The notion of phraseology is now used across a wide range of linguistic disciplines: Phraseology (proper), Corpus Linguistics, Discourse Analysis, Pragmatics, Cognitive Linguistics, Computational Linguistics. It is, however, conspicuously absent from most studies in the area of Translation Studies (e.g. Delisle 2003, Baker & Saldanha 2011). The paradox is that many practical difficulties encountered by translators and interpreters are directly related to phraseology in the broad sense (Colson 2008, 2013), and this can most clearly be seen in the failure of SMT-models (statistical machine translation) to deal efficiently with the translation of set phrases (used here as a generic term for all categories of phraseological constructions, from collocations to proverbs). Although corpus-based and computational phraseology still need to be clearly delineated from other concurrent disciplines, a possible way of narrowing the gap between phraseology and translation studies is proposed here: the recourse to experiments involving on the one hand set phrases and, on the other, evidence from parallel translation corpora or SMT-machines such as Google Translate. We will argue that both phraseology and translation studies have much to gain from this cross fertilisation, because both disciplines are regularly criticised for their lack of coherent terminological description and for the insufficient number of reproducible experiments they involve. The aim of this paper is not to draw up an exhaustive list of the possible experiments showing the interweaving of phraseology and translation studies, but to propose directions for future research involving a number of key issues that are posed by phraseology and are illustrated by translation practice. A first series of experiments relating to this subject matter concerns the problems posed by phraseology to human translation. Decoding phraseology in the source text is far from easy for translators and interpreters, all the more so as they are usually not native speakers of the source language. Also, finding a natural formulation in the target language and avoiding translationese requires an excellent mastery of the phraseology of the target language. I will argue that experiments with translation corpora may precisely shed some light on some crucial notions of phraseology and of translation studies. Experiments have shown that translation errors due to phraseology are legion in many translation corpora, even in the official translations of the European Union. A contribution of corpus-based phraseology would therefore consist in making human translators aware of the pitfalls of phraseology in the source text. Even experienced professionals sometimes fail to detect the fixed or semi-fixed character of a source text construction. Experiments along these lines should therefore also include the creation of large, multilingual phraseological databases, which brings us back to two serious shortcomings of computational phraseology: 1. There is no universally accepted algorithm for the automatic extraction of phraseology, especially not for ngrams larger than bigrams. 2. There is no consensus as to the proportion of set phrases in relation with the rest of the vocabulary: according to Jackendoff (1995), there are about as many fixed expressions as there are single words in the dictionary, but others (such as Mel'čuk 1995) hold the view that fixed expressions far outnumber single words. I will argue in that respect that algorithms derived from text mining and information retrieval techniques (Baeza-Yates, R. & B. Ribeiro-Neto 1999) can be efficient and (computationally) cost-effective in order to build up unfiltered collections of recurrent fixed or semi-fixed phrases, from which translators could gain information about the number of set phrases in the source text. Such an algorithm has been proposed in Colson (2014), and a provisional database of about 700,000 English set phrases (tokens) has been assembled, which seems to confirm that Jackendoff's view about the total number of fixed expressions was not correct. A second series of experiments that would turn out to be profitable to a better theoretical understanding of both phraseology and translation studies, has to do with the specific problems posed by phraseology to automatic translation. Phraseology has only recently been identified as one of the main sources of errors in automatic translation systems, including the most recent SMT-systems (Monti, Mitkov, Corpas Pastor & Seretan 2013). I will however point out that the theoretical underpinnings of phraseology are at stake in order to provide a coherent explanation for the serious shortcomings in the automatic translation of sentences containing phraseology. The crux of the matter seems to be the complex interplay between association and frequency in fixed expressions. Recent evidence shows that, contrary to what is assumed by most statistical scores, there should be no relationship between the statistical association of the grams constituting a set phrase, and its frequency in a huge corpus. The countless examples of wrong translations of phraseologically rich sentences by Google Translate, for instance, all point to the fundamentally wrong way in which ngrams were traced down, namely by giving the highest priority to frequency. Further experimentation should also shed some light on the overall statistical distribution of set phrases in large corpora. The well-know zipfian distribution of words in a corpus poses theoretical problems as far as phraseology is concerned. Corpus-based studies (Baroni 2008) indicate that the distribution of ngrams themselves may display a Zipf-Mandelbrot curve. This is an important theoretical challenge to the theory of phraseology and also to semantics, having therefore consequences on the way meaning may be expressed in different languages and be adequately translated from one language into another. I will point out that a general theory of phraseology, as outlined by Mejri (2006), may offer a new insight into the statistical underpinnings of both morpheme associations (in words) and of word association (in set phrases). References Baeza-Yates, R. & B. Ribeiro-Neto (1999). Modern Information Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, Addison Wesley. Baker, M. & G. Saldanha (eds.) (2011). Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. New York: Routledge. Baroni, M. (2008). Distributions in text. In: A. Lüdeling & M. Kytö, (eds.), Corpus linguistics. An international handbook. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, p. 803-821. Baroni, M., Bernardini, S., Ferraresi, A. & E. Zanchetta. (2009). The WaCky Wide Web: A collection of very large linguistically processed Web-crawled corpora. Journal of Language Resources and Evaluation, 43, p. 209-226. Colson, J.-P. (2008). Cross-linguistic phraseological studies: An overview. In: Granger, S. & F. Meunier (eds.), Phraseology. An interdisciplinary perspective. John Benjamins, Amsterdam / Philadelphia, p. 191-206. Colson, J.-P. (2010a). The Contribution of Web-based Corpus Linguistics to a Global Theory of Phraseology. In: Ptashnyk, S., Hallsteindóttir, E. & N. Bubenhofer (eds.), Corpora, Web and Databases. Computer-Based Methods in Modern Phraselogy and Lexicography. Hohengehren, Schneider Verlag, p. 23-35. Colson, J.-P. (2010b). Automatic extraction of collocations: a new Web-based method. In: S. Bolasco, S., Chiari, I. & L. Giuliano, Proceedings of JADT 2010,Statistical Analysis of Textual Data, Sapienza University of Rome, 9-11 June 2010. Milan, LED Edizioni, p. 397-408. Colson, J.-P. (2013). Pratique traduisante et idiomaticité : l'importance des structures semi-figées. In : Mogorrón Huerta, P., Gallego Hernández, D., Masseau, P. & Tolosa Igualada, M. (eds.), Fraseología, Opacidad y Traduccíon. Studien zur romanischen Sprachwissenschaft und interkulturellen Kommunikation (Herausgegeben von Gerd Wotjak). Frankfurt am Main, Peter Lang, p. 207-218. Colson, J.-P. (2014). Set phrases around globalization : an experiment in corpus-based computational phraseology. Paper presented at CILC 2014, 6th International Conference on Corpus Linguistics. University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, 22-24 May 2014. Corpas Pastor, G. (2013). Detección, descripción y contraste de las unidades fraseológicas mediante tecnologías lingüísticas. In Olza, I. & R. Elvira Manero (eds.) Fraseopragmática. Berlin: Frank & Timme, p. 335-373. Delisle, J. (2003). La traduction raisonnée. Ottawa: Presses de l'Université d'Ottawa. Jackendoff, R. (1995). The boundaries of the lexicon. In M. Everaert, E.-J. van der Linden, A. Schenk & R. Schroeder (eds.), Idioms: Structural and psychological perspectives. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, p. 133-165. Mejri, S. (2006). Polylexicalité, monolexicalité et double articulation. Cahiers de Lexicologie, 2 :209-221. Mel'čuk, I. 1995. Phrasemes in language and phraseology in linguistics. In M. Everaert, E.-J. van der Linden, A. Schenk & R. Schroeder (eds.), Idioms: Structural and psychological perspectives. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, p. 167-232. Monti, J., Mitkov, R., Corpas Pastor, G. & V. Seretan (eds) (2013). Workshop Proceedings: Multi-word units in machine translation and translation technologies, Nice 14th Machine Translation Summit.
