Computational studies of the reversible domain swapping of p13suc1

A minimalist representation of protein structures using a Go- like potential for interactions is implemented to investigate the mechanisms of the domain swapping of p13suc1, a protein that exists in two native conformations: a monomer and a domain- swapped dimer formed by the exchange of a beta- strand. Inspired by experimental studies which showed a similarity of the transition states for folding of the monomer and the dimer, in this study we justify this similarity in molecular descriptions. When intermediates are populated in the simulations, formation of a domain- swapped dimer initiates from the ensemble of unfolded monomers, given by the fact that the dimer formation occurs at the folding/ unfolding temperature of the monomer ( T-f). It is also shown that transitions, leading to a dimer, involve the presence of two intermediates, one of them has a dimeric form and the other is monomeric; the latter is much more populated than the former. However, at temperatures lower than T-f, the population of intermediates decreases. It is argued that the two folded forms may coexist in absence of intermediates at a temperature much lower than T-f. Computational simulations enable us to find a mechanism, `` lock- and- dock'', for domain swapping of p13suc1. To explore the route toward dimer formation, the folding of unstructured monomers must be retarded by first locking one of the free ends of each chain. Then, the other free termini could follow and dock at particular regions, where most intrachain contacts are formed, and thus de. ne the transition states of the dimer. The simulations also showed that a decrease in the maximum distance between monomers increased their stability, which is explained based on confinement arguments. Although the simulations are based on models extracted from the native structure of the monomer and the dimer of p13suc1, the mechanism of the domain- swapping process could be general, not only for p13suc1.

OntoTag - A Linguistic and Ontological Annotation Model Suitable for the Semantic Web

