Abstract # 20470 Financial chess spectrum: popular version on super brains think tank LiJing; YuManping , university of international business and economics, Beijing, China Abstract Text: This paper aims to construct knowledge ontology namely the terminology system through double chessboards so as to display the popular version on super brains think-tank, which reflects the intelligence of interdisciplinary, cross-field and cross-industry both practical and effective. The basic steps of the method are as follows: The first step is to extract the core knowledge ontology of the experts by building up big data center of experts' research results. The second step, is to construct the popularity of knowledge base formed with the help of double chessboards in the human-computer interaction and specially-silly programming environment as convenient conditions of development. The third step, is to use the way of financial chess spectrum to extract the experience of financial experts,pooling them through the convenience of human-computer interaction interface. Specific examples of its typical practice, at least involving: the founders and representatives of various milestones, in particular, collectors or synthesizer, taken them into the think tank, by using the typical research results with abstract from summary approach. Thus, to ensure that the integrity, authority and practicality of the financial chess spectrum, the most important thing is that the precise reusing can be targeted. The result is:the financial chess spectrum from the experts both of financial theory and financial practice,in the most popular way, targeted to mobilize that it is most suitable for repeated using, within the knowledge center, which can ensure that the best reuse of the big data of summary, and knowledge management. Specific performance, financial chess spectrum system, as a popular version of super-brains think tank, can assist users to achieve accurate query and correct decision-making. The significance lies in: accumulation process of financial chess spectrum, can not only systematically summed up the intellectual work results by the financial professional teachers and students and practitioners, but also play the positive role in the field of financial experts and practitioners, especially the actual operation. It can ensure the vitality of the think tank within these times. Session Selection: AAAS Student Poster Competition Title: Financial chess spectrum: popular version on super brains think tank Subject Category: Social Sciences Submitter's E-mail Address: financial_chess@aliyun.com First Author Presenter LiJing; YuManping Email: financial_chess@aliyun.com -- Will not be published university of international business and economics assistant / student no. 10, huixin dongjie,chaoyang district Zhu Hai City Polytechnic,Xihu Chengqu,Jinwan District,Zhuhai,P.R.China Beijing 100029 China Advisor XiaoHui Zou Email: zouxiaohui@pku.org.cn Alternate Email: 949309225@qq.com -- Will not be published aaas Member SINO-US Searle Research Center，China University of Geosciences (Beijing) Searle Research Center Prof. (Researcher) 29,Xueyuan Road, Haidian District Super think tank based on double brains,Promotion Association of China Group Corporation Beijing 100083 China Student Poster Advisor Confirmation Title: Financial chess spectrum: popular version on super brains think tank Subject Category: Social Sciences Session Selection: AAAS Student Poster Competition Sunday Slot: : Sunday, February 19, 2017: 9:30 AM-4:30 PM First Author Presenter LiJing; YuManping Email: financial_chess@aliyun.com -- Will not be published university of international business and economics assistant / student no. 10, huixin dongjie,chaoyang district Zhu Hai City Polytechnic,Xihu Chengqu,Jinwan District,Zhuhai,P.R.China Beijing 100029 China Advisor XiaoHui Zou Email: zouxiaohui@pku.org.cn Alternate Email: 949309225@qq.com -- Will not be published aaas Member SINO-US Searle Research Center Searle Research Center Prof. (Researcher) China University of Geosciences (Beijing)，29,Xueyuan Road, Haidian District Super think tank based on double brains,Promotion Association of China Group Corporation Beijing 100083 China You have already confirmed that you are the advisor for the poster listed above. https://aaas.confex.com/aaas/2017/poster/papers/extraroles.cgi?roleid=137847password=210839
