Fly Swarms and Complexity

A system is considered complex if it is composed of individual parts that abide by their own set of rules while the system, as a whole, exhibits unexpected properties. The motivation for studying complexity spurs from the fact that it is a fundamental aspect of many systems, including forest fires, earthquakes, stock markets, fish schools, plant root growth, and fly swarms. We are particularly interested in fly swarms and the possible complex properties that the swarm exhibits, arising from the individual fly interactions. Fly swarms are a relatively simple complex system, but such systems are still not fully understood. In this research, various computational models were developed to assist with the understanding of fly swarms. These models were primarily described by analyzing the average distance from the center of mass, average distance between flies, and the inertia ratios. The inertia ratios indicated asymmetric fly systems, suggesting some accuracy in such models as physical fly swarms exhibit asymmetry. A major goal of this research was to provide a mathematical definition for swarming. While an arbitrary definition was developed, future research is required to pinpoint a definite definition

Quantifying Complex Systems via Computational Fly Swarms

A physical system is considered complex if individual components independently follow simple rules of motion but the system, as a whole, exhibits more elaborate, unexpected properties. Many different systems in nature show properties of complexity, making understanding such systems valuable. We study behaviors of fly swarms and the possible complex properties that swarms exhibit, arising from individual fly interactions. A simple stochastic fly swarm model was created to investigate the relationship between the average radius of the swarm and the number of individuals within it, as experimental data shows a power law scaling of the number of flies to average radius. In addition, this model is used to distinguish between swarming and non-swarming behavior

Evaluation of forensic DNA traces when propositions of interest relate to activities: analysis and discussion of recurrent concerns

When forensic scientists evaluate and report on the probative strength of single DNA traces, they commonly rely on only one number, expressing the rarity of the DNA profile in the population of interest. This is so because the focus is on propositions regarding the source of the recovered trace material, such as “the person of interest is the source of the crime stain.” In particular, when the alternative proposition is “an unknown person is the source of the crime stain,” one is directed to think about the rarity of the profile. However, in the era of DNA profiling technology capable of producing results from small quantities of trace material (i.e., non-visible staining) that is subject to easy and ubiquitous modes of transfer, the issue of source is becoming less central, to the point that it is often not contested. There is now a shift from the question “whose DNA is this?” to the question “how did it get there?” As a consequence, recipients of expert information are now very much in need of assistance with the evaluation of the meaning and probative strength of DNA profiling results when the competing propositions of interest refer to different activities. This need is widely demonstrated in day-to-day forensic practice and is also voiced in specialized literature. Yet many forensic scientists remain reluctant to assess their results given propositions that relate to different activities. Some scientists consider evaluations beyond the issue of source as being overly speculative, because of the lack of relevant data and knowledge regarding phenomena and mechanisms of transfer, persistence and background of DNA. Similarly, encouragements to deal with these activity issues, expressed in a recently released European guideline on evaluative reporting (Willis et al., 2015), which highlights the need for rethinking current practice, are sometimes viewed skeptically or are not considered feasible. In this discussion paper, we select and discuss recurrent skeptical views brought to our attention, as well as some of the alternative solutions that have been suggested. We will argue that the way forward is to address now, rather than later, the challenges associated with the evaluation of DNA results (from small quantities of trace material) in light of different activities to prevent them being misrepresented in court

Quality of Communication in Robotic Surgery and Surgical Outcomes

Robotic surgery has introduced unique challenges to surgical workflow. The association between quality of communication in robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery and surgical outcomes was evaluated

Key role of temperature monitoring in interpretation of microwave effect on transesterification and esterification reactions for biodiesel production

Microwave effects have been quantified, comparing activation energies and pre-exponential factors to those obtained in a conventionally-heated reactor for biodiesel production from waste cooking oils via transesterification and esterification reactions. Several publications report an enhancement of biodiesel production using microwaves, however recent reviews highlight poor temperature measurements in microwave reactors give misleading reaction performances. Operating conditions have therefore been carefully chosen to investigate non-thermal microwave effects alone. Temperature is monitored by an optical fiber sensor, which is more accurate than infrared sensors. For the transesterification reaction, the activation energy is 37.1 kJ/mol (20.1–54.2 kJ/mol) in the microwave-heated reactor compared with 31.6 kJ/mol (14.6–48.7 kJ/mol) in the conventionally-heated reactor. For the esterification reaction, the activation energy is 45.4 kJ/mol (31.8–58.9 kJ/mol) for the microwave-heated reactor compared with 56.1 kJ/mol (55.7–56.4 kJ/mol) for conventionally-heated reactor. The results confirm the absence of non-thermal microwave effects for homogenous-catalyzed reactions

The Parthenon, February 19, 2020

The Parthenon, Marshall University’s student newspaper, was published by students Monday through Friday during the regular semester and weekly on Thursdays during the summer. Due to budgetary constraints, beginning with the 2018 Fall semester, the newspaper is only published one day a week (and once every other week during the summer). The editorial staff is responsible for the news and the editorial content

The Parthenon, February 5, 2020

The Parthenon, Marshall University’s student newspaper, was published by students Monday through Friday during the regular semester and weekly on Thursdays during the summer. Due to budgetary constraints, beginning with the 2018 Fall semester, the newspaper is only published one day a week (and once every other week during the summer). The editorial staff is responsible for the news and the editorial content

The Parthenon, March 18, 2020

The Parthenon, Marshall University’s student newspaper, was published by students Monday through Friday during the regular semester and weekly on Thursdays during the summer. Due to budgetary constraints, beginning with the 2018 Fall semester, the newspaper is only published one day a week (and once every other week during the summer). The editorial staff is responsible for the news and the editorial content

The Parthenon, January 22, 2020

The Parthenon, Marshall University’s student newspaper, was published by students Monday through Friday during the regular semester and weekly on Thursdays during the summer. Due to budgetary constraints, beginning with the 2018 Fall semester, the newspaper is only published one day a week (and once every other week during the summer). The editorial staff is responsible for the news and the editorial content

The Parthenon, February 26, 2020

The Parthenon, Marshall University’s student newspaper, was published by students Monday through Friday during the regular semester and weekly on Thursdays during the summer. Due to budgetary constraints, beginning with the 2018 Fall semester, the newspaper is only published one day a week (and once every other week during the summer). The editorial staff is responsible for the news and the editorial content