OntoTag - A Linguistic and Ontological Annotation Model Suitable for the Semantic Web 1. INTRODUCTION. LINGUISTIC TOOLS AND ANNOTATIONS: THEIR LIGHTS AND SHADOWS Computational Linguistics is already a consolidated research area. It builds upon the results of other two major ones, namely Linguistics and Computer Science and Engineering, and it aims at developing computational models of human language (or natural language, as it is termed in this area). Possibly, its most well-known applications are the different tools developed so far for processing human language, such as machine translation systems and speech recognizers or dictation programs. These tools for processing human language are commonly referred to as linguistic tools. Apart from the examples mentioned above, there are also other types of linguistic tools that perhaps are not so well-known, but on which most of the other applications of Computational Linguistics are built. These other types of linguistic tools comprise POS taggers, natural language parsers and semantic taggers, amongst others. All of them can be termed linguistic annotation tools. Linguistic annotation tools are important assets. In fact, POS and semantic taggers (and, to a lesser extent, also natural language parsers) have become critical resources for the computer applications that process natural language. Hence, any computer application that has to analyse a text automatically and ‘intelligently’ will include at least a module for POS tagging. The more an application needs to ‘understand’ the meaning of the text it processes, the more linguistic tools and/or modules it will incorporate and integrate. However, linguistic annotation tools have still some limitations, which can be summarised as follows: 1. Normally, they perform annotations only at a certain linguistic level (that is, Morphology, Syntax, Semantics, etc.). 2. They usually introduce a certain rate of errors and ambiguities when tagging. This error rate ranges from 10 percent up to 50 percent of the units annotated for unrestricted, general texts. 3. Their annotations are most frequently formulated in terms of an annotation schema designed and implemented ad hoc. A priori, it seems that the interoperation and the integration of several linguistic tools into an appropriate software architecture could most likely solve the limitations stated in (1). Besides, integrating several linguistic annotation tools and making them interoperate could also minimise the limitation stated in (2). Nevertheless, in the latter case, all these tools should produce annotations for a common level, which would have to be combined in order to correct their corresponding errors and inaccuracies. Yet, the limitation stated in (3) prevents both types of integration and interoperation from being easily achieved. In addition, most high-level annotation tools rely on other lower-level annotation tools and their outputs to generate their own ones. For example, sense-tagging tools (operating at the semantic level) often use POS taggers (operating at a lower level, i.e., the morphosyntactic) to identify the grammatical category of the word or lexical unit they are annotating. Accordingly, if a faulty or inaccurate low-level annotation tool is to be used by other higher-level one in its process, the errors and inaccuracies of the former should be minimised in advance. Otherwise, these errors and inaccuracies would be transferred to (and even magnified in) the annotations of the high-level annotation tool. Therefore, it would be quite useful to find a way to (i) correct or, at least, reduce the errors and the inaccuracies of lower-level linguistic tools; (ii) unify the annotation schemas of different linguistic annotation tools or, more generally speaking, make these tools (as well as their annotations) interoperate. Clearly, solving (i) and (ii) should ease the automatic annotation of web pages by means of linguistic tools, and their transformation into Semantic Web pages (Berners-Lee, Hendler and Lassila, 2001). Yet, as stated above, (ii) is a type of interoperability problem. There again, ontologies (Gruber, 1993; Borst, 1997) have been successfully applied thus far to solve several interoperability problems. Hence, ontologies should help solve also the problems and limitations of linguistic annotation tools aforementioned. Thus, to summarise, the main aim of the present work was to combine somehow these separated approaches, mechanisms and tools for annotation from Linguistics and Ontological Engineering (and the Semantic Web) in a sort of hybrid (linguistic and ontological) annotation model, suitable for both areas. This hybrid (semantic) annotation model should (a) benefit from the advances, models, techniques, mechanisms and tools of these two areas; (b) minimise (and even solve, when possible) some of the problems found in each of them; and (c) be suitable for the Semantic Web. The concrete goals that helped attain this aim are presented in the following section. 2. GOALS OF THE PRESENT WORK As mentioned above, the main goal of this work was to specify a hybrid (that is, linguistically-motivated and ontology-based) model of annotation suitable for the Semantic Web (i.e. it had to produce a semantic annotation of web page contents). This entailed that the tags included in the annotations of the model had to (1) represent linguistic concepts (or linguistic categories, as they are termed in ISO/DCR (2008)), in order for this model to be linguistically-motivated; (2) be ontological terms (i.e., use an ontological vocabulary), in order for the model to be ontology-based; and (3) be structured (linked) as a collection of ontology-based triples, as in the usual Semantic Web languages (namely RDF(S) and OWL), in order for the model to be considered suitable for the Semantic Web. Besides, to be useful for the Semantic Web, this model should provide a way to automate the annotation of web pages. As for the present work, this requirement involved reusing the linguistic annotation tools purchased by the OEG research group (http://www.oeg-upm.net), but solving beforehand (or, at least, minimising) some of their limitations. Therefore, this model had to minimise these limitations by means of the integration of several linguistic annotation tools into a common architecture. Since this integration required the interoperation of tools and their