Revenge of the Weeds Plant pests are evolving to outsmart common herbicides, costing farmers crops and money. By Amy Coombs | May 20, 2012 10 Comments !-- /a -- Link this Stumble Tweet this Corn fields Wikimedia Commons, Gardenkitty It’s a story suited for a Hollywood horror film, yet it’s also a tenet of evolutionary biology. Introduce a toxin to a system, and you inevitably select for resistant survivors. These few individuals gain a reproductive advantage and multiply; sometimes they can’t be stopped with even the most potent chemicals. For years, this general plot line made headlines in the fields of antibiotic resistance and cancer research. More recently, plants have become a common protagonist. Weeds around the world are developing resistance to glyphosate—one of the most common herbicides on the market—and like bacteria and tumor cells, many plants can also withstand multiple other toxins, each with unique molecular targets. In January, a hair-raising infestation of the kochia shrub was confirmed in Alberta, Canada. Originally introduced to desert climates as forage for cattle, the tenacious weed can now survive glyphosate, which targets an enzyme involved in the biosynthesis of aromatic compounds. It can also withstand chemicals that inhibit the ALS enzyme, involved in the production of amino acids. At least 2,000 acres are now impacted, and “we expect more cases will be confirmed after a field survey this fall,” says Hugh Beckie of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, the government department that manages farming policies. The United States are also being taken by storm. Palmer amaranth recently developed resistance to the same two classes of chemicals in Tennessee. Since 2009, the tall, spindly weed has swept across 1 million acres of cropland , causing some farmers to abandon their fields. And in California, a plant named hairy fleabane recently crept into vineyards . It is now able to withstand both glyphosate and Paraquat—a chemical that hijacks photons from proteins involved in photosynthesis. Worldwide, 23 weed species have developed glyphosate resistance, and at least 10 of these have also developed resistance to other herbicides, according to the International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. And Bill Freese, of the Center for Food Safety in Washington, DC, believes these numbers underestimate the problem. In order for a weed to be listed as resistant, it must survive four times the concentration used to kill susceptible plants. “Some weeds tolerate lower levels of glyphosate, and these also have a big impact in the field,” he says. Weed infestations are more of a nuisance than a monstrosity—but they are biting into farmer’s pocketbooks. In Alabama, 61 percent of soybean fields are infested with glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth, costing farmers $71 million a year in lost yields, and 80 percent of the state’s cotton is also infested, with losses now totaling $10.9 million. Selecting for super-weeds It’s not uncommon for bacteria to multiply every 20 minutes, but plants have a much longer life cycle and thus a slower rate of evolution. This makes herbicide resistance deceptively improbable. Kochia scoparia Wikimedia Commons, WildBoar The chance that a single mutation will confer herbicide resistance is 1 in 100,000, making the likelihood of a double resistant mutant less than 1 in a trillion . Early industry-sponsored research suggested resistance to glyphosate was particularly unlikely because large mutations in the herbicide’s target, the EPSPS enzyme, would render it dysfunctional, killing the plant before it could reproduce. “The claims made were nave, and resistant weeds have indeed developed,” says David Mortensen , a weed scientist at Pennsylvania State University. “When a chemical is applied to such a wide area—to nearly all soybean and cotton, and a big percentage of corn—the selection pressure is too intense.” Indeed, glyphosate use has increased dramatically, from the 4 million or so pounds that were applied to corn in 2000 to 65 million pounds last year, with use on cotton and soy fields also climbing. Much of this increase can be attributed to the incorporation of genetically engineered crops that are unaffected by glyphosate, which is sold by St. Louis-based Monsanto under the brand name Roundup. To help farmers spray glyphosate directly over fields without harming crops, Monsanto released Roundup Ready soy and canola in 1996. Genetically engineered cotton and corn soon followed, and by 2001, the GE crops spanned millions of acres. This is when resistant weeds made their debut. “Glyphosate has been around since the 1970s, but resistant weeds didn’t become a serious problem until the herbicide was packaged with genetically engineered crops,” says Mortensen. But according to Rick Cole, who over sees weed management for Monsanto , over-use is not the problem, and the solution is simply to apply a second herbicide with a different molecular target. “The problem is that glyphosate is used alone—over and over again,” he says. “Using a second mode of action reduces the risk of resistance.” In a set of recommendations released