This Thesis has been mainly developed in the laboratories of IMAES research group in the Chemical Engineering Department at the University of Castilla-La Mancha (UCLM). It is a part of a research line dealing with the elimination of emerging contaminants in wastewater using advanced oxidation processes. It has been supported by the "Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad" (MINECO, Spanish Government) through the project CTM2013-44317-R entitled "Tratamiento en planta piloto de efluentes acuosos industriales mediante sonofotocatálisis UV/solar" and UCLM funding GI20142907. In addition, some parts of this research were carried out at the Department of Chemical Engineering of the University of Bath (United Kingdom), thanks to University of Bath International Research Fund Future Research Leaders Incubator Scheme, and at the School of Engineering of the University of Edinburgh, through a research visit supported by MINECO. Over the past 15 years, increasing numbers of studies have identified numerous different water sources containing trace, but accumulating, toxic chemicals. Many of such chemicals are thought to be recalcitrant, inhibitory or toxic to biological treatment in both wastewater treatment works and in the environment and so may be able to enter our water cycle. Photocatalysis is a promising degradation technology for such compounds, however due to inefficient and costly reactor systems, it has not yet been widely taken up by Industry. This project seeks to rectify this, by comparing a wide range of photocatalytic reactor technologies that have been integrated with further intensification technologies to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the pollutant degradation. This includes: different reactor configurations (falling film photoreactor, solar compound parabolic collectors (CPC), a spinning disc reactor.) and intensifications processes (use of ultrasound (US), ferrioxalate and sulfate radicals-based advanced oxidation processes). This Thesis is focussed on comparing and optimizing the key parameters controlling the reaction kinetics and mechanisms of the reactors to determine the optimal degree of treatment of these types of accumulating toxic biologically recalcitrant chemicals in wastewaters, using antipyrine and carmamazepine as model compounds. The treatment efficiency and effectiveness, neural network optimization as well as technoeconomic analysis were used to determine the optimal intensification technology of photocatalytic process. Finally, real industrial effluents were also tested to prove the validity of studied processes. Overall, the main novelty of this work will be the first extensive study comparing a wide range of photocatalytic process intensification technologies. ANTIPIRINE The removal of antipyrine (AP) was evaluated under a sono-photo-Fenton system (UV/H2O2/Fe/US) in a synthetic wastewater reaching 79% of mineralization in 50 minutes in optimal conditions ([H2O2]0 = 500 mg/L; [Fe2+]0 = 27 mg/L; Amplitude = 20% and Pulse length = 1). The radical reaction in the bulk solution was found be the primary mineralization pathway (94.8%), followed by photolysis (3.65%), direct reaction with H2O2 (0.86%) and reaction by ultrasonically generated oxidative species (0.64%). Complete mineralization of reaction intermediates refractory towards hydroxyl radical was attained using persulfate anions simultaneously activated by heat energy (thermally, ultrasound) and UV-C light. The SO·4-based mineralization process enables another reaction pathway generating more easy degradable derivatives reaching more than 99% of total organic carbon (TOC) removal in 120 min under selected optimal operating conditions ([S2O82-]0 = 1200 mg/L; Temperature = 50 ªC; Amplitude = 10%; pH = 2.8). This demonstrated that activated persulfate-based oxidation system is a potential alternative to degrade intermediate compounds, which are refractory to hydroxyl radicals. The degradation of AP in aqueous solution using UV-A-LED (365 nm) photo-Fenton reaction intensified with ferrioxalate complexes and with the addition of persultate was also studied. A complete degradation of AP and 93% of mineralization of AP solution was reached in 2.5 and 60 min, respectively. In the last step of reaction, different intermediates difficult to be degraded such as 2-butenedioic acid, butanedioic acid, 4-oxo-pentanoic acid, acetate and formate may be generated. Finally, the photodegradation of AP solutions was also studied and optimized in a novel photocatalytic spinning disc reactor (SDR). A heterogeneous process (UV/H2O2/TiO2) was selected. TiO2 was immobilized on the surface of a glass disc using the sol-gel method. AP was completely degraded under the optimal conditions: pH = 4; [H2O2]0 = 1500 mg/L; Disc speed = 500 rpm; Flowrate = 25 mL/s. In addition, regeneration of the disc (up to 10 cycles) was performed with no loss in efficiency. The value of the apparent volumetric rate constant was found to be 6.9·10^4 s-1 with no apparent mass transfer limitation. Based on the main identified intermediates, a reaction mechanism was proposed for antipyrine photodegradation: firstly, cleavage of the N-N bond of penta-heterocycle leads to the formation of two aromatic acids and N-phenylpropanamide. An attack to the C-N bond in the latter compound produced bencenamina. Finally, the phenyl ring of the aromatic intermediates was opened and molecular organic acids were formed. CARBAMAZEPINE Different sytems including UV/H2O2/Fe/US, UV/H2O2/US and UV/H2O2 were used to study the photodegradation process of the antiepileptic drug carbamazepine (CBZ). An important synergistic effect between sonolysis and UV irradiation of 27.7% was quantified using the pseudo-first-order rate constants for carbamazepine degradation. An empirical model that includes the scavenger effect was applied and satisfactorily reproduced both degradation and mineralization of CBZ. It was found that the carbamazepine photodegradation occured mainly through a radical mechanism in two steps: during the first 10–15 min, CBZ was completely degraded, whereas TOC barely changed, confirming that intermediates were not easy to mineralize. From that moment, intermediates were formed and HO· radicals were responsible for increased mineralization rate with a gradual decrease in the scavenger effect (kscv = 0.0004 min^-1 mM^-1). 93% of mineralization in 35 minutes was reached when the initial conditions were [Fe2+]0 = 15 mg/L and [H2O2]0 = 680 mg/L. A study of the flow pattern inside the reactor showed that improvement in mineralization rate with US radiation cannot be attributed to a positive effect in mixing. On the other hand, \textit{in situ} chemical oxidation of CBZ was also performed using persulfate anions simultaneously activated by heat energy (thermal, ultrasound), UV-C light, Fe2+ ions and hydrogen peroxide. Nearly complete mineralization (99%) was reached in 90 min. The mineralization process of carbamazepine solutions can be described using pseudo-second-order kinetics in the studied system. A lab thin film reactor was tested to remove CBZ in a photo-Fenton system assisted with ultrasound radiation (UV/H2O2/Fe/US) achieving 89% of mineralization in 35 min. The synergism between the UV process and the sonolytic one was quantified as 55.2%. The sono-photodegradation of CBZ was also tested in a thin film pilot plant reactor and compared with a 28-L UV-C conventional pilot plant and with a solar Collector Parabolic Compound (CPC). At pilot plant scale, a UV/H2O2/Fe/US process reaching 60% of mineralization would cost 2.1 and 3.8 €/m^3 for the conventional and thin film plant, respectively. In the solar process, electric consumption accounts for a maximum of 33% of total costs. Thus, for 80% TOC removal, the cost of this treatment was about 1.36 €/m^3. However, the efficiency of the solar installation decreases in cloudy days and cannot be used during night, so that a limited flow rate can be treated. REAL WASTEWATER FROM BEVERAGE INDUSTRY Real industrial wastewater from beverage industry was studied during solar photo-Fenton system intensified with ferrioxalates complexes in a CPC plant. 70.6% and 96.6% of TOC was removed after 55 and 125 min, respectively, under optimal conditions (H2O2 flowrate = 460 mL/h}; (COOH)2 flowrate = 2100 mL/h}; [Fe2+]0 = 150 mg/L;} pH = 2.79; Medium solar power = 35.8 Wh). It was found that solar power was the main factor affecting mineralization during the first 60 Wh of accumulated solar energy due to the generation of hydroxyl radicals. However, solar power is unimportant at the end of the process (150 Wh of accumulated energy), when the molecular reaction mechanism between H2O2 and the intermediates was predominant. The overall mineralization process (k = 0.0096 min^-1) occured due to the contributions of the photo-Fenton process (k = 0.0044 min^-1) and the ferrioxalate photochemistry (k = 0.003 min^-1)}. The synergism between both processes was 22.9% based on the pseudo-first-order rate constants for TOC removal. A wastewater with similar characteristics was treated in a conventional UV-C pilot plant using a photo-Fenton process intensified with persulfate. Under optimal conditions (pH = 2.9; [H2O2]0 = 4000 mg/L}; [Fe2+]0 = 375 mg/L), 53% of mineralization was achieved after two hours. The remaining TOC was mainly composed of acetate and formate, whose decarboxylation was limited via hydroxyl radical reactions. Thus, persulfate was added to the system after 2 h to obtain a more efficient decarboxylation by sulfate radicals. The combined treatment with UV-C irradiation and thermally activated persulfate enhanced the mineralization efficiency. Under the best conditions, 76% mineralization was achieved in 4 h: first 2 h under photo-Fenton reaction (UV-C/H2O2/Fe) and UV-C/H2O2/Fe/S2O82-/Thermal process in the second two hours (65 ªC; [S2O82-]0 = 1500 mg/L). WASTEWATER EFFLUENT FROM PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY Finally, a ferrioxalate-assited photo-Fenton process was used to treat an industrial wastewater effluent from a pharmaceutical laboratory in a CPC semi-industrial plant. More than 79% of TOC was removed in 2 h when the aquous effluent containing up to 400 mg/L of organic carbon concentration. It could be seen that most of TOC removal occurs early in the first hour of reaction. Then the degradation shows a slower rate due to the generation of acetates which are more difficult to eliminate.
