55 research outputs found

    Software engineering whispers: The effect of textual vs. graphical software design descriptions on software design communication

    Get PDF
    Context:\ua0Software\ua0engineering\ua0is a social and collaborative activity. Communicating and sharing knowledge between\ua0software\ua0developers requires much effort. Hence, the quality of\ua0communication\ua0plays an important role in influencing project success. To better understand the\ua0effect\ua0of\ua0communication\ua0on project success, more in-depth empirical studies investigating this phenomenon are needed. Objective: We investigate the\ua0effect\ua0of using a\ua0graphical\ua0versus\ua0textual\ua0design\ua0description\ua0on co-located\ua0software\ua0design\ua0communication. Method: Therefore, we conducted a family of experiments involving a mix of 240\ua0software\ua0engineering\ua0students from four universities. We examined how different\ua0design\ua0representations (i.e.,\ua0graphical\ua0vs.\ua0textual) affect the ability to Explain, Understand, Recall, and Actively Communicate knowledge. Results: We found that the\ua0graphical\ua0design\ua0description\ua0is better than the\ua0textual\ua0in promoting Active Discussion between developers and improving the Recall of\ua0design\ua0details. Furthermore, compared to its unaltered version, a well-organized and motivated\ua0textual\ua0design\ua0description–that is used for the same amount of time–enhances the recall of\ua0design\ua0details and increases the amount of active discussions at the cost of reducing the perceived quality of explaining

    Measurement of the cosmic ray spectrum above 4×10184{\times}10^{18} eV using inclined events detected with the Pierre Auger Observatory

    Full text link
    A measurement of the cosmic-ray spectrum for energies exceeding 4×10184{\times}10^{18} eV is presented, which is based on the analysis of showers with zenith angles greater than 6060^{\circ} detected with the Pierre Auger Observatory between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2013. The measured spectrum confirms a flux suppression at the highest energies. Above 5.3×10185.3{\times}10^{18} eV, the "ankle", the flux can be described by a power law EγE^{-\gamma} with index γ=2.70±0.02(stat)±0.1(sys)\gamma=2.70 \pm 0.02 \,\text{(stat)} \pm 0.1\,\text{(sys)} followed by a smooth suppression region. For the energy (EsE_\text{s}) at which the spectral flux has fallen to one-half of its extrapolated value in the absence of suppression, we find Es=(5.12±0.25(stat)1.2+1.0(sys))×1019E_\text{s}=(5.12\pm0.25\,\text{(stat)}^{+1.0}_{-1.2}\,\text{(sys)}){\times}10^{19} eV.Comment: Replaced with published version. Added journal reference and DO

    Energy Estimation of Cosmic Rays with the Engineering Radio Array of the Pierre Auger Observatory

    Full text link
    The Auger Engineering Radio Array (AERA) is part of the Pierre Auger Observatory and is used to detect the radio emission of cosmic-ray air showers. These observations are compared to the data of the surface detector stations of the Observatory, which provide well-calibrated information on the cosmic-ray energies and arrival directions. The response of the radio stations in the 30 to 80 MHz regime has been thoroughly calibrated to enable the reconstruction of the incoming electric field. For the latter, the energy deposit per area is determined from the radio pulses at each observer position and is interpolated using a two-dimensional function that takes into account signal asymmetries due to interference between the geomagnetic and charge-excess emission components. The spatial integral over the signal distribution gives a direct measurement of the energy transferred from the primary cosmic ray into radio emission in the AERA frequency range. We measure 15.8 MeV of radiation energy for a 1 EeV air shower arriving perpendicularly to the geomagnetic field. This radiation energy -- corrected for geometrical effects -- is used as a cosmic-ray energy estimator. Performing an absolute energy calibration against the surface-detector information, we observe that this radio-energy estimator scales quadratically with the cosmic-ray energy as expected for coherent emission. We find an energy resolution of the radio reconstruction of 22% for the data set and 17% for a high-quality subset containing only events with at least five radio stations with signal.Comment: Replaced with published version. Added journal reference and DO

    Measurement of the Radiation Energy in the Radio Signal of Extensive Air Showers as a Universal Estimator of Cosmic-Ray Energy

    Full text link
    We measure the energy emitted by extensive air showers in the form of radio emission in the frequency range from 30 to 80 MHz. Exploiting the accurate energy scale of the Pierre Auger Observatory, we obtain a radiation energy of 15.8 \pm 0.7 (stat) \pm 6.7 (sys) MeV for cosmic rays with an energy of 1 EeV arriving perpendicularly to a geomagnetic field of 0.24 G, scaling quadratically with the cosmic-ray energy. A comparison with predictions from state-of-the-art first-principle calculations shows agreement with our measurement. The radiation energy provides direct access to the calorimetric energy in the electromagnetic cascade of extensive air showers. Comparison with our result thus allows the direct calibration of any cosmic-ray radio detector against the well-established energy scale of the Pierre Auger Observatory.Comment: Replaced with published version. Added journal reference and DOI. Supplemental material in the ancillary file

    Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

    Get PDF
    In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium ) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the fi eld understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field
    corecore