earlier this month (May 10), the Weed Science Society of America suggested that in addition to minimizing herbicide use, farmers also diversify the chemicals they apply to their plants in order to keep herbicides effective for the long term. Yet combining chemicals doesn’t always work out as planned, says Patrick Tranel, a weed scientist at the University of Illinois. While doubling up on chemicals makes it unlikely that anything will survive, he says, it also “potentially increases the chance of selecting for a general mechanism that confers resistance to both herbicides.” Masters of survival Weeds can’t grow wings or run away, so in order to survive harsh environments, they have developed diverse, generalized adaptation responses. Recently, University of Washington professor Andre d’Avignon stumbled onto a surprising example . Using nuclear magnetic resonance imaging, he and his team traced glyphosate through horseweed, a native plant that infiltrates row crops with windblown seeds. In susceptible weeds, the chemical ended up in the cytosol, but in resistant plants, 85 percent was bound up in the vacuole within 24 hours. This mechanism has also been demonstrated in glyphosate-resistant Italian ryegrass and Rigid ryegrass . Conyza bonariensis (horseweed) seed heads and flowers Wikimedia Commons, Rickjpelleg “This is a more generic process than the alteration of an enzyme, and it means a single plant can likely adapt to two chemicals at once,” says Mortensen. In bacteria, multiple drug resistance is often traced to the large, diverse class of ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters, which carry an array of chemicals into the cell and organelles. This same class of proteins may help resistant plants sequester glyphosate. Indeed, d’Avignon has found evidence that horseweed may over-express a localized vacuole transporter, and while the protein has yet to be isolated, unpublished results suggest it requires ATP and traffics other chemicals typical of ABC transporters. “If there is an ABC transporter involved, it could possibly transport more than one herbicide to the vacuole,” says d’Avignon, whose work is sponsored by Monsanto. Another strategy—used by plants and bacteria, alike—is to overexpress targeted enzymes, so that some can still function properly even while others are destroyed by the chemical. Glyphosate-resistant waterhemp, Palmer amaranth, kochia, and Italian ryegrass, for example, all overexpress the EPSPS gene that the herbicide targets. Yet instead of simply upregulating gene expression, glyphosate-resistant plants make multiple copies of the EPSPS gene. “This is very hard to do—it’s much less likely than a point mutation,” says Tranel. The rise of the resistant If the situation wasn’t bad enough already, it appears to be snowballing. Weeds in nine different countries have independently developed resistance to multiple modes of action. Some stubborn survivors can now survive most of the chemicals used by farmers, and the infestations are spreading. Last year, for example, farmers in Iowa reported infestations of waterhemp in their corn and soy fields. The weed has now encroached on 500 acres, and continues to survive treatments of glyphosate and six additional chemicals. The case is a rare example of a weed developing resistance to three chemical classes, each with a unique molecular target. Even more impressive, a biotype of Rigid Ryegrass growing in Victoria, Australia, is now resistant to four chemical classes. Only about 10 acres are impacted so far, but the weeds are predicted to spread. Despite the seemingly small odds of a plant evolving resistance to multiple herbicides, the dramatic increase in glyphosate-resistant weeds, which now infest more than 17 million acres nationwide, has made this possibility exponentially more likely. “We don’t need a single plant to undergo two unlikely adaptations—we just need one event to happen in a biotype that already has glyphosate resistance,” says Mortensen. The next wave of genetically modified seeds will be the ultimate experiment, says Freese. Monsanto is developing crops that can be simultaneously sprayed with glyphosate and the herbicide dicamba. Dow AgroSciences plans to market genetically engineered corn seeds resistant to both glyphosate and the herbicide 2,4-D; the US Department of Agriculture is reviewing the technology this summer. “Just as we had an increase in glyphosate after Roundup Ready crops were released, we may soon see a huge increase in 2,4-D,” Freese says. “In our view, this will also lead to weeds with multiple resistance to 2,4-D and glyphosate. ” if (typeof dc_tile=='undefined') {dc_tile=1;} else {dc_tile++;} if (typeof ord=='undefined') {ord=Math.random()*10000000000000000;} document.write(''); Tags: agriculture , crop engineering , crop yields , evolution , evolutionary biology , farm , farming , GM crops , stripes Related Articles GM Crop Field Intruder Arrested By Jef Akst A protestor is arrested for trying to break into a field of genetically modified wheat at a UK agricultural research station. Comment Live Slow, Die Old By Ed Yong Ancient bacteria living in deep-sea sediments are alive—but with metabolisms so slow that it’s hard to tell. 8 Comments How Prawns Lure Prey By Sabrina Richards Orange-loving Trinidad guppies are curiously attracted to orange spots on prawn pincers, which may make it easier for the predators to snatch them up. 1 Comment
