Evaluation of push and pull communication models on a VANET with virtual traffic lights

It is expected in a near future that safety applications based on vehicle-to-everything communications will be a common reality in the traffic roads. This technology will contribute to improve the safety of vulnerable road users, for example, with the use of virtual traffic light systems (VTLS) in the intersections. This work implements and evaluates a VTLS conceived to help the pedestrians pass safely the intersections without real traffic lights. The simulated VTLS scenario used two distinct communication paradigms—the pull and push communication models. The pull model was implemented in named data networking (NDN), because NDN uses natively a pull-based communication model, where consumers send requests to pull the contents from the provider. A distinct approach is followed by the push-based model, where consumers subscribe previously the information, and then the producers distribute the available information to those consumers. Comparing the performance of the push and pull models on a VANET with VTLS, it is observed that the push mode presents lower packet loss and generates fewer packets, and consequently occupies less bandwidth, than the pull mode. In fact, for the considered metrics, the VTLS implemented with the pull mode presents no advantage when compared with the push mode.This work has been supported by national funds through FCT—Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia within the Project Scope: UID/CEC/00319/2020 and by the European Structural and Investment Funds in the FEDER component, through the Operational Competitiveness and Internationalization Programme (COMPETE 2020) [Project nº 039334; Funding Reference: POCI-01-0247-FEDER-039334]

Enhancing VRUs safety with V2P communications: an experiment with hidden pedestrians on a crosswalk

Vehicular Ad hoc Networks (VANETs) are the network that enables communications between road entities, such as vehicles, Road Side Units (RSUs), or Vulnerable Road Users (VRUs). The work presented in this paper aims to provide a methodology to prevent accidents that happen to VRUs' entities, more precisely, to pedestrians. The goal of this safety application use-case is to detect and warn the involved parties of a potentially dangerous situation when a pedestrian crosses a road in a crosswalk where direct line-of-sight detection from both parties is limited or not possible. The warning message is transmitted using Decentralized Environmental Notification Messages (DENMs) using standard communication technologies. Because the different parties may use different communication technologies, a cloud service is used as an intermediary to allow communication between vehicles (using IEEE 802.11p) and pedestrians (using Long-Term Evolution (LTE)). The results show that all the involved entities can be warned in usable time, enough for an action to be taken, such as performing an emergency brake.This work has been supported by national funds through FCT - Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia within the Project Scope: UIDB/00319/2020 and by the European Structural and Investment Funds in the FEDER component, through the Operational Competitiveness and Internationalization Programme (COMPETE 2020) [Project no 039334; Funding Reference: POCI-01-0247-FEDER-039334]

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field