&ACE: A high-performance parallel prolog system

In recent years a lot of research has been invested in parallel processing of numerical applications. However, parallel processing of Symbolic and AI applications has received less attention. This paper presents a system for parallel symbolic computitig, narned ACE, based on the logic programming paradigm. ACE is a computational model for the full Prolog language, capable of exploiting Or-parall< lism and Independent And-parallelism. In this paper vve focus on the implementation of the and-parallel part of the ACE system (ralled &ACE) on a shared memory multiprocessor, d< scribing its organization, some optimizations, and presenting some performance figures, proving the abilhy of &ACE to efficiently exploit parallelism.

ACE: And/or-parallel copying-based execution of logic programs

In this paper we present a novel execution model for parallel implementation of logic programs which is capable of exploiting both independent and-parallelism and or-parallelism in an efficient way. This model extends the stack copying approach, which has been successfully applied in the Muse system to implement or-parallelism, by integrating it with proven techniques used to support independent and-parallelism. We show how all solutions to non-deterministic andparallel goals are found without repetitions. This is done through recomputation as in Prolog (and in various and-parallel systems, like &-Prolog and DDAS), i.e., solutions of and-parallel goals are not shared. We propose a scheme for the efficient management of the address space in a way that is compatible with the apparently incompatible requirements of both and- and or-parallelism. We also show how the full Prolog language, with all its extra-logical features, can be supported in our and-or parallel system so that its sequential semantics is preserved. The resulting system retains the advantages of both purely or-parallel systems as well as purely and-parallel systems. The stack copying scheme together with our proposed memory management scheme can also be used to implement models that combine dependent and-parallelism and or-parallelism, such as Andorra and Prometheus.

Issues in implementing ACE: A stack copying based and-or parallel system

We discuss several issues involved in the implementation of ACE, a model capable of exploiting both And-parallelism and Or-parallelism in Prolog in a unified framework. The Orparallel model that ACE employs is based on the idea of stack-copying developed for Muse, while the model of independent And-parallelism is based on the distributed stack approach of &-Prolog. We discuss the organization of the workers, a number of sharing assumtions, techniques for work load detection, and issues relaed to which parts need to be copied when a flexible and-scheduling strategy is used.

Processing of the JEFF-3.1.2 Cross Section Library into various formats (ACE, PENDF, GENDF, MATXSR and BOXER) for testing purposes

1. Objectives and planning 1.1 Processing JEFF-3.1.2 in ACE format 1.2 Processing JEFF-3.1.2 to JANIS and BOXER format 1.3 Changes in NJOY99.364 1.4 Updates in JEFF-3.1.2 1.5 Processing TENDL-2011

Processing and validation of JEFF3-3.1.2 Cross-section Library into Various Formats: ACE, PENDF, GENDF, MATXSR and BOXER.

Following the processing and validation of JEFF-3.1 performed in 2006 and presented in ND2007, and as a consequence of the latest updated of this library (JEFF-3.1.2) in February 2012, a new processing and validation of JEFF-3.1.2 cross section library is presented in this paper. The processed library in ACE format at ten different temperatures was generated with NJOY-99.364 nuclear data processing system. In addition, NJOY-99 inputs are provided to generate PENDF, GENDF, MATXSR and BOXER formats. The library has undergone strict QA procedures, being compared with other available libraries (e.g. ENDF/B-VII.1) and processing codes as PREPRO-2000 codes. A set of 119 criticality benchmark experiments taken from ICSBEP-2010 has been used for validation purposes.

Compaslab.org, competences to be an ace. Learning design for a successful sustainable employability

Companies are looking for workers trained in soft skills, and we want to help in the learning process. How? Through three courses (Building trust through values, soft skills and entrepreneurship) and historical aces, characters who joined strong values, intellectual and social capabilities and an entrepreneurial spirit, to leave a legacy. CompasLab.org = Values + Skills + Action.

Acreditacion internacional y evaluación de la pertinencia local de las maestrías en ingeniería de proyectos

Los modelos de acreditación en el contexto internacional evalúan principalmente resultados de aprendizaje y la capacidad de los programas de maestría en ingeniería de proyectos para lograr los objetivos educativos que declaran en su misión. Sin embargo, no se garantiza que esos objetivos y por tanto los resultados, satisfagan necesidades reales del entorno nacional o regional, un aspecto esencial en los países en vías de desarrollo. El objetivo de la presente comunicación es sustentar la importancia de la evaluación de la pertinencia de estos programas y hacer un análisis de los principales modelos de garantía de la calidad y organismos de acreditación para conocer la forma en que se evalúa o no la pertinencia de los programas. Se encontró que, en un contexto económico de libre mercado, de internacionalización de la educación y movilidad, la acreditación de las maestrías sigue un modelo de acreditación internacional y no se cuenta en la mayoría de los casos con criterios e indicadores para evaluar la pertinencia. Sin embargo existen, dos modelos de acreditación o certificación que garantizan que un programa de maestría en ingeniería de proyectos sea pertinente localmente: el proyecto REG de AEIPRO y el proyecto europeo EUR-ACE.

An Intercomparison of Modelling Approaches for Simulating the Atmospheric Dispersion of Ammonia Emitted by Agricultural Sources

