Quantum Imaging: Scattered Observations On "Copenhagen"

Applications of Machine Learning Methods to Quantifying Phenotypic Traits that Distinguish the Wild Type from the Mutant Arabidopsis Thaliana Seedlings during Root Gravitropism

Composite Materials With Uncured Epoxy Matrix Exposed In Stratosphere During NASA Stratospheric Balloon Flight

A Graphene Quantum Dot with a Single Electron Transistor as Integrated Charge Sensor

Foundations of Inference

One fascinating question that occupies social scientists concerns groups discussions. The problem is to determine the nature of the interaction between individuals and in particular, who influences whom.

Various breakthroughs in network theory and agent-based modelling have revolutionised researchers' understanding of these processes. One approach for analysing online discussions is to look for the set of keywords that define a topic of discussion, record the various instances in which these words appear and then study the links between the sites that use them: which came first, who links to whom and so on. This data can then be used to construct a network of influence.

While this has been hugely useful, it's hard to escape the sense that it fails to capture the true dynamics of influence, the way the balance of power and influence within a group shifts from moment to moment as a discussion evolves. If you've ever participated in a face to face group discussion, you'll know what I mean. (And if you haven't, where have you been?)

Today, Wei Pan and pals at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge take an important step towards righting this situation. They've built a reasonable model that simulates the ebb and flow of influence between individuals during a group discussion. They do this by creating a conventional model of the network of influences between individuals and then take into account that these influences change in time.

What's impressive about this approach is that it has predictive power in the real world. Pan and co applied the model to data taken from real world discussions in which groups of four people took part in brainstorming and problem solving sessions, either face to face or in separate rooms.

The question Pan and co try to answer at each point in these discussions is: who is going to speak next. Humans listening to these discussions get this right about half the time. Presumably, they are able to use various cues such as the topic of conversation and the inferred emotional state of each speaker.

Pan and co's algorithm does significantly better than this, correctly predicting the next speaker between 55 and 67 per cent of the time. And get this: it does it using nothing but the volume of speech to determine the patterns of influence between individuals.

That's impressive but the team has even more ambitious plans. Groups of four are relatively simple. But what of groups of hundreds or thousands? "Our immediate next step is also to apply our approach to larger and longer individual human behavioral datasets which we are currently collecting," they say.

Beyond that is the question of how this data and the model they've developed can provide feedback in real time that improves the performance of the groups. Is it conceivable that a system like this could coach individuals involved in discussions in a way that improves the outcome? And if so, how long before we see the iPhone app?

Ref: http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.0240: Modeling Dynamical Influence in Human Interaction Patterns

Panspermia is the idea that life exists throughout the universe in comets, asteroids and interstellar dust clouds and that life of Earth was seeded from one or more of these sources. Panspermia holds that we are all extraterrestrials.

While this is certainly not a mainstream idea in science, a growing body of evidence suggests that it should be carefully studied rather than casually disregarded.

For example, various bugs have been shown to survive for months or even years in the harsh conditions of space. And one of the more interesting but lesser known facts about the Mars meteorite that some scientists believe holds evidence of life on Mars, is that its interior never rose above 50 degrees centigrade, despite being blasted from the Martian surface by an meteor impact and surviving a fiery a descent through Earth's thick atmosphere.

If there is life up there, this evidence suggests that it could survive the trip to Earth.

All that seems well established. Now for the really controversial stuff.

In 2001, numerous people observed red rain falling over Kerala in the southern tip of India during a two month period. One of them was Godfrey Louis, a physicist at nearby Cochin University of Science and Technology. Intrigued by this phenomena, Louis collected numerous samples of red rain, determined to find out what was causing the contamination, perhaps sand or dust from some distant desert.

Under a microscope, however, he found no evidence of sand or dust. Instead, the rain water was filled with red cells that look remarkably like conventional bugs on Earth. What was strange was that Louis found no evidence of DNA in these cells which would rule out most kinds of known biological cells (red blood cells are one possibility but ought to be destroyed quickly by rain water).

Louis published his results in the peer-reviewed journal Astrophysics and Space in 2006, along with the tentative suggestion that the cells could be extraterrestrial, perhaps from a comet that had disintegrated in the upper atmosphere and then seeded clouds as the cells floated down to Earth. In fact, Louis says there were reports in the region of a sonic boom-type noise at the time, which could have been caused by the disintegration of an object in the upper atmosphere.

Since then, Louis has continued to study the cells with an international team including Chandra Wickramasinghe from the University of Cardiff in the UK and one of the leading proponents of the panspermia theory, which he developed in the latter half of the 20th century with the remarkable physicist Fred Hoyle.

Today Louis, Wickramasinghe and others publish some extraordinary claims about these red cells. They say that the cells clearly reproduce at a temperature of 121 degrees C. "Under these conditions daughter cells appear within the original mother cells and the number of cells in the samples increases with length of exposure to 121 degrees C," they say. By contrast, the cells are inert at room temperature.

That makes them highly unusual, to say the least. The spores of some extremophiles can survive these kinds of temperatures and then reproduce at lower temperatures but nothing behaves like this at these temperatures, as far as we know.

This is an extraordinary claim that will need to be independently verified before it will be more broadly accepted.

And of course, this behaviour does not suggest an extraterrestrial origin for these cells, by any means.