annotations, ontologies were proposed as the main technological component to make them effectively interoperate. From the very beginning, it seemed that the formalisation of the elements and the knowledge underlying linguistic annotations within an appropriate set of ontologies would be a great step forward towards the formulation of such a model (henceforth referred to as OntoTag). Obviously, first, to combine the results of the linguistic annotation tools that operated at the same level, their annotation schemas had to be unified (or, preferably, standardised) in advance. This entailed the unification (id. standardisation) of their tags (both their representation and their meaning), and their format or syntax. Second, to merge the results of the linguistic annotation tools operating at different levels, their respective annotation schemas had to be (a) made interoperable and (b) integrated. And third, in order for the resulting annotations to suit the Semantic Web, they had to be specified by means of an ontology-based vocabulary, and structured by means of ontology-based triples, as hinted above. Therefore, a new annotation scheme had to be devised, based both on ontologies and on this type of triples, which allowed for the combination and the integration of the annotations of any set of linguistic annotation tools. This annotation scheme was considered a fundamental part of the model proposed here, and its development was, accordingly, another major objective of the present work. All these goals, aims and objectives could be re-stated more clearly as follows: Goal 1: Development of a set of ontologies for the formalisation of the linguistic knowledge relating linguistic annotation. Sub-goal 1.1: Ontological formalisation of the EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) de facto standards for morphosyntactic and syntactic annotation, in a way that helps respect the triple structure recommended for annotations in these works (which is isomorphic to the triple structures used in the context of the Semantic Web). Sub-goal 1.2: Incorporation into this preliminary ontological formalisation of other existing standards and standard proposals relating the levels mentioned above, such as those currently under development within ISO/TC 37 (the ISO Technical Committee dealing with Terminology, which deals also with linguistic resources and annotations). Sub-goal 1.3: Generalisation and extension of the recommendations in EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) and ISO/TC 37 to the semantic level, for which no ISO/TC 37 standards have been developed yet. Sub-goal 1.4: Ontological formalisation of the generalisations and/or extensions obtained in the previous sub-goal as generalisations and/or extensions of the corresponding ontology (or ontologies). Sub-goal 1.5: Ontological formalisation of the knowledge required to link, combine and unite the knowledge represented in the previously developed ontology (or ontologies). Goal 2: Development of OntoTag’s annotation scheme, a standard-based abstract scheme for the hybrid (linguistically-motivated and ontological-based) annotation of texts. Sub-goal 2.1: Development of the standard-based morphosyntactic annotation level of OntoTag’s scheme. This level should include, and possibly extend, the recommendations of EAGLES (1996a) and also the recommendations included in the ISO/MAF (2008) standard draft. Sub-goal 2.2: Development of the standard-based syntactic annotation level of the hybrid abstract scheme. This level should include, and possibly extend, the recommendations of EAGLES (1996b) and the ISO/SynAF (2010) standard draft. Sub-goal 2.3: Development of the standard-based semantic annotation level of OntoTag’s (abstract) scheme. Sub-goal 2.4: Development of the mechanisms for a convenient integration of the three annotation levels already mentioned. These mechanisms should take into account the recommendations included in the ISO/LAF (2009) standard draft. Goal 3: Design of OntoTag’s (abstract) annotation architecture, an abstract architecture for the hybrid (semantic) annotation of texts (i) that facilitates the integration and interoperation of different linguistic annotation tools, and (ii) whose results comply with OntoTag’s annotation scheme. Sub-goal 3.1: Specification of the decanting processes that allow for the classification and separation, according to their corresponding levels, of the results of the linguistic tools annotating at several different levels. Sub-goal 3.2: Specification of the standardisation processes that allow (a) complying with the standardisation requirements of OntoTag’s annotation scheme, as well as (b) combining the results of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation. Sub-goal 3.3: Specification of the merging processes that allow for the combination of the output annotations and the interoperation of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation. Sub-goal 3.4: Specification of the merge processes that allow for the integration of the results and the interoperation of those tools performing their annotations at different levels. Goal 4: Generation of OntoTagger’s schema, a concrete instance of OntoTag’s abstract scheme for a concrete set of linguistic annotations. These linguistic annotations result from the tools and the resources available in the research group, namely • Bitext’s DataLexica (http://www.bitext.com/EN/datalexica.asp), • LACELL’s (POS) tagger (http://www.um.es/grupos/grupo-lacell/quees.php), • Connexor’s FDG (http://www.connexor.eu/technology/machinese/glossary/fdg/), and • EuroWordNet (Vossen et al., 1998). This schema should help evaluate OntoTag’s underlying hypotheses, stated below. Consequently, it should implement, at least, those levels of the abstract scheme dealing with the annotations of the set of tools considered in this implementation. This includes the morphosyntactic, the syntactic and the semantic levels. Goal 5: Implementation of OntoTagger’s configuration, a concrete instance of OntoTag’s abstract architecture for this set of linguistic tools and annotations. This configuration (1) had to use the schema generated in the previous goal; and (2) should help support or refute the hypotheses of this work as well (see the next section). Sub-goal 5.1: Implementation of the decanting processes that facilitate the classification and separation of