RESUMEN La dispersión del amoniaco (NH3) emitido por fuentes agrícolas en medias distancias, y su posterior deposición en el suelo y la vegetación, pueden llevar a la degradación de ecosistemas vulnerables y a la acidificación de los suelos. La deposición de NH3 suele ser mayor junto a la fuente emisora, por lo que los impactos negativos de dichas emisiones son generalmente mayores en esas zonas. Bajo la legislación comunitaria, varios estados miembros emplean modelos de dispersión inversa para estimar los impactos de las emisiones en las proximidades de las zonas naturales de especial conservación. Una revisión reciente de métodos para evaluar impactos de NH3 en distancias medias recomendaba la comparación de diferentes modelos para identificar diferencias importantes entre los métodos empleados por los distintos países de la UE. En base a esta recomendación, esta tesis doctoral compara y evalúa las predicciones de las concentraciones atmosféricas de NH3 de varios modelos bajo condiciones, tanto reales como hipotéticas, que plantean un potencial impacto sobre ecosistemas (incluidos aquellos bajo condiciones de clima Mediterráneo). En este sentido, se procedió además a la comparación y evaluación de varias técnicas de modelización inversa para inferir emisiones de NH3. Finalmente, se ha desarrollado un modelo matemático simple para calcular las concentraciones de NH3 y la velocidad de deposición de NH3 en ecosistemas vulnerables cercanos a una fuente emisora. La comparativa de modelos supuso la evaluación de cuatro modelos de dispersión (ADMS 4.1; AERMOD v07026; OPS-st v3.0.3 y LADD v2010) en un amplio rango de casos hipotéticos (dispersión de NH3 procedente de distintos tipos de fuentes agrícolas de emisión). La menor diferencia entre las concentraciones medias estimadas por los distintos modelos se obtuvo para escenarios simples. La convergencia entre las predicciones de los modelos fue mínima para el escenario relativo a la dispersión de NH3 procedente de un establo ventilado mecánicamente. En este caso, el modelo ADMS predijo concentraciones significativamente menores que los otros modelos. Una explicación de estas diferencias podríamos encontrarla en la interacción de diferentes “penachos” y “capas límite” durante el proceso de parametrización. Los cuatro modelos de dispersión fueron empleados para dos casos reales de dispersión de NH3: una granja de cerdos en Falster (Dinamarca) y otra en Carolina del Norte (EEUU). Las concentraciones medias anuales estimadas por los modelos fueron similares para el caso americano (emisión de granjas ventiladas de forma natural y balsa de purines). La comparación de las predicciones de los modelos con concentraciones medias anuales medidas in situ, así como la aplicación de los criterios establecidos para la aceptación estadística de los modelos, permitió concluir que los cuatro modelos se comportaron aceptablemente para este escenario. No ocurrió lo mismo en el caso danés (nave ventilada mecánicamente), en donde el modelo LADD no dio buenos resultados debido a la ausencia de procesos de “sobreelevacion de penacho” (plume-rise). Los modelos de dispersión dan a menudo pobres resultados en condiciones de baja velocidad de viento debido a que la teoría de dispersión en la que se basan no es aplicable en estas condiciones. En situaciones de frecuente descenso en la velocidad del viento, la actual guía de modelización propone usar un modelo que sea eficaz bajo dichas condiciones, máxime cuando se realice una valoración que tenga como objeto establecer una política de regularización. Esto puede no ser siempre posible debido a datos meteorológicos insuficientes, en cuyo caso la única opción sería utilizar un modelo más común, como la versión avanzada de los modelos Gausianos ADMS o AERMOD. Con el objetivo de evaluar la idoneidad de estos modelos para condiciones de bajas velocidades de viento, ambos modelos fueron utilizados en un caso con condiciones Mediterráneas. Lo que supone sucesivos periodos de baja velocidad del viento. El estudio se centró en la dispersión de NH3 procedente de una granja de cerdos en Segovia (España central). Para ello la concentración de NH3 media mensual fue medida en 21 localizaciones en torno a la granja. Se realizaron también medidas de concentración de alta resolución en una única localización durante una campaña de una semana. En este caso, se evaluaron dos estrategias para mejorar la respuesta del modelo ante bajas velocidades del viento. La primera se basó en “no zero wind” (NZW), que sustituyó periodos de calma con el mínimo límite de velocidad del viento y “accumulated calm emissions” (ACE), que forzaban al modelo a calcular las emisiones totales en un periodo de calma y la siguiente hora de no-calma. Debido a las importantes incertidumbres en los datos de entrada del modelo (inputs) (tasa de emisión de NH3, velocidad de salida de la fuente, parámetros de la capa límite, etc.), se utilizó el mismo caso para evaluar la incertidumbre en la predicción del modelo y valorar como dicha incertidumbre puede ser considerada en evaluaciones del modelo. Un modelo dinámico de emisión, modificado para el caso de clima Mediterráneo, fue empleado para estimar la variabilidad temporal en las emisiones de NH3. Así mismo, se realizó una comparativa utilizando las emisiones dinámicas y la tasa constante de emisión. La incertidumbre predicha asociada a la incertidumbre de los inputs fue de 67-98% del valor medio para el modelo ADMS y entre 53-83% del valor medio para AERMOD. La mayoría de esta incertidumbre se debió a la incertidumbre del ratio de emisión en la fuente (50%), seguida por la de las condiciones meteorológicas (10-20%) y aquella asociada a las velocidades de salida (5-10%). El modelo AERMOD predijo mayores concentraciones que ADMS y existieron más simulaciones que alcanzaron los criterios de aceptabilidad cuando se compararon las predicciones con las concentraciones medias anuales medidas. Sin embargo, las predicciones del modelo ADMS se correlacionaron espacialmente mejor con las mediciones. El uso de valores dinámicos de emisión estimados mejoró el comportamiento de ADMS, haciendo empeorar el de AERMOD. La aplicación de estrategias destinadas a mejorar el comportamiento de este último tuvo efectos contradictorios similares. Con el objeto de comparar distintas técnicas de modelización inversa, varios modelos (ADMS, LADD y WindTrax) fueron empleados para un caso no agrícola, una colonia de pingüinos en la Antártida. Este caso fue empleado para el estudio debido a que suponía la oportunidad de obtener el primer factor de emisión experimental para una colonia de pingüinos antárticos. Además las condiciones eran propicias desde el punto de vista de la casi total ausencia de concentraciones ambiente (background). Tras el trabajo de modelización existió una concordancia suficiente entre las estimaciones obtenidas por los tres modelos. De este modo se pudo definir un factor de emisión de para la colonia de 1.23 g NH3 por pareja criadora por día (con un rango de incertidumbre de 0.8-2.54 g NH3 por pareja criadora por día). Posteriores aplicaciones de técnicas de modelización inversa para casos agrícolas mostraron también un buen compromiso estadístico entre las emisiones estimadas por los distintos modelos. Con todo ello, es posible concluir que la modelización inversa es una técnica robusta para estimar tasas de emisión de NH3. Modelos de selección (screening) permiten obtener una rápida y aproximada estimación de los impactos medioambientales, siendo una herramienta útil para evaluaciones de impactos en tanto que permite eliminar casos que presentan un riesgo potencial de daño bajo. De esta forma, lo recursos del modelo pueden Resumen (Castellano) destinarse a casos en donde la posibilidad de daño es mayor. El modelo de Cálculo Simple de los Límites de Impacto de Amoniaco (SCAIL) se desarrolló para obtener una estimación de la concentración media de NH3 y de la tasa de deposición seca asociadas a una fuente agrícola. Está técnica de selección, basada en el modelo LADD, fue evaluada y calibrada con diferentes bases de datos y, finalmente, validada utilizando medidas independientes de concentraciones realizadas cerca de las fuentes. En general SCAIL dio buenos resultados de acuerdo a los criterios estadísticos establecidos. Este trabajo ha permitido definir situaciones en las que las concentraciones predichas por modelos de dispersión son similares, frente a otras en las que las predicciones difieren notablemente entre modelos. Algunos modelos nos están diseñados para simular determinados escenarios en tanto que no incluyen procesos relevantes o están más allá de los límites de su aplicabilidad. Un ejemplo es el modelo LADD que no es aplicable en fuentes con velocidad de salida significativa debido a que no incluye una parametrización de sobreelevacion del penacho. La evaluación de un esquema simple combinando la sobreelevacion del penacho y una turbulencia aumentada en la fuente mejoró el comportamiento del modelo. Sin embargo más pruebas son necesarias para avanzar en este sentido. Incluso modelos que son aplicables y que incluyen los procesos relevantes no siempre dan similares predicciones. Siendo las razones de esto aún desconocidas. Por ejemplo, AERMOD predice mayores concentraciones que ADMS para dispersión de NH3 procedente de naves de ganado ventiladas mecánicamente. Existe evidencia que sugiere que el modelo ADMS infraestima concentraciones en estas situaciones debido a un elevado límite de velocidad de viento. Por el contrario, existen evidencias de que AERMOD sobreestima concentraciones debido a