Online Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Extreme Learning Machine Applied to 3D Path Following for Remotely Operated Underwater Vehicles

In marine missions that involve 3D path following tasks, the overall goal of Underwater Vehicles (UVs) is the successful completion of a path previously specified by the operator. This implies that the path must be followed by the UV as closely as possible and arrive at a location for collection by a vessel. In this paper, an Online Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Extreme Learning Machine (OIT2-FELM) is suggested to achieve a robust following behaviour along a predefined 3D path using a Remotely Operated Underwater Vehicle (ROV). The proposed machine is a fast sequential learning scheme to the training of a more generalised model of TSK Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Inference Systems (TSK IT2 FISs) equivalent to Single Layer Feedforward Neural Networks (SLFNs). Learning new input data in the OIT2-FELM can be done one-by-one or chunk-by-chunk with a fixed or varying size. The OIT2-FELM is implemented in a hierarchical navigation strategy (HNS) as the main guidance mechanism to infer local control motions and to provide the ROV with the necessary autonomy to complete a predefined 3D path. For local path-planning, the OIT2-FELM performs signal classification for obstacle avoidance and target detection based on data collected by an on-board scan sonar. To evaluate the performance of the proposed OIT2-FELM, two different experiments are suggested. First, a number of benchmark problems in the field of non-linear system identification, regression and classification problems are used. Secondly, a number of experiments to the completion of a predefined 3D path using an ROV is implemented. Compared to other fuzzy strategies, the OIT2-FELM offered two significant capabilities. On the one hand, the OIT2-FELM provides a better treatment of uncertainty and noisy signals in underwater environments while improving the ROV's performance. Secondly, online learning in OIT2-FELM allows continuous knowledge discovery from survey data to infer the surroundings of the ROV. Experiment results to the completion of 3D paths show the effectiveness of the proposed approach to handle uncertainty and produce reasonable classification predictions (∼90.5% accuracy in testing data).</p

Dementia in Latin America : paving the way towards a regional action plan

Regional challenges faced by Latin American and Caribbean countries (LACs) to fight dementia, such as heterogeneity, diversity, political instabilities, and socioeconomic disparities, can be addressed more effectively grounded in a collaborative setting based on the open exchange of knowledge. In this work, the Latin American and Caribbean Consortium on Dementia (LAC-CD) proposes an agenda for integration to deliver a Knowledge to Action Framework (KtAF). First, we summarize evidence-based strategies (epidemiology, genetics, biomarkers, clinical trials, nonpharmacological interventions, networking and translational research) and align them to current global strategies to translate regional knowledge into actions with transformative power. Then, by characterizing genetic isolates, admixture in populations, environmental factors, and barriers to effective interventions and mapping these to the above challenges, we provide the basic mosaics of knowledge that will pave the way towards a KtAF. We describe strategies supporting the knowledge creation stage that underpins the translational impact of KtAF

Dementia in Latin America: Paving the way toward a regional action plan.

Across Latin American and Caribbean countries (LACs), the fight against dementia faces pressing challenges, such as heterogeneity, diversity, political instability, and socioeconomic disparities. These can be addressed more effectively in a collaborative setting that fosters open exchange of knowledge. In this work, the Latin American and Caribbean Consortium on Dementia (LAC-CD) proposes an agenda for integration to deliver a Knowledge to Action Framework (KtAF). First, we summarize evidence-based strategies (epidemiology, genetics, biomarkers, clinical trials, nonpharmacological interventions, networking, and translational research) and align them to current global strategies to translate regional knowledge into transformative actions. Then we characterize key sources of complexity (genetic isolates, admixture in populations, environmental factors, and barriers to effective interventions), map them to the above challenges, and provide the basic mosaics of knowledge toward a KtAF. Finally, we describe strategies supporting the knowledge creation stage that underpins the translational impact of KtAF

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health