Numerical simulation of an ethanol turbulent spray flame with RANS and diffusion combustion model

A detailed numerical simulation of ethanol turbulent spray combustion on a rounded jet flame is pre- sented in this article. The focus is to propose a robust mathematical model with relatively low complexity sub- models to reproduce the main characteristics of the cou- pling between both phases, such as the turbulence modulation, turbulent droplets dissipation, and evaporative cooling effect. A RANS turbulent model is implemented. Special features of the model include an Eulerian– Lagrangian procedure under a fully two-way coupling and a modified flame sheet model with a joint mixture fraction– enthalpy b -PDF. Reasonable agreement between measured and computed mean profiles of temperature of the gas phase and droplet size distributions is achieved. Deviations found between measured and predicted mean velocity profiles are attributed to the turbulent combustion modeling adopted

Protein buffering in model systems and in whole human saliva

The aim of this study was to quantify the buffer attributes (value, power, range and optimum) of two model systems for whole human resting saliva, the purified proteins from whole human resting saliva and single proteins. Two model systems, the first containing amyloglucosidase and lysozyme, and the second containing amyloglucosidase and alpha-amylase, were shown to provide, in combination with hydrogencarbonate and di-hydrogenphosphate, almost identical buffer attributes as whole human resting saliva. It was further demonstrated that changes in the protein concentration as small as 0.1% may change the buffer value of a buffer solution up to 15 times. Additionally, it was shown that there was a protein concentration change in the same range (0.16%) between saliva samples collected at the time periods of 13:00 and others collected at 9:00 am and 17:00. The mode of the protein expression changed between these samples corresponded to the change in basic buffer power and the change of the buffer value at pH 6.7. Finally, SDS Page and Ruthenium II tris (bathophenantroline disulfonate) staining unveiled a constant protein expression in all samples except for one 50 kDa protein band. As the change in the expression pattern of that 50 kDa protein band corresponded to the change in basic buffer power and the buffer value at pH 6.7, it was reasonable to conclude that this 50 kDa protein band may contain the protein(s) belonging to the protein buffer system of human saliva.

Molecular Consequences of the SERPINH1/HSP47 Mutation in the Dachshund Natural Model of Osteogenesis Imperfecta.

Osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) is a heritable connective tissue disease characterized by bone fragility and increased risk of fractures. Up to now, mutations in at least 18 genes have been associated with dominant and recessive forms of OI that affect the production or post-translational processing of procollagen or alter bone homeostasis. Among those, SERPINH1 encoding heat shock protein 47 (HSP47), a chaperone exclusive for collagen folding in the ER, was identified to cause a severe form of OI in dachshunds (L326P) as well as in humans (one single case with a L78P mutation). To elucidate the disease mechanism underlying OI in the dog model, we applied a range of biochemical assays to mutant and control skin fibroblasts as well as on bone samples. These experiments revealed that type I collagen synthesized by mutant cells had decreased electrophoretic mobility. Procollagen was retained intracellularly with concomitant dilation of ER cisternae and activation of the ER stress response markers GRP78 and phospho-eIF2α, thus suggesting a defect in procollagen processing. In line with the migration shift detected on SDS-PAGE of cell culture collagen, extracts of bone collagen from the OI dog showed a similar mobility shift, and on tandem mass spectrometry, the chains were post-translationally overmodified. The bone collagen had a higher content of pyridinoline than control dog bone. We conclude that the SERPINH1 mutation in this naturally occurring model of OI impairs how HSP47 acts as a chaperone in the ER. This results in abnormal post-translational modification and cross-linking of the bone collagen.

MASP-1 Induced Clotting--The First Model of Prothrombin Activation by MASP-1.

Mannan-binding lectin-associated serine protease-1 (MASP-1), a protein of the complement lectin pathway, resembles thrombin in terms of structural features and substrate specificity. Due to its interplay with several coagulation factors, it has the ability to induce fibrin clot formation independent of the usual coagulation activation pathways. We have recently shown that MASP-1 activates prothrombin and identified arginine (R) 155, R271, and R393 as potential cleavage sites. FXa cleaves R320 instead of R393, and thrombin cleaves R155 and R284 in prothrombin. Here we have used three arginine-to-glutamine mutants of prothrombin, R271Q, R320Q, R393Q and the serine-to-alanine active site mutant S525A to investigate in detail the mechanism of MASP-1 mediated prothrombin activation. Prothrombin wildtype and mutants were digested with MASP-1 and the cleavage products were analysed by SDS-PAGE and N-terminal sequencing. A functional clotting assay was performed by thrombelastography. We have found that MASP-1 activates prothrombin via two simultaneous pathways, either cleaving at R271 or R393 first. Both pathways result in the formation of several active alternative thrombin species. Functional studies confirmed that both R393 and R320 are required for prothrombin activation by MASP-1, whereas R155 is not considered to be an important cleavage site in this process. In conclusion, we have described for the first time a detailed model of prothrombin activation by MASP-1.

(Fig 2, page 399), Distribution of Fe and Mn in ferromanganese nodules of the Eningi-Lampi Lake, Russia

The distribution of Mn and Fe in water, sediments, hydroxide nodules and crusts of Eningi-Lampi ore-bearing lake is regular, and concordant from the source to the areas of accumulation of these components. Mn-Fe hydroxide nodules and crusts occur at the water-sediment interface, and more rarely in the upper (0-5 cm) film of brown watery mud. The leading role in the formation of Mn-Fe nodules and crusts is played by the chemosorption and auto-catalytic oxidation in the course of interaction of component-bearing solutions with active surfaces. This is considered to be the basic process for the model of ferromanganese ore formation in recent basins. Despite the differences in the physico-geographical and geochemical characteristics of lakes, mediterranean seas and oceans, the formation of ferromanganese hydroxide nodules and crusts in these basins may be explained by this model.