At DiGRA 2013 (Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, USA), the Indie Game Studies panel and dedicated issue of the journal Loading…, curated by Prof Bart Simon, brought the emerging forms of independent game development to the attention of game scholars (Parker 2014). Five years later, the indie scene has become richer and varied, and has been adapting to mutating contexts of production and distribution. Festivals, incubators for start-ups and small companies, workshops and mentoring schemes, have been proliferating in the USA, Canada, Australia, Northern Europe, and the United Kingdom. Numerous independent companies have been founded in the geographical areas where the video game industry was already solid, and a significant presence is establishing in parts of the world that have been traditionally distant from the main hubs of video game development. While the differences (economic, managerial, ideological) with the mainstream productions have always been contested, the recent proliferation of independent companies has further confused the boundaries that appeared to separate the independent territories from the 'official' video game industry. In 2013 the trade association TIGA estimated that in the United Kingdom '83% of all studios that started up in 2011 and 2012 were independent (as opposed to publisher owned)' (TIGA 2013). It has been estimated that, in 2014, 95% of video game companies in the United Kingdom were micro or small businesses, according to NESTA (2014) and the British government (GOV.uk 2014). In Australia, independent companies now form the 'backbone' of game development (Apperley and Golding 2015, 61; Banks and Cunningham 2016). In 2013, a survey involving 2,500 North American game developers revealed that 53% of them identified as 'indie' (GDC 2013), and a subsequent survey by IGDA revealed that 48% of US game developers self-identified as independent (IGDA 2014). Independence is no longer a marginal or alternative mode of production, if it ever was, but the most common type of organization within the video game industry. It appears that almost every game developer is now partially or temporarily 'indie' within their career, and the trend is expected to grow, consistently with the recent developments of the cinema, music, and fashion industries (Hesmondhalgh 2013, McRobbie 2016). The workshop will explore the current state, meanings, and values associated with independence in video game culture, through a series of contributions and findings that analyse the domain from different perspectives, disciplines and geographical specificities. What is at stake, in 2018, when making claims of autonomy, self-management, and creative control? Are indie games helping improve the diversity deficit in game makers and audiences? Is there still room for independence, in a production context where short-term contracts, individualism, and financial risks are considered necessary to be involved in game development? The workshop picks up where the 2013 DiGRA panel left off, bringing together the most current research and theorizing on the topic of "indie game studies." Speakers, including some of from the original panel in Atlanta, will present and compare research in a series of short (approx. 15 minutes) presentations. The presentation will culminate in a discussion, to which participants will be invited to contribute, identifying patterns, controversies and gaps, with a view toward continuing towards further collaboration, research, publication and dissemination. Speakers' contributions: Indie Game Studies – 5 years later Paolo Ruffino (Lecturer in Media Studies, University of Lincoln, UK) Ruffino will introduce the workshop. Drawing on Felan Parker's proposal of 'indie game studies', the workshop gathers some of the international scholars who are currently doing research on independent game development (Parker 2014). This presentation looks at the various approaches to the study of independence. It also questions the reasons for doing research on this topic in this particular historical moment, while developers are starting to organise in local/global unions and networks of mutual assistance. It also draws on regionally specific studies regarding the meaning and values of independence, with a view on mapping the contemporary topics and questions of academic research in the field. Game Production Studies: Theory, Method and Practice Casey O'Donnell (Associate Professor in the Department of Media and Information at Michigan State University, USA) Dr. O'Donnell's addition to this workshop is rooted in a deep interest and care for game production studies, beginning with his early dissertation work with AAA game developers and subsequently working in a variety of fields doing research on game production in the educational, crowdsourcing and "indie" communities. O'Donnell's focus will be on the theories, methods and practices of performing indie game production studies. Game Production Studies explore the wide array of processes, practices, texts, technologies and aspects that take place in and surrounding the game production process. This process is often referred to generally as "game development," which while rooted in the practice of making games actually constitutes a wide variety of tasks, disciplinary perspectives, processes, people and institutions. Indiepocalypse Nadav Lipkin (Assistant Professor of Media, Communication and Technology at La Roche College, Pittsburgh, PA, USA) In his 2013 article for Loading…, Lipkin went about defining independent games. A fear at the heart of that discussion was that larger corporations would co-opt the indie movement by producing games that look indie without being independent from dominant production practices. Since then, subsequent research suggests a different concern is perhaps more worthy of examination. For this workshop, Lipkin will discuss the Indiepocalypse and focus on how the biggest threat to independents is not the mainstream but each other. Overproduction, a glamorization of insecure and unpaid labor, and mainstream distribution partners (especially Steam) who have contradictory financial interests need to be better understood. By examining these conditions, Lipkin intends to connect the games industry more closely to examinations of other creative industries plagued by similarly poor labor and economic conditions. Some notes on the indiefication of game development Olli Sotamaa (Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Game Lab, School of Information Sciences at University of Tampere, Finland) This presentation will draw on my study of the Finnish game development scene that has been going on for almost a decade now. While Finland arguably is a small node in the global circuits of game production, well known hit games like Rovio's Angry Birds and Supercell's Clash of Clans have attracted attention worldwide. Following Garda & Grabarczyk (2016), I consider it important to highlight how the notions of independent games are always connected to given time and place. Accordingly, I examine how independence and 'indie' get a particular meaning in a North-European game development scene defined by small domestic market and early focus on mobile games. Drawing from diverse examples ranging from Housemarque, an independent studio founded in 1995 and a nominee for the Best Indie Studio in Develop Awards 2018, to Arvi Teikari, the designer of IGF 2018 winner Baba is You, this presentation explores the different understandings of indie in an environment that has never hosted a strong AAA industry. As at least some of the game development practices look increasingly similar, it is clear that we need to take a closer look at the production networks (Tyni 2017) and cultural intermediaries (Parker, Whitson & Simon 2018) and explore how they differ between individual games and companies. The other side of the spectrum – how indies saved VR Paweł Grabarczyk (Post-Doc at ITU Copenhagen, Denmark) As has been pointed out (Juul 2015, Garda & Grabarczyk 2016) pixel art and low (or at least relatively humble) production values have become the de facto aesthetic standard for contemporary independent games. Indie games can typically be run on modest computers as they do not require expensive graphics cards or fast processors. The result of this common association is that independent games with relatively high production values are sometimes dubbed as "AAA indie" (Hellblade Senua's Sacrifice can be a good example of this). Contrary to this VR technologies are typically associated with expensive, high end machines because they require both: the purchase of a relatively powerful computer and the purchase of the headset itself. On the face of it, VR games and indie aesthetics could not be further apart. It is thus very surprising that this expensive technology attracted a substantial number of independent developers (for example, there are currently 1864 games tagged as "independent" "VR" games on the Steam platform). More importantly, many of the most successful VR games belong to the indie category (Job Simulator, SuperHot VR, Beat Saber). I believe that this phenomenon demands further study, because it escapes some of the existing classifications and conceptualizations of independent games market (the move from retro-aesthetics being the most obvious reason for this). I argue that there are three reasons why independent developers were attracted to VR platforms. The first reason is the move from pixel art to low poly art which has been visible in many recent games (and which made the transition from "flat" games to VR games possible). The second reason is the spirit of innovation which permeates both communities (indie developers and VR developers). The third, most intriguing factor is that VR games created an economic niche which resulted from the lack of so called "AAA" games being developed specifically for VR. Project:INDIE Dr Celia Pearce (Associate Professor of Game Design at Northeastern University, USA) Over the past decade, indie games have grown at such a rapid rate that by 2014 roughly half of game developers identified as indie. This explosion is the outcome of a bottom-up, complex, emergent process representing the convergence of a variety of visible and invisible factors, including: emerging technologies, new publication and funding models, game academia, festivals and exhibitions, accessible creation tools, peer-learning and creative communities (e.g. game jams, co-working spaces), as well changes in government and popular perception of games. Project:INDIE is an initiative and consortium formed to develop an overview of the indie ecosystem, mapping the complex interrelationships and influences between its constituent parts. We will do this by aggregating existing research on indie games, identifying gaps and setting research agendas, and conducting comparative analysis on datasets from key players to understand the synergies between various contributing factors to the growth and commercial success of indie and artgames. Independent game industry in Melbourne, Australia Dr Brendan Keogh (Digital Media Research Centre, Queensland University of Technology, Australia) Like other countries beyond North America and Japan, Australia has an emerging, grassroots videogame industry consisting primarily of small teams of independent studios creating original IP in precarious conditions. In Australia, this independent game industry has centred on Melbourne, Victoria, where state funding and the support of institutions such as the State Library of Victoria and the Australian Centre of the Moving Image have encouraged the growth of a robust and diverse ecology of videogame makers. Crucially, within this ecology are two interlocking but distinct independent scenes with different practices and approaches. This talk will present preliminary findings from interview research conducted with 40 videogame makers and cultural institutions in Melbourne to highlight the specific tensions, experiences, skills, and identities across these two Melbourne indie game scenes to draw attention to the need to account for a variety of scales of formal and informal creative labour practices within local videogame development fields. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION Paweł Grabarczyk is a post-doc researcher at IT University of Copenhagen and adjunct professor at University of Lodz. His research focuses mostly on the boundaries between philosophy and game studies: specifically philosophy of language (ontology of games and conceptual analysis) and philosophy of mind (forms of representation in games and virtual reality). He is also interested in the study of modern and historical trends in games (indie games, shareware games) and demoscene. He is the president of Centre for Philosophical Research and an editor-in-chief of Replay: The Polish Journal of Game Studies. Brendan Keogh is an Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Research Fellow currently conducting research into Australian videogame makers and skills transfer. He is the author of A Play of Bodies: How We Perceive Videogames and Killing is Harmless: A Critical Reading of Spec Ops The Line. Nadav Lipkin is an Assistant Professor of Media, Communication and Technology at La Roche College in Pittsburgh. His dissertation, "Agents at work: Decision making capacity and creative labor in network society," explores agency for creative professionals through a cross-industry analysis and a case study of the independent game development community in New York City. His research focuses on independent media production both in and beyond the games industry. Currently, he is examining the responses of YouTube content producers to changes in the platform's content policies. Casey O'Donnell is an Associate Professor in the Department of Media and Information at Michigan State University. His research examines the creative collaborative work of videogame design and development. This research examines the cultural and collaborative dynamics that occur in both professional "AAA" organizations and formal and informal "independent" game development communities. His first book, "Developer's Dilemma" is published by MIT Press. Casey is an active game developer, releasing "Osy," in 2011, "Against the Gradient," in 2012, "GLITcH" in 2013 and "Kerem B'Yavneh," in 2016. His work has been funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institute of Health (NIH). Celia Pearce is an award-winning game designer, researcher, writer and curator. She currently holds a position as Associate Professor of Game Design at Northeastern University. She is the author or co-author of numerous of books and papers, including Communities of Play (MIT Press), Ethnography and Virtual Worlds (Princeton) and IndieCade@10: A Decade of Innovation (CMU ETC Press-In Progress), which chronicles the history of IndieCade, the festival she co-founded. Her recent game credits include Fracture, co-designed for the Blinks Platform, and eBee, which won the 2016 award for Innovation in Tabletop Game Design at Boston Festival of Indie Games. Paolo Ruffino is Lecturer in Media Studies at University of Lincoln, UK, and artist with the collective IOCOSE. Ruffino is the author of Future Gaming: Creative Interventions in Video Game Culture (Goldsmiths and MIT Press), and editor and co-author of numerous publications on games cultures, gamification, and game art. He has been researching in the areas of digital culture, media and cultural studies, media art, and semiotics. Ruffino is President of DiGRA Italia and board member of British DiGRA. Olli Sotamaa is an Associate Professor of game cultures studies at the University of Tampere. His publications cover co-production, user-generated content, game industry analysis & game studies methods. Sotamaa is the co-director of University of Tampere Game Research Lab and a team leader at the Centre of Excellence in Game Culture Studies (2018-2025). His current research interests include game production studies, creative labour and game policy. BIBLIOGRAPHY Apperley, T. and Golding, D. (2015) "Australia" in In Video Games Around the World (M.J.P. Wolf, dir.), Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press, pp. 57–70. Arsenault, D., and Guay, L.-M. (2015). "Canada". In Video Games Around the World (M.J.P. Wolf, dir.), Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press, p. 105-118. Garda, M.B. & Grabarczyk, P. (2016). Is Every Indie Game Independent? Towards the Concept of Independent Game. Game Studies, vol. 16, Issue 1. GDC (2013) "GDC State of the Industry research exposes major trends ahead of March show". GDConf.com. February 28. Available at http://www.gdconf.com /news/gdc_state_of_the_industry_rese/ GOV.uk (2014). "Video games tax relief passes final hurdle". GOV.uk, 27th March. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/video-games-tax-relief-passes-final-hurdle Gregg, M. (2011) Work's Intimacy. Cambridge, UK and Malden, MA: Polity Press Hesmondhalgh, David. 2013. The Cultural Industries. 3rd Edition. London: Sage. Kultima, A; Alha, K. & Nummenmaa, T. (2016). Building Finnish Game Jam Community through Positive Social Facilitation. Proceedings of the 20th International Academic Mindtrek Conference, pp. 433-440. New York: ACM. Juul, J. (2014). "High-tech Low-tech Authenticity: The Creation of Independent Style at the Independent Games Festival". In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games. Fort Lauderdale. Lessard, J. (2012). "Glutomax: Québecois Proto-Indie Game Development". Loading. Vol. 7, no 11, December 31st. Available at http://journals.sfu.ca/loading/index.php/loading/article/view/127. Lipkin, N. (2012). "Examining Indie's Independence: The Meaning of "Indie" Games, the Politics of Production, and Mainstream Cooptation". Loading. Vol. 7, no 11, December 31st. Available at http://journals.sfu.ca/loading/index.php/loading/article/view/122. NESTA (2014) "A Map of the UK Games Industry", Nesta.org, 25th September. Available at https://www.nesta.org.uk/publications/map-uk-games-industry McRobbie, A. 2016. Be Creative: Making a Living in the New Culture Industries. Cambridge: Polity Press. Parker, F. (2014) "Indie Game Studies Year Eleven". In Proceedings of DiGRA 2013: DeFragging Game Studies, Vol. 7, August 2014. Available at http://www.digra.org/digital-library/publications/indie-game-studies-year-eleven/ Parker, F; Whitson, J.R. & Simon, B. (2018). Megabooth: The cultural intermediation of indie games. New Media & Society, 20(5), 1953-1972. Ruffino, P. (2012). "Narratives of Independent Production in Video Game Culture". Loading. Vol. 7, no 11, December 31st. Available at http://journals.sfu.ca/loading/index.php/loading/article/view/120. Swalwell, M., and Davidson, M. (2015). "Game History and the Case of 'Malzak': Theorizing the Manufacture of 'local Product'in 1980s New Zealand". Locating Emerging Media (Ben Aslinger et Germaine R. Halegoua, dirs.), London: Routledge. Swalwell, M. (2012). "The Early Micro User: Games writing, hardware hacking, and the will to mod". In Proceedings of DiGRA Nordic 2012 Conference: Local and Global—Games in Culture and Society , June, Tampere Swalwell, M. (2008). "1980s Home coding: The art of amateur programming". Aotearoa Digital Arts New Media Reader (Stella Brennan and Su Ballard, dirs.), p. 192-201. Tyni, H. (2017). Double Duty: Crowdfunding and the Evolving Game Production Network. Games and Culture, Online First. UKIE (2017) "The UK Video Games Sector: a Blueprint for Growth". The UK Interactive Entertainment Association. Available at http://ukie.org.uk/blueprint
The module was administered as a post-election interview. The resulting data are provided along with voting, demographic, district and macro variables in a single dataset.
