163 resultados para angle-selected tuning
Resumo:
The system TlCo2Se2-xSx has been thoroughly investigated by neutron powder diffraction and SQUID magnetometry. TlCo2Se2-xSx is a layered tetragonal structure containing atomic cobalt layers separated by a distance of 6.4 angstrom in the sulphide and 6.8 angstrom in the selenide. The solid solubility of isovalent selenium and sulphur atoms in the structure makes it possible to continuously vary the interlayer distance and thereby tune the magnetic coupling between the Co-layers. At low temperatures, the Co-atoms are ferromagnetically ordered within the layers and magnetic moments lie in the ab-plane. However, these Co-moments form a helical magnetic structure that prevails for 0 <= x <= 1.5 with a gradual decrease of the angle between adjacent Co-layers from 122 degrees to 39 degrees. For x >= 1.75, a collinear ferromagnetic structure is stable. The relationship between the coupling angle and the Co-interlayer separation shows an almost linear behaviour. The helical phase contains no net spontaneous magnetic moment up to TlCo2SeS, where a small net magnetic moment appears that increases until the ferromagnetic structure is found for 1.75 <= x <= 2.0. (C) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Resumo:
Purpose: A peripheral iridotomy (PI) is the treatment of choice for pupillary block. In this study we investigated the effect of enlarging the size of a small PI on the anterior chamber angle in patients with angle closure using ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM). Patients and Methods: Patients who had been treated with laser peripheral iridotomy for angle closure and were identified to have a small patent PI (<100 µm) with still appositionally closed anterior chamber angle were selected prospectively. The anterior chamber angle was assessed using UBM. The angle opening distance 500 µm from the scleral spur (AOD500) as well as the anterior and posterior chamber depth (ACD and PCD) 1000 µm from the scleral spur was measured. In addition, the ACD/PCD ratio was calculated. Afterwards, the PI was enlarged using an Nd: YAG laser and the UBM measurements were repeated as described above. Results: Six eyes of six patients were examined. After the enlargement of the PI the average AOD500 increased from 109 µm (±36) to 147 µm (±40) (p
Resumo:
A forward and backward least angle regression (LAR) algorithm is proposed to construct the nonlinear autoregressive model with exogenous inputs (NARX) that is widely used to describe a large class of nonlinear dynamic systems. The main objective of this paper is to improve model sparsity and generalization performance of the original forward LAR algorithm. This is achieved by introducing a replacement scheme using an additional backward LAR stage. The backward stage replaces insignificant model terms selected by forward LAR with more significant ones, leading to an improved model in terms of the model compactness and performance. A numerical example to construct four types of NARX models, namely polynomials, radial basis function (RBF) networks, neuro fuzzy and wavelet networks, is presented to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed technique in comparison with some popular methods.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI) on forward-scatter of light and subjective visual symptoms and to identify LPI parameters influencing these phenomena. DESIGN: Cohort study derived from a randomized trial, using an external control group. PARTICIPANTS: Chinese subjects initially aged 50 or older and 70 years or younger with bilateral narrow angles undergoing LPI in 1 eye selected at random, and age- and gender-matched controls. METHODS: Eighteen months after laser, LPI-treated subjects underwent digital iris photography and photogrammetry to characterize the size and location of the LPI, Lens Opacity Classification System III cataract grading, and measurement of retinal straylight (C-Quant; OCULUS, Wetzlar, Germany) in the treated and untreated eyes and completed a visual symptoms questionnaire. Controls answered the questionnaire and underwent straylight measurement and (in a random one-sixth sample) cataract grading. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Retinal straylight levels and subjective visual symptoms. RESULTS: Among 230 LPI-treated subjects (121 [58.8%] with LPI totally covered by the lid, 43 [19.8%] with LPI partly covered by the lid, 53 [24.4%] with LPI uncovered by the lid), 217 (94.3%) completed all testing, as did 250 (93.3%) of 268 controls. Age, gender, and prevalence of visual symptoms did not differ between treated subjects and controls, although nuclear (P<0.01) and cortical (P = 0.03) cataract were less common among controls. Neither presenting visual acuity nor straylight score differed between the treated and untreated eyes among all treated persons, nor among those (n = 96) with LPI partially or totally uncovered. Prevalence of subjective glare did not differ significantly between participants with totally covered LPI (6.61%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.39%-12.5%), partially covered LPI (11.6%; 95% CI, 5.07%-24.5%), or totally uncovered LPI (9.43%; 95% CI, 4.10%-10.3%). In regression models, only worse cortical cataract grade (P = 0.01) was associated significantly with straylight score, and no predictors were associated with subjective glare. None of the LPI size or location parameters were associated with straylight or subjective symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggests that LPI is safe regarding measures of straylight and visual symptoms. This randomized design provides strong evidence that treatment programs for narrow angles would be unlikely to result in important medium-term visual disability.