the results of those linguistic resources that provide annotations at several different levels (on the one hand, LACELL’s tagger operates at the morphosyntactic level and, minimally, also at the semantic level; on the other hand, FDG operates at the morphosyntactic and the syntactic levels and, minimally, at the semantic level as well). Sub-goal 5.2: Implementation of the standardisation processes that allow (i) specifying the results of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation according to the requirements of OntoTagger’s schema, as well as (ii) combining these shared level results. In particular, all the tools selected perform morphosyntactic annotations and they had to be conveniently combined by means of these processes. Sub-goal 5.3: Implementation of the merging processes that allow for the combination (and possibly the improvement) of the annotations and the interoperation of the tools that share some level of annotation (in particular, those relating the morphosyntactic level, as in the previous sub-goal). Sub-goal 5.4: Implementation of the merging processes that allow for the integration of the different standardised and combined annotations aforementioned, relating all the levels considered. Sub-goal 5.5: Improvement of the semantic level of this configuration by adding a named entity recognition, (sub-)classification and annotation subsystem, which also uses the named entities annotated to populate a domain ontology, in order to provide a concrete application of the present work in the two areas involved (the Semantic Web and Corpus Linguistics). 3. MAIN RESULTS: ASSESSMENT OF ONTOTAG’S UNDERLYING HYPOTHESES The model developed in the present thesis tries to shed some light on (i) whether linguistic annotation tools can effectively interoperate; (ii) whether their results can be combined and integrated; and, if they can, (iii) how they can, respectively, interoperate and be combined and integrated. Accordingly, several hypotheses had to be supported (or rejected) by the development of the OntoTag model and OntoTagger (its implementation). The hypotheses underlying OntoTag are surveyed below. Only one of the hypotheses (H.6) was rejected; the other five could be confirmed. H.1 The annotations of different levels (or layers) can be integrated into a sort of overall, comprehensive, multilayer and multilevel annotation, so that their elements can complement and refer to each other. • CONFIRMED by the development of: o OntoTag’s annotation scheme, o OntoTag’s annotation architecture, o OntoTagger’s (XML, RDF, OWL) annotation schemas, o OntoTagger’s configuration. H.2 Tool-dependent annotations can be mapped onto a sort of tool-independent annotations and, thus, can be standardised. • CONFIRMED by means of the standardisation phase incorporated into OntoTag and OntoTagger for the annotations yielded by the tools. H.3 Standardisation should ease: H.3.1: The interoperation of linguistic tools. H.3.2: The comparison, combination (at the same level and layer) and integration (at different levels or layers) of annotations. • H.3 was CONFIRMED by means of the development of OntoTagger’s ontology-based configuration: o Interoperation, comparison, combination and integration of the annotations of three different linguistic tools (Connexor’s FDG, Bitext’s DataLexica and LACELL’s tagger); o Integration of EuroWordNet-based, domain-ontology-based and named entity annotations at the semantic level. o Integration of morphosyntactic, syntactic and semantic annotations. H.4 Ontologies and Semantic Web technologies (can) play a crucial role in the standardisation of linguistic annotations, by providing consensual vocabularies and standardised formats for annotation (e.g., RDF triples). • CONFIRMED by means of the development of OntoTagger’s RDF-triple-based annotation schemas. H.5 The rate of errors introduced by a linguistic tool at a given level, when annotating, can be reduced automatically by contrasting and combining its results with the ones coming from other tools, operating at the same level. However, these other tools might be built following a different technological (stochastic vs. rule-based, for example) or theoretical (dependency vs. HPS-grammar-based, for instance) approach. • CONFIRMED by the results yielded by the evaluation of OntoTagger. H.6 Each linguistic level can be managed and annotated independently. • REJECTED: OntoTagger’s experiments and the dependencies observed among the morphosyntactic annotations, and between them and the syntactic annotations. In fact, Hypothesis H.6 was already rejected when OntoTag’s ontologies were developed. We observed then that several linguistic units stand on an interface between levels, belonging thereby to both of them (such as morphosyntactic units, which belong to both the morphological level and the syntactic level). Therefore, the annotations of these levels overlap and cannot be handled independently when merged into a unique multileveled annotation. 4. OTHER MAIN RESULTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS First, interoperability is a hot topic for both the linguistic annotation community and the whole Computer Science field. The specification (and implementation) of OntoTag’s architecture for the combination and integration of linguistic (annotation) tools and annotations by means of ontologies shows a way to make these different linguistic annotation tools and annotations interoperate in practice. Second, as mentioned above, the elements involved in linguistic annotation were formalised in a set (or network) of ontologies (OntoTag’s linguistic ontologies). • On the one hand, OntoTag’s network of ontologies consists of − The Linguistic Unit Ontology (LUO), which includes a mostly hierarchical formalisation of the different types of linguistic elements (i.e., units) identifiable in a written text; − The Linguistic Attribute Ontology (LAO), which includes also a mostly hierarchical formalisation of the different types of features that characterise the linguistic units included in the LUO; − The Linguistic Value Ontology (LVO), which includes the corresponding formalisation of the different values that the attributes in the LAO can take; − The OIO (OntoTag’s Integration Ontology), which  Includes the knowledge required to link, combine and unite the knowledge represented in the LUO, the LAO and the LVO;  Can be