CSES Variable List The list of variables is being provided on the CSES Website to help in understanding what content is available from CSES, and to compare the content available in each module.
Themes: MICRO-LEVEL DATA:
Identification and study administration variables: weighting factors;election type; date of election 1st and 2nd round; study timing (post election study, pre-election and post-election study, between rounds of majoritarian election); mode of interview; gender of interviewer; date questionnaire administered; primary electoral district of respondent; number of days the interview was conducted after the election
Demography: age; gender; education; marital status; union membership; union membership of others in household; current employment status; main occupation; employment type - public or private; industrial sector; occupation of chief wage earner and of spouse; household income; number of persons in household; number of children in household under the age of 18; attendance at religious services; religiosity; religious denomination; language usually spoken at home; race; ethnicity; region of residence; rural or urban residence
Survey variables: respondent cast a ballot at the current and the previous election; respondent cast candidate preference vote at the previous election; satisfaction with the democratic process in the country; last election was conducted fairly; form of questionnaire (long or short); party identification; intensity of party identification; political parties care what people think; political parties are necessary; recall of candidates from the last election (name, gender and party); number of candidates correctly named; sympathy scale for selected parties and political leaders; assessment of the state of the economy in the country; assessment of economic development in the country; degree of improvement or deterioration of economy; politicians know what people think; contact with a member of parliament or congress during the past twelve months; attitude towards selected statements: it makes a difference who is in power and who people vote for; people express their political opinion; self-assessment on a left-right-scale; assessment of parties and political leaders on a left-right-scale; political information items
DISTRICT-LEVEL DATA:
number of seats contested in electoral district; number of candidates; number of party lists; percent vote of different parties; official voter turnout in electoral district
MACRO-LEVEL DATA:
founding year of parties; ideological families of parties; international organization the parties belong to; left-right position of parties assigned by experts; election outcomes by parties in current (lower house/upper house) legislative election; percent of seats in lower house received by parties in current lower house/upper house election; percent of seats in upper house received by parties in current lower house/upper house election; percent of votes received by presidential candidate of parties in current elections; electoral turnout; electoral alliances permitted during the election campaign; existing electoral alliances; most salient factors in the election; head of state (regime type); if multiple rounds: selection of head of state; direct election of head of state and process of direct election; threshold for first-round victory; procedure for candidate selection at final round; simple majority or absolute majority for 2nd round victory; year of presidential election (before or after this legislative election); process if indirect election of head of state; head of government (president or prime minister); selection of prime minister; number of elected legislative chambers; for lower and upper houses was coded: number of electoral segments; number of primary districts; number of seats; district magnitude (number of members elected from each district); number of secondary and tertiary electoral districts; compulsory voting; votes cast; voting procedure; electoral formula; party threshold; parties can run joint lists; requirements for joint party lists; possibility of apparentement; types of apparentement agreements; multi-party endorsements; multi-party endorsements on ballot; ally party support; constitutional prerogatives of the head of state; constitutional powers of prime minister; methods of cabinet dismissal; dissolution of legislature
Das International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) ist ein länderübergreifendes, fortlaufendes Umfrageprogramm, das jährlich Erhebungen zu Themen durchführt, die für die Sozialwissenschaften wichtig sind. Das Programm begann 1984 mit vier Gründungsmitgliedern - Australien, Deutschland, Großbritannien und den Vereinigten Staaten - und ist inzwischen auf fast 50 Mitgliedsländer aus aller Welt angewachsen. Da die Umfragen auf Replikationen ausgelegt sind, können die Daten sowohl für länder- als auch für zeitübergreifende Vergleiche genutzt werden. Jedes ISSP-Modul konzentriert sich auf ein bestimmtes Thema, das in regelmäßigen Zeitabständen wiederholt wird. Details zur Durchführung der nationalen ISSP-Umfragen entnehmen Sie bitte der Dokumentation. Die vorliegende Studie konzentriert sich auf Fragen zu nationalem Bewusstsein und nationaler Identität.
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are not fully comprehensive, as current strategies typically test only the additive model, exclude the X chromosome, and use only one reference panel for genotype imputation. We implement an extensive GWAS strategy, GUIDANCE, which improves genotype imputation by using multiple reference panels and includes the analysis of the X chromosome and non-additive models to test for association. We apply this methodology to 62,281 subjects across 22 age-related diseases and identify 94 genome-wide associated loci, including 26 previously unreported. Moreover, we observe that 27.7% of the 94 loci are missed if we use standard imputation strategies with a single reference panel, such as HRC, and only test the additive model. Among the new findings, we identify three novel low-frequency recessive variants with odds ratios larger than 4, which need at least a three-fold larger sample size to be detected under the additive model. This study highlights the benefits of applying innovative strategies to better uncover the genetic architecture of complex diseases. ; This work has been sponsored by the grant SEV-2011-00067 and SEV2015-0493 of Severo Ochoa Program, awarded by the Spanish Government, by the grant TIN2015- 65316-P, awarded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, and by the Generalitat de Catalunya (contract 2014-SGR-1051). This work was supported by an EFSD/Lilly research fellowship. Josep M. Mercader was supported by a Sara Borrell Fellowship from the Instituto Carlos III, Beatriu de Pinós fellowship from the Agency for Management of University and Research Grants (AGAUR) and by the American Diabetes Association Innovative and Clinical Translational Award 1-19-ICTS-068. Sílvia Bonàs was supported by FI-DGR Fellowship from FIDGR 2013 from Agència de Gestió d'Ajuts Universitaris i de Recerca (AGAUR, Generalitat de Catalunya), and a 'Juan de la Cierva' postdoctoral fellowship (MINECO;FJCI-2017-32090). Cecilia Salvoro received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement H2020-MSCA-COFUND-2016- 754433. Cristian Ramon-Cortes pre-doctoral contract is financed by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation, and Universities under contract BES-2016-076791. Elizabeth G. Atkinson was supported by the National Institutes of Mental Health (grants K01MH121659 and T32MH017119). Jose Florez was supported by NIH/NIDDK award K24 DK110550. This study made use of data generated by the UK10K Consortium, derived from samples from UK10K COHORT IMPUTATION (EGAS00001000713). A full list of the investigators who contributed to the generation of the data is available at www.UK10K.org. Funding for UK10K was provided by the Wellcome Trust under award WT091310. This study made use of data generated by the 'Genome of the Netherlands' project, which is funded by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (grant no. 184021007). The data were made available as a Rainbow Project of BBMRI-NL. Samples were contributed by LifeLines (http://lifelines.nl/lifelines-research/general), the Leiden Longevity Study (http://www.healthy-ageing.nl; http://www.langleven.net), the Netherlands Twin Registry (NTR: http://www.tweelingenregister.org), the Rotterdam studies (http://www.erasmus-epidemiology.nl/rotterdamstudy) and the Genetic Research in Isolated Populations program (http://www.epib.nl/research/geneticepi/research. html#gip). The sequencing was carried out in collaboration with the Beijing Institute for Genomics (BGI). This study also made use of data generated by The Haplotype Reference Consortium (HRC) accessed through The European Genome-phenome Archive at the European Bioinformatics Institute with the accession numbers EGAD00001002729, after a form agreed by the Barcelona Supercomputing Center (BSC) with WTSI. This research has been conducted using also the UK Biobank Resource (application number 31063 and 27892). The Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) Project was supported by the Common Fund of the Office of the Director of the National Institutes of Health, and by NCI, NHGRI, NHLBI, NIDA, NIMH, and NINDS. The data used for the analyses described in this manuscript were obtained from the GTEx Portal on 07/16/2019. We acknowledge PRACE for awarding us access to both MareNostrum supercomputer from the Barcelona Supercomputing Center, based in Spain at Barcelona, and the SuperMUC supercomputer of the Leibniz Supercomputing Center (LRZ), based in Garching at Germany (proposals numbers 2016143358 and 2016163985). The technical support group from the Barcelona Supercomputing Center is gratefully acknowledged. Finally, we thank all the Computational Genomics group at the BSC for their helpful discussions and valuable comments on the manuscript. We also acknowledge Elias Rodriguez Fos for designing the GUIDANCE logo. ; Peer Reviewed ; Article signat per 22 autors/autores: Marta Guindo-Martínez 1,18; Ramon Amela 1,18; Silvia Bonàs-Guarch 1,2,3; Montserrat Puiggròs 1; Cecilia Salvoro 1; Irene Miguel-Escalada 1,2,3; Caitlin E. Carey 4,5; Joanne B. Cole 6,7,8,9; Sina Rüeger 10; Elizabeth Atkinson 4,5,11; Aaron Leong 8,12; Friman Sanchez 1; Cristian Ramon-Cortes 1; Jorge Ejarque 1; Duncan S. Palmer 4,5,17; Mitja Kurki 10; FinnGen Consortium*, Krishna Aragam 11,13,14; Jose C. Florez 6,7,15; Rosa M. Badia 1; Josep M. Mercader 1,6,7,15,19✉ & David Torrents 1,16,19✉ *A full list of members and their affiliations appears in the Supplementary Information 1 Barcelona Supercomputing Center (BSC), Barcelona, Spain. 