Resumo:
The angle concept is a multifaceted concept having static and dynamic definitions. The static definition of the angle refers to “the space between two rays” or “the intersection of two rays at the same end point” (Mitchelmore & White, 1998), whereas the dynamic definition of the angle concept highlights that the size of angle is the amount of rotation in direction (Fyhn, 2006). Since both definitions represent two diverse situations and have unique limitations (Henderson & Taimina, 2005), students may hold misconceptions about the angle concept. In this regard, the aim of this research was to explore high achievers’ knowledge regarding the definition of the angle concept as well as to investigate their erroneous answers on the angle concept.
104 grade 6 students drawn from four well-established elementary schools of Yozgat, Turkey were participated in this research. All participants were selected via a purposive sampling method and their mathematics grades were 4 or 5 out of 5, and. Data were collected through four questions prepared by considering the learning competencies set out in the grade 6 curriculum in Turkey and the findings of previous studies whose purposes were to identify students’ misconceptions of the angle concept. The findings were analyzed by two researchers, and their inter-rater agreement was calculated as 0.91, or almost perfect. Thereafter, coding discrepancies were resolved, and consensus was established.
The angle concept is a multifaceted concept having static and dynamic definitions.The static definition of the angle refers to “the space between two rays” or“the intersection of two rays at the same end point” (Mitchelmore & White, 1998), whereas the dynamicdefinition of the angle concept highlights that the size of angle is the amountof rotation in direction (Fyhn, 2006). Since both definitionsrepresent two diverse situations and have unique limitations (Henderson & Taimina, 2005), students may holdmisconceptions about the angle concept. In this regard, the aim of thisresearch was to explore high achievers’ knowledge regarding the definition ofthe angle concept as well as to investigate their erroneous answers on theangle concept.
104grade 6 students drawn from four well-established elementary schools of Yozgat,Turkey were participated in this research. All participants were selected via a purposive sampling method and their mathematics grades were 4 or 5 out of 5,and. Data were collected through four questions prepared by considering the learning competencies set out in the grade 6 curriculum in Turkey and the findings of previous studies whose purposes were to identify students’ misconceptions of the angle concept. The findings were analyzed by two researchers, and their inter-rater agreement was calculated as 0.91, or almost perfect. Thereafter, coding discrepancies were resolved, and consensus was established.
In the first question, students were asked to answer a multiple choice questions consisting of two statics definitions and one dynamic definition of the angle concept. Only 38 of 104 students were able to recognize these three definitions. Likewise, Mitchelmore and White (1998) investigated that less than10% of grade 4 students knew the dynamic definition of the angle concept. Additionally,the purpose of the second question was to figure out how well students could recognize 0-degree angle. We found that 49 of 104 students were unable to recognize MXW as an angle. While 6 students indicated that the size of MXW is0, other 6 students revealed that the size of MXW is 360. Therefore, 12 of 104students correctly answered this questions. On the other hand, 28 of 104students recognized the MXW angle as 180-degree angle. This finding demonstrated that these students have difficulties in naming the angles.Moreover, the third question consisted of three concentric circles with center O and two radiuses of the outer circle, and the intersection of the radiuses with these circles were named. Then, students were asked to compare the size of AOB, GOD and EOF angles. Only 36 of 104 students answered correctly by indicating that all three angles are equal, whereas 68 of 104 students incorrectly responded this question by revealing AOB<GOD< EOF. These students erroneously thought the size of the angle is related to either the size of the arc marking the angle or the area between the arms of the angle and the arc marking angle. These two erroneous strategies for determining the size of angles have been found by a few studies (Clausen-May,2008; Devichi & Munier, 2013; Kim & Lee, 2014; Mithcelmore, 1998;Wilson & Adams, 1992). The last question, whose aim was to determine how well students can adapt theangle concept to real life, consisted of an observer and a barrier, and students were asked to color the hidden area behind the barrier. Only 2 of 104students correctly responded this question, whereas 19 of 104 students drew rays from the observer to both sides of the barrier, and colored the area covered by the rays, the observer and barrier. While 35 of 104 students just colored behind the barrier without using any strategies, 33 of 104 students constructed two perpendicular lines at the both end of the barrier, and colored behind the barrier. Similarly, Munier, Devinci and Merle (2008) found that this incorrect strategy was used by 27% of students.