viewed as a knowledge representation ontology that describes the most elementary vocabulary used in the area of annotation. • On the other hand, OntoTag’s ontologies incorporate the knowledge included in the different standards and recommendations for linguistic annotation released so far, such as those developed within the EAGLES and the SIMPLE European projects or by the ISO/TC 37 committee: − As far as morphosyntactic annotations are concerned, OntoTag’s ontologies formalise the terms in the EAGLES (1996a) recommendations and their corresponding terms within the ISO Morphosyntactic Annotation Framework (ISO/MAF, 2008) standard; − As for syntactic annotations, OntoTag’s ontologies incorporate the terms in the EAGLES (1996b) recommendations and their corresponding terms within the ISO Syntactic Annotation Framework (ISO/SynAF, 2010) standard draft; − Regarding semantic annotations, OntoTag’s ontologies generalise and extend the recommendations in EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) and, since no stable standards or standard drafts have been released for semantic annotation by ISO/TC 37 yet, they incorporate the terms in SIMPLE (2000) instead; − The terms coming from all these recommendations and standards were supplemented by those within the ISO Data Category Registry (ISO/DCR, 2008) and also of the ISO Linguistic Annotation Framework (ISO/LAF, 2009) standard draft when developing OntoTag’s ontologies. Third, we showed that the combination of the results of tools annotating at the same level can yield better results (both in precision and in recall) than each tool separately. In particular, 1. OntoTagger clearly outperformed two of the tools integrated into its configuration, namely DataLexica and FDG in all the combination sub-phases in which they overlapped (i.e. POS tagging, lemma annotation and morphological feature annotation). As far as the remaining tool is concerned, i.e. LACELL’s tagger, it was also outperformed by OntoTagger in POS tagging and lemma annotation, and it did not behave better than OntoTagger in the morphological feature annotation layer. 2. As an immediate result, this implies that a) This type of combination architecture configurations can be applied in order to improve significantly the accuracy of linguistic annotations; and b) Concerning the morphosyntactic level, this could be regarded as a way of constructing more robust and more accurate POS tagging systems. Fourth, Semantic Web annotations are usually performed by humans or else by machine learning systems. Both of them leave much to be desired: the former, with respect to their annotation rate; the latter, with respect to their (average) precision and recall. In this work, we showed how linguistic tools can be wrapped in order to annotate automatically Semantic Web pages using ontologies. This entails their fast, robust and accurate semantic annotation. As a way of example, as mentioned in Sub-goal 5.5, we developed a particular OntoTagger module for the recognition, classification and labelling of named entities, according to the MUC and ACE tagsets (Chinchor, 1997; Doddington et al., 2004). These tagsets were further specified by means of a domain ontology, namely the Cinema Named Entities Ontology (CNEO). This module was applied to the automatic annotation of ten different web pages containing cinema reviews (that is, around 5000 words). In addition, the named entities annotated with this module were also labelled as instances (or individuals) of the classes included in the CNEO and, then, were used to populate this domain ontology. • The statistical results obtained from the evaluation of this particular module of OntoTagger can be summarised as follows. On the one hand, as far as recall (R) is concerned, (R.1) the lowest value was 76,40% (for file 7); (R.2) the highest value was 97, 50% (for file 3); and (R.3) the average value was 88,73%. On the other hand, as far as the precision rate (P) is concerned, (P.1) its minimum was 93,75% (for file 4); (R.2) its maximum was 100% (for files 1, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10); and (R.3) its average value was 98,99%. • These results, which apply to the tasks of named entity annotation and ontology population, are extraordinary good for both of them. They can be explained on the basis of the high accuracy of the annotations provided by OntoTagger at the lower levels (mainly at the morphosyntactic level). However, they should be conveniently qualified, since they might be too domain- and/or language-dependent. It should be further experimented how our approach works in a different domain or a different language, such as French, English, or German. • In any case, the results of this application of Human Language Technologies to Ontology Population (and, accordingly, to Ontological Engineering) seem very promising and encouraging in order for these two areas to collaborate and complement each other in the area of semantic annotation. Fifth, as shown in the State of the Art of this work, there are different approaches and models for the semantic annotation of texts, but all of them focus on a particular view of the semantic level. Clearly, all these approaches and models should be integrated in order to bear a coherent and joint semantic annotation level. OntoTag shows how (i) these semantic annotation layers could be integrated together; and (ii) they could be integrated with the annotations associated to other annotation levels. Sixth, we identified some recommendations, best practices and lessons learned for annotation standardisation, interoperation and merge. They show how standardisation (via ontologies, in this case) enables the combination, integration and interoperation of different linguistic tools and their annotations into a multilayered (or multileveled) linguistic annotation, which is one of the hot topics in the area of Linguistic Annotation. And last but not least, OntoTag’s annotation scheme and OntoTagger’s annotation schemas show a way to formalise and annotate coherently and uniformly the different units and features associated to the different levels and layers of linguistic annotation. This is a great scientific step ahead towards the global standardisation of this area, which is the aim of ISO/TC 37 (in particular, Subcommittee 4, dealing with the standardisation of linguistic annotations and resources).