2 Regulatory Genomics and Diabetes, Centre for Genomic Regulation, The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain. 3 CIBER de Diabetes y Enfermedades Metabólicas Asociadas, Madrid, Spain. 4 Stanley Center for Psychiatric Research, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA. 5 Analytic and Translational Genetics Unit, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 6 Programs in Metabolism and Medical and Population Genetics, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA. 7 Diabetes Unit and Center for Genomic Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 8 Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 9 Division of Endocrinology and Center for Basic and Translational Obesity Research, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 10 Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland, FIMM, HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. 11 Program in Medical and Population Genetics, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA. 12 Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 13 Cardiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 14 Cardiovascular Research Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 15 Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 16 Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ICREA), Barcelona, Spain. 17 Present address: GENOMICS plc, Oxford, UK. 18 These authors contributed equally: Marta Guindo-Martínez, Ramon Amela. 19 These authors jointly supervised this work: Josep M. Mercader, David Torrents. ; Postprint (published version)
WOS: 000449782800001 ; A search is presented for the pair production of heavy vectorlike quarks, T (T) over bar or B (B) over bar, that decay into final states with jets and no reconstructed leptons. Jets in the final state are classified using a deep neural network as arising from hadronically decaying W/Z bosons, Higgs bosons, top quarks, or background. The analysis uses data from the ATLAS experiment corresponding to 36.1 fb(-1) of proton-proton collisions with a center-of-mass energy of root s = 13 TeV delivered by the Large Hadron Collider in 2015 and 2016. No significant deviation from the Standard Model expectation is observed. Results are interpreted assuming the vectorlike quarks decay into a Standard Model boson and a third-generation-quark, T -> Wb, Ht, Zt or B -> Wt, Hb, Zb, for a variety of branching ratios. At 95% confidence level, the observed (expected) lower limit on the vectorlike B-quark mass for a weak-isospin doublet (B, Y) is 950 (890) GeV, and the lower limits on the masses for the pure decays B -> Hb and T -> Ht, where these results are strongest, arc 1010 (970) GeV and 1010 (1010) GeV, respectively. ; ANPCyT, ArgentinaANPCyT; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, AustraliaAustralian Research Council; BMWFW, Austria; FWF, AustriaAustrian Science Fund (FWF); ANAS, AzerbaijanAzerbaijan National Academy of Sciences (ANAS); SSTC, Belarus; CNPq, BrazilNational Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq); FAPESP, BrazilFundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP); NSERC, CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada; NRC, Canada; CFI, CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation; CERN; CONICYT, ChileComision Nacional de Investigacion Cientifica y Tecnologica (CONICYT); CAS, ChinaChinese Academy of Sciences; MOST, ChinaMinistry of Science and Technology, China; NSFC, ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China; COLCIENCIAS, ColombiaDepartamento Administrativo de Ciencia, Tecnologia e Innovacion Colciencias; MSMT CR, Czech RepublicMinistry of Education, Youth & Sports - Czech RepublicCzech Republic Government; MPO CR, Czech RepublicCzech Republic Government; VSC CR, Czech RepublicCzech Republic Government; DNRF, Denmark; DNSRC, DenmarkDanish Natural Science Research Council; IN2P3-CNRS, FranceCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS); CEA-DRF/IRFU, France; SRNSFG, Georgia; BMBF, GermanyFederal Ministry of Education & Research (BMBF); HGF, Germany; MPG, GermanyMax Planck Society; GSRT, GreeceGreek Ministry of Development-GSRT; RGC, Hong Kong SAR, ChinaHong Kong Research Grants Council; ISF, IsraelIsrael Science Foundation; Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, ItalyIstituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare; MEXT, JapanMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan (MEXT); JSPS, JapanMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan (MEXT)Japan Society for the Promotion of Science; CNRST, Morocco; NWO, NetherlandsNetherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO)Netherlands Government; RCN, Norway; MNiSW, PolandMinistry of Science and Higher Education, Poland; NCN, Poland; FCT, PortugalPortuguese Foundation for Science and Technology; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia, Russian FederationRussian Federation; NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS, SloveniaSlovenian Research Agency - Slovenia; MIZS, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC, Sweden; Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, Switzerland; SNSF, SwitzerlandSwiss National Science Foundation (SNSF); Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, TaiwanMinistry of Science and Technology, Taiwan; TAEK, TurkeyMinistry of Energy & Natural Resources - Turkey; STFC, United KingdomScience & Technology Facilities Council (STFC); DOE, United States of AmericaUnited States Department of Energy (DOE); NSF, United States of AmericaNational Science Foundation (NSF); BCKDF, Canada; Canada Council, Canada; CANARIE, Canada; CRC, Canada; Compute Canada, Canada; FQRNT, CanadaFQRNT; Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET, European UnionEuropean Union (EU); ERC, European UnionEuropean Union (EU)European Research Council (ERC); ERDF, European UnionEuropean Union (EU); FP7, European UnionEuropean Union (EU); Horizon 2020, European Union; Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions, European UnionEuropean Union (EU); Investissements d'Avenir Labex and Idex, FranceFrench National Research Agency (ANR); ANR, FranceFrench National Research Agency (ANR); Region Auvergne, FranceRegion Auvergne-Rhone-Alpes; Fondation Partager le Savoir, France; DFG, GermanyGerman Research Foundation (DFG); AvH Foundation, GermanyAlexander von Humboldt Foundation; EU-ESFEuropean Union (EU); Greek NSRFGreek Ministry of Development-GSRT; BSF, IsraelUS-Israel Binational Science Foundation; GIF, IsraelGerman-Israeli Foundation for Scientific Research and Development; Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; CERCA Programme Generalitat de Catalunya, Generalitat Valenciana, SpainGeneralitat Valenciana; Royal Society, United KingdomRoyal Society of London; Leverhulme Trust, United KingdomLeverhulme Trust ; We thank CERN for the very successful operation of the LHC, as well as the support staff from our institutions without whom ATLAS could not be operated efficiently. We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWFW and FWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; SSTC, Belarus; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC and CFI, Canada; CERN; CONICYT, Chile; CAS, MOST and NSFC, China; COLCIENCIAS, Colombia; MSMT CR, MPO CR and VSC CR, Czech Republic; DNRF and DNSRC, Denmark; IN2P3-CNRS, CEA-DRF/IRFU, France; SRNSFG, Georgia; BMBF, HGF, and MPG, Germany; GSRT, Greece; RGC, Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan; CNRST, Morocco; NWO, Netherlands; RCN, Norway; MNiSW and NCN, Poland; FCT, Portugal; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia and NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIZS, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC and Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, SNSF and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, Taiwan; TAEK, Turkey; STFC, United Kingdom; DOE and NSF, United States of America. In addition, individual groups and members have received support from BCKDF, the Canada Council, CANARIE, CRC, Compute Canada, FQRNT, and the Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET, ERC, ERDF, FP7, Horizon 2020 and Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions, European Union; Investissements d'Avenir Labex and Idex, ANR, Region Auvergne and Fondation Partager le Savoir, France; DFG and AvH Foundation, Germany; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes co-financed by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; BSF, GIF and Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; CERCA Programme Generalitat de Catalunya, Generalitat Valenciana, Spain; the Royal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom. The crucial computing support from all WLCG partners is acknowledged gratefully, in particular from CERN, the ATLAS Tier-1 facilities at TRIUMF (Canada), NDGF (Denmark, Norway, Sweden), CC-IN2P3 (France), KIT/GridKA (Germany), INFN-CNAF (Italy), NL-T1 (Netherlands), PIC (Spain), ASGC (Taiwan), RAL (UK) and BNL (USA), the Tier-2 facilities worldwide and large non-WLCG resource providers. Major contributors of computing resources are listed in Ref. [101].
