Computer-Automated Evolution of Spacecraft X-Band Antennas

A document discusses the use of computer- aided evolution in arriving at a design for X-band communication antennas for NASA s three Space Technology 5 (ST5) satellites, which were launched on March 22, 2006. Two evolutionary algorithms, incorporating different representations of the antenna design and different fitness functions, were used to automatically design and optimize an X-band antenna design. A set of antenna designs satisfying initial ST5 mission requirements was evolved by use these algorithms. The two best antennas - one from each evolutionary algorithm - were built. During flight-qualification testing of these antennas, the mission requirements were changed. After minimal changes in the evolutionary algorithms - mostly in the fitness functions - new antenna designs satisfying the changed mission requirements were evolved and within one month of this change, two new antennas were designed and prototypes of the antennas were built and tested. One of these newly evolved antennas was approved for deployment on the ST5 mission, and flight-qualified versions of this design were built and installed on the spacecraft. At the time of writing the document, these antennas were the first computer-evolved hardware in outer space

BlindBuilder : a new encoding to evolve Lego-like structures

This paper introduces a new representation for assemblies of small Lego-like elements: structures are indirectly encoded as construction plans. This representation shows some interesting properties such as hierarchy, modularity and easy constructibility checking by definition. Together with this representation, efficient GP operators are introduced that allow efficient and fast evolution, as witnessed by the results on two construction problems that demonstrate that the proposed approach is able to achieve both compactness and reusability of evolved components

Legal Advocacy, Performance, and Affection

Professor Geoffrey Hazard\u27s lecture addresses appellate advocacy. That advocate\u27s brief is best, he says, that, short of surrender, concedes most to the opposing party. We assume that Professor Hazard would scarcely have ventured out of New Haven to participate in the distinguished Sibley Lectureship merely to commend to the consideration of the audience an interesting but minor rhetorical ploy. Therefore we read his comments as surely implying more. We interpret his lecture as an invitation to rethink the nature of the courtroom event. The textual openings to our examination of fundamentals are found in various of Professor Hazard\u27s comments--for instance, his diagnosis of a larger fear of weakness in the context as a whole, and his recognition of advocates\u27 arguments as derivative from the court\u27s functioni. Consideration of these and other comments has led us through a hermeneutical adventure to imagine a restatement of Professor Hazard\u27s conclusion: That argument is best that is most performative of affection

Differential branching fraction and angular analysis of Λb0→Λμ+μ−\Lambda^{0}_{b} \rightarrow \Lambda \mu^+\mu^- decays

The differential branching fraction of the rare decay $\Lambda^{0}_{b} \rightarrow \Lambda \mu^+\mu^-$ is measured as a function of $q^{2}$, the square of the dimuon invariant mass. The analysis is performed using proton-proton collision data, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 3.0 \mbox{ fb}^{-1}, collected by the LHCb experiment. Evidence of signal is observed in the $q^2$ region below the square of the $J/\psi$ mass. Integrating over 15 < q^{2} < 20 \mbox{ GeV}^2/c^4 the branching fraction is measured as d\mathcal{B}(\Lambda^{0}_{b} \rightarrow \Lambda \mu^+\mu^-)/dq^2 = (1.18 ^{+ 0.09} _{-0.08} \pm 0.03 \pm 0.27) \times 10^{-7} ( \mbox{GeV}^{2}/c^{4})^{-1}, where the uncertainties are statistical, systematic and due to the normalisation mode, $\Lambda^{0}_{b} \rightarrow J/\psi \Lambda$, respectively. In the $q^2$ intervals where the signal is observed, angular distributions are studied and the forward-backward asymmetries in the dimuon ($A^{l}_{\rm FB}$) and hadron ($A^{h}_{\rm FB}$) systems are measured for the first time. In the range 15 < q^2 < 20 \mbox{ GeV}^2/c^4 they are found to be A^{l}_{\rm FB} = -0.05 \pm 0.09 \mbox{ (stat)} \pm 0.03 \mbox{ (syst)} and A^{h}_{\rm FB} = -0.29 \pm 0.07 \mbox{ (stat)} \pm 0.03 \mbox{ (syst)}.Comment: 27 pages, 10 figures, Erratum adde

Study of B−→DK−π+π−B^{-}\to DK^-\pi^+\pi^- and B−→Dπ−π+π−B^-\to D\pi^-\pi^+\pi^- decays and determination of the CKM angle γ\gamma