Development of a domain decomposition method for computational aeroacoustics

Abstract not available

Effective Cell-Centred Time-Domain Maxwell's Equations Numerical Solvers

This research work analyses techniques for implementing a cell-centred finite-volume time-domain (ccFV-TD) computational methodology for the purpose of studying microwave heating. Various state-of-the-art spatial and temporal discretisation methods employed to solve Maxwell's equations on multidimensional structured grid networks are investigated, and the dispersive and dissipative errors inherent in those techniques examined. Both staggered and unstaggered grid approaches are considered. Upwind schemes using a Riemann solver and intensity vector splitting are studied and evaluated. Staggered and unstaggered Leapfrog and Runge-Kutta time integration methods are analysed in terms of phase and amplitude error to identify which method is the most accurate and efficient for simulating microwave heating processes. The implementation and migration of typical electromagnetic boundary conditions. from staggered in space to cell-centred approaches also is deliberated. In particular, an existing perfectly matched layer absorbing boundary methodology is adapted to formulate a new cell-centred boundary implementation for the ccFV-TD solvers. Finally for microwave heating purposes, a comparison of analytical and numerical results for standard case studies in rectangular waveguides allows the accuracy of the developed methods to be assessed.

Leveraging Web 2.0 data for scalable semi-supervised learning of domain-specific sentiment lexicons

Since manually constructing domain-specific sentiment lexicons is extremely time consuming and it may not even be feasible for domains where linguistic expertise is not available. Research on the automatic construction of domain-specific sentiment lexicons has become a hot topic in recent years. The main contribution of this paper is the illustration of a novel semi-supervised learning method which exploits both term-to-term and document-to-term relations hidden in a corpus for the construction of domain specific sentiment lexicons. More specifically, the proposed two-pass pseudo labeling method combines shallow linguistic parsing and corpusbase statistical learning to make domain-specific sentiment extraction scalable with respect to the sheer volume of opinionated documents archived on the Internet these days. Another novelty of the proposed method is that it can utilize the readily available user-contributed labels of opinionated documents (e.g., the user ratings of product reviews) to bootstrap the performance of sentiment lexicon construction. Our experiments show that the proposed method can generate high quality domain-specific sentiment lexicons as directly assessed by human experts. Moreover, the system generated domain-specific sentiment lexicons can improve polarity prediction tasks at the document level by 2:18% when compared to other well-known baseline methods. Our research opens the door to the development of practical and scalable methods for domain-specific sentiment analysis.