WOS: 000438622000007 ; A search for pair production of up-type vector-like quarks (T) with a significant branching ratio into a top quark and either a Standard Model Higgs boson or a Z boson is presented. The same analysis is also used to search for four-top-quark production in several new physics scenarios. The search is based on a dataset of pp collisions at root s = 13TeV recorded in 2015 and 2016 with the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider and corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb(-1). Data are analysed in the lepton+jets final state, characterised by an isolated electron or muon with high transverse momentum, large missing transverse momentum and multiple jets, as well as the jets+E-T(miss) final state, characterised by multiple jets and large missing transverse momentum. The search exploits the high multiplicity of jets identified as originating from b-quarks, and the presence of boosted, hadronically decaying top quarks and Higgs bosons reconstructed as large-radius jets, characteristic of signal events. No significant excess above the Standard Model expectation is observed, and 95% CL upper limits are set on the production cross sections for the different signal processes considered. These cross-section limits are used to derive lower limits on the mass of a vector-like T quark under several branching ratio hypotheses assuming contributions from T -> Wb, Zt, Ht decays. The 95% CL observed lower limits on the T quark mass range between 0.99TeV and 1.43TeV for all possible values of the branching ratios into the three decay modes considered, significantly extending the reach beyond that of previous searches. Additionally, upper limits on anomalous four-top-quark production are set in the context of an effective field theory model, as well as in an universal extra dimensions model. ; ANPCyT, ArgentinaANPCyT; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, AustraliaAustralian Research Council; BMWFW, Austria; FWF, AustriaAustrian Science Fund (FWF); ANAS, AzerbaijanAzerbaijan National Academy of Sciences (ANAS); SSTC, Belarus; CNPq, BrazilNational Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq); FAPESP, BrazilFundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP); NSERC, CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada; NRC, Canada; CFI, CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation; CERN; CONICYT, ChileComision Nacional de Investigacion Cientifica y Tecnologica (CONICYT); CAS, ChinaChinese Academy of Sciences; MOST, ChinaMinistry of Science and Technology, China; NSFC, ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China; COLCIENCIAS, ColombiaDepartamento Administrativo de Ciencia, Tecnologia e Innovacion Colciencias; MSMT CR, Czech RepublicMinistry of Education, Youth & Sports - Czech RepublicCzech Republic Government; MPO CR, Czech RepublicCzech Republic Government; VSC CR, Czech RepublicCzech Republic Government; DNRF, Denmark; DNSRC, DenmarkDanish Natural Science Research Council; IN2P3-CNRS, FranceCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS); CEA-DRF/IRFU, France; SRNSFG, Georgia; BMBF, GermanyFederal Ministry of Education & Research (BMBF); HGF, Germany; MPG, GermanyMax Planck Society; GSRT, GreeceGreek Ministry of Development-GSRT; RGC, China; Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF, IsraelIsrael Science Foundation; I-CORE, Israel; Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, ItalyIstituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare; MEXT, JapanMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan (MEXT); JSPS, JapanMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan (MEXT)Japan Society for the Promotion of Science; CNRST, Morocco; NWO, NetherlandsNetherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO)Netherlands Government; RCN, Norway; MNiSW, PolandMinistry of Science and Higher Education, Poland; NCN, Poland; FCT, PortugalPortuguese Foundation for Science and Technology; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia, Russian FederationRussian Federation; NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS, SloveniaSlovenian Research Agency - Slovenia; MIZS, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC, Sweden; Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, Switzerland; SNSF, SwitzerlandSwiss National Science Foundation (SNSF); Canton of Bern, Switzerland; MOST, TaiwanMinistry of Science and Technology, Taiwan; TAEK, TurkeyMinistry of Energy & Natural Resources - Turkey; STFC, United KingdomScience & Technology Facilities Council (STFC); DOE, United States of AmericaUnited States Department of Energy (DOE); NSF, United States of AmericaNational Science Foundation (NSF); BCKDF, Canada; Canada Council, Canada; CANARIE, Canada; CRC, Canada; Compute Canada, Canada; FQRNT, CanadaFQRNT; Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET, European UnionEuropean Union (EU); ERC, European UnionEuropean Union (EU)European Research Council (ERC); ERDF, European UnionEuropean Union (EU); FP7, European UnionEuropean Union (EU); Horizon 2020, European Union; Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions, European UnionEuropean Union (EU); Investissements d'Avenir Labex and Idex, FranceFrench National Research Agency (ANR); ANR, FranceFrench National Research Agency (ANR); Region Auvergne, FranceRegion Auvergne-Rhone-Alpes; Fondation Partager le Savoir, France; DFG, GermanyGerman Research Foundation (DFG); AvH Foundation, GermanyAlexander von Humboldt Foundation; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes - EU-ESF; Greek NSRFGreek Ministry of Development-GSRT; BSF, IsraelUS-Israel Binational Science Foundation; GIF, IsraelGerman-Israeli Foundation for Scientific Research and Development; Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; CERCA Programme Generalitat de Catalunya, Spain; Generalitat Valenciana, SpainGeneralitat Valenciana; Royal Society, United KingdomRoyal Society of London; Leverhulme Trust, United KingdomLeverhulme Trust; Canton of Geneva, Switzerland ; We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWFW and FWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; SSTC, Belarus; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC and CFI, Canada; CERN; CONICYT, Chile; CAS, MOST and NSFC, China; COLCIENCIAS, Colombia; MSMT CR, MPO CR and VSC CR, Czech Republic; DNRF and DNSRC, Denmark; IN2P3-CNRS, CEA-DRF/IRFU, France; SRNSFG, Georgia; BMBF, HGF, and MPG, Germany; GSRT, Greece; RGC, Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF, I-CORE and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan; CNRST, Morocco; NWO, Netherlands; RCN, Norway; MNiSW and NCN, Poland; FCT, Portugal; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia and NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIZS, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC and Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, SNSF and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, Taiwan; TAEK, Turkey; STFC, United Kingdom; DOE and NSF, United States of America. In addition, individual groups and members have received support from BCKDF, the Canada Council, CANARIE, CRC, Compute Canada, FQRNT, and the Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET, ERC, ERDF, FP7, Horizon 2020 and Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions, European Union; Investissements d'Avenir Labex and Idex, ANR, Region Auvergne and Fondation Partager le Savoir, France; DFG and AvH Foundation, Germany; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes co-financed by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; BSF, GIF and Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; CERCA Programme Generalitat de Catalunya, Generalitat Valenciana, Spain; the Royal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom.
BACKGROUND: Timely assessment of the burden of HIV/AIDS is essential for policy setting and programme evaluation. In this report from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015 (GBD 2015), we provide national estimates of levels and trends of HIV/AIDS incidence, prevalence, coverage of antiretroviral therapy (ART), and mortality for 195 countries and territories from 1980 to 2015. METHODS: For countries without high-quality vital registration data, we estimated prevalence and incidence with data from antenatal care clinics and population-based seroprevalence surveys, and with assumptions by age and sex on initial CD4 distribution at infection, CD4 progression rates (probability of progression from higher to lower CD4 cell-count category), on and off antiretroviral therapy (ART) mortality, and mortality from all other causes. Our estimation strategy links the GBD 2015 assessment of all-cause mortality and estimation of incidence and prevalence so that for each draw from the uncertainty distribution all assumptions used in each step are internally consistent. We estimated incidence, prevalence, and death with GBD versions of the Estimation and Projection Package (EPP) and Spectrum software originally developed by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). We used an open-source version of EPP and recoded Spectrum for speed, and used updated assumptions from systematic reviews of the literature and GBD demographic data. For countries with high-quality vital registration data, we developed the cohort incidence bias adjustment model to estimate HIV incidence and prevalence largely from the number of deaths caused by HIV recorded in cause-of-death statistics. We corrected these statistics for garbage coding and HIV misclassification. FINDINGS: Global HIV incidence reached its peak in 1997, at 3·3 million new infections (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 3·1-3·4 million). Annual incidence has stayed relatively constant at about 2·6 million per year (range 2·5-2·8 million) since 2005, after a period of fast decline between 1997 and 2005. The number of people living with HIV/AIDS has been steadily increasing and reached 38·8 million (95% UI 37·6-40·4 million) in 2015. At the same time, HIV/AIDS mortality has been declining at a steady pace, from a peak of 1·8 million deaths (95% UI 1·7-1·9 million) in 2005, to 1·2 million deaths (1·1-1·3 million) in 2015. We recorded substantial heterogeneity in the levels and trends of HIV/AIDS across countries. Although many countries have experienced decreases in HIV/AIDS mortality and in annual new infections, other countries have had slowdowns or increases in rates of change in annual new infections. INTERPRETATION: Scale-up of ART and prevention of mother-to-child transmission has been one of the great successes of global health in the past two decades. However, in the past decade, progress in reducing new infections has been slow, development assistance for health devoted to HIV has stagnated, and resources for health in low-income countries have grown slowly. Achievement of the new ambitious goals for HIV enshrined in Sustainable Development Goal 3 and the 90-90-90 UNAIDS targets will be challenging, and will need continued efforts from governments and international agencies in the next 15 years to end AIDS by 2030. ; Funding: We thank the countless individuals who have contributed to the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study 2015 in various capacities. We specifically thank Jeffrey Eaton and John Stover. HW and CJLM received funding for this study from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; the National Institute of Mental Health, National Institutes of Health (NIH; R01MH110163); and the National Institute on Aging, NIH (P30AG047845). LJAR acknowledges the support of Qatar National Research Fund (NPRP 04-924-3-251) who provided the main funding for generating the data provided to the GBD-Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation effort. BPAQ acknowledges institutional support from PRONABEC (National Program of Scholarship and Educational Loan), provided by the Peruvian government. DB is supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (grant number OPP1068048). JDN was supported in his contribution to this work by a Fellowship from Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia, Portugal (SFRH/BPD/92934/2013). KD is supported by a Wellcome Trust Fellowship in Public Health and Tropical Medicine (grant number 099876). TF received financial support from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF; project number P300P3-154634). AG acknowledges funding from Sistema Nacional de Investigadores de Panama-SNI. PJ is supported by Wellcome Trust-DBT India Alliance Clinical and Public Health Intermediate Fellowship. MK receives research support from the Academy of Finland, the Swedish Research Council, Alzheimerfonden, Alzheimer's Research & Prevention Foundation, Center for Innovative Medicine (CIMED) at Karolinska Institutet South Campus, AXA Research Fund, Wallenberg Clinical Scholars Award from the Knut och Alice Wallenbergs Foundation, and the Sheika Salama Bint Hamdan Al Nahyan Foundation. AK's work was supported by the Miguel Servet contract financed by the CP13/00150 and PI15/00862 projects, integrated into the National R&D&I and funded by the ISCIII (General Branch Evaluation and Promotion of Health Research), and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF-FEDER). SML is funded by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinician Scientist Fellowship (grant number NIHR/CS/010/014). HJL reports grants from the NIHR, EU Innovative Medicines Initiative, Centre for Strategic & International Studies, and WHO. WM is Program analyst, Population and Development, in the Peru Country Office of the United Nations Population Fund, which does not necessarily endorse this study. For UOM, funding from the German National Cohort Consortium (O1ER1511D) is gratefully acknowledged. KR reports grants from NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, NIHR Career Development Fellowship, and Oxford Martin School during the conduct of the study. GR acknowledges that work related to this paper has been done on the behalf of the GBD Genitourinary Disease Expert Group supported by the International Society of Nephrology (ISN). ISS reports grants from FAPESP (Brazilian public agency). RSS receives institutional support from Universidad de Ciencias Aplicadas y Ambientales, UDCA, Bogota Colombia. SS receives postdoctoral funding from the Fonds de la recherche en sante du Quebec (FRSQ), including its renewal. RTS was supported in part by grant number PROMETEOII/2015/021 from Generalitat Valenciana and the national grant PI14/00894 from ISCIII-FEDER. PY acknowledges support from Strategic Public Policy Research (HKU7003-SPPR-12).