By BOB DAVIS SHENZHEN, China—The supercomputer in this southern boomtown is named Nebulae for the interstellar clouds of gas that give birth to stars. The machine symbolizes China's soaring ambition to challenge the U.S. and other developed nations in technology, but also underscores the limitations of what China can achieve. China's unexpected progress in developing supercomputers, the brains of modern science and an engine of economic development, has caused an outbreak of anxiety over the past two years in the U.S., which has long been the field's undisputed leader. China's advances in computing have been critical to its ability to build spacecraft and advanced warplanes and to its growing prowess in genetics. China overtook Japan in 2010 as the number two investor in research and development, according to Battelle Memorial Institute, a Columbus, Ohio, research outfit. Though China remains well behind the U.S. in RD spending, it is gaining ground. But a closer look at China's supercomputers reveals a program that is far less of a threat to U.S. technological dominance than commonly believed. Chinese researchers say decisions about how supercomputers are used are often made by local politicians more interested in local development projects than breakthrough technology. Enlarge Image Associated Press The Tianhe-1A supercomputer at the National Center for Supercomputing in Tianjin, China. China's bureaucrats meanwhile haven't figured out how to mount software development projects that come close to U.S. or European standards. Chinese scientists also lack the funding, and freedom, to explore technologies that haven't already been endorsed by the government, which can keep them well behind the cutting edge. The result is that China's supercomputing projects aren't producing the kinds of breakthroughs that can create new industries. It is instead being deployed to help the country simply catch up with the U.S. and Europe, in areas ranging from health care to automotive design to aviation. That is important economically, but it is also a reminder that China remains a developing country whose main goal is to close the economic and technology gaps with richer nations. "The strategy has been never to lead, but to follow" technologically, said Qian Depei, a Beihang University researcher, who has worked for decades on China's advanced computing programs. "That was the most economically efficient way to develop." Richard Suttmeier,a University of Oregon expert on Chinese science policy, said China hasn't figured out "the right formula" to pioneer new technologies in part because researchers are rewarded according to the number of academic papers they publish rather than the quality and novelty of their work. Supercomputers are largely seen in China as local economic-development tools. City governments play a much larger role in setting China's supercomputer research agenda than they do in the U.S. because Chinese cities finance a larger share of the projects. Shenzhen, which paid three-quarters of the $1.3 billion cost of the Shenzhen supercomputer center, "doesn't care about climate change and astrophysics"—traditional supercomputer research projects—said Feng Shengzhong, deputy director of a Shenzhen research institute that develops applications for the Nebulae. "They care about local problems." He is working on a plan to use the Nebulae to improve health care services in South China—a socially important goal but not one that makes use of the power of what is ranked as the world's fourth-fastest supercomputer. China is now home to 74 of the world's 500 fastest supercomputers—which can make trillions of calculations every second—up from just 10 in 2007. Changes in the way the machines are designed have helped the country. In the 1980s, when Cray Research CRAY -2.39% in Minneapolis was the world's supercomputer technology leader, the machines were powered by a few enormously powerful processors, whose design was difficult to match. Exports were tightly controlled. Starting in the 1990s, supercomputer researchers began to lash together tens of thousands of off-the-shelf microprocessors to work on