Back to the future in one week - implementing a Smalltalk VM in PyPy

We report on our experiences with the Spy project, including implementation details and benchmark results. Spy is a re-implementation of the Squeak (i.e., Smalltalk-80) VM using the PyPy toolchain. The PyPy project allows code written in RPython, a subset of Python, to be translated to a multitude of different backends and architectures. During the translation, many aspects of the implementation can be independently tuned, such as the garbage collection algorithm or threading implementation. In this way, a whole host of interpreters can be derived from one abstract interpreter definition. Spy aims to bring these benefits to Squeak, allowing for greater portability and, eventually, improved performance. The current Spy codebase is able to run a small set of benchmarks that demonstrate performance superior to many similar Smalltalk VMs, but which still run slower than in Squeak itself. Spy was built from scratch over the course of a week during a joint Squeak-PyPy Sprint in Bern last autumn.

Comparison of pain-resilient working individuals to population-based case controls with/without momentary low back pain

Background: Few studies have examined the 20% of individuals who never experience an episode of low back pain (LBP). To date, no investigation has been undertaken that examines a group who claim to have never experienced LBP in their lifetime in comparison to two population-based case–control groups with and without momentary LBP. This study investigates whether LBP-resilient workers between 50 and 65 years had better general health, demonstrated more positive health behaviour and were better able to achieve routine activities compared with both case–control groups. Methods: Forty-two LBP-resilient participants completed the same pain assessment questionnaire as a population-based LBP sample from a nationwide, large-scale cross-sectional survey in Switzerland. The LBP-resilient participants were pairwise compared to the propensity score-matched case controls by exploring differences in demographic and work characteristics, and by calculating odds ratios (ORs) and effect sizes. A discriminant analysis explored group differences, while the multiple logistic regression analysis specified single indicators which accounted for group differences. Results: LBP-resilient participants were healthier than the case controls with momentary LBP and achieved routine activities more easily. Compared to controls without momentary LBP, LBP-resilient participants had a higher vitality, a lower workload, a healthier attitude towards health and behaved more healthily by drinking less alcohol. Conclusions: By demonstrating a difference between LBP-resilient participants and controls without momentary LBP, the question that arises is what additional knowledge can be attained. Three underlying traits seem to be relevant about LBP-resilient participants: personality, favourable work conditions and subjective attitudes/attributions towards health. These rationales have to be considered with respect to LBP prevention.

Who is likely to develop persistent low back pain? A longitudinal analysis of prognostic occupational factors

OBJECTIVE: Occupational low back pain (LBP) is considered to be the most expensive form of work disability, with the socioeconomic costs of persistent LBP exceeding the costs of acute and subacute LBP by far. This makes the early identification of patients at risk of developing persistent LBP essential, especially in working populations. The aim of the study was to evaluate both risk factors (for the development of persistent LBP) and protective factors (preventing the development of persistent LBP) in the same cohort. PARTICIPANTS: An inception cohort of 315 patients with acute to subacute or with recurrent LBP was recruited from 14 health practitioners (twelve general practitioners and two physiotherapists) across New Zealand. METHODS: Patients with persistent LBP at six-month follow-up were compared to patients with non-persistent LBP looking at occupational, psychological, biomedical and demographic/lifestyle predictors at baseline using multiple logistic regression analyses. All significant variables from the different domains were combined into a one predictor model. RESULTS: A final two-predictor model with an overall predictive value of 78% included social support at work (OR 0.67; 95%CI 0.45 to 0.99) and somatization (OR 1.08; 95%CI 1.01 to 1.15). CONCLUSIONS: Social support at work should be considered as a resource preventing the development of persistent LBP whereas somatization should be considered as a risk factor for the development of persistent LBP. Further studies are needed to determine if addressing these factors in workplace interventions for patients suffering from acute, subacute or recurrent LBP prevents subsequent development of persistent LBP.

Wake up. Back to Bed – Zugang zum nächtlichen Training?

