This paper presents a novel 3D-SRAM architecture that can be used to extend the scaling of SRAM. This architecture significantly reduces the bit-line capacitance, achieves 3.4 times reduction in active power consumption and 1.8 times reduction in access time. In this architecture, local bit-lines are vertical and connect through select transistors to the global bit-lines routed on the bottom level. A proof-of-concept 32Kb sub-array emulating the critical path of the 3D-SRAM has demonstrated about 5 times improvement in power-delay over conventional 2D-SRAM.
Abstract Summary: Heterogeneity and genome search meta-analysis (HEGESMA) is a comprehensive software for performing genome scan meta-analysis, a quantitative method to identify genetic regions (bins) with consistently increased linkage score across multiple genome scans, and for testing the heterogeneity of the results of each bin across scans. The program provides as an output the average of ranks and three heterogeneity statistics, as well as corresponding significance levels. Statistical inferences are based on Monte Carlo permutation tests. The program allows both unweighted and weighted analysis, with the weights for each study as specified by the user. Furthermore, the program performs heterogeneity analyses restricted to the bins with similar average ranks. Availability: http://biomath.med.uth.gr Contact: zintza@med.uth.gr
The kinetics of the immune response to the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV) were studied in 38 children who received bone marrow transplants (BMTs). Anti-pneumococcal antibody concentrations increased 1 and 3 months after vaccination for all 5 serotypes tested, but, in 21 children, the vaccine was not adequately immunogenic. Children vaccinated <18 months after receiving a BMT had a 4.2-fold increased odds of poor response (P=. 06). Antibody concentrations returned close to baseline levels 9 months after vaccination. Avidity declined significantly as early as 1 month after vaccination and remained low thereafter. Antibody concentration responses to PPV were superior among 9 healthy control children (P=.001); 37 of 38 children with a BMT elicited adequate, persistent immune responses to Haemophilus influenzae conjugate vaccine. Immune responses to PPV in children with a BMT are suboptimal, short lived, and associated with declining avidity. The different kinetics of antibody concentration and avidity indicate that both markers should be used for evaluating pneumococcal vaccines in this high-risk population.
Pushback is a mechanism for defending against distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks. DDoS attacks are treated as a congestion-control problem, but because most such congestion is caused by malicious hosts not obeying traditional end-to-end congestion control, the problem must be handled by the routers. Functionality is added to each router to detect and preferentially drop packets that probably belong to an attack. Upstream routers are also notified to drop such packets (hence the term Pushback) in order that the router's resources be used to route legitimate traffic. In this paper we present an architecture for Pushback, its implementation under FreeBSD, and suggestions for how such a system can be implemented in core routers.
Abstract In‐house editorials and journalistic pieces are massively published in peer‐reviewed scientific journals. This corpus has remained outside the efforts of evidence‐based medicine and research reform, and it can be imbued with unchecked biases. High‐impact journals publish such pieces massively and may generate strong support for specific narratives and perspectives. Pieces with a political slant are also a major issue. Besides high‐impact journals, across the entire scientific corpus, such pieces may be (mis)used to boost impact factors, create implausibly prolific CVs (occasionally even fraudulent) and can be powerful instruments of opinion making favouring some sponsors. Here we propose how this influential literature corpus may be strengthened to maximize its benefits and diminish its potential harms. Helpful measures to consider may include bolstering transparency (on authorship, financial compensation, disclosures of publication‐specific and generic conflicts of interest, handling of political issues, peer‐review, commissioning and timing); self‐regulation with limits per author, improvement of subject matter expertise (with experts, meta‐researchers and methodologists); balance of perspectives (with debates and for choice of topics); and post‐publication review, audit, correction and potential retraction, as needed. A systematic research agenda is needed to study better this phenomenon and also the effectiveness of proposed interventions.
The language and conceptual framework of "research reproducibility" are nonstandard and unsettled across the sciences.In this Perspective, we review an array of explicit and implicit definitions of reproducibility and related terminology, and discuss how to avoid potential misunderstandings when these terms are used as a surrogate for "truth.
In Reply.—We thank Best et al for their comments. We fully agree that safety aspects in randomized trials of aminoglycoside dosing, as in the vast majority of biomedical fields,1 is suboptimal and that the situation needs to be improved.2 Large-scale studies on the ototoxicity profile of single daily doses would be welcome. However, realistically, these studies are likely to be mostly, if not exclusively, nonrandomized at this point.We disagree that the current evidence does not suggest that we can confidently recommend universal change in aminoglycoside dosing for children. Of course, evidence can never be final, but there are few topics in pediatrics for which so many trials have been done with uniformly reassuring results. We disagree about the fear of an “incomplete evidence base.” The incomplete evidence base pertains mostly to the inappropriate continued use of multiple daily doses in children. In fact, multiple daily dosing of aminoglycosides was universally adopted for both adults and children a long time ago based on absolutely no evidence. Multiple daily dosing has remained a common, if not prevalent, strategy for both children and adults despite the fact that evidence from many dozens of randomized trials and meta-analyses has failed to show its superiority and have even suggested its inferiority.3As far as subgroup populations are concerned, there is no evidence to suggest that multiple daily dosing is indicated in any patient subgroup. Perpetuating emphasis on spurious subgroup differences4 is only likely to inappropriately delay the wider adoption of single daily dosing.Finally, therapeutic dose monitoring is a different question, and robust evidence is needed to decide when (or if ever) it is indeed indicated to optimize single daily dosing.5 Single daily dosing translates to lower trough values and should simplify the need for monitoring anyhow.6
