Impact of Taylor-Aris diffusivity on analyte and system zone dispersion in CZE assessed by computer simulation and experimental validation.

Application of pressure-driven laminar flow has an impact on zone and boundary dispersion in open tubular CE. The GENTRANS dynamic simulator for electrophoresis was extended with Taylor-Aris diffusivity which accounts for dispersion due to the parabolic flow profile associated with pressure-driven flow. Effective diffusivity of analyte and system zones as functions of the capillary diameter and the amount of flow in comparison to molecular diffusion alone were studied for configurations with concomitant action of imposed hydrodynamic flow and electroosmosis. For selected examples under realistic experimental conditions, simulation data are compared with those monitored experimentally using modular CE setups featuring both capacitively coupled contactless conductivity and UV absorbance detection along a 50 μm id fused-silica capillary of 90 cm total length. The data presented indicate that inclusion of flow profile based Taylor-Aris diffusivity provides realistic simulation data for analyte and system peaks, particularly those monitored in CE with conductivity detection.

High-resolution computer simulations of EKC

The electrophoresis simulation software, GENTRANS, has been modified to include the interaction of analytes with an electrolyte additive to allow the simulation of liquid-phase EKC separations. The modifications account for interaction of weak and strong acid and base analytes with a single weak or strong acid or base background electrolyte additive and can be used to simulate a range of EKC separations with both charged and neutral additives. Simulations of separations of alkylphenyl ketones under real experimental conditions were performed using mobility and interaction constant data obtained from the literature and agreed well with experimental separations. Migration times in fused-silica capillaries and linear polyacrylamide-coated capillaries were within 7% of the experimental values, while peak widths were always narrower than the experimental values, but were still within 50% of those obtained by experiment. Simulations of sweeping were also performed; although migration time agreement was not as good as for simple EKC separations, peak widths were in good agreement, being within 1-50% of the experimental values. All simulations for comparison with experimental data were performed under real experimental conditions using a 47 cm capillary and a voltage of 20 kV and represent the first quantitative attempt at simulating EKC separations with and without sweeping.

Are We Sims? How Computer Simulations Represent and What this Means for the Simulation Argument

N. Bostrom’s simulation argument and two additional assumptions imply that we are likely to live in a computer simulation. The argument is based upon the following assumption about the workings of realistic brain simulations: The hardware of a computer on which a brain simulation is run bears a close analogy to the brain itself. To inquire whether this is so, I analyze how computer simulations trace processes in their targets. I describe simulations as fictional, mathematical, pictorial, and material models. Even though the computer hardware does provide a material model of the target, this does not suffice to underwrite the simulation argument because the ways in which parts of the computer hardware interact during simulations do not resemble the ways in which neurons interact in the brain. Further, there are computer simulations of all kinds of systems, and it would be unreasonable to infer that some computers display consciousness just because they simulate brains rather than, say, galaxies.

Comparison of actual surgical outcomes and 3-dimensional surgical simulations

PURPOSE: The advent of imaging software programs has proved to be useful for diagnosis, treatment planning, and outcome measurement, but precision of 3-dimensional (3D) surgical simulation still needs to be tested. This study was conducted to determine whether the virtual surgery performed on 3D models constructed from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) can correctly simulate the actual surgical outcome and to validate the ability of this emerging technology to recreate the orthognathic surgery hard tissue movements in 3 translational and 3 rotational planes of space. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Construction of pre- and postsurgery 3D models from CBCTs of 14 patients who had combined maxillary advancement and mandibular setback surgery and 6 patients who had 1-piece maxillary advancement surgery was performed. The postsurgery and virtually simulated surgery 3D models were registered at the cranial base to quantify differences between simulated and actual surgery models. Hotelling t tests were used to assess the differences between simulated and actual surgical outcomes. RESULTS: For all anatomic regions of interest, there was no statistically significant difference between the simulated and the actual surgical models. The right lateral ramus was the only region that showed a statistically significant, but small difference when comparing 2- and 1-jaw surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual surgical methods were reliably reproduced. Oral surgery residents could benefit from virtual surgical training. Computer simulation has the potential to increase predictability in the operating room.

How can computer simulations produce new knowledge?

It is often claimed that scientists can obtain new knowledge about nature by running computer simulations. How is this possible? I answer this question by arguing that computer simulations are arguments. This view parallels Norton’s argument view about thought experiments. I show that computer simulations can be reconstructed as arguments that fully capture the epistemic power of the simulations. Assuming the extended mind hypothesis, I furthermore argue that running the computer simulation is to execute the reconstructing argument. I discuss some objections and reject the view that computer simulations produce knowledge because they are experiments. I conclude by comparing thought experiments and computer simulations, assuming that both are arguments.