Consequently, we found that although the participants in this study were high achievers, they still held several misconceptions on the angle concept and had difficulties in adapting the angle concept to real life.
Keywords: the angle concept;misconceptions; erroneous answers; high achievers
ReferencesClausen-May, T. (2008). AnotherAngle on Angles. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 13(1),4–8.
Devichi, C., & Munier, V.(2013). About the concept of angle in elementary school: Misconceptions andteaching sequences. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 32(1),1–19. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2012.10.001
Fyhn, A. B. (2006). A climbinggirl’s reflections about angles. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 25(2),91–102. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2006.02.004
Henderson, D. W., & Taimina,D. (2005). Experiencing geometry: Euclidean and non-Euclidean with history(3rd ed.). New York, USA: Prentice Hall.
Kim, O.-K., & Lee, J. H.(2014). Representations of Angle and Lesson Organization in Korean and AmericanElementary Mathematics Curriculum Programs. KAERA Research Forum, 1(3),28–37.
Mitchelmore, M. C., & White,P. (1998). Development of angle concepts: A framework for research. MathematicsEducation Research Journal, 10(3), 4–27.
Mithcelmore, M. C. (1998). Youngstudents’ concepts of turning and angle. Cognition and Instruction, 16(3),265–284.
Munier, V., Devichi, C., &Merle, H. (2008). A Physical Situation as a Way to Teach Angle. TeachingChildren Mathematics, 14(7), 402–407.
Wilson, P. S., & Adams, V.M. (1992). A Dynamic Way to Teach Angle and Angle Measure. ArithmeticTeacher, 39(5), 6–13.
Resumo:
Direction repulsion describes the phenomenon in which observers typically overestimate the direction difference between two superimposed motions moving in different directions (Marshak & Sekuler, Science 205(1979) 1399). Previous research has found that, when a relatively narrow range of distractor speeds is considered, direction repulsion of a target motion increases monotonically with increasing speed of the distractor motion. We sought to obtain a more complete measurement of this speed-tuning function by considering a wider range of distractor speeds than has previously been used. Our results show that, contrary to previous reports, direction repulsion as a function of distractor speed describes an inverted U-function. For a target of 2.5deg/s, we demonstrate that the attenuation of repulsion magnitude with high-speed disractors can be largely explained in terms of the reduced apparent contrast of the distractor. However, when we reduce target motion speed, this no longer holds. When considered from the perspective of Edwards et al.s (Edwards, Badcock, & Smith, Vision Research 38 (1998) 1573) two global-motion channels, our results suggest that direction repulsion is speed dependent when the distractor and target motions are processed by different globalmotion channels, but is not speed dependent when both motions are processed by the same, high-speed channel. The implications of these results for models of direction repulsion are discussed.
Resumo:
.
Resumo:
A novel wide angle spectrometer has been implemented with a highly oriented pyrolytic graphite crystal coupled to an image plate. This spectrometer has allowed us to look at the energy resolved spectrum of scattered x rays from a dense plasma over a wide range of angles ( ~ 30°) in a single shot. Using this spectrometer we were able to observe the temporal evolution of the angular scatter cross section from a laser shocked foil. A spectrometer of this type may also be useful in investigations of x-ray line transfer from laser-plasmas experiments.