sobreestimaciones a bajas Resumen (Castellano) velocidades de viento. Sin embrago, una modificación simple del pre-procesador meteorológico parece mejorar notablemente el comportamiento del modelo. Es de gran importancia que estas diferencias entre las predicciones de los modelos sean consideradas en los procesos de evaluación regulada por los organismos competentes. Esto puede ser realizado mediante la aplicación del modelo más útil para cada caso o, mejor aún, mediante modelos múltiples o híbridos. ABSTRACT Short-range atmospheric dispersion of ammonia (NH3) emitted by agricultural sources and its subsequent deposition to soil and vegetation can lead to the degradation of sensitive ecosystems and acidification of the soil. Atmospheric concentrations and dry deposition rates of NH3 are generally highest near the emission source and so environmental impacts to sensitive ecosystems are often largest at these locations. Under European legislation, several member states use short-range atmospheric dispersion models to estimate the impact of ammonia emissions on nearby designated nature conservation sites. A recent review of assessment methods for short-range impacts of NH3 recommended an intercomparison of the different models to identify whether there are notable differences to the assessment approaches used in different European countries. Based on this recommendation, this thesis compares and evaluates the atmospheric concentration predictions of several models used in these impact assessments for various real and hypothetical scenarios, including Mediterranean meteorological conditions. In addition, various inverse dispersion modelling techniques for the estimation of NH3 emissions rates are also compared and evaluated and a simple screening model to calculate the NH3 concentration and dry deposition rate at a sensitive ecosystem located close to an NH3 source was developed. The model intercomparison evaluated four atmospheric dispersion models (ADMS 4.1; AERMOD v07026; OPS-st v3.0.3 and LADD v2010) for a range of hypothetical case studies representing the atmospheric dispersion from several agricultural NH3 source types. The best agreement between the mean annual concentration predictions of the models was found for simple scenarios with area and volume sources. The agreement between the predictions of the models was worst for the scenario representing the dispersion from a mechanically ventilated livestock house, for which ADMS predicted significantly smaller concentrations than the other models. The reason for these differences appears to be due to the interaction of different plume-rise and boundary layer parameterisations. All four dispersion models were applied to two real case studies of dispersion of NH3 from pig farms in Falster (Denmark) and North Carolina (USA). The mean annual concentration predictions of the models were similar for the USA case study (emissions from naturally ventilated pig houses and a slurry lagoon). The comparison of model predictions with mean annual measured concentrations and the application of established statistical model acceptability criteria concluded that all four models performed acceptably for this case study. This was not the case for the Danish case study (mechanically ventilated pig house) for which the LADD model did not perform acceptably due to the lack of plume-rise processes in the model. Regulatory dispersion models often perform poorly in low wind speed conditions due to the model dispersion theory being inapplicable at low wind speeds. For situations with frequent low wind speed periods, current modelling guidance for regulatory assessments is to use a model that can handle these conditions in an acceptable way. This may not always be possible due to insufficient meteorological data and so the only option may be to carry out the assessment using a more common regulatory model, such as the advanced Gaussian models ADMS or AERMOD. In order to assess the suitability of these models for low wind conditions, they were applied to a Mediterranean case study that included many periods of low wind speed. The case study was the dispersion of NH3 emitted by a pig farm in Segovia, Central Spain, for which mean monthly atmospheric NH3 concentration measurements were made at 21 locations surrounding the farm as well as high-temporal-resolution concentration measurements at one location during a one-week campaign. Two strategies to improve the model performance for low wind speed conditions were tested. These were ‘no zero wind’ (NZW), which replaced calm periods with the minimum threshold wind speed of the model and ‘accumulated calm emissions’ (ACE), which forced the model to emit the total emissions during a calm period during the first subsequent non-calm hour. Due to large uncertainties in the model input data (NH3 emission rates, source exit velocities, boundary layer parameters), the case study was also used to assess model prediction uncertainty and assess how this uncertainty can be taken into account in model evaluations. A dynamic emission model modified for the Mediterranean climate was used to estimate the temporal variability in NH3 emission rates and a comparison was made between the simulations using the dynamic emissions and a constant emission rate. Prediction uncertainty due to model input uncertainty was 67-98% of the mean value for ADMS and between 53-83% of the mean value for AERMOD. Most of this uncertainty was due to source emission rate uncertainty (~50%), followed by uncertainty in the meteorological conditions (~10-20%) and uncertainty in exit velocities (~5-10%). AERMOD predicted higher concentrations than ADMS and more of the simulations met the model acceptability criteria when compared with the annual mean measured concentrations. However, the ADMS predictions were better correlated spatially with the measurements. The use of dynamic emission estimates improved the performance of ADMS but worsened the performance of AERMOD and the application of strategies to improved model performance had similar contradictory effects. In order to compare different inverse modelling techniques, several models (ADMS, LADD and WindTrax) were applied to a non-agricultural case study of a penguin colony in Antarctica. This case study was used since it gave the opportunity to provide the first experimentally-derived emission factor for an Antarctic penguin colony and also had the advantage of negligible background concentrations. There was sufficient agreement between the emission estimates obtained from the three models to define an emission factor for the penguin colony (1.23 g NH3 per breeding pair per day with an uncertainty range of 0.8-2.54 g NH3 per breeding pair per day). This emission estimate compared favourably to the value obtained using a simple micrometeorological technique (aerodynamic gradient) of 0.98 g ammonia per breeding pair per day (95% confidence interval: 0.2-2.4 g ammonia per breeding pair per day). Further application of the inverse modelling techniques for a range of agricultural case studies also demonstrated good agreement between the emission estimates. It is concluded, therefore, that inverse dispersion modelling is a robust technique for estimating NH3 emission rates. Screening models that can provide a quick and approximate estimate of environmental impacts are a useful tool for impact assessments because they can be used to filter out cases that potentially have a minimal environmental impact allowing resources to be focussed on more potentially damaging cases. The Simple Calculation of Ammonia Impact Limits (SCAIL) model was developed as a screening model to provide an estimate of the mean NH3 concentration and dry deposition rate downwind of an agricultural source. This screening tool, based on the LADD model, was evaluated and calibrated with several experimental datasets and then validated using independent concentration measurements made near sources. Overall SCAIL performed acceptably according to established statistical criteria. This work has identified situations where the concentration predictions of dispersion models are similar and other situations where the predictions are significantly different. Some models are simply not designed to simulate certain scenarios since they do not include the relevant processes or are beyond the limits of their applicability. An example is the LADD model that is not applicable to sources with significant exit velocity since the model does not include a plume-rise parameterisation. The testing of a simple scheme combining a momentum-driven plume rise and increased turbulence at the source improved model performance, but more testing is required. Even models that are applicable and include the relevant process do not always give similar predictions and the reasons for this need to be investigated. AERMOD for example predicts higher concentrations than ADMS for dispersion from mechanically ventilated livestock housing. There is evidence to suggest that ADMS underestimates concentrations in these situations due to a high wind speed threshold. Conversely, there is also evidence that AERMOD overestimates concentrations in these situations due to overestimation at low wind speeds. However, a simple modification to the meteorological pre-processor appears to improve the performance of the model. It is important that these differences between the predictions of these models are taken into account in regulatory assessments. This can be done by applying the most suitable model for the assessment in question or, better still, using multiple or hybrid models.

