Plasmonic nanoparticles for the protection of the final optics in inertial confinement fusion facilities: capabilities and limitations

Final lenses in laser fusion plants. Challenges for the protection of the final lenses. Plasmonic nanoparticles. Radiation resistance

Typological/Placement possibilities and limitations of ductile behavior of bridges in seismic areas

Consideraciones sobre la ductilidad en zonas sísmicas. This paper analyses the ductile behavior of a highway overpass located in a seismic zone. The paper presents the results of a pushover analysis that enables the design engineer to estimate the behavior of the bridge’s columns in two directions in an independent manner. The differences with the theoretical bilinear behavior are described and explained. Indications are given on the need and possibilities of taking advantage of ductility in different seismic events scenarios.

Lesson from the habitat suitability models to evaluate the environmental of Pinus nigra Arnold and Pinus sylvesris L. in the Iberian Peninsula

PREDICT POTENTIAL DISTRIBUTION. Spatial and temporal evolution of the species under different climate scenarios. Generation of habitat suitability models (HSM)  high degree of uncertainty and limitations. The importance of their validation has been stressed. In this work we discuss the present potential distribution of P. sylvestris and P. nigra in the Iberian Peninsula by using MaxEnt, and evaluate the influence of the different environmental variables. Our intention is to select a set of environmental variables that explains better their current distribution, to achieve the most accurate and reliable models. Then we project them to the past climatic conditions (21 to 0 kyrs BP), to evaluate the outputs with existing palaeo-ecological data.

Comparison of experimental and numerical sloshing loads in partially filled tanks

Sloshing describes the movement of liquids inside partially filled tanks, generating dynamic loads on the tank structure. The resulting impact pressures are of great importance in assessing structural strength, and their correct evaluation still represents a challenge for the designer due to the high level of nonlinearities involved, with complex free surface deformations, violent impact phenomena and influence of air trapping. In the present paper, a set of two-dimensional cases, for which experimental results are available, is considered to assess the merits and shortcomings of different numerical methods for sloshing evaluation, namely two commercial RANS solvers (FLOW-3D and LS-DYNA), and two academic software (Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics and RANS). Impact pressures at various critical locations and global moment induced by water motion in a partially filled rectangular tank, subject to a simple harmonic rolling motion, are evaluated and predictions are compared with experimental measurements. 2012 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.

Advanced methodologies for the dendrogeomorphic analysis of past floods and related risks

This communication presents an overview of their first results and innovate methodologies, focused in their possibilities and limitations for the reconstruction of recent floods and paleofloods over the World.

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).

The role of residual stresses in the performance and durability of prestressing steel wires

Residual stresses developed during wire drawing influence the mechanical behavior and durability of steel wires used for prestressed concrete structures, particularly the shape of the stress–strain curve, stress relaxation losses, fatigue life, and environmental cracking susceptibility. The availability of general purpose finite element analysis tools and powerful diffraction techniques (X-rays and neutrons) has made it possible to predict and measure accurately residual stress fields in cold-drawn steel wires. Work carried out in this field in the past decade, shows the prospects and limitations of residual stress measurement, how the stress relaxation losses and environmentally-assisted cracking are correlated with the profile of residual stresses and how the performance of steel wires can be improved by modifying such a stress profile

Design, development and construction of an outdoor testing facility for semi-transparent photovoltaic modules

Building-integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV) is one of the most promising technologies enabling buildings to generate on-site part of their electricity needs while performing architectural functionalities. A clear example of BIPV products consists of semi-transparent photovoltaic modules (STPV), designed to replace the conventional glazing solutions in building façades. Accordingly, the active building envelope is required to perform multiple requirements such as provide solar shading to avoid overheating, supply solar gains and thermal insulation to reduce heat loads and improve daylight utilization. To date, various studies into STPV systems have focused on their energy performance based on existing simulation programs, or on the modelling, normally validated by limited experimental data, of the STPV modules thermal behaviour. Taking into account that very limited experimental research has been conducted on the energy performance of STPV elements and that the characterization in real operation conditions is necessary to promote an energetically efficient integration of this technology in the building envelope, an outdoor testing facility has been designed, developed and built at the Solar Energy Institute of the Technical University of Madrid. In this work, the methodology used in the definition of the testing facility, its capability and limitations are presented and discussed.

