plookup: A simplified polynomial protocol for lookup tables

We present a protocol for checking the values of a committed polynomial $f\in \mathbb{F}_{<n}[X]$ over a multiplicative subgroup $H\subset \mathbb{F}$ of size $n$, are contained in the values of a table $t\in \mathbb{F}^d$. Our protocol can be viewed as a simplification of one from Bootle et. al [BCGJM, ASIACRYPT 2018] for a similar problem, with potential efficiency improvements when $d\leq n$. In particular, [BCGJM]\u27s protocol requires comitting to several auxiliary polynomials of degree $d\cdot \log n$, whereas ours requires three commitments to auxiliary polynomials of degree $n$, which can be much smaller in the case $d\sim n$. One common use case of this primitive in the zk-SNARK setting is a ``batched range proof\u27\u27, where one wishes to check all of $f$\u27s values on $H$ are in a range $[0,\ldots,M]$. We present a slightly optimized protocol for this special case, and pose improving it as an open problem

fflonk: a Fast-Fourier inspired verifier efficient version of PlonK

We present a variant of the Kate, Zaverucha and Goldberg polynomial commitment scheme [KZG] where $d$ polynomials can be opened at a point that is a $d$\u27th power, such that the amount of verifier group operations does not depend on $d$. Our method works by reducing opening multiple polynomials at a single point $x$, to opening a single polynomial at many points via an ``FFT-like identity\u27\u27. As an application we present a version of the PlonK zk-SNARK[GWC] with significantly improved verifier performance, at the cost roughly tripling the prover time. Specifically, in addition to the two pairings, the verifier only performs five scalar multiplications, rather than 16 or 18 as in the versions presented in [GWC]

PLONK: Permutations over Lagrange-bases for Oecumenical Noninteractive arguments of Knowledge

zk-SNARK constructions that utilize an updatable universal structured reference string remove one of the main obstacles in deploying zk-SNARKs [GKMMM, Crypto 2018]. The important work of Maller et al. [MBKM, CCS 2019] presented $\mathsf{Sonic}$ - the first potentially practical zk-SNARK with fully succinct verification for general arithmetic circuits with such an SRS. However, the version of $\mathsf{Sonic}$ enabling fully succinct verification still requires relatively high proof construction overheads. We present a universal SNARK construction with fully succinct verification, and significantly lower prover running time (roughly 7.5-20 less group exponentiations than [MBKM] in the fully succinct verifier mode depending on circuit structure). Similarly to [MBKM], we rely on a permutation argument based on Bayer and Groth [Eurocrypt 2012]. However, we focus on ``Evaluations on a subgroup rather than coefficients of monomials\u27\u27; which enables simplifying both the permutation argument and the artihmetization step

Measurement invariance across gender and relationship with sociometric status

In recent years, bullying research has transitioned from investigating the characteristics of the bully?victim dyad to examining bullying as a grouplevel process, in which the majority of children play some kind of role. This study used a shortened adaptation of the Participant Role Scale (PRS) to identify these roles in a representative sample of 2,050 Spanish children aged 8 to 13 years. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed three different roles, indicating that the adapted scale remains a reliable way to distinguish the Bully, Defender, and Outsider roles. In addition, measurement invariance of the adapted scale was examined to analyze possible gender differences among the roles. Peer status was assessed separately by gender through two sociometric procedures: the nominations-based method and the ratingsbased method. Across genders, children in the Bully role were more often rated as rejected, whereas Defenders were more popular. Results suggest that although the PRS can reveal several different peer roles in the bullying process, a more clear distinction between bullying roles (i.e., Bully, Assistant,and Reinforcer) could better inform strategies for bullying interventions

Risky business: A mixed methods study of decision-making regarding COVID-19 risk at a public university in the United States

IntroductionUntil vaccines became available in late 2020, our ability to prevent the spread of COVID-19 within countries depended largely on voluntary adherence to mitigation measures. However, individual decision-making regarding acceptable COVID-19 risk is complex. To better understand decision-making regarding COVID-19 risk, we conducted a qualitative substudy within a larger Berkeley COVID-19 Safe Campus Initiative (BCSCI) during the summer of 2020, and completed a mixed-methods analysis of factors influencing decision-making.Materials and methodsWe interviewed 20 participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 10 who remained negative, and analyzed quantitative survey data from 3,324 BCSCI participants. The BCSCI study enrolled university-affiliated people living in the local area during summer of 2020, collected data on behaviors and attitudes toward COVID-19, and conducted SARS-CoV-2 testing at baseline and endline.ResultsAt baseline, 1362 students (57.5%) and 285 non-students (35.1%) said it had been somewhat or very difficult to comply with COVID-19-related mandates. Most-cited reasons were the need to go out for food/essentials, difficulty of being away from family/friends, and loneliness. Eight interviewees explicitly noted they made decisions partially because of others who may be at high risk. We did not find significant differences between the behaviors of students and non-students.DiscussionDespite prevailing attitudes about irresponsibility of college students during the COVID-19 pandemic, students in our study demonstrated a commitment to making rational choices about risk behavior, not unlike non-students around them. Decision-making was driven by perceived susceptibility to severe disease, need for social interaction, and concern about risk to others. A harm reduction public health approach may be beneficial

