A mathematical theory of stochastic microlensing. II. Random images, shear, and the Kac-Rice formula

Continuing our development of a mathematical theory of stochastic microlensing, we study the random shear and expected number of random lensed images of different types. In particular, we characterize the first three leading terms in the asymptotic expression of the joint probability density function (pdf) of the random shear tensor due to point masses in the limit of an infinite number of stars. Up to this order, the pdf depends on the magnitude of the shear tensor, the optical depth, and the mean number of stars through a combination of radial position and the star's mass. As a consequence, the pdf's of the shear components are seen to converge, in the limit of an infinite number of stars, to shifted Cauchy distributions, which shows that the shear components have heavy tails in that limit. The asymptotic pdf of the shear magnitude in the limit of an infinite number of stars is also presented. All the results on the random microlensing shear are given for a general point in the lens plane. Extending to the general random distributions (not necessarily uniform) of the lenses, we employ the Kac-Rice formula and Morse theory to deduce general formulas for the expected total number of images and the expected number of saddle images. We further generalize these results by considering random sources defined on a countable compact covering of the light source plane. This is done to introduce the notion of global expected number of positive parity images due to a general lensing map. Applying the result to microlensing, we calculate the asymptotic global expected number of minimum images in the limit of an infinite number of stars, where the stars are uniformly distributed. This global expectation is bounded, while the global expected number of images and the global expected number of saddle images diverge as the order of the number of stars. © 2009 American Institute of Physics.

Qualitative analysis of the interdisciplinary interaction between data analysis specialists and novice clinical researchers.

BACKGROUND: The inherent complexity of statistical methods and clinical phenomena compel researchers with diverse domains of expertise to work in interdisciplinary teams, where none of them have a complete knowledge in their counterpart's field. As a result, knowledge exchange may often be characterized by miscommunication leading to misinterpretation, ultimately resulting in errors in research and even clinical practice. Though communication has a central role in interdisciplinary collaboration and since miscommunication can have a negative impact on research processes, to the best of our knowledge, no study has yet explored how data analysis specialists and clinical researchers communicate over time. METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We conducted qualitative analysis of encounters between clinical researchers and data analysis specialists (epidemiologist, clinical epidemiologist, and data mining specialist). These encounters were recorded and systematically analyzed using a grounded theory methodology for extraction of emerging themes, followed by data triangulation and analysis of negative cases for validation. A policy analysis was then performed using a system dynamics methodology looking for potential interventions to improve this process. Four major emerging themes were found. Definitions using lay language were frequently employed as a way to bridge the language gap between the specialties. Thought experiments presented a series of "what if" situations that helped clarify how the method or information from the other field would behave, if exposed to alternative situations, ultimately aiding in explaining their main objective. Metaphors and analogies were used to translate concepts across fields, from the unfamiliar to the familiar. Prolepsis was used to anticipate study outcomes, thus helping specialists understand the current context based on an understanding of their final goal. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The communication between clinical researchers and data analysis specialists presents multiple challenges that can lead to errors.