Volume I -- 1 Cambridge, That Was: The Crucible of Heterodox Economics -- 1.1 The Narrative -- 1.2 Evolutions and Revolutions -- 1.2.1 The Great Banyan of Heterodox Traditions -- 1.2.2 Cohorts -- 1.2.3 The Cambridge Habitat -- 1.2.4 Which Cambridge? -- 1.3 Regime Change -- 1.3.1 The World of Cambridge: Stories Within -- 1.3.2 Worlds Beyond Cambridge: Neoliberalism at the Gates -- 1.4 The Dialectic of Competing Paradigms -- 1.4.1 Laissez-Faire: "Receding at last into the distance" -- 1.4.2 The Force of Ideas -- 1.4.3 Opposition Brewing -- 1.4.4 Evolutions and Hegemonic Incorporation -- 1.4.5 Ideological: Not the Techniques but the Purposes of Economics -- 1.4.6 Sociological: Mathematical Whiz-Kids and Ageing Dinosaurs -- 1.4.7 Beyond Kuhnian Reductionism -- 1.4.8 Mankiw's Pendulum -- 1.4.9 Solow's À La Carte Approach -- 1.4.10 Silos and Trenches -- 1.4.11 Joan Versus Hahn—History Versus Equilibrium -- 1.5 Semantics and Pedantics -- References -- 2 The Warring Tribes -- 2.1 A Sanctuary of Sages -- 2.1.1 Class to Community: The Cement of War -- 2.1.2 Community to Conflict: Cement to Sand -- 2.1.3 A Pride of Savage Prima Donnas -- 2.2 Faculty Wars -- 2.2.1 Paradise Lost -- 2.2.2 Fault Lines Within -- Wynne Godley: No Legacy No Synthesis, No Textbooks—The Samuelson Factor -- Shifting Student Preferences? -- "Irrelevance" and Irreverence: Joan and K-Theory -- Inbred Insularity, Complacency -- Simultaneities in the Demographic Lifecycle -- Lack of Internal Group Coherence -- The Heterodox Camp: No Chairs—Sorry, Standing Room Only -- A Break in Intergenerational Transmission, in the Reproduction of Traditions -- 2.3 Godfathers, Uncles and Nephews: The Gathering Foe -- 2.3.1 The Trojan Horse: By the Pricking of My Thumbs -- 2.3.2 Forming the Academy -- Meanwhile, at the Orthodox Party—A Merry Game of Musical Chairs -- 2.3.3 The Chess Master -- 2.4 The Campaign: How the War Was Lost and Won -- 2.4.1 The Orthodox Gambit: Capture the External Commanding Heights -- 2.4.2 Carrots and Commanders -- 2.4.3 Modus Operandi: Masters, Mandarins and Interlocking Committees -- References -- 3 Worlds Beyond Cambridge: The Global Web of the 'Neoliberal Thought Collective' -- 3.1 Conjunctures -- 3.1.1 1930s, The Prelude -- LSE Versus Cambridge -- Émigré Economists: The Benefactions of Lenin and Hitler -- 3.1.2 1940s, The Cascade -- 3.1.3 Keynesianism: Divergent Receptions -- Post-war Affinity in the UK -- Post-New Deal Hostility in the USA -- 3.2 Spreading the Word: Messiahs, Messages, Methods -- 3.2.1 Ideas and Ideologies: Manufacturers and Retailers -- 3.2.2 USA: Early Ideological Entrepreneurs of Libertarianism -- Harold Luhnow: The Volker Fund and its Dollars -- Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) and its Facilitators -- 3.2.3 Europe: Friedrich Hayek and the Mont Pelerin Society -- Antecedents -- Pilgrims Atop a Mountain, Mont Pelerin, Switzerland, April 1947 -- Financial Sponsors -- The First Meeting of Minds -- Sarcastic Schumpeter, Sceptical Solow, Scathing Samuelson -- 3.2.4 UK: Antony Fisher, Global Venture Capitalist of Think Tanks -- 3.3 Branding the Message: The 'Nobel' Prize -- 3.3.1 The Stockholm Connection: Ideological Entrepreneurs -- 3.3.2 Some Early Awards: Setting the Direction -- Jan Tinbergen—Ragnar Frisch 1969 -- Samuelson 1970 -- Gunnar Myrdal—Friedrich von Hayek 1974 -- Milton Friedman 1976 -- 3.3.3 Mont Pelerin Society and the 'Nobel'—A Golden Embrace -- 3.3.4 Cambridge Heterodoxy? -- 3.3.5 'An Ideological Coup' -- 3.4 Reaching Politics: Weaponising the Message -- 3.4.1 Santiago de Chile: Pinochet the Pioneer -- Chicago and its Cowboys -- Thatcher: Romancing Pinochet's Chile -- 3.4.2 The White House: Reagan, a Disciple -- 3.4.3 10 Downing Street: Thatcher, a Devotee -- More than its Weight in Gold—The Market Price of Symbolic Capital -- 3.4.4 Pulling Together -- 3.5 Besieging Cambridge: The Chicago–MIT–LSE Trinity -- 3.5.1 A Cross-Atlantic Triangle -- 3.5.2 Diversity of Practice -- 3.5.3 Unity of Purpose -- References -- 4 Camp Skirmishes Over Interstitial Spaces: Journals, Seminars, Textbooks -- 4.1 The Battle of Teruel—The Day before -- 4.2 Journals -- 4.2.1 EJ Leaves 'Home'—The Loss of a Flagship -- 4.2.2 CJE Arrives—A Forum of One's Own -- 4.2.3 Cambridge Economic Policy Review: One Crowded Hour of Glorious Life -- 4.3 Seminars -- 4.3.1 Cambridge Economic Club—A Marshallian Precursor: 1884–1890, 1896–? -- 4.3.2 Political Economy Club: From Keynes to Robertson to Kahn—Dazzling to Dour -- 4.3.3 The Marshall Society: A Socialisation into Economics and Its Purposes -- 4.3.4 Piero Sraffa's Research Students Seminar: A Precocious Nursery -- 4.3.5 In Retrospect, Austin Robinson on the Cambridge Circus: The Engine Room of The General Theory -- 4.3.6 Cambridge–LSE Joint Seminar: Jousting Juniors -- 4.3.7 Kahn's 'Secret' Seminar at King's: Fires in the Kitchen -- 4.3.8 The Richard Stone Common Room: Typhoo and Typhoons -- 4.3.9 Ajit Singh's Political Economy Seminar at Queens': Young Turks -- 4.3.10 Arestis and Kitson Political Economy Seminar at St. Catherine's College -- 4.3.11 Hahn's Churchill Seminar: Only Maths and Neoclassicals, Others Beware -- 4.3.12 Cambridge Growth Project Seminar at DAE -- 4.3.13 Hahn's 'Quaker' Risk Seminar: The Rising Tide -- 4.3.14 Matthews's CLARE Group: The Master's Lodge of Moderate Practitioners -- 4.3.15 Lawson—Realism and Social Ontology: Ways of Seeing and Framing -- 4.4 Textbooks -- 4.4.1 Distant Thunder: Keynes and McCarthy, Tarshis and Samuelson -- 4.4.2 Lawrence Klein and the Paradox of The Keynesian Revolution -- Puzzle -- Ph.D.—At Samuelson's Feet -- Cowles Commission—The New Dealers -- The Keynesian Revolution: The Extra Chapter— Klein, Then a Closet Marxist? -- Beyond Keynes -- UMich and McCarthyism -- Policy to Forecasting -- Resolution -- 4.4.3 'Death of a Revolutionary Textbook': Robinson and Eatwell -- 4.4.4 An 'Applied Economics' Textbook That Wasn't: Joan and Young Friends -- 4.5 The Battle of Teruel—The Day After -- Appendix 4.1: First off the Blocks: Mabel Timlin's Keynesian Economics, 1942 -- References -- 5 The DAE Trilogy -- 5.1 Origins and Evolution -- 5.1.1 Origins -- 5.1.2 Evolution: Substance and Styles -- 5.1.3 Foundations of Stone -- 5.1.4 Reddaway's Method: Eclectic Development -- 5.1.5 Godley: Turbulent Times -- 5.2 End of the Golden Age: The Decade of Discontent -- 5.3 The Trilogy: Discrete Episodes or a Serial Campaign? -- Appendix 5.1: DAE—Finding a Good Home -- References -- 6 Cambridge Economic Policy Group: Beheading a Turbulent Priest -- 6.1 Charged Conjuncture -- 6.1.1 Imbroglios of 1974: Old Versus New Cambridge Versus the Establishment -- 6.1.2 The Enigma of Kahn -- 6.1.3 Kaldor: On Radical Policy Implications of New Cambridge, 1976 -- 6.1.4 Cambridge Squabbles: Spillover into Whitehall? -- 6.1.5 Triggering Crisis: The Pivot of the OPEC Price Hikes -- 6.1.6 1979: Enter Margaret Thatcher, Right-Wing, Upfront -- 6.1.7 The Case of the Odd Consensus: The Letter by 364 Economists, 1981 -- 6.1.8 Thatcher in the Garage of the Federal Reserve -- 6.1.9 1981: Brixton Riots, Toxteth Fires: "A Concentration of Hopelessness" -- 6.1.10 The CEPG: A Thorn in the Thatcher Hide -- 6.1.11 The Bogey of Import Controls and the Spectre of Bennism -- 6.2 SSRC and CEPG: Dispensing Instant Injustice -- 6.2.1 Posner's Parlour -- 6.2.2 Posner's Process -- 6.3 Epilogue -- 6.3.1 Vengeance -- 6.3.2 The Team Scattered -- 6.3.3 The Model Reincarnated -- 6.3.4 The Rehabilitation of Wynne -- 6.3.5 Wynne Godley: 'My Credo' … -- 6.3.6 The Pacification of the CEPG -- Appendix 6.1: Old Cambridge, New Cambridge, 1974: and All the King's Men -- 1. Letter WG to RFK 23 May 1974. JVR/ vii/228/3/3 -- 2. Letter NK to RFK 20 May 1974. JVR/ vii/228/3/14-16 -- 3. Letter from RFK and MP to NK 24 May 1974. JVR/vii/228/3/17-20 -- 4. Letter from RFK and MP to NK 28 May 1974. JVR/vii/228/3/24 -- 5. Letter from FC to RFK 29 May 1974. JVR/7/228/3/25 -- 6. Reply from RFK to FC 6 June 1974. JVR/7/228/3/24 -- 7. In the interim, NK replied to RFK and MP. JVR/7/228/3/26 -- 8. Letter from NK to RFK. RFK/12/2/132/3 -- References -- 7 'Unintended' Collateral Damage? The Cambridge Economic Policy Group and the Joseph-Rothschild-Posner SSRC Enquiry, 