Changing use of formal methods in philosophy: late 2000s vs. late 2010s

Traditionally, logic has been the dominant formal method within philosophy. Are logical methods still dominant today, or have the types of formal methods used in philosophy changed in recent times? To address this question, we coded a sample of philosophy papers from the late 2000s and from the late 2010s for the formal methods they used. The results indicate that the proportion of papers using logical methods remained more or less constant over that time period but the proportion of papers using probabilistic methods was approximately three times higher in the late 2010s than it was in the late 2000s. Further analyses explored this change by looking more closely at specific methods, specific levels of technical engagement, and specific subdisciplines within philosophy. These analyses indicate that the increasing proportion of papers using probabilistic methods was pervasive, not confined to particular probabilistic methods, levels of sophistication, or subdisciplines

Applications of a hybrid method to a plate with simply supported boundary conditions

* The EN12354 building acoustics prediction standards are based on the statistical energy analysis (SEA) method. In a traditional SEA path analysis, lightweight or heavyweight materials have different principal paths that determine the sound insulation for the specified building acoustics frequency range (50Hz-5000Hz). Different building materials require different applications of the engineering method (EN12354) to determine in-situ sound insulation with flanking. A hybrid method, such as the (finite element method) FEM-SEA hybrid approach, offers an alternative theoretical framework to predict in situ sound insulation with the capacity to combine vastly different methods. In a hybrid model, different power flow contributions (due to the deterministic and direct-field energies) are naturally separated into different matrices. This work investigates the feasibility of using a hybrid model to predict sound insulation. The hybrid method is applied to three different materials. These models are compared against traditional SEA and infinite plate models

CropPol: a dynamic, open and global database on crop pollination

Seventy five percent of the world's food crops benefit from insect pollination. Hence, there has been increased interest in how global change drivers impact this critical ecosystem service. Because standardized data on crop pollination are rarely available, we are limited in our capacity to understand the variation in pollination benefits to crop yield, as well as to anticipate changes in this service, develop predictions, and inform management actions. Here, we present CropPol, a dynamic, open and global database on crop pollination. It contains measurements recorded from 202 crop studies, covering 3,394 field observations, 2,552 yield measurements (i.e. berry weight, number of fruits and kg per hectare, among others), and 47,752 insect records from 48 commercial crops distributed around the globe. CropPol comprises 32 of the 87 leading global crops and commodities that are pollinator dependent. Malus domestica is the most represented crop (32 studies), followed by Brassica napus (22 studies), Vaccinium corymbosum (13 studies), and Citrullus lanatus (12 studies). The most abundant pollinator guilds recorded are honey bees (34.22% counts), bumblebees (19.19%), flies other than Syrphidae and Bombyliidae (13.18%), other wild bees (13.13%), beetles (10.97%), Syrphidae (4.87%), and Bombyliidae (0.05%). Locations comprise 34 countries distributed among Europe (76 studies), Northern America (60), Latin America and the Caribbean (29), Asia (20), Oceania (10), and Africa (7). Sampling spans three decades and is concentrated on 2001-05 (21 studies), 2006-10 (40), 2011-15 (88), and 2016-20 (50). This is the most comprehensive open global data set on measurements of crop flower visitors, crop pollinators and pollination to date, and we encourage researchers to add more datasets to this database in the future. This data set is released for non-commercial use only. Credits should be given to this paper (i.e., proper citation), and the products generated with this database should be shared under the same license terms (CC BY-NC-SA). This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

2010 Master of Fine Arts Exhibition, UC Davis

The 2010 MFA Exhibition, provocatively titled by the artists themselves, presents the final degree work for our second-year class of graduate students. The first-years open a show on 7 June 2010 at the University Club; just behind them a new class of eight students, selected from a very large pool of the most talented college graduates in the country, readies itself to matriculate in the fall.This cycle has been repeated now for some four decades, always culminating in the annual MFA Exhibition. The graduate program in Studio Art maintains a curriculum of diverse and cross-disciplinary study, emphasizing creative and independent studio practice and advanced intellectual inquiry. Studio Art at UC Davis enjoys an illustrious history—the confluence between 1959 and 1962, for example, of Robert Arneson, Roy De Forest, Manuel Neri, Wayne Thiebaud, and William T. Wiley. This exhibition catalogue, we believe, documents the continued flourishment of young artists and their mentors on the Davis campus.The essays here introducing the work of each artist are by Renny Pritikin, director of the Nelson Gallery, to whom the students, faculty, and I express our ongoing collegial thanks. Professor Annabeth Rosen served as director of graduate studies for this class.The catalogue design is by Rudy Garibay of the Arts Administrative Group, veteran designer for campus publications in Music and Theatre and more recently the California Lighting Technology Center at UCD.I am especially pleased that the electronic version of the catalogue will represent our inaugural deposition to the University of California's eScholarship project at the California Digital Library. Visit www.escholarship.org/uc/aah.Additionally we are very grateful to the entire staff of the Nelson Gallery: Renny Pritikin, director; Katrina Wong, assistant to the director and designer of the promotional materials; Robin Bernhard, collection manager; and Kyle Monhollen, senior preparator; to the staff of the Pence Gallery: Natalie Nelson, director; Eileen Hendren, office manager; to the musicians for Robert Machoian's work, led by Richard Chowenhill of the Department of Music; and, always, to the donors whose generosity to the Department of Art and Art History has resulted in the endowments that enable our program to attract and support artists of the caliber presented here: family of Robert Arneson, Marcia Cary, Freemon Gadberry, Richard and Fay Nelson, Mary Lou Osborne, Wayne Thiebaud and family, and Nettie Weber.D. Kern Holoman, interim chai