a single job. China could buy those computer chips from Intel Corp., INTC -1.13% Advanced Micro Devices Inc. AMD -1.47% and other firms and make its own machines. Analysts say that Chinese scientists have benefited from training at top computer centers in the U.S. and Europe and the availability of computer chips and other parts from abroad, as well as consistent Chinese government funding and support. The supercomputer effort isn't dogged by charges that the Chinese have ripped off foreign technology. Rather, Chinese scientists say U.S. restrictions on some high-technology exports have required them to redouble their domestic efforts. Still, China remains largely dependent on U.S. made microprocessors—the brains of the computer—which puts it behind the leading edge. Beijing has developed one computer that uses locally designed microprocessors, but doesn't run commercially available software. Another microprocessor in development, the Loongson, would use existing software and could eventually become a competitor to Intel and others. Some of China's supercomputers have been used to design wings for China's stealth fighter, now in test phase, and to design parts for China's first commercial jet. Beijing lags well behind the U.S. in both efforts. In Shenzhen, the Nebulae, which is still being tested, is expected to improve storm warning systems and help genetics companies search for the causes of disease. But it is also scheduled to be used for far less demanding tasks, such as processing video animation. In the U.S., said Steve Conway, a supercomputer analyst at market researcher IDC, in Framingham, Mass., cities and states chip in money for local supercomputer centers, but they generally have little say in setting the priorities for the machines. U.S. supercomputer centers nearly always focus on advanced scientific research, such as designing drugs tailored to individuals. Research at the edge of technology is risky, but can have big payoffs and leave competitors like China well behind. "American alarmism isn't always well-founded," said Mr. Suttmeier, of the University of Oregon. "The critical point is keep devising strategies in the U.S. to stay way ahead of the game." One of China's greatest weaknesses is in software development, a potentially crippling problem because the usefulness of the machines depends on the quality of the software applications. Less than 10% of supercomputing funding goes to developing such applications, said Chinese researchers who complain that political leaders press them to build headline-grabbing new machines rather than focus on whether they are used to their full capabilities. In the U.S., which spends about six times as much on supercomputers as China, the software budget equals about 30% of hardware spending, and computer specialists say even that level isn't sufficient. The battle for software dollars is so intense in China that researchers rarely work as a team on long-term software projects, Chinese scientists say. To illustrate the uneven perception of China's supercomputer efforts, Mr. Qian, the veteran supercomputer researcher, holds his palms at hip level. "Generally, we're here," he said, "but everyone thinks we're higher," as he raises his palms to shoulder height. Write to Bob Davis at bob.davis@wsj.com A version of this article appeared Mar. 24, 2012, on page B1 in some U.S. editions of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: China's Not-So-Super Computers.
What kind of committee would make such a demand for super short abstracts? I had an abstract of 800 words. (Yes, I know it is too long.) So, I just spent 30 mins to shorten it to less than 160 words. Here it is. ON THE EASTWARD SHIFT OF THE ARABIAN SEA OXYGEN MINIMUM ZONE Observations indicate that the upper part of the Arabian Sea oxygen minimum zone (ASOMZ; above 400 m) appears to the east of most productive regions along the western boundary of the Arabian Sea. There is no consensus about what causes the so-called “eastward shift.” We use a coupled biological/physical model to investigate the processes that determine the “eastward shift.” The physical component of the model is a variable-density, 6 1/2-layer model, with each layer corresponding to a distinct dynamic regime or water-mass type. Its biological component consists of a set of advective-diffusive equations in each layer that determine nitrogen concentration in five compartments, namely, nutrients, phytoplankton, zooplankton, and two size classes of detritus. In addition, the model contains an oxygen compartment that reacts to production and consumption of dissolved inorganic nitrogen in the biological system. We will show the relative roles of physical versus biological processes in generating the so-called “eastward shift” in the upper ASOMZ.