We report a study of the suppressed $B^-\to DK^-\pi^+\pi^-$ and favored $B^-\to D\pi^-\pi^+\pi^-$ decays, where the neutral $D$ meson is detected through its decays to the $K^{\mp}\pi^{\pm}$ and CP-even $K^+K^-$ and $\pi^+\pi^-$ final states. The measurement is carried out using a proton-proton collision data sample collected by the LHCb experiment, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 3.0~fb$^{-1}$. We observe the first significant signals in the CP-even final states of the $D$ meson for both the suppressed $B^-\to DK^-\pi^+\pi^-$ and favored $B^-\to D\pi^-\pi^+\pi^-$ modes, as well as in the doubly Cabibbo-suppressed $D\to K^+\pi^-$ final state of the $B^-\to D\pi^-\pi^+\pi^-$ decay. Evidence for the ADS suppressed decay $B^{-}\to DK^-\pi^+\pi^-$, with $D\to K^+\pi^-$, is also presented. From the observed yields in the $B^-\to DK^-\pi^+\pi^-$, $B^-\to D\pi^-\pi^+\pi^-$ and their charge conjugate decay modes, we measure the value of the weak phase to be $\gamma=(74^{+20}_{-19})^{\rm o}$. This is one of the most precise single-measurement determinations of $\gamma$ to date.Comment: 22 pages, 9 figures; All figures and tables, along with any supplementary material and additional information, are available at https://lhcbproject.web.cern.ch/lhcbproject/Publications/LHCbProjectPublic/LHCb-PAPER-2015-020.htm

A study of CPCP violation in B∓→Dh∓B^\mp \rightarrow Dh^\mp (h=K,πh=K,\pi) with the modes D→K∓π±π0D \rightarrow K^\mp \pi^\pm \pi^0, D→π+π−π0D \rightarrow \pi^+\pi^-\pi^0 and D→K+K−π0D \rightarrow K^+K^-\pi^0

An analysis of the decays of $B^\mp \rightarrow D K^\mp$ and $B^\mp \rightarrow D \pi^\mp$ is presented in which the $D$ meson is reconstructed in the three-body final states $K^\mp \pi^\pm \pi^0$, $\pi^+ \pi^- \pi^0$ and $K^+ K^- \pi^0$. Using data from LHCb corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 3.0 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collisions, measurements of several $CP$ observables are performed. First observations are obtained of the suppressed ADS decay $B^\mp \rightarrow [\pi^\mp K^\pm \pi^0]_D \pi^\mp$ and the quasi-GLW decay $B^\mp \rightarrow [K^+ K^- \pi^0]_D \pi^\mp$. The results are interpreted in the context of the unitarity triangle angle $\gamma$ and related parameters

Observation of the Bs0→η′η′B^0_s\to\eta'\eta' decay

The first observation of the $B^0_s\to\eta'\eta'$ decay is reported. The study is based on a sample of proton-proton collisions corresponding to $3.0$ ${\rm fb^{-1}}$ of integrated luminosity collected with the LHCb detector. The significance of the signal is $6.4$ standard deviations. The branching fraction is measured to be $[3.31 \pm 0.64\,{\rm (stat)} \pm 0.28\,{\rm (syst)} \pm 0.12\,{\rm (norm)}]\times10^{-5}$, where the third uncertainty comes from the $B^{\pm}\to\eta' K^{\pm}$ branching fraction that is used as a normalisation. In addition, the charge asymmetries of $B^{\pm}\to\eta' K^{\pm}$ and $B^{\pm}\to\phi K^{\pm}$, which are control channels, are measured to be $(-0.2 \pm1.3)\%$ and $(+1.7\pm1.3)\%$, respectively. All results are consistent with theoretical expectations

Observation of the decay Bc→J/ψK+K−π+B_c \rightarrow J/\psi K^+ K^- \pi^+

The decay $B_c\rightarrow J/\psi K^+ K^- \pi^+$ is observed for the first time, using proton-proton collisions collected with the LHCb detector corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 3fb$^{-1}$. A signal yield of $78\pm14$ decays is reported with a significance of 6.2 standard deviations. The ratio of the branching fraction of \B_c \rightarrow J/\psi K^+ K^- \pi^+ decays to that of $B_c \rightarrow J/\psi \pi^+$ decays is measured to be $0.53\pm 0.10\pm0.05$, where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.Comment: 18 pages, 2 figure