Parametric study of the expansive joint model for cracking of concrete due to rebar corrosion

Un modelo numérico llamado elemento junta expansiva fue programado para simular la expansión mecánica del óxido y estudiar la fisuración en el hormigón circundante. El elemento junta expansiva trabaja con elementos finitos con fisura cohesiva embebida adaptable para simular la fractura del hormigón según el modelo de fisura cohesiva. Se ha comprobado que el modelo reproduce correctamente el patrón de fisuración del hormigón que se obtiene en ensayos de corrosión acelerada. En este trabajo, se realiza un estudio paramétrico del elemento junta expansiva para establecer los límites de los parámetros constitutivos del óxido. Se simula una cierta expansión variando los valores de los parámetros del óxido y se estudian la apertura de fisura y las tensiones resultantes en el hormigón. Se determina el rango de valores para los que los resultados de las simulaciones son prácticamente iguales, con el menor número posible de iteraciones.

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).

A generic persistence model for CLP systems

This paper describes a model of persistence in (C)LP languages and two different and practically very useful ways to implement this model in current systems. The fundamental idea is that persistence is a characteristic of certain dynamic predicates (i.e., those which encapsulate state). The main effect of declaring a predicate persistent is that the dynamic changes made to such predicates persist from one execution to the next one. After proposing a syntax for declaring persistent predicates, a simple, file-based implementation of the concept is presented and some examples shown. An additional implementation is presented which stores persistent predicates in an external database. The abstraction of the concept of persistence from its implementation allows developing applications which can store their persistent predicates alternatively in files or databases with only a few simple changes to a declaration stating the location and modality used for persistent storage. The paper presents the model, the implementation approach in both the cases of using files and relational databases, a number of optimizations of the process (using information obtained from static global analysis and goal clustering), and performance results from an implementation of these ideas.

Improving web learning through model optimization using bootstrap for a tour-guide robot

We perform a review of Web Mining techniques and we describe a Bootstrap Statistics methodology applied to pattern model classifier optimization and verification for Supervised Learning for Tour-Guide Robot knowledge repository management. It is virtually impossible to test thoroughly Web Page Classifiers and many other Internet Applications with pure empirical data, due to the need for human intervention to generate training sets and test sets. We propose using the computer-based Bootstrap paradigm to design a test environment where they are checked with better reliability.

Nonlinear analysis of a simple model of temperature evolution in a satellite

We analyze a simple model of the heat transfer to and from a small satellite orbiting round a solar system planet. Our approach considers the satellite isothermal, with external heat input from the environment and from internal energy dissipation, and output to the environment as black-body radiation. The resulting nonlinear ordinary differential equation for the satellite’s temperature is analyzed by qualitative, perturbation and numerical methods, which prove that the temperature approaches a periodic pattern (attracting limit cycle). This approach can occur in two ways, according to the values of the parameters: (i) a slow decay towards the limit cycle over a time longer than the period, or (ii) a fast decay towards the limit cycle over a time shorter than the period. In the first case, an exactly soluble average equation is valid. We discuss the consequences of our model for the thermal stability of satellites.

A model for the transcriptional regulation of the CYP2B1/B2 gene in rat liver.

The phenobarbitone-responsive minimal promoter has been shown to lie between nt -179 and nt + 1 in the 5' (upstream) region of the CYP2B1/B2 gene in rat liver, on the basis of the drug responsiveness of the sequence linked to human growth hormone gene as reporter and targeted to liver as an asialoglycoprotein-DNA complex in vivo. Competition analyses of the nuclear protein-DNA complexes formed in gel shift assays with the positive (nt -69 to -98) and negative (nt -126 to -160) cis elements (PE and NE, respectively) identified within this region earlier indicate that the same protein may be binding to both the elements. The protein species purified on PE and NE affinity columns appear to be identical based on SDS/PAGE analysis, where it migrates as a protein of 26-28 kDa. Traces of a high molecular weight protein (94-100 kDa) are also seen in the preparation obtained after one round of affinity chromatography. The purified protein stimulates transcription of a minigene construct containing the 179 nt on the 5' side of the CYP2B1/B2 gene linked to the I exon in a cell-free system from liver nuclei. The purified protein can give rise to all the three complexes (I, II, and III) with the PE, just as the crude nuclear extract, under appropriate conditions. Manipulations in vitro indicate that the NE has a significantly higher affinity for the dephosphorylated form than for the phosphorylated form of the protein. The PE binds both forms. Phenobarbitone treatment of the animal leads to a significant increase in the phosphorylation of the 26- to 28-kDa and 94-kDa proteins in nuclear labeling experiments followed by isolation on a PE affinity column. We propose that the protein binding predominantly to the NE in the dephosphorylated state characterizes the basal level of transcription of the CYP2B1/B2 gene. Phenobarbitone treatment leads to phosphorylation of the protein, shifting the equilibrium toward binding to the PE. This can promote interaction with an upstream enhancer through other proteins such as the 94-kDa protein and leads to a significant activation of transcription.

A numerical model for predicting shoreline changes /

A mathematical model for long-term, three-dimensional shoreline evolution is developed. The combined effects of variations of sea level; wave refraction and diffraction; loss of sand by density currents during storms, by rip currents, and by wind; bluff erosion and berm accretion; effects of manmade structures such as long groin or navigational structures; and beach nourishment are all taken into account. A computer program is developed with various subroutines which permit modification as the state-of-the-art progresses. The program is applied to a test case at Holland Harbor, Michigan. (Author).

Riprap stability and navigation tests for the divide-cut section, Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway : hydraulic model investigation /

"May 1986."