However, Wickramasinghe and co can't resist hinting at such an exotic explanation. They've examined the way these fluoresce when bombarded with light and say it is remarkably similar to various unexplained emission spectra seen in various parts of the galaxy. One such place is the Red Rectangle, a cloud of dust and gas around a young star in the Monocerous constellation.

It would be fair to say that more evidence will be required before Kerala's red rain can be satisfactorily explained. In the meantime, it looks a fascinating mystery.

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1008.4960: Growth And Replication Of Red Rain Cells At 121oC And Their Red Fluorescence

In 1980, Tim Rowbotham, a microbiologist at the University of Bradford, made an extraordinary discovery about a tiny single-celled protozoa called Acanthamoeba. These organisms are ubiquitous, turning up almost anywhere there is liquid water. Since the 1950s they have been known to cause a number of rare diseases, mainly in humans with impaired immune systems.

What Rowbotham found was that they could be much more dangerous.

It had long been known that protozoa feed on bacteria, gradually munching through great mounds of these bugs. However, Rowbotham discovered that Legionella, the particularly nasty bacteria that causes Legionnaire's disease, could not only survive being eaten by Acanthamoeba but actually thrived on it. In fact, it turns out that there is some kind of symbiotic relationship between these organisms that even today is not yet fully understood.

Microbiologists are still coming to terms with the implications of this discovery. They have since found that Acanthamoeba can host other nasties too such as H Pylori, the bacteria responsible for stomach ulcers, various strains of the food poisoning bugs Lysteria and E coli, a type of Chlamydiae and MRSA, the superbug currently sweeping through many hospitals.

The fear is that Acanthamoeba harbours these bacterial species, providing a safe haven against attack from antibiotics and contributing to the virulence of these bugs. That could make them an important source of infectious disease that is largely ignored.

So the study of the interaction between Acanthamoeba and the bacteria it supports has become an important area of research. But it is hampered by the difficulty of studying how protozoa interact with bacteria.

Today, Giorgos Tsibidis from the Foundation for Research and Technology in Greece and a couple of mates make a contribution that could help. It takes the form of a computer vision system that can identify individual protozoa, distinguishing them from cysts by virtue of their shape, and follow them as they move. The same system is also able to monitor concentration of bacteria.

They've tested the idea by watching the behaviour of Acanthamoeba protozoa grazing on a lawn of Salmonella bacteria. The machine is able to follow the Acanthamoeba as they move and to measure the drop in concentration of the Salmonella bacteria is they are eaten.

That'll save some postdocs a huge amount of time and could dramatically improve our understanding of protozoan-bacterial interactions. it may even help save a few lives if it turns out that Acanthamoeba play a significant role in the transmission of disease.

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1008.4662: Automated Two-Dimensional Acanthamoeba Polyphaga Tracking And Calculation Of Salmonella Typhimurium Distribution In Spatio-Temporal Images

Here's a thorny problem: to develop an objective way to rank countries according to the quality of life they offer their citizens.

There are various ways of approaching this problem. For example, the Economist Intelligence Unit compiles its quality of life index using surveys, a useful technique but one that is hard to show is objective. Another widely quoted index, the Life Quality Index is based on life expectancy at birth and the gross domestic product per person but is only able to rank countries by applying a correction factor for each country that some critics say is open to bias.

Is there another way? Andrei Zinovyev at the Institut Curie in Paris and Alexander Gorban at the University of Leicester in the UK think so, using a mathematical technique developed in the mid-90s that can cut through this kind of problem .

They chose several widely-measured and well-studied indices on which to base their index: GDP per capita, life expectancy at birth, infant mortality rate and the incidence of tuberculosis. This data from 2005 is available for 162 countries.

Zinovyev and Gorban then plot this data in four-dimensional space. To create a ranking, the important question is whether there is a linear function that reduces this four-dimensional dataset to a one-dimensional set. Unsurprisingly, the answer turns out to be no. "Any linear mapping will inevitably give strong distortions in one or other region of data space," they say. That's what makes this problem tricky.

However, in the mid-90s a group of mathematicians devised a technique for reducing the dimensionality of complex data sets. This technique is essentially equivalent to connecting various data points together with springs and allowing the system to relax; hence it's name: elastic mapping. The trick is to find an arrangement of springs that "flattens" the data set, or in other words, reduces its dimensionality.

And that's basically what Zinovyev and Gorban have done, creating what they call the Nonlinear Quality of Life Index in the process.

Here are the top and bottom 5 from 2005:

1. Luxembourg
2. USA
3. Norway
4. Ireland
5. Iceland
.
.
.
158. Zambia
159. Mozambique
160. Zimbabwe
161. Kenya
162. Swaziland

No real surprises there, although there are some interesting features of the list. For example Equatorial Guinea is ranked at 140 although its GDP per capita is more than Saudi Arabia's ranked at 37. That's because of Equatorial Guinea's appalling health statistics: 123 infant mortalities per 10,000 inhabitants, for example, compared to 21 in Saudi Arabia.

For similar reasons, Russia is ranked 71st despite having a GDP per capita that is significantly higher than other countries with a similar ranking.

Every list throws ups anomalies like this. The important point about this one is that it is done objectively and transparently.

That's important because these kinds of indices are widely used by economists and politicians as a measure of economic and social development and so used to determine spending polices and legislation.

Objectivity is hard to come by when making these kinds of decisions. If the people who matter would agree to use it, this index could help.

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1008.4063: Nonlinear Quality of Life Index