Learning domain-specific sentiment lexicons for predicting product sales

Generic sentiment lexicons have been widely used for sentiment analysis these days. However, manually constructing sentiment lexicons is very time-consuming and it may not be feasible for certain application domains where annotation expertise is not available. One contribution of this paper is the development of a statistical learning based computational method for the automatic construction of domain-specific sentiment lexicons to enhance cross-domain sentiment analysis. Our initial experiments show that the proposed methodology can automatically generate domain-specific sentiment lexicons which contribute to improve the effectiveness of opinion retrieval at the document level. Another contribution of our work is that we show the feasibility of applying the sentiment metric derived based on the automatically constructed sentiment lexicons to predict product sales of certain product categories. Our research contributes to the development of more effective sentiment analysis system to extract business intelligence from numerous opinionated expressions posted to the Web

Correlating flow induced shear stress and chondrocytes activity in micro-porous scaffold using computational fluid dynamics and rapid prototyping

Flow induced shear stress plays an important role in regulating cell growth and distribution in scaffolds. This study sought to correlate wall shear stress and chondrocytes activity for engineering design of micro-porous osteochondral grafts based on the hypothesis that it is possible to capture and discriminate between the transmitted force and cell response at the inner irregularities. Unlike common tissue engineering therapies with perfusion bioreactors in which flow-mediated stress is the controlling parameter, this work assigned the associated stress as a function of porosity to influence in vitro proliferation of chondrocytes. D-optimality criterion was used to accommodate three pore characteristics for appraisal in a mixed level fractional design of experiment (DOE); namely, pore size (4 levels), distribution pattern (2 levels) and density (3 levels). Micro-porous scaffolds (n=12) were fabricated according to the DOE using rapid prototyping of an acrylic-based bio-photopolymer. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) models were created correspondingly and used on an idealized boundary condition with a Newtonian fluid domain to simulate the dynamic microenvironment inside the pores. In vitro condition was reproduced for the 3D printed constructs seeded by high pellet densities of human chondrocytes and cultured for 72 hours. The results showed that cell proliferation was significantly different in the constructs (p<0.05). Inlet fluid velocity of 3×10-2mms-1 and average shear stress of 5.65×10-2 Pa corresponded with increased cell proliferation for scaffolds with smaller pores in hexagonal pattern and lower densities. Although the analytical solution of a Poiseuille flow inside the pores was found insufficient for the description of the flow profile probably due to the outside flow induced turbulence, it showed that the shear stress would increase with cell growth and decrease with pore size. This correlation demonstrated the basis for determining the relation between the induced stress and chondrocyte activity to optimize microfabrication of engineered cartilaginous constructs.

A sub‒domain smoothed Galerkin method for solid mechanics problems

A sub‒domain smoothed Galerkin method is proposed to integrate the advantages of mesh‒free Galerkin method and FEM. Arbitrarily shaped sub‒domains are predefined in problems domain with mesh‒free nodes. In each sub‒domain, based on mesh‒free Galerkin weak formulation, the local discrete equation can be obtained by using the moving Kriging interpolation, which is similar to the discretization of the high‒order finite elements. Strain smoothing technique is subsequently applied to the nodal integration of sub‒domain by dividing the sub‒domain into several smoothing cells. Moreover, condensation of DOF can also be introduced into the local discrete equations to improve the computational efficiency. The global governing equations of present method are obtained on the basis of the scheme of FEM by assembling all local discrete equations of the sub‒domains. The mesh‒free properties of Galerkin method are retained in each sub‒domain. Several 2D elastic problems have been solved on the basis of this newly proposed method to validate its computational performance. These numerical examples proved that the newly proposed sub‒domain smoothed Galerkin method is a robust technique to solve solid mechanics problems based on its characteristics of high computational efficiency, good accuracy, and convergence.

