How good are distributed allocation algorithms for solving urban search and rescue problems? A comparative study with centralized algorithms

In this paper, a modified centralized algorithm based on particle swarm optimization (MCPSO) is presented to solve the task allocation problem in the search and rescue domain. The reason for this paper is to provide a benchmark against distributed algorithms in search and rescue application area. The hypothesis of this paper is that a centralized algorithm should perform better than distributed algorithms because it has all the available information at hand to solve the problem. Therefore, the centralized approach will provide a benchmark for evaluating how well the distributed algorithms are working and how much improvement can still be gained. Among the distributed algorithms, the consensus-based bundle algorithm (CBBA) is a relatively recent method based on the market auction mechanism, which is receiving considerable attention. Other distributed algorithms, such as PI and PI with softmax, have shown to perform better than CBBA. Therefore, in this paper, the three distributed algorithms mentioned earlier are compared against three centralized algorithms. They are particle swarm optimization, MCPSO, described in this paper, and genetic algorithms. Two experiments were conducted. The first involved comparing all the above-mentioned algorithms, both centralized and distributed, using the same set of application scenarios. It is found that MCPSO always outperforms the other five algorithms in time cost. Due to the high failure rate of CBBA and the other two centralized methods, the second experiment focused on carrying out more tests to compare MCPSO against PI and PI with softmax. All the results are shown and analyzed to determine the performance gaps between the distributed algorithms and the MCPSO

The problem of legal activities of sects in Ukraine

Перші нетрадиційні духовні культи (секти) почали з’являтися в СРСР у період перебудови. З розпадом Союзу і культурним хаосом, що охопив країну, ситуація значно погіршилась. На території України розпочали діяльність різного роду месії і пророки, які не завжди мали позитивні наміри. Яскравим прикладом цього можуть бути події 10 листопада 1993 р., коли близько сотні членів релігійного руху “Юсмалос”, відомого як “Біле Братство”, на чолі зі своїми духовними лідерами захопили державний музей – храм Святої Софії в Києві, щоб очікувати кінця світу, який відповідно до їхнього світорозуміння, був призначений на 24 листопада 1993 року. Метою членів братства було зачинитися в храмі та здійснити самоспалення. Масовому самогубству вдалося запобігти лише завдяки втручанню правоохоронців

Improving the Solubility of Agomelatine via Cocrystals

Four cocrystals of agomelatine with urea (<b>1</b>), glycolic acid (<b>2</b>), isonicotinamide (<b>3</b>), and methyl 4-hydroxybenzoate (<b>4</b>) in 1:1 stoichiometry were successfully synthesized via six kinds of synthons. The structures of <b>1</b>–<b>4</b> were determined by the single crystal X-ray diffraction, in which <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> form two-dimensional hydrogen bonded frameworks between agomelatine and coformers, while <b>4</b> displays a one-dimensional chain structure. The results of differential scanning calorimetry measurements indicate that the melting points of <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> are between those of agomelatine and coformers, while the melting point of <b>4</b> is below those of agomelatine and coformer. After the formations of cocrystals, the solubility of agomelatine is much improved, and the solubility values of <b>1</b>–<b>4</b> in phosphate buffer of pH 6.8 are approximately 2.2, 2.9, 4.7, and 3.5 times as large as that of agomelatine Form II, and 1.6, 2.1, 3.4, and 2.5 times as large as that of agomelatine Form I. The solids of <b>1</b>–<b>4</b> can keep their crystalline forms in phosphate buffer of pH 6.8 for 3.5, 2.0, 6.0, and 15.0 h, respectively

