the relationship between employment growth, hirings and separations in a large panel of German establishments over the period 1993-2009. Although the average level of hiring and separation is much lower in Germany than in the US, as expected, we find that the relationship between employment growth and worker flows in German establishments is very similar to the behaviour of US establishments described in Davis, Faberman & Haltiwanger (2006, 2011), and quite different to the behaviour of French establishments described in Abowd, Corbel & Kramarz (1999). The relationship is very stable over time, even during the most recent economic crisis, and across different types of establishment.job turnover, worker turnover, hirings and separations

On αrγs(k)-perfect graphs

AbstractFor some integer k⩾0 and two graph parameters π and τ, a graph G is called πτ(k)-perfect, if π(H)−τ(H)⩽k for every induced subgraph H of G. For r⩾1 let αr and γr denote the r-(distance)-independence and r-(distance)-domination number, respectively. In (J. Graph Theory 32 (1999) 303–310), I. Zverovich gave an ingenious complete characterization of α1γ1(k)-perfect graphs in terms of forbidden induced subgraphs. In this paper we study αrγs(k)-perfect graphs for r,s⩾1. We prove several properties of minimal αrγs(k)-imperfect graphs. Generalizing Zverovich's main result in (J. Graph Theory 32 (1999) 303–310), we completely characterize α2r−1γr(k)-perfect graphs for r⩾1. Furthermore, we characterize claw-free α2γ2(k)-perfect graphs

Cyclic sums, network sharing and restricted edge cuts in graphs with long cycles

Cyclic Sums, Network Sharing and Restricted Edge Cuts in Graphs with Long Cycles Dieter Rautenbach , Lutz Volkmann Preprint series: 07-06, 8 MSC 2000 05A17 Partitions of integers 05C40 Connectivity Abstract We study graphs G = (V,E) containing a long cycle which for given integers a1, a2, ..., ak 2 N have an edge cut whose removal results in k components with vertex sets V1, V2, ..., Vk such that |Vi| ai for 1 i k. Our results closely relate to problems and recent research in network sharing and network reliability. Keywords: restricted edge connectivity, arbitrarily vertex decomposable graph, network reliability, network sharin

Selection of research fellowship recipients by committee peer review. Reliability, fairness and predictive validity of Board of Trustees' decisions

Summary: In science, peer review is the best-established method of assessing manuscripts for publication and applications for research fellowships and grants. However, the fairness of peer review, its reliability and whether it achieves its aim to select the best science and scientists has often been questioned. The paper presents the first comprehensive study on committee peer review for the selection of doctoral (Ph.D.) and post-doctoral research fellowship recipients. We analysed the selection procedure followed by the Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds (B.I.F.), a foundation for the promotion of basic research in biomedicine, with regard to the reliability, fairness and predictive validity of the procedure - the three quality criteria for professional evaluations. We analysed a total of 2,697 applications, 1,954 for doctoral and 743 for post-doctoral fellowships. In 76% of the cases, the fellowship award decision was characterized by agreement between reviewers. Similar figures for reliability have been reported for the grant selection procedures of other major funding agencies. With regard to fairness, we analysed whether potential sources of bias, i.e., gender, nationality, major field of study and institutional affiliation, could have influenced decisions made by the B.I.F. Board of Trustees. For post-doctoral fellowship applications, no statistically significant influence of any of these variables could be observed. For doctoral fellowship applications, we found evidence of an institutional, major field of study and gender bias, but not of a nationality bias. The most important aspect of our study was to investigate the predictive validity of the procedure, i.e., whether the foundation achieves its aim to select as fellowship recipients the best junior scientists. Our bibliometric analysis showed that this is indeed the case and that the selection procedure is thus highly valid: research articles by B.I.F. fellows are cited considerably more often than the “average' paper (average citation rate) published in the journal sets corresponding to the fields “Multidisciplinary', “Molecular Biology & Genetics', and “Biology & Biochemistry' in Essential Science Indicators (ESI) from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA). Most of the fellows publish within these field

The validity of staff editors' initial evaluations of manuscripts: a case study of Angewandte Chemie International Edition

This paper investigates the extent to which staff editors' evaluations of submitted manuscripts—that is, internal evaluations carried out before external peer reviewing—are valid. To answer this question we utilized data on the manuscript reviewing process at the journal Angewandte Chemie International Edition. The results of this study indicate that the initial internal evaluations are valid. Further, it appears that external review is indispensable for the decision on the publication worthiness of manuscripts: (1) For the majority of submitted manuscripts, staff editors are uncertain about publication worthiness; (2) there is a statistically significant proportional difference in "Rejection” between the editors' initial evaluation and the final editorial decision (after peer review); (3) three-quarters of the manuscripts that were rated negatively at the initial internal evaluation but accepted for publication after the peer review had far above-average citation count

Does the h -index for ranking of scientists really work?

Summary: Hirsch (2005) has proposed the h-index as a single-number criterion to evaluate the scientific output of a researcher (Ball, 2005): A scientist has index h if h of his/her Np papers have at least h citations each, and the other (Np − h) papers have fewer than h citations each. In a study on committee peer review (Bornmann & Daniel, 2005) we found that on average the h-index for successful applicants for post-doctoral research fellowships was consistently higher than for non-successful applicant

Selecting scientific excellence through committee peer review - A citation analysis of publications previously published to approval or rejection of post-doctoral research fellowship applicants

Summary: We investigated committee peer review for awarding long-term fellowships to post-doctoral researchers as practiced by the Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds (B.I.F.) - a foundation for the promotion of basic research in biomedicine. Assessing the validity of selection decisions requires a generally accepted criterion for research impact. A widely used approach is to use citation counts as a proxy for the impact of scientific research. Therefore, a citation analysis for articles published previous to the applicants' approval or rejection for a B.I.F. fellowship was conducted. Based on our model estimation (negative binomial regression model), journal articles that had been published by applicants approved for a fellowship award (n = 64) prior to applying for the B.I.F. fellowship award can be expected to have 37% (straight counts of citations) and 49% (complete counts of citations) more citations than articles that had been published by rejected applicants (n = 333). Furthermore, comparison with international scientific reference values revealed (a) that articles published by successful and non-successful applicants are cited considerably more often than the "average” publication and (b) that excellent research performance can be expected more of successful than non-successful applicants. The findings confirm that the foundation is not only achieving its goal of selecting the best junior scientists for fellowship awards, but also successfully attracting highly talented young scientists to apply for B.I.F. fellowship