OntoTag - A Linguistic and Ontological Annotation Model Suitable for the Semantic Web

OntoTag - A Linguistic and Ontological Annotation Model Suitable for the Semantic Web 1. INTRODUCTION. LINGUISTIC TOOLS AND ANNOTATIONS: THEIR LIGHTS AND SHADOWS Computational Linguistics is already a consolidated research area. It builds upon the results of other two major ones, namely Linguistics and Computer Science and Engineering, and it aims at developing computational models of human language (or natural language, as it is termed in this area). Possibly, its most well-known applications are the different tools developed so far for processing human language, such as machine translation systems and speech recognizers or dictation programs. These tools for processing human language are commonly referred to as linguistic tools. Apart from the examples mentioned above, there are also other types of linguistic tools that perhaps are not so well-known, but on which most of the other applications of Computational Linguistics are built. These other types of linguistic tools comprise POS taggers, natural language parsers and semantic taggers, amongst others. All of them can be termed linguistic annotation tools. Linguistic annotation tools are important assets. In fact, POS and semantic taggers (and, to a lesser extent, also natural language parsers) have become critical resources for the computer applications that process natural language. Hence, any computer application that has to analyse a text automatically and ‘intelligently’ will include at least a module for POS tagging. The more an application needs to ‘understand’ the meaning of the text it processes, the more linguistic tools and/or modules it will incorporate and integrate. However, linguistic annotation tools have still some limitations, which can be summarised as follows: 1. Normally, they perform annotations only at a certain linguistic level (that is, Morphology, Syntax, Semantics, etc.). 2. They usually introduce a certain rate of errors and ambiguities when tagging. This error rate ranges from 10 percent up to 50 percent of the units annotated for unrestricted, general texts. 3. Their annotations are most frequently formulated in terms of an annotation schema designed and implemented ad hoc. A priori, it seems that the interoperation and the integration of several linguistic tools into an appropriate software architecture could most likely solve the limitations stated in (1). Besides, integrating several linguistic annotation tools and making them interoperate could also minimise the limitation stated in (2). Nevertheless, in the latter case, all these tools should produce annotations for a common level, which would have to be combined in order to correct their corresponding errors and inaccuracies. Yet, the limitation stated in (3) prevents both types of integration and interoperation from being easily achieved. In addition, most high-level annotation tools rely on other lower-level annotation tools and their outputs to generate their own ones. For example, sense-tagging tools (operating at the semantic level) often use POS taggers (operating at a lower level, i.e., the morphosyntactic) to identify the grammatical category of the word or lexical unit they are annotating. Accordingly, if a faulty or inaccurate low-level annotation tool is to be used by other higher-level one in its process, the errors and inaccuracies of the former should be minimised in advance. Otherwise, these errors and inaccuracies would be transferred to (and even magnified in) the annotations of the high-level annotation tool. Therefore, it would be quite useful to find a way to (i) correct or, at least, reduce the errors and the inaccuracies of lower-level linguistic tools; (ii) unify the annotation schemas of different linguistic annotation tools or, more generally speaking, make these tools (as well as their annotations) interoperate. Clearly, solving (i) and (ii) should ease the automatic annotation of web pages by means of linguistic tools, and their transformation into Semantic Web pages (Berners-Lee, Hendler and Lassila, 2001). Yet, as stated above, (ii) is a type of interoperability problem. There again, ontologies (Gruber, 1993; Borst, 1997) have been successfully applied thus far to solve several interoperability problems. Hence, ontologies should help solve also the problems and limitations of linguistic annotation tools aforementioned. Thus, to summarise, the main aim of the present work was to combine somehow these separated approaches, mechanisms and tools for annotation from Linguistics and Ontological Engineering (and the Semantic Web) in a sort of hybrid (linguistic and ontological) annotation model, suitable for both areas. This hybrid (semantic) annotation model should (a) benefit from the advances, models, techniques, mechanisms and tools of these two areas; (b) minimise (and even solve, when possible) some of the problems found in each of them; and (c) be suitable for the Semantic Web. The concrete goals that helped attain this aim are presented in the following section. 2. GOALS OF THE PRESENT WORK As mentioned above, the main goal of this work was to specify a hybrid (that is, linguistically-motivated and ontology-based) model of annotation suitable for the Semantic Web (i.e. it had to produce a semantic annotation of web page contents). This entailed that the tags included in the annotations of the model had to (1) represent linguistic concepts (or linguistic categories, as they are termed in ISO/DCR (2008)), in order for this model to be linguistically-motivated; (2) be ontological terms (i.e., use an ontological vocabulary), in order for the model to be ontology-based; and (3) be structured (linked) as a collection of ontology-based triples, as in the usual Semantic Web languages (namely RDF(S) and OWL), in order for the model to be considered suitable for the Semantic Web. Besides, to be useful for the Semantic Web, this model should provide a way to automate the annotation of web pages. As for the present work, this requirement involved reusing the linguistic annotation tools purchased by the OEG research group (http://www.oeg-upm.net), but solving beforehand (or, at least, minimising) some of their limitations. Therefore, this model had to minimise these limitations by means of the integration of several linguistic annotation tools into a common architecture. Since this integration required the interoperation of tools and their annotations, ontologies were proposed as the main technological component to make them effectively interoperate. From the very beginning, it seemed that the formalisation of the elements and the knowledge underlying linguistic annotations within an appropriate set of ontologies would be a great step forward towards the formulation of such a model (henceforth referred to as OntoTag). Obviously, first, to combine the results of the linguistic annotation tools that operated at the same level, their annotation schemas had to be unified (or, preferably, standardised) in advance. This entailed the unification (id. standardisation) of their tags (both their representation and their meaning), and their format or syntax. Second, to merge the results of the linguistic annotation tools operating at different levels, their respective annotation schemas had to be (a) made interoperable and (b) integrated. And third, in order for the resulting annotations to suit the Semantic Web, they had to be specified by means of an ontology-based vocabulary, and structured by means of ontology-based triples, as hinted above. Therefore, a new annotation scheme had to be devised, based both on ontologies and on this type of triples, which allowed for the combination and the integration of the annotations of any set of linguistic annotation tools. This annotation scheme was considered a fundamental part of the model proposed here, and its development was, accordingly, another major objective of the present work. All these goals, aims and objectives could be re-stated more clearly as follows: Goal 1: Development of a set of ontologies for the formalisation of the linguistic knowledge relating linguistic annotation. Sub-goal 1.1: Ontological formalisation of the EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) de facto standards for morphosyntactic and syntactic annotation, in a way that helps respect the triple structure recommended for annotations in these works (which is isomorphic to the triple structures used in the context of the Semantic Web). Sub-goal 1.2: Incorporation