Nanoinformatics approaches for information extraction and text mining in nanomedical research texts

La nanotecnología es un área de investigación de reciente creación que trata con la manipulación y el control de la materia con dimensiones comprendidas entre 1 y 100 nanómetros. A escala nanométrica, los materiales exhiben fenómenos físicos, químicos y biológicos singulares, muy distintos a los que manifiestan a escala convencional. En medicina, los compuestos miniaturizados a nanoescala y los materiales nanoestructurados ofrecen una mayor eficacia con respecto a las formulaciones químicas tradicionales, así como una mejora en la focalización del medicamento hacia la diana terapéutica, revelando así nuevas propiedades diagnósticas y terapéuticas. A su vez, la complejidad de la información a nivel nano es mucho mayor que en los niveles biológicos convencionales (desde el nivel de población hasta el nivel de célula) y, por tanto, cualquier flujo de trabajo en nanomedicina requiere, de forma inherente, estrategias de gestión de información avanzadas. Desafortunadamente, la informática biomédica todavía no ha proporcionado el marco de trabajo que permita lidiar con estos retos de la información a nivel nano, ni ha adaptado sus métodos y herramientas a este nuevo campo de investigación. En este contexto, la nueva área de la nanoinformática pretende detectar y establecer los vínculos existentes entre la medicina, la nanotecnología y la informática, fomentando así la aplicación de métodos computacionales para resolver las cuestiones y problemas que surgen con la información en la amplia intersección entre la biomedicina y la nanotecnología. Las observaciones expuestas previamente determinan el contexto de esta tesis doctoral, la cual se centra en analizar el dominio de la nanomedicina en profundidad, así como en el desarrollo de estrategias y herramientas para establecer correspondencias entre las distintas disciplinas, fuentes de datos, recursos computacionales y técnicas orientadas a la extracción de información y la minería de textos, con el objetivo final de hacer uso de los datos nanomédicos disponibles. El autor analiza, a través de casos reales, alguna de las tareas de investigación en nanomedicina que requieren o que pueden beneficiarse del uso de métodos y herramientas nanoinformáticas, ilustrando de esta forma los inconvenientes y limitaciones actuales de los enfoques de informática biomédica a la hora de tratar con datos pertenecientes al dominio nanomédico. Se discuten tres escenarios diferentes como ejemplos de actividades que los investigadores realizan mientras llevan a cabo su investigación, comparando los contextos biomédico y nanomédico: i) búsqueda en la Web de fuentes de datos y recursos computacionales que den soporte a su investigación; ii) búsqueda en la literatura científica de resultados experimentales y publicaciones relacionadas con su investigación; iii) búsqueda en registros de ensayos clínicos de resultados clínicos relacionados con su investigación. El desarrollo de estas actividades requiere el uso de herramientas y servicios informáticos, como exploradores Web, bases de datos de referencias bibliográficas indexando la literatura biomédica y registros online de ensayos clínicos, respectivamente. Para cada escenario, este documento proporciona un análisis detallado de los posibles obstáculos que pueden dificultar el desarrollo y el resultado de las diferentes tareas de investigación en cada uno de los dos campos citados (biomedicina y nanomedicina), poniendo especial énfasis en los retos existentes en la investigación nanomédica, campo en el que se han detectado las mayores dificultades. El autor ilustra cómo la aplicación de metodologías provenientes de la informática biomédica a estos escenarios resulta efectiva en el dominio biomédico, mientras que dichas metodologías presentan serias limitaciones cuando son aplicadas al contexto nanomédico. Para abordar dichas limitaciones, el autor propone un enfoque nanoinformático, original, diseñado específicamente para tratar con las características especiales que la información presenta a nivel nano. El enfoque consiste en un análisis en profundidad de la literatura científica y de los registros de ensayos clínicos disponibles para extraer información relevante sobre experimentos y resultados en nanomedicina —patrones textuales, vocabulario en común, descriptores de experimentos, parámetros de caracterización, etc.—, seguido del desarrollo de mecanismos para estructurar y analizar dicha información automáticamente. Este análisis concluye con la generación de un modelo de datos de referencia (gold standard) —un conjunto de datos de entrenamiento y de test anotados manualmente—, el cual ha sido aplicado a la clasificación de registros de ensayos clínicos, permitiendo distinguir automáticamente los estudios centrados en nanodrogas y nanodispositivos de aquellos enfocados a testear productos farmacéuticos tradicionales. El presente trabajo pretende proporcionar los métodos necesarios para organizar, depurar, filtrar y validar parte de los datos nanomédicos existentes en la actualidad a una escala adecuada para la toma de decisiones. Análisis similares para otras tareas de investigación en nanomedicina ayudarían a detectar qué recursos nanoinformáticos se requieren para cumplir los objetivos actuales en el área, así como a generar conjunto de datos de referencia, estructurados y densos en información, a partir de literatura y otros fuentes no estructuradas para poder aplicar nuevos algoritmos e inferir nueva información de valor para la investigación en nanomedicina. ABSTRACT Nanotechnology is a research area of recent development that deals with the manipulation and control of matter with dimensions ranging from 1 to 100 nanometers. At the nanoscale, materials exhibit singular physical, chemical and biological phenomena, very different from those manifested at the conventional scale. In medicine, nanosized compounds and nanostructured materials offer improved drug targeting and efficacy with respect to traditional formulations, and reveal novel diagnostic and therapeutic properties. Nevertheless, the complexity of information at the nano level is much higher than the complexity at the conventional biological levels (from populations to the cell). Thus, any nanomedical research workflow inherently demands advanced information management. Unfortunately, Biomedical Informatics (BMI) has not yet provided the necessary framework to deal with such information challenges, nor adapted its methods and tools to the new research field. In this context, the novel area of nanoinformatics aims to build new bridges between medicine, nanotechnology and informatics, allowing the application of computational methods to solve informational issues at the wide intersection between biomedicine and nanotechnology. The above observations determine the context of this doctoral dissertation, which is focused on analyzing the nanomedical domain in-depth, and developing nanoinformatics strategies and tools to map across disciplines, data sources, computational resources, and information extraction and text mining techniques, for leveraging available nanomedical data. The author analyzes, through real-life case studies, some research tasks in nanomedicine that would require or could benefit from the use of nanoinformatics methods and tools, illustrating present drawbacks and limitations of BMI approaches to deal with data belonging to the nanomedical domain. Three different scenarios, comparing both the biomedical and nanomedical contexts, are discussed as examples of activities that researchers would perform while conducting their research: i) searching over the Web for data sources and computational resources supporting their research; ii) searching the literature for experimental results and publications related to their research, and iii) searching clinical trial registries for clinical results related to their research. The development of these activities will depend on the use of informatics tools and services, such as web browsers, databases of citations and abstracts indexing the biomedical literature, and web-based clinical trial registries, respectively. For each scenario, this document provides a detailed analysis of the potential information barriers that could hamper the successful development of the different research tasks in both fields (biomedicine and nanomedicine), emphasizing the existing challenges for nanomedical research —where the major barriers have been found. The author illustrates how the application of BMI methodologies to these scenarios can be proven successful in the biomedical domain, whilst these methodologies present severe limitations when applied to the nanomedical context. To address such limitations, the author proposes an original nanoinformatics approach specifically designed to deal with the special characteristics of information at the nano level. This approach consists of an in-depth analysis of the scientific literature and available clinical trial registries to extract relevant information about experiments and results in nanomedicine —textual patterns, common vocabulary, experiment descriptors, characterization parameters, etc.—, followed by the development of mechanisms to automatically structure and analyze this information. This analysis resulted in the generation of a gold standard —a manually annotated training or reference set—, which was applied to the automatic classification of clinical trial summaries, distinguishing studies focused on nanodrugs and nanodevices from those aimed at testing traditional pharmaceuticals. The present work aims to provide the necessary methods for organizing, curating and validating existing nanomedical data on a scale suitable for decision-making. Similar analysis for different nanomedical research tasks would help to detect which nanoinformatics resources are required to meet current goals in the field, as well as to generate densely populated and machine-interpretable reference datasets from the literature and other unstructured sources for further testing novel algorithms and inferring new valuable information for nanomedicine.

