The concept of transport capacity and its use in different geomorphic process domains

The notion of sediment-transport capacity has been engrained in geomorphological and related literature for over 50 years, although its earliest roots date back explicitly to Gilbert in fluvial geomorphology in the 1870s and implicitly to eighteenth to nineteenth century developments in engineering. Despite cross fertilization between different process domains, there seem to have been independent inventions of the idea in aeolian geomorphology by Bagnold in the 1930s and in hillslope studies by Ellison in the 1940s. Here we review the invention and development of the idea of transport capacity in the fluvial, aeolian, coastal, hillslope, débris flow, and glacial process domains. As these various developments have occurred, different definitions have been used, which makes it both a difficult concept to test, and one that may lead to poor communications between those working in different domains of geomorphology. We argue that the original relation between the power of a flow and its ability to transport sediment can be challenged for three reasons. First, as sediment becomes entrained in a flow, the nature of the flow changes and so it is unreasonable to link the capacity of the water or wind only to the ability of the fluid to move sediment. Secondly, environmental sediment transport is complicated, and the range of processes involved in most movements means that simple relationships are unlikely to hold, not least because the movement of sediment often changes the substrate, which in turn affects the flow conditions. Thirdly, the inherently stochastic nature of sediment transport means that any capacity relationships do not scale either in time or in space. Consequently, new theories of sediment transport are needed to improve understanding and prediction and to guide measurement and management of all geomorphic systems.

Pregnancy Planning and Diabetes:A Qualitative Exploration of Women's Attitudes Toward Preconception Care

Introduction: Seeking preconception care is recognized as an important health behavior for women with preexisting diabetes. Yet many women with diabetes do not seek care or advice until after they are pregnant, and many enter pregnancy with suboptimal glycemic control. This study explored the attitudes about pregnancy and preconception care seeking in a group of nonpregnant women with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Methods: In-depth semistructured interviews were completed with 14 nonpregnant women with type 1 diabetes. Results: Analysis of the interview data revealed 4 main themes: 1) the emotional complexity of childbearing decisions, 2) preferences for information related to pregnancy, 3) the importance of being known by your health professional, and 4) frustrations with the medical model of care. Discussion: These findings raise questions about how preconception care should be provided to women with diabetes and highlight the pivotal importance of supportive, familiar relationships between health professionals and women with diabetes in the provision of individualized care and advice. By improving the quality of relationships and communication between health care providers and patients, we will be better able to provide care and advice that is perceived as relevant to the individual, whatever her stage of family planning. © 2012 by the American College of Nurse-Midwives.

A Collaborative Multiagent Framework based on Online Risk-Aware Planning and Decision-Making

Planning is an essential process in teams of multiple agents pursuing a common goal. When the effects of actions undertaken by agents are uncertain, evaluating the potential risk of such actions alongside their utility might lead to more rational decisions upon planning. This challenge has been recently tackled for single agent settings, yet domains with multiple agents that present diverse viewpoints towards risk still necessitate comprehensive decision making mechanisms that balance the utility and risk of actions. In this work, we propose a novel collaborative multi-agent planning framework that integrates (i) a team-level online planner under uncertainty that extends the classical UCT approximate algorithm, and (ii) a preference modeling and multicriteria group decision making approach that allows agents to find accepted and rational solutions for planning problems, predicated on the attitude each agent adopts towards risk. When utilised in risk-pervaded scenarios, the proposed framework can reduce the cost of reaching the common goal sought and increase effectiveness, before making collective decisions by appropriately balancing risk and utility of actions. 

Hierarchical Task Network Planning with Common-Sense Reasoning for Multiple-People Behaviour Analysis

Safety on public transport is a major concern for the relevant authorities. We
address this issue by proposing an automated surveillance platform which combines data from video, infrared and pressure sensors. Data homogenisation and integration is achieved by a distributed architecture based on communication middleware that resolves interconnection issues, thereby enabling data modelling. A common-sense knowledge base models and encodes knowledge about public-transport platforms and the actions and activities of passengers. Trajectory data from passengers is modelled as a time-series of human activities. Common-sense knowledge and rules are then applied to detect inconsistencies or errors in the data interpretation. Lastly, the rationality that characterises human behaviour is also captured here through a bottom-up Hierarchical Task Network planner that, along with common-sense, corrects misinterpretations to explain passenger behaviour. The system is validated using a simulated bus saloon scenario as a case-study. Eighteen video sequences were recorded with up to six passengers. Four metrics were used to evaluate performance. The system, with an accuracy greater than 90% for each of the four metrics, was found to outperform a rule-base system and a system containing planning alone.

Morality, Power and the Planning Subject

Ethical issues are at the heart of planning. Thus, planning theory has long displayed an interest in debating both the ethical justification for planning and how the activity of planning can be rendered more ethically sensitive. However, comparatively little attention has been shown to how the very constitution of the planner as a ‘moral subject’ may be ethically problematic for planning practice. This article addresses this lacuna through an engagement with the philosophy of Michel Foucault. In contrast to how his work is normally applied, this article accords with Foucault’s own direction that his later examination of ethics be used as a lens through which to read his earlier analysis of power and knowledge. Accordingly, the article first outlines Foucault’s innovative reinterpretation of how power and knowledge operate in society before setting this within his novel reconception of ethics. This theoretical exposition is then employed to interpret the material drawn from in-depth qualitative interviews with 20 planning officers working in a range of different contexts. The article subsequently employs Foucault’s ethically informed reading of power and knowledge to identify ethical issues arising from the approaches used by practitioners to justify their planning activities. The article concludes by suggesting how such issues can be resolved.