into this preliminary ontological formalisation of other existing standards and standard proposals relating the levels mentioned above, such as those currently under development within ISO/TC 37 (the ISO Technical Committee dealing with Terminology, which deals also with linguistic resources and annotations). Sub-goal 1.3: Generalisation and extension of the recommendations in EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) and ISO/TC 37 to the semantic level, for which no ISO/TC 37 standards have been developed yet. Sub-goal 1.4: Ontological formalisation of the generalisations and/or extensions obtained in the previous sub-goal as generalisations and/or extensions of the corresponding ontology (or ontologies). Sub-goal 1.5: Ontological formalisation of the knowledge required to link, combine and unite the knowledge represented in the previously developed ontology (or ontologies). Goal 2: Development of OntoTag’s annotation scheme, a standard-based abstract scheme for the hybrid (linguistically-motivated and ontological-based) annotation of texts. Sub-goal 2.1: Development of the standard-based morphosyntactic annotation level of OntoTag’s scheme. This level should include, and possibly extend, the recommendations of EAGLES (1996a) and also the recommendations included in the ISO/MAF (2008) standard draft. Sub-goal 2.2: Development of the standard-based syntactic annotation level of the hybrid abstract scheme. This level should include, and possibly extend, the recommendations of EAGLES (1996b) and the ISO/SynAF (2010) standard draft. Sub-goal 2.3: Development of the standard-based semantic annotation level of OntoTag’s (abstract) scheme. Sub-goal 2.4: Development of the mechanisms for a convenient integration of the three annotation levels already mentioned. These mechanisms should take into account the recommendations included in the ISO/LAF (2009) standard draft. Goal 3: Design of OntoTag’s (abstract) annotation architecture, an abstract architecture for the hybrid (semantic) annotation of texts (i) that facilitates the integration and interoperation of different linguistic annotation tools, and (ii) whose results comply with OntoTag’s annotation scheme. Sub-goal 3.1: Specification of the decanting processes that allow for the classification and separation, according to their corresponding levels, of the results of the linguistic tools annotating at several different levels. Sub-goal 3.2: Specification of the standardisation processes that allow (a) complying with the standardisation requirements of OntoTag’s annotation scheme, as well as (b) combining the results of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation. Sub-goal 3.3: Specification of the merging processes that allow for the combination of the output annotations and the interoperation of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation. Sub-goal 3.4: Specification of the merge processes that allow for the integration of the results and the interoperation of those tools performing their annotations at different levels. Goal 4: Generation of OntoTagger’s schema, a concrete instance of OntoTag’s abstract scheme for a concrete set of linguistic annotations. These linguistic annotations result from the tools and the resources available in the research group, namely • Bitext’s DataLexica (http://www.bitext.com/EN/datalexica.asp), • LACELL’s (POS) tagger (http://www.um.es/grupos/grupo-lacell/quees.php), • Connexor’s FDG (http://www.connexor.eu/technology/machinese/glossary/fdg/), and • EuroWordNet (Vossen et al., 1998). This schema should help evaluate OntoTag’s underlying hypotheses, stated below. Consequently, it should implement, at least, those levels of the abstract scheme dealing with the annotations of the set of tools considered in this implementation. This includes the morphosyntactic, the syntactic and the semantic levels. Goal 5: Implementation of OntoTagger’s configuration, a concrete instance of OntoTag’s abstract architecture for this set of linguistic tools and annotations. This configuration (1) had to use the schema generated in the previous goal; and (2) should help support or refute the hypotheses of this work as well (see the next section). Sub-goal 5.1: Implementation of the decanting processes that facilitate the classification and separation of the results of those linguistic resources that provide annotations at several different levels (on the one hand, LACELL’s tagger operates at the morphosyntactic level and, minimally, also at the semantic level; on the other hand, FDG operates at the morphosyntactic and the syntactic levels and, minimally, at the semantic level as well). Sub-goal 5.2: Implementation of the standardisation processes that allow (i) specifying the results of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation according to the requirements of OntoTagger’s schema, as well as (ii) combining these shared level results. In particular, all the tools selected perform morphosyntactic annotations and they had to be conveniently combined by means of these processes. Sub-goal 5.3: Implementation of the merging processes that allow for the combination (and possibly the improvement) of the annotations and the interoperation of the tools that share some level of annotation (in particular, those relating the morphosyntactic level, as in the previous sub-goal). Sub-goal 5.4: Implementation of the merging processes that allow for the integration of the different standardised and combined annotations aforementioned, relating all the levels considered. Sub-goal 5.5: Improvement of the semantic level of this configuration by adding a named entity recognition, (sub-)classification and annotation subsystem, which also uses the named entities annotated to populate a domain ontology, in order to provide a concrete application of the present work in the two areas involved (the Semantic Web and Corpus Linguistics). 3. MAIN RESULTS: ASSESSMENT OF ONTOTAG’S UNDERLYING HYPOTHESES The model developed in the present thesis tries to shed some light on (i) whether linguistic annotation tools can effectively interoperate; (ii) whether their results can be combined and integrated; and, if they can, (iii) how they can, respectively, interoperate and be combined and integrated. Accordingly, several hypotheses had to be supported (or rejected) by the development of the OntoTag model and OntoTagger (its implementation). The hypotheses underlying OntoTag are surveyed below. Only one of the hypotheses (H.6) was rejected; the other five could be confirmed. H.1 The annotations of different levels (or layers) can be integrated into a sort of overall, comprehensive, multilayer and multilevel annotation, so that their elements can complement and refer to each other. • CONFIRMED by the development of: o OntoTag’s annotation scheme, o OntoTag’s annotation architecture, o OntoTagger’s (XML, RDF, OWL) annotation schemas, o OntoTagger’s configuration. H.2 Tool-dependent annotations can be mapped onto a sort of tool-independent annotations and, thus, can be standardised. • CONFIRMED by means of the standardisation phase incorporated into OntoTag and OntoTagger for the annotations yielded by the tools. H.3 Standardisation should ease: H.3.1: The interoperation of linguistic tools. H.3.2: The comparison, combination (at the same level and layer) and integration (at different levels or layers) of annotations. • H.3 was CONFIRMED by means of the development of OntoTagger’s ontology-based configuration: o Interoperation, comparison, combination and integration of the annotations of three different linguistic tools (Connexor’s FDG, Bitext’s DataLexica and LACELL’s tagger); o Integration of EuroWordNet-based, domain-ontology-based and named entity annotations at the semantic level. o Integration of morphosyntactic, syntactic and semantic annotations. H.4 Ontologies and Semantic Web technologies (can) play a crucial role in the standardisation of linguistic annotations, by providing consensual vocabularies and standardised formats for annotation (e.g., RDF triples). • CONFIRMED by means of the development of OntoTagger’s RDF-triple-based annotation schemas. H.5 The rate of errors introduced by a linguistic tool at a given level, when annotating, can be reduced automatically by contrasting and combining its results with the ones coming from other tools, operating at the same level. However, these other tools might be built following a different technological (stochastic vs. rule-based, for example) or theoretical (dependency vs. HPS-grammar-based, for instance) approach. • CONFIRMED by the results yielded by the evaluation of OntoTagger. H.6 Each linguistic level can be managed and annotated independently. • REJECTED: OntoTagger’s experiments and the dependencies observed among the morphosyntactic annotations, and between them and the syntactic annotations. In fact, Hypothesis H.6 was already rejected when OntoTag’s ontologies were developed. We observed then that several linguistic units stand on an interface between levels, belonging thereby to both of them (such as morphosyntactic units, which belong to both the morphological level and the syntactic level). Therefore, the annotations of these levels overlap and cannot be handled independently when merged into a unique multileveled annotation. 