Depth Averaged Models for Fast Landslide Propagation: Mathematical, Rheological and Numerical Aspects

This paper presents an overview of depth averaged modelling of fast catastrophic landslides where coupling of solid skeleton and pore fluid (air and water) is important. The first goal is to show how Biot-Zienkiewicz models can be applied to develop depth integrated, coupled models. The second objective of the paper is to consider a link which can be established between rheological and constitutive models. Perzyna´s viscoplasticity can be considered a general framework within which rheological models such as Bingham and cohesive frictional fluids can be derived. Among the several alternative numerical models, we will focus here on SPH which has not been widely applied by engineers to model landslide propagation. We propose an improvement, based on combining Finite Difference meshes associated to SPH nodes to describe pore pressure evolution inside the landslide mass. We devote a Section to analyze the performance of the models, considering three sets of tests and examples which allows to assess the model performance and limitations: (i) Problems having an analytical solution, (ii) Small scale laboratory tests, and (iii) Real cases for which we have had access to reliable information

Hydromorphic change and biotic response challenge efficient river rehabilitation

From an extensive literature review and meta-analyses, this study has i) identified the most important hydromorphological process related to river degradation and rehabilitation, ii) conceptually linked it to evolutionary and functional response chains of aquatic biota, and iii) provided empirical evidence and ecological data for the respective hydromorphological requirements, preferences and limitations of aquatic plants, benthic invertebrates, lampreys, and freshwater fishes.