Improving the Solubility of Agomelatine via Cocrystals

Four cocrystals of agomelatine with urea (<b>1</b>), glycolic acid (<b>2</b>), isonicotinamide (<b>3</b>), and methyl 4-hydroxybenzoate (<b>4</b>) in 1:1 stoichiometry were successfully synthesized via six kinds of synthons. The structures of <b>1</b>–<b>4</b> were determined by the single crystal X-ray diffraction, in which <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> form two-dimensional hydrogen bonded frameworks between agomelatine and coformers, while <b>4</b> displays a one-dimensional chain structure. The results of differential scanning calorimetry measurements indicate that the melting points of <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> are between those of agomelatine and coformers, while the melting point of <b>4</b> is below those of agomelatine and coformer. After the formations of cocrystals, the solubility of agomelatine is much improved, and the solubility values of <b>1</b>–<b>4</b> in phosphate buffer of pH 6.8 are approximately 2.2, 2.9, 4.7, and 3.5 times as large as that of agomelatine Form II, and 1.6, 2.1, 3.4, and 2.5 times as large as that of agomelatine Form I. The solids of <b>1</b>–<b>4</b> can keep their crystalline forms in phosphate buffer of pH 6.8 for 3.5, 2.0, 6.0, and 15.0 h, respectively

Improving the Solubility of Agomelatine via Cocrystals

Four cocrystals of agomelatine with urea (<b>1</b>), glycolic acid (<b>2</b>), isonicotinamide (<b>3</b>), and methyl 4-hydroxybenzoate (<b>4</b>) in 1:1 stoichiometry were successfully synthesized via six kinds of synthons. The structures of <b>1</b>–<b>4</b> were determined by the single crystal X-ray diffraction, in which <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> form two-dimensional hydrogen bonded frameworks between agomelatine and coformers, while <b>4</b> displays a one-dimensional chain structure. The results of differential scanning calorimetry measurements indicate that the melting points of <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> are between those of agomelatine and coformers, while the melting point of <b>4</b> is below those of agomelatine and coformer. After the formations of cocrystals, the solubility of agomelatine is much improved, and the solubility values of <b>1</b>–<b>4</b> in phosphate buffer of pH 6.8 are approximately 2.2, 2.9, 4.7, and 3.5 times as large as that of agomelatine Form II, and 1.6, 2.1, 3.4, and 2.5 times as large as that of agomelatine Form I. The solids of <b>1</b>–<b>4</b> can keep their crystalline forms in phosphate buffer of pH 6.8 for 3.5, 2.0, 6.0, and 15.0 h, respectively

Approach of Cocrystallization to Improve the Solubility and Photostability of Tranilast

The cocrystals and salts of an antiallergic drug, tranilast, were synthesized to improve its solubility and photostability. Two tranilast cocrystals with urea (<b>1</b>) and nicotinamide (<b>2</b>), as well as two salts with cytosine (<b>3</b>) and sodium ion (<b>4</b>), were obtained and characterized by infrared spectra, thermogravimetric analyses, differential scanning calorimetry, and powder and single crystal X-ray diffractions. The results of single crystal structure analyses of <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> indicate that tranilast combines amide groups in coformers via R₂²(8) synthon, resulting in a 1:1 stoichiometry. The complexes showed advantages in terms of solubility and photostability in comparison to pure tranilast. The maximum solubility values of <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> in phosphate buffer of pH 6.8 are approximately 1.6, 1.9, and 2.0 times as large as that of tranilast, and the residual of tranilast is 79.5, 92.9, 88.5, 86.2, and 87.4% for tranilast and <b>1</b>–<b>4</b>, respectively, under the fluorescent lamp irradiation for 96 h

Approach of Cocrystallization to Improve the Solubility and Photostability of Tranilast