4. OTHER MAIN RESULTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS First, interoperability is a hot topic for both the linguistic annotation community and the whole Computer Science field. The specification (and implementation) of OntoTag’s architecture for the combination and integration of linguistic (annotation) tools and annotations by means of ontologies shows a way to make these different linguistic annotation tools and annotations interoperate in practice. Second, as mentioned above, the elements involved in linguistic annotation were formalised in a set (or network) of ontologies (OntoTag’s linguistic ontologies). • On the one hand, OntoTag’s network of ontologies consists of − The Linguistic Unit Ontology (LUO), which includes a mostly hierarchical formalisation of the different types of linguistic elements (i.e., units) identifiable in a written text; − The Linguistic Attribute Ontology (LAO), which includes also a mostly hierarchical formalisation of the different types of features that characterise the linguistic units included in the LUO; − The Linguistic Value Ontology (LVO), which includes the corresponding formalisation of the different values that the attributes in the LAO can take; − The OIO (OntoTag’s Integration Ontology), which  Includes the knowledge required to link, combine and unite the knowledge represented in the LUO, the LAO and the LVO;  Can be viewed as a knowledge representation ontology that describes the most elementary vocabulary used in the area of annotation. • On the other hand, OntoTag’s ontologies incorporate the knowledge included in the different standards and recommendations for linguistic annotation released so far, such as those developed within the EAGLES and the SIMPLE European projects or by the ISO/TC 37 committee: − As far as morphosyntactic annotations are concerned, OntoTag’s ontologies formalise the terms in the EAGLES (1996a) recommendations and their corresponding terms within the ISO Morphosyntactic Annotation Framework (ISO/MAF, 2008) standard; − As for syntactic annotations, OntoTag’s ontologies incorporate the terms in the EAGLES (1996b) recommendations and their corresponding terms within the ISO Syntactic Annotation Framework (ISO/SynAF, 2010) standard draft; − Regarding semantic annotations, OntoTag’s ontologies generalise and extend the recommendations in EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) and, since no stable standards or standard drafts have been released for semantic annotation by ISO/TC 37 yet, they incorporate the terms in SIMPLE (2000) instead; − The terms coming from all these recommendations and standards were supplemented by those within the ISO Data Category Registry (ISO/DCR, 2008) and also of the ISO Linguistic Annotation Framework (ISO/LAF, 2009) standard draft when developing OntoTag’s ontologies. Third, we showed that the combination of the results of tools annotating at the same level can yield better results (both in precision and in recall) than each tool separately. In particular, 1. OntoTagger clearly outperformed two of the tools integrated into its configuration, namely DataLexica and FDG in all the combination sub-phases in which they overlapped (i.e. POS tagging, lemma annotation and morphological feature annotation). As far as the remaining tool is concerned, i.e. LACELL’s tagger, it was also outperformed by OntoTagger in POS tagging and lemma annotation, and it did not behave better than OntoTagger in the morphological feature annotation layer. 2. As an immediate result, this implies that a) This type of combination architecture configurations can be applied in order to improve significantly the accuracy of linguistic annotations; and b) Concerning the morphosyntactic level, this could be regarded as a way of constructing more robust and more accurate POS tagging systems. Fourth, Semantic Web annotations are usually performed by humans or else by machine learning systems. Both of them leave much to be desired: the former, with respect to their annotation rate; the latter, with respect to their (average) precision and recall. In this work, we showed how linguistic tools can be wrapped in order to annotate automatically Semantic Web pages using ontologies. This entails their fast, robust and accurate semantic annotation. As a way of example, as mentioned in Sub-goal 5.5, we developed a particular OntoTagger module for the recognition, classification and labelling of named entities, according to the MUC and ACE tagsets (Chinchor, 1997; Doddington et al., 2004). These tagsets were further specified by means of a domain ontology, namely the Cinema Named Entities Ontology (CNEO). This module was applied to the automatic annotation of ten different web pages containing cinema reviews (that is, around 5000 words). In addition, the named entities annotated with this module were also labelled as instances (or individuals) of the classes included in the CNEO and, then, were used to populate this domain ontology. • The statistical results obtained from the evaluation of this particular module of OntoTagger can be summarised as follows. On the one hand, as far as recall (R) is concerned, (R.1) the lowest value was 76,40% (for file 7); (R.2) the highest value was 97, 50% (for file 3); and (R.3) the average value was 88,73%. On the other hand, as far as the precision rate (P) is concerned, (P.1) its minimum was 93,75% (for file 4); (R.2) its maximum was 100% (for files 1, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10); and (R.3) its average value was 98,99%. • These results, which apply to the tasks of named entity annotation and ontology population, are extraordinary good for both of them. They can be explained on the basis of the high accuracy of the annotations provided by OntoTagger at the lower levels (mainly at the morphosyntactic level). However, they should be conveniently qualified, since they might be too domain- and/or language-dependent. It should be further experimented how our approach works in a different domain or a different language, such as French, English, or German. • In any case, the results of this application of Human Language Technologies to Ontology Population (and, accordingly, to Ontological Engineering) seem very promising and encouraging in order for these two areas to collaborate and complement each other in the area of semantic annotation. Fifth, as shown in the State of the Art of this work, there are different approaches and models for the semantic annotation of texts, but all of them focus on a particular view of the semantic level. Clearly, all these approaches and models should be integrated in order to bear a coherent and joint semantic annotation level. OntoTag shows how (i) these semantic annotation layers could be integrated together; and (ii) they could be integrated with the annotations associated to other annotation levels. Sixth, we identified some recommendations, best practices and lessons learned for annotation standardisation, interoperation and merge. They show how standardisation (via ontologies, in this case) enables the combination, integration and interoperation of different linguistic tools and their annotations into a multilayered (or multileveled) linguistic annotation, which is one of the hot topics in the area of Linguistic Annotation. And last but not least, OntoTag’s annotation scheme and OntoTagger’s annotation schemas show a way to formalise and annotate coherently and uniformly the different units and features associated to the different levels and layers of linguistic annotation. This is a great scientific step ahead towards the global standardisation of this area, which is the aim of ISO/TC 37 (in particular, Subcommittee 4, dealing with the standardisation of linguistic annotations and resources).