消费在收入允许下需要的商品功能集合记住Ω，并且在短时间内Ω部存在漂移，即不会发生改变，只要一个商品使得消费者认识到其商品功能集合Ζ落在Ω内，即Ζ其才会购买； 现对厂商在生产商品之前是否研究消费者需求和商品被被生产出来之后是否宣传作以比较分析 ;如果厂商生产前没有研究需求而进行生产的情况，最终此商品的功能集合为A 1 ，厂商生产前没研究需求而进行生产的情况，商品的功能集合为A 2 ，此时假设A 1 与A 2 有相同的势，即阿列夫零（A 1 ）=阿列夫零（A 2 ）。 如果A 1 消费者认为A 1 = A 1 1 ∪ A 1 2 ，A 1 1 ∩ A 1 2 =0， 前者满足其需求，而后者不满足其需求，即A 1 1 属于Ω，A 1 2 不属于Ω；同样如果A2被消费者认为其有A 2 1 与A 2 2 购成，前者满足其需求，而后者不满足其需求，即A 2 1 属于Ω，A 2 2 不属于Ω；如果把功能集合的成本泛函为C i ，其把有用的功能空间映射到一个数集上，即C i :A→C,此时厂商研究消费者者相对不研究消费者需要多花费成本可以表示为C i =C i (A 1 1 /A 2 1 )；因为有一部分如不是落在消费的需要的功能集合内，假若要购买了消费也得为那一部分不需要的功能点赋价，故消费者不会购买，就需要厂商在把产品生产出来之后做宣传工作。 因为对于消费者的认知，A 1 应有四部分构成，即生产出的商品原本是符合其功能需求的那部分商品功能集合最终也被其识别为符合其功能集合，记住A 1 11 ，原本是不符合其功能需求的那部分商品功能集合最终也被其识别为符合其功能集合，记住A 1 21 ，原本是符合其功能需求的那部分商品功能集合最终也被其识别为不符合其功能集合，记住A 1 12 ，原本是不符合其功能需求的那部分商品功能集合最终也被其识别为不符合其功能集合A 1 22 ，记住；商品生产出来之后没研究市场需求的做宣传的这四部分为：A 2 11, A 2 21， A 2 12, A 2 22， ，一般来说前两部分不用再做宣传，因为其都是落在消费者所需要的功能集合 Ω的，而只需要对A i 12 和A i 22 （i=1,2）两部进行宣传，并且有C i (A i 12 )/阿列夫零（A i 12 ) C i (A i 22 )/阿列夫零（A i 22 )(i=1,2),则此时记成本函数为Cf,前者的成本为C1=C f （ A 1 12 ）+C f （ A 1 22 ），后者的成本为C2=C f （ A 2 12 ）+C f （ A 2 22 ） 则不研究市场需求却宣传所多花费的成本记住ΔC=C1-C2,则一般来说要使得这两种情况下的商品全部销售出去，应有以下关系成立 C i (A 1 1 /A 2 1 )= ΔC。 一 般完全不宣传的情况下注重已经知道的消费者的显需求，而完全宣传下的注重不知道的消费者的隐需求； 对于厂商来说，即使在生产前不研究市场的需求，而随意构造产品，只要对产品做大势宣传，则也能使产品全部销售出去，这与不做宣传工作但在生产产品之前研究市场需求是等价的 ；在这两种情况下还基于两种假设， 宣传的前提条件是产品生产出来之后厂商必须知道消费者的需求功能集合和此商品的功能集合，研究市场需求的前提条件是在生产之前必须知道消费者需求功能集合，并且这个集合不存在漂移，即在消费者偏好没改变之前进行生产。
标签: super