Two-scale computational modelling of unsaturated flow in soils exhibiting small scale heterogeneities

Unsaturated water flow in soil is commonly modelled using Richards’ equation, which requires the hydraulic properties of the soil (e.g., porosity, hydraulic conductivity, etc.) to be characterised. Naturally occurring soils, however, are heterogeneous in nature, that is, they are composed of a number of interwoven homogeneous soils each with their own set of hydraulic properties. When the length scale of these soil heterogeneities is small, numerical solution of Richards’ equation is computationally impractical due to the immense effort and refinement required to mesh the actual heterogeneous geometry. A classic way forward is to use a macroscopic model, where the heterogeneous medium is replaced with a fictitious homogeneous medium, which attempts to give the average flow behaviour at the macroscopic scale (i.e., at a scale much larger than the scale of the heterogeneities). Using the homogenisation theory, a macroscopic equation can be derived that takes the form of Richards’ equation with effective parameters. A disadvantage of the macroscopic approach, however, is that it fails in cases when the assumption of local equilibrium does not hold. This limitation has seen the introduction of two-scale models that include at each point in the macroscopic domain an additional flow equation at the scale of the heterogeneities (microscopic scale). This report outlines a well-known two-scale model and contributes to the literature a number of important advances in its numerical implementation. These include the use of an unstructured control volume finite element method and image-based meshing techniques, that allow for irregular micro-scale geometries to be treated, and the use of an exponential time integration scheme that permits both scales to be resolved simultaneously in a completely coupled manner. Numerical comparisons against a classical macroscopic model confirm that only the two-scale model correctly captures the important features of the flow for a range of parameter values.

Computational science for undergraduate biologists via QUT.Bio.Excel

Molecular biology is a scientific discipline which has changed fundamentally in character over the past decade to rely on large scale datasets – public and locally generated - and their computational analysis and annotation. Undergraduate education of biologists must increasingly couple this domain context with a data-driven computational scientific method. Yet modern programming and scripting languages and rich computational environments such as R and MATLAB present significant barriers to those with limited exposure to computer science, and may require substantial tutorial assistance over an extended period if progress is to be made. In this paper we report our experience of undergraduate bioinformatics education using the familiar, ubiquitous spreadsheet environment of Microsoft Excel. We describe a configurable extension called QUT.Bio.Excel, a custom ribbon, supporting a rich set of data sources, external tools and interactive processing within the spreadsheet, and a range of problems to demonstrate its utility and success in addressing the needs of students over their studies.

Effects of strain artefacts arising from a pre-defined callus domain in models of bone healing mechanobiology

Iterative computational models have been used to investigate the regulation of bone fracture healing by local mechanical conditions. Although their predictions replicate some mechanical responses and histological features, they do not typically reproduce the predominantly radial hard callus growth pattern observed in larger mammals. We hypothesised that this discrepancy results from an artefact of the models’ initial geometry. Using axisymmetric finite element models, we demonstrated that pre-defining a field of soft tissue in which callus may develop introduces high deviatoric strains in the periosteal region adjacent to the fracture. These bone-inhibiting strains are not present when the initial soft tissue is confined to a thin periosteal layer. As observed in previous healing models, tissue differentiation algorithms regulated by deviatoric strain predicted hard callus forming remotely and growing towards the fracture. While dilatational strain regulation allowed early bone formation closer to the fracture, hard callus still formed initially over a broad area, rather than expanding over time. Modelling callus growth from a thin periosteal layer successfully predicted the initiation of hard callus growth close to the fracture site. However, these models were still susceptible to elevated deviatoric strains in the soft tissues at the edge of the hard callus. Our study highlights the importance of the initial soft tissue geometry used for finite element models of fracture healing. If this cannot be defined accurately, alternative mechanisms for the prediction of early callus development should be investigated.