Improving the efficiency of nondeterministic indepemndent and-parallel systems

We present the design and implementation of the and-parallel component of ACE. ACE is a computational model for the full Prolog language that simultaneously exploits both or-parallelism and independent and-parallelism. A high performance implementation of the ACE model has been realized and its performance reported in this paper. We discuss how some of the standard problems which appear when implementing and-parallel systems are solved in ACE. We then propose a number of optimizations aimed at reducing the overheads and the increased memory consumption which occur in such systems when using previously proposed solutions. Finally, we present results from an implementation of ACE which includes the optimizations proposed. The results show that ACE exploits and-parallelism with high efficiency and high speedups. Furthermore, they also show that the proposed optimizations, which are applicable to many other and-parallel systems, significantly decrease memory consumption and increase speedups and absolute performance both in forwards execution and during backtracking.

Estudio crítico comparativo de las metodologías de análisis de la rigidización de fondos comprimidos y almas de puentes mixtos planteadas por las diferentes normativas : RPX-95, EAE y EC4

Los puentes con sección mixta de hormigon y acero son, a dia de hoy, una de las tipologias mas recurrentes por las diversas, y ya conocidas, ventajas que ofrecen en determinadas circunstancias. Resulta por tanto necesario, y de interes, estar actualizado y conocer el marco normativo que rige el diseño y proyecto de este tipo de puentes. El planteamiento normativo referente al desarrollo de proyectos de puentes mixtos se encuentra actualmente en una fase de transicion durante la cual se llevaria a cabo la redaccion de una nueva “Instruccion para el Proyecto de Puentes Mixtos”, la cual incorporaria directamente las prescripciones del Eurocodigo 4. Dicha instruccion sustituira a las actualmente vigentes “Recomendaciones para el Proyecto de Puentes Mixtos para Carretera (RPX-95)”. Por otra parte, en el ano 2011, se incorpora a la reglamentacion la “Instruccion de Acero Estructural (EAE)” en la cual se establecen criterios de ambito comun con los dos documentos anteriormente citados. La coyuntura normativa descrita en el parrafo anterior hace que resulte de gran interes realizar un estudio comparativo entre las normativas actualmente vigentes: - Eurocodigo 4: “Proyecto de estructuras mixtas de acero y hormigon”-RPX-95: “Recomendaciones para el Proyecto de Puentes Mixtos para Carretera”-EAE: “Instruccion de Acero Estructural”. Uno de los principales objetivos de este estudio es poder extraer conclusiones interesantes de cara a la implementacion definitiva de los Eurocodigos en el marco normativo espanol, hecho que se preve que se produzca en un futuro cercano, alrededor del ano 2018. Dentro de la amplia casuistica que hace referencia al proyecto de puentes mixtos, el presente estudio se centra en las metodologias de analisis referentes a la rigidizacion de fondos comprimidos y almas. Por tanto, se analizaran y compararan los criterios relacionados con los Estados Limites ultimos de piezas flectadas con seccion mixta y se estudiara como influyen los rigidizadores, tanto transversales como longitudinales, en dichos Estados Limites Ultimos. Concretamente los Estados Limites Ultimos que seran objetivo de estudio seran: Resistencia a Flexion y a Cortante de la seccion, y dimensionado de los Rigidizadores. El estudio de los ELU recientemente citados incluye el analisis de la diversa casuistica tipica de los puentes mixtos: fenomenos de inestabilidad en fondos comprimidos y almas, presencia de losa inferior de hormigon en secciones de momentos negativos, particularidades de la seccion cajon, etc. Se debe resaltar que las diversas normativas de estructuras mixtas de hormigon y acero remiten con asiduidad en varios de sus apartados a las normativas especificas para estos materiales, por ejemplo al Eurocodigo 3 o al EHE. Por lo tanto el estudio de las secciones mixtas comporta tambien un buen conocimiento y dominio de las normativas que hacen referencia al hormigon y al acero por separado. Formalmente, el cuerpo del trabajo se estructura en tres partes bien diferenciadas: -CAPITULO III: Estudio critico comparativo -CAPITULO IV: Aplicacion practica de Eurocodigo y RPX-95 -CAPITULO V: Desarrollo de herramienta de calculo para la verificacion de rigidizadores transversales segun el Eurocodigo 4. En el CAPITULO III se lleva a cabo un analisis comparativo de la metodologia de analisis, condiciones y limitaciones que proponen cada una de las normativas, destacando las semejanzas y diferencias existentes entre ellas. Este apartado es basicamente teorico y tiene como objetivo observar las diferencias principales que existen y discutir el porque de estas, para los diversos criterios de Estado Limite Ultimo estudiados. Un aspecto interesante desde el punto de vista practico del diseño y proyecto de puentes es observar si las normativas son mas o menos conservadoras en las verificaciones que proponen y las limitaciones que establecen, ya que esto afecta directamente al coste del puente. A continuacion, en el CAPITULO IV, se realiza una aplicacion practica de algunos de los aspectos de Estado Limite ultimo estudiados en el CAPITULO III. Se aplican las metodologias de las dos normativas estudiadas con mayor profundidad, Eurocodigo y RPX-95, a diversas secciones tipo. De esta manera, se podran complementar y corroborar con datos numericos, las conclusiones extraidas del analisis comparativo del capitulo anterior. Por ultimo, en el CAPITULO V, se expone de manera detallada la informacion acerca de la hoja de Excel en que se ha implementado la metodologia de calculo para la verificacion de rigidizadores transversales segun los Eurocodigos. Esta hoja de calculo tiene como objetivo ser la version actualizada de ACE-003-Comprobación rigidizadores en cajones y perfiles en "H", una hoja de calculo utilizada e implementada en MC2 Estudio de Ingeniería S.L. en base a las directrices dictadas por la “Recomendaciones para el Proyecto de Puentes Mixtos para Carretera”.