The cocrystals and salts of an antiallergic drug, tranilast, were synthesized to improve its solubility and photostability. Two tranilast cocrystals with urea (<b>1</b>) and nicotinamide (<b>2</b>), as well as two salts with cytosine (<b>3</b>) and sodium ion (<b>4</b>), were obtained and characterized by infrared spectra, thermogravimetric analyses, differential scanning calorimetry, and powder and single crystal X-ray diffractions. The results of single crystal structure analyses of <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> indicate that tranilast combines amide groups in coformers via R₂²(8) synthon, resulting in a 1:1 stoichiometry. The complexes showed advantages in terms of solubility and photostability in comparison to pure tranilast. The maximum solubility values of <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> in phosphate buffer of pH 6.8 are approximately 1.6, 1.9, and 2.0 times as large as that of tranilast, and the residual of tranilast is 79.5, 92.9, 88.5, 86.2, and 87.4% for tranilast and <b>1</b>–<b>4</b>, respectively, under the fluorescent lamp irradiation for 96 h

Approach of Cocrystallization to Improve the Solubility and Photostability of Tranilast

The cocrystals and salts of an antiallergic drug, tranilast, were synthesized to improve its solubility and photostability. Two tranilast cocrystals with urea (<b>1</b>) and nicotinamide (<b>2</b>), as well as two salts with cytosine (<b>3</b>) and sodium ion (<b>4</b>), were obtained and characterized by infrared spectra, thermogravimetric analyses, differential scanning calorimetry, and powder and single crystal X-ray diffractions. The results of single crystal structure analyses of <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> indicate that tranilast combines amide groups in coformers via R₂²(8) synthon, resulting in a 1:1 stoichiometry. The complexes showed advantages in terms of solubility and photostability in comparison to pure tranilast. The maximum solubility values of <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> in phosphate buffer of pH 6.8 are approximately 1.6, 1.9, and 2.0 times as large as that of tranilast, and the residual of tranilast is 79.5, 92.9, 88.5, 86.2, and 87.4% for tranilast and <b>1</b>–<b>4</b>, respectively, under the fluorescent lamp irradiation for 96 h

Approach of Cocrystallization to Improve the Solubility and Photostability of Tranilast

The cocrystals and salts of an antiallergic drug, tranilast, were synthesized to improve its solubility and photostability. Two tranilast cocrystals with urea (<b>1</b>) and nicotinamide (<b>2</b>), as well as two salts with cytosine (<b>3</b>) and sodium ion (<b>4</b>), were obtained and characterized by infrared spectra, thermogravimetric analyses, differential scanning calorimetry, and powder and single crystal X-ray diffractions. The results of single crystal structure analyses of <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> indicate that tranilast combines amide groups in coformers via R₂²(8) synthon, resulting in a 1:1 stoichiometry. The complexes showed advantages in terms of solubility and photostability in comparison to pure tranilast. The maximum solubility values of <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> in phosphate buffer of pH 6.8 are approximately 1.6, 1.9, and 2.0 times as large as that of tranilast, and the residual of tranilast is 79.5, 92.9, 88.5, 86.2, and 87.4% for tranilast and <b>1</b>–<b>4</b>, respectively, under the fluorescent lamp irradiation for 96 h

Approach of Cocrystallization to Improve the Solubility and Photostability of Tranilast

The cocrystals and salts of an antiallergic drug, tranilast, were synthesized to improve its solubility and photostability. Two tranilast cocrystals with urea (<b>1</b>) and nicotinamide (<b>2</b>), as well as two salts with cytosine (<b>3</b>) and sodium ion (<b>4</b>), were obtained and characterized by infrared spectra, thermogravimetric analyses, differential scanning calorimetry, and powder and single crystal X-ray diffractions. The results of single crystal structure analyses of <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> indicate that tranilast combines amide groups in coformers via R₂²(8) synthon, resulting in a 1:1 stoichiometry. The complexes showed advantages in terms of solubility and photostability in comparison to pure tranilast. The maximum solubility values of <b>1</b>–<b>3</b> in phosphate buffer of pH 6.8 are approximately 1.6, 1.9, and 2.0 times as large as that of tranilast, and the residual of tranilast is 79.5, 92.9, 88.5, 86.2, and 87.4% for tranilast and <b>1</b>–<b>4</b>, respectively, under the fluorescent lamp irradiation for 96 h