Assistive technologies to address capabilities of people with dementia: from research to practice

Assistive technologies (AT) became pervasive and virtually present in all our life domains. They can be either an enabler or an obstacle leading to social exclusion. The Fondation Médéric Alzheimer gathered international experts of dementia care, with backgrounds in biomedical, human and social sciences, to analyse how AT can address the capabilities of people with dementia, on the basis of their needs. Discussion covered the unmet needs of people with dementia, the domains of daily life activities where AT can provide help to people with dementia, the enabling and empowering impact of technology to improve their safety and wellbeing, barriers and limits of use, technology assessment, ethical and legal issues. The capability approach (possible freedom) appears particularly relevant in person-centered dementia care and technology development. The focus is not on the solution, rather on what the person can do with it: seeing dementia as disability, with technology as an enabler to promote capabilities of the person, provides a useful framework for both research and practice. This article summarizes how these concepts took momentum in professional practice and public policies in the past fifteen years (2000-2015), discusses current issues in the design, development and economic model of AT for people with dementia, and covers how these technologies are being used and assessed

Clinical Characterization of Patients Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer and Undergoing Conservative Management : a PIONEER Analysis Based on Big Data

Funding statement PIONEER is funded through the IMI2 Joint Undertaking and is listed under grant agreement No. 777492. This joint undertaking receives support from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations EFPIA. The European Health Data & Evidence Network has received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking under grant agreement no. 806968. The Joint Undertaking is supported by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and EFPIA, a large association which represents the biopharmaceutical industry in Europe. The views communicated within are those of PIONEER. Neither the IMI nor the European Union, EFPIA, or any Associated Partners are responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained hereinPeer reviewe

Implementation and evaluation of a multi-level mental health promotion intervention for the workplace (MENTUPP): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Background Well-organised and managed workplaces can be a source of wellbeing. The construction, healthcare and information and communication technology sectors are characterised by work-related stressors (e.g. high workloads, tight deadlines) which are associated with poorer mental health and wellbeing. The MENTUPP intervention is a flexibly delivered, multi-level approach to supporting small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in creating mentally healthy workplaces. The online intervention is tailored to each sector and designed to support employees and leaders dealing with mental health difficulties (e.g. stress), clinical level anxiety and depression, and combatting mental health-related stigma. This paper presents the protocol for the cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) of the MENTUPP intervention in eight European countries and Australia. Methods Each intervention country will aim to recruit at least two SMEs in each of the three sectors. The design of the cRCT is based on the experiences of a pilot study and guided by a Theory of Change process that describes how the intervention is assumed to work. SMEs will be randomly assigned to the intervention or control conditions. The aim of the cRCT is to assess whether the MENTUPP intervention is effective in improving mental health and wellbeing (primary outcome) and reducing stigma, depression and suicidal behaviour (secondary outcome) in employees. The study will also involve a process and economic evaluation. Conclusions At present, there is no known multi-level, tailored, flexible and accessible workplace-based intervention for the prevention of non-clinical and clinical symptoms of depression, anxiety and burnout, and the promotion of mental wellbeing. The results of this study will provide a comprehensive overview of the implementation and effectiveness of such an intervention in a variety of contexts, languages and cultures leading to the overall goal of delivering an evidence-based intervention for mental health in the workplace

No Exit? Withdrawal Rights and the Law of Corporate Reorganizations

Bankruptcy scholarship is largely a debate about the comparative merits of a mandatory regime on one hand and bankruptcy by free design on the other. By the standard account, the current law of corporate reorganization is mandatory. Various rules that cannot be avoided ensure that investors’ actions are limited and they do not exercise their rights against specialized assets in a way that destroys the value of a business as a whole. These rules solve collective action problems and reduce the risk of bargaining failure. But there are costs to a mandatory regime. In particular, investors cannot design their rights to achieve optimal monitoring as they could in a system of bankruptcy by free design. This Article suggests that the academic debate has missed a fundamental feature of the law. Bankruptcy operates on legal entities, not on firms in the economic sense. For this reason, sophisticated investors do not face a mandatory regime at all. The ability of investors to place assets in separate entities gives them the ability to create specific withdrawal rights in the event the firm encounters financial distress. There is nothing mandatory about rules like the automatic stay when assets can be partitioned off into legal entities that are beyond the reach of the bankruptcy judge. Thus, by partitioning assets of one economic enterprise into different legal entities, investors can create a tailored bankruptcy regime. In this way, legal entities serve as building blocks that can be combined to create specific and varied but transparent investor withdrawal rights. This regime of tailored bankruptcy has been unrecognized and underappreciated and may be preferable to both mandatory and free design regimes. By allowing a limited number of investors to opt out of bankruptcy in a particular, discrete, and visible way, investors as a group may be able to both limit the risk of bargaining failure and at the same time enjoy the disciplining effect that a withdrawal right brings with it