Lugares intermedios en Accesibilidad: Metodología integrada de diagnóstico y solución de barreras de accesibilidad físitica y criterios de comprensión e identificación a todas las escalas del Patrimonio

El presente artículo se centra en la aportación del Grupo de Investigación Paisaje Cultural (GIPC/UPM) en el proyecto de investigación PATRAC Patrimonio Accesible: I+D+i para una cultura sin barreras. En el marco de dos subproyectos, se ha trabajado, respectivamente, en el desarrollo de una metodología integrada de identificación y solución de barreras de accesibilidad física a todas las escalas del patrimonio, y en la selección, adaptación y gestión de la información de apoyo a la comprensión del bien patrimonial. El desarrollo se basa en una postura teórica previa: la importancia de la continuidad entre las escalas en la accesibilidad al patrimonio, y la especificidad de la relación entre el individuo y el elemento o entorno patrimonial. Las conclusiones recogen los conceptos que singularizan la aportación del GIPC. Así, se destaca el trabajo en aquellos espacios intermedios que conectan las diferentes escalas a las que se apunta, la calidad del diseño como medio de aplicación de criterios universales para soluciones específicas y la importancia, en la relación entre el hombre y el patrimonio, de la orientación y la identificación. This paper is focused in the contribution of the Grupo de investigación de Paisaje Cultural (GIPC/UPM) (Research Group on Cultural Landscapes) to the PATRACT project. In this framework it has been designed an integrated methodology to identify and solve physical barriers in all the scales of heritage; and in the selection, management and adaptation of information to improve the understanding the importance of heritage. This contribution is supported in a starting theory premise: the importance of continuity in the scales of accessibility to heritage, and the specificity of the relationship between the individual with the element or heritage environment. In the conclusions the GIPC group has strengthened the importance of the intermediate spaces which interlink different scales, using the quality of the design to accomplish specific solutions, and the relation between the human being and heritage as a pivotal point in the orientation and identification processes.

Self-Tuning PID controller for autonomous car tracking in urban traffic

In this paper an on line self-tuned PID controller is proposed for the control of a car whose goal is to follow another one, at distances and speeds typical in urban traffic. The bestknown tuning mechanism is perhaps the MIT rule, due to its ease of implementation. However, as it is well known, this method does not guarantee the stability of the system, providing good results only for constant or slowly varying reference signals and in the absence of noise, which are unrealistic conditions. When the reference input varies with an appreciable rate or in presence of noise, eventually it could result in system instability. In this paper an alternative method is proposed that significantly improves the robustness of the system for varying inputs or in the presence of noise, as demonstrated by simulation.

Políticas estatales en áreas de rehabilitación integral, tipología urbana y vulnerabilidad social

Durante los años de boom inmobiliario la obtención de plusvalías a través del desarrollo de operaciones de obra nueva fue llevada hasta sus últimas consecuencias. Ya en los años previos al estallido de la burbuja inmobiliaria, y con mayor fuerza tras éste, las políticas de rehabilitación y regeneración urbana se han presentado como una salida para un sector en crisis. Pero no sólo ese puede ser el objetivo, es necesario considerar la rehabilitación en áreas urbanas como una herramienta para el reequilibrio de la ciudad fragmentada y la incorporación de sus habitantes y espacios al proyecto de construcción de la ciudad democrática. Teniendo en cuenta esta dualidad, debemos plantearnos diversas cuestiones: ¿Cuál ha sido hasta ahora la evolución de las políticas de fomento de la rehabilitación urbana? ¿Cómo es el procedimiento que articula y gestiona el trasvase de ayudas al sector privado? ¿Sobre qué áreas de la ciudad han recaído las ayudas? Para dar respuesta a estas preguntas hemos analizado los programas de rehabilitación en áreas desarrollados en las últimas décadas a través de la financiación de los Planes de Vivienda estatales. El trabajo por un lado se centra en desgranar los documentos que conforman el marco legal de los planes de vivienda, analizando los programas y los mecanismos disponibles para la rehabilitación en áreas. Por otro, se analizan las áreas declaradas en ciudades de más de 50.000 habitantes y capitales de provincia, con el objetivo de evaluar la magnitud de las ayudas estatales y la evolución de su impacto en la ciudad consolidada y en las promociones periféricas.

Thermal Scattering Libraries Processing (F4E, Task 6.2)

Presentación del trabajo realizado en el marco del proyecto F4E, sobre el procesamiento de librerías de dispersión térmica de neutrones en formato ACE para su uso con el código MCNP. Se presentan tanto los métodos y procedimientos empleados, como los resultados y diferencias entre las distintas fuentes de datos.