Einleitung Ein Klartraum ist definiert als ein Traum, in dem der Träumende weiß, dass er träumt. In der Fachliteratur finden sich verschiedene Induktionstechniken, um die Klartraum-häufigkeit zu steigern (z.B. Stumbrys, Erlacher, Schädlich & Schredl, 2012). Zudem wurde in einer Pilotstudie gezeigt, dass ein Training im Klartraum zu Verbesserungen in einer Zielwurfaufgabe am nächsten Morgen führt (Erlacher & Schredl, 2010). Um ein regelmäßiges Training im Traum zu ermöglichen, besteht für die Sportpraxis das Problem, Klarträume gezielt zu induzieren. In dieser Studie wurde im Schlaflabor die so genannte Memnotische Induktion von luziden Träumen (MILT) – eine Autosugges-tionstechnik in der die Intention, einen Klartraum zu erleben, an Traumhinweise ge-koppelt wird – im Morgenschlaf überprüft. Methoden Insgesamt wurden 52 Versuchsteilnehmer (32 männlich und 20 weiblich) im Alter von 24 Jahren (± 2.2) im Schlaflabor untersucht. Die Personen waren in 4 Gruppen aufge-teilt. Alle Personen schliefen zunächst für ca. 6 Stunden, wurden dann aus einer REM-Phase geweckt und sollten einen Traum berichten. Im Anschluss blieben die Teilnehmer 30 bzw. 60 Minuten wach und praktizierten entweder MILT oder beschäf-tigten sich mit einer kognitiven oder motorischen Kontrollaufgabe. Im Anschluss durf-ten alle Teilnehmer für max. 4 weitere Stunden schlafen. Das Auftreten eines Klartraums in der morgendlichen Schlafphase diente als abhängige Variable. Ergebnisse und Diskussion Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass MILT zu einer gesteigerten Klartraumhäufigkeit (33-70%) im Vergleich zur Kontrollbedingung (9-14%) führt. Ein Unterschied zwischen 30 Minuten (50%) zu 60 Minuten MILT (70%) ist marginal. Das Auftreten von Klarträumen kann durch MILT im Morgenschlaf signifikant gestei-gert werden. Die Erfolgsquote schwankt jedoch mit Blick auf die genaue Definition ei-nes Klartraums. Es konnten bei nicht klartraumerfahrenen Versuchsteilnehmerinnen mehr Klarträume induziert werden. Für die Sportpraxis könnten solche Induktions-techniken dem Sportler ermöglichen, im Traum zu trainieren. In weiteren Studien wäre zu untersuchen, ob Athleten ebenfalls Klarträume induziert werden können. Ebenso sollte die Auswirkung eines regelmäßigen Klartraumtrainings in der Sportpraxis wei-ter untersucht werden. Literatur Stumbrys, T., Erlacher, D., Schädlich, M. & Schredl, M. (2012). Induction of lucid dreams: a systematic review of evidence. Consciousness and Cognition, 21(3), 1456-1475. Erlacher, D. & Schredl, M. (2010). Practicing a motor task in a lucid dream enhances subsequent performance: A pilot study. The Sport Psychologist, 24(2), 157-167.

A global radiosonde and tracked balloon archive on 16 pressure levels (GRASP) back to 1905 – Part 1: Merging and interpolation to 00:00 and 12:00 GMT

Many observed time series of the global radiosonde or PILOT networks exist as fragments distributed over different archives. Identifying and merging these fragments can enhance their value for studies on the three-dimensional spatial structure of climate change. The Comprehensive Historical Upper-Air Network (CHUAN version 1.7), which was substantially extended in 2013, and the Integrated Global Radiosonde Archive (IGRA) are the most important collections of upper-air measurements taken before 1958. CHUAN (tracked) balloon data start in 1900, with higher numbers from the late 1920s onward, whereas IGRA data start in 1937. However, a substantial fraction of those measurements have not been taken at synoptic times (preferably 00:00 or 12:00 GMT) and on altitude levels instead of standard pressure levels. To make them comparable with more recent data, the records have been brought to synoptic times and standard pressure levels using state-of-the-art interpolation techniques, employing geopotential information from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 20th Century Reanalysis (NOAA 20CR). From 1958 onward the European Re-Analysis archives (ERA-40 and ERA-Interim) available at the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) are the main data sources. These are easier to use, but pilot data still have to be interpolated to standard pressure levels. Fractions of the same records distributed over different archives have been merged, if necessary, taking care that the data remain traceable back to their original sources. If possible, station IDs assigned by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) have been allocated to the station records. For some records which have never been identified by a WMO ID, a local ID above 100 000 has been assigned. The merged data set contains 37 wind records longer than 70 years and 139 temperature records longer than 60 years. It can be seen as a useful basis for further data processing steps, most notably homogenization and gridding, after which it should be a valuable resource for climatological studies. Homogeneity adjustments for wind using the NOAA-20CR as a reference are described in Ramella Pralungo and Haimberger (2014). Reliable homogeneity adjustments for temperature beyond 1958 using a surface-data-only reanalysis such as NOAA-20CR as a reference have yet to be created. All the archives and metadata files are available in ASCII and netCDF format in the PANGAEA archive

What is the best time point to identify patients at risk of developing persistent low back pain?

BACKGROUND Early identification of patients at risk of developing persistent low back pain (LBP) is crucial. OBJECTIVE Aim of this study was to identify in patients with a new episode of LBP the time point at which those at risk of developing persistent LBP can be best identified.METHODS: Prospective cohort study of 315 patients presenting to a health practitioner with a first episode of acute LBP. Primary outcome measure was functional limitation. Patients were assessed at baseline, three, six, twelve weeks and six months looking at factors of maladaptive cognition as potential predictors. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed for all time points. RESULTS The best time point to predict the development of persistent LBP at six months was the twelve-week follow-up (sensitivity 78%; overall predictive value 90%). Cognitions assessed at first visit to a health practitioner were not predictive. CONCLUSIONS Maladaptive cognitions at twelve weeks appear to be suitable predictors for a transition from acute to persistent LBP. Already three weeks after patients present to a health practitioner with acute LBP cognitions might influence the development of persistent LBP. Therefore, cognitive-behavioral interventions should be considered as early adjuvant LBP treatment in patients at risk of developing persistent LBP.