1982 -- 7.1 Joseph—Rothschild—Posner—Godley -- 7.2 The Posner-the-Saviour Narrative -- 7.3 Setting Up the Enquiry -- 7.4 Who Proposed Rothschild? -- 7.5 Rothschild Report Writing Process -- 7.6 The Judgement of Rothschild -- 7.7 Between Draft and Release and Response: Handshakes and Cigars -- 7.8 Did Posner Get Away with Just a Change of Name? -- 7.9 CEPG—Collateral Damage? Or, Traded Down the River? -- 7.10 The Rothschild Report: Gleanings on Macroeconomic Modelling -- 7.11 Lord Kaldor—Off the Record, Off the Cuff, Off the Mark? -- 7.12 Lord Harris' Vitriol -- 7.13 Catholicity and Independence -- 7.14 Rothschild's Last Word -- 7.15 Joseph's Last Laugh -- References -- 8 Cambridge Growth Project: Running the Gauntlet -- 8.1 Background and Conjuncture -- 8.1.1 The Decision -- 8.2 Substantive Issues -- 8.2.1 No Innovation? -- 8.2.2 Catholicity, Turnover and the Value of Disaggregation -- 8.2.3 Use of Input-Output Tables -- 8.2.4 CGP Presence in Policy Debates -- 8.2.5 Insularity -- 8.2.6 On Exploiting the Cheap Labour of Graduate Students -- 8.3 Issues of Procedural Probity -- 8.3.1 Shifting Goalposts Across Evaluations -- 8.3.2 Unequal Application of Criterion of Commercial Funding -- 8.3.3 Public Good or Private Resource? -- 8.3.4 ESRC Ignored CGP Model Performance: Why? -- 8.3.5 Compromised 'Independent' Evidence -- 8.4 Other Concerns -- 8.4.1 'Reds'? -- 8.4.2 Crowding Out Competitors? -- 8.4.3 Deadweight Loss of Built-up Intellectual Capital -- 8.4.4 Gratuitously Offensive: Up Close and Out of Order -- 8.4.5 The Consortium: 'Revived Talk of Conspiracy Theory' -- 8.4.6 I.
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWFW and FWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; SSTC, Belarus; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC and CFI, Canada; CERN; CONICYT, Chile; CAS, MOST and NSFC, China; COLCIENCIAS, Colombia; MSMT CR, MPO CR and VSC CR, Czech Republic; DNRF, DNSRC and Lundbeck Foundation, Denmark; IN2P3-CNRS, CEA-DSM/IRFU, France; GNSF, Georgia; BMBF, HGF, and MPG, Germany; GSRT, Greece; RGC, Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF, I-CORE and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan; CNRST, Morocco; FOM and NWO, Netherlands; RCN, Norway; MNiSW and NCN, Poland; FCT, Portugal; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia and NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIZS, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC and Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, SNSF and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, Taiwan; TAEK, Turkey; STFC, United Kingdom; DOE and NSF, United States of America. In addition, individual groups and members have received support from BCKDF, the Canada Council, CANARIE, CRC, Compute Canada, FQRNT, and the Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET, ERC, FP7, Horizon 2020 and Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions, European Union; Investissements d'Avenir Labex and Idex, ANR, Region Auvergne and Fondation Partager le Savoir, France; DFG and AvH Foundation, Germany; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes co-financed by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; BSF, GIF and Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; the Royal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom. ; A search is performed for narrow resonances decaying into WW, W Z, or ZZ boson pairs using 20:3 fb−1 of proton-proton collision data at a centre-of-mass energy of ps = 8 TeV recorded with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. Diboson resonances with masses in the range from 1.3 to 3.0 TeV are sought after using the invariant mass distribution of dijets where both jets are tagged as a boson jet, compatible with a highly boosted W or Z boson decaying to quarks, using jet mass and substructure properties. The largest deviation from a smoothly falling background in the observed dijet invariant mass distribution occurs around 2 TeV in the W Z channel, with a global significance of 2.5 standard deviations. Exclusion limits at the 95% confidence level are set on the production cross section times branching ratio for the W Z final state of a new heavy gauge boson, W0, and for the WW and ZZ final states of Kaluza-Klein excitations of the graviton in a bulk Randall-Sundrum model, as a function of the resonance mass. W0 bosons with couplings predicted by the extended gauge model in the mass range from 1.3 to 1.5 TeV are excluded at 95% confidence level. ; ANPCyT ; YerPhI, Armenia ; Australian Research Council ; BMWFW, Austria ; Austrian Science Fund (FWF) ; Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences (ANAS) ; SSTC, Belarus ; National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) ; Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) ; Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada ; NRC, Canada ; Canada Foundation for Innovation ; CERN ; Comision Nacional de Investigacion Cientifica y Tecnologica (CONICYT) ; Chinese Academy of Sciences ; Ministry of Science and Technology, China ; National Natural Science Foundation of China ; Departamento Administrativo de Ciencia, Tecnologia e Innovacion Colciencias ; Ministry of Education, Youth & Sports - Czech Republic Czech Republic Government ; DNRF, Denmark ; Danish Natural Science Research Council ; Lundbeckfonden ; Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) ; CEA-DSM/IRFU, France ; Federal Ministry of Education & Research (BMBF) ; HGF, Germany ; Max Planck Society ; Greek Ministry of Development-GSRT ; Hong Kong Research Grants Council ; Israel Science Foundation ; I-CORE, Israel ; Benoziyo Center, Israel ; Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN) ; Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan (MEXT) Japan Society for the Promotion of Science ; CNRST, Morocco ; FOM (The Netherlands) Netherlands Government ; Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) Netherlands Government ; RCN, Norway ; Ministry of Science and Higher Education, Poland ; NCN, Poland ; Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology ; MNE/IFA, Romania ; Russian Federation ; NRC KI, Russian Federation ; JINR ; MESTD, Serbia ; MSSR, Slovakia ; Slovenian Research Agency - Slovenia ; MIZS, Slovenia ; DST/NRF, South Africa ; MINECO, Spain ; SRC, Sweden ; Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden ; SERI, Switzerland ; Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) ; Canton of Bern, Switzerland ; Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan ; Ministry of Energy & Natural Resources - Turkey ; United States Department of Energy (DOE) ; National Science Foundation (NSF) ; BCKDF, Canada ; Canada Council, Canada ; CANARIE, Canada ; CRC, Canada ; Compute Canada, Canada ; FQRNT ; Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada ; European Union (EU) ; European Union (EU) European Research Council (ERC) ; Horizon, European Union ; French National Research Agency (ANR) ; Region Auvergne-Rhone-Alpes ; Fondation Partager le Savoir, France ; German Research Foundation (DFG) ; Alexander von Humboldt Foundation ; Herakleitos programme - EU-ESF ; Thales programme - EU-ESF ; Aristeia programme - EU-ESF ; Greek Ministry of Development-GSRT ; US-Israel Binational Science Foundation ; German-Israeli Foundation for Scientific Research and Development ; Minerva, Israel ; BRF, Norway ; Royal Society of London ; Canton of Geneva, Switzerland ; Leverhulme Trust ; Science & Technology Facilities Council (STFC) ST/L001144/1 ST/L001179/1 ST/L00352X/1 ST/M004821/1 GRIDPP 1201187 ST/I006056/1 ST/K001248/1 ST/K001361/1 LHCb Upgrades ST/H00100X/1 ST/M001474/1 ST/I005803/1 GRIDPP ST/K001310/1 LHCb ST/L000326/1 ST/M001504/1 ST/N000463/1 ST/M503575/1 ST/L003325/1 ST/M002071/1 ATLAS Upgrades ST/M001733/1 ST/L001179/1 ATLAS Upgrade ST/K001361/1 LHCb ST/J005576/1 ST/J004944/1 ST/J004928/1 ATLAS Upgrades ST/J00474X/1 ATLAS Upgrades ST/G502320/1 1521422 ST/M006980/1 ATLAS Upgrades ST/M006980/1 ST/M004821/1 ST/L006480/1 ST/K00137X/1 ST/J005487/1 ST/N000307/1 ST/L001195/1 ST/K001361/1 ST/H001093/2 PP/E000444/1 GRIDPP ST/K001388/1 ST/J501074/1 ST/H001093/1 ST/K001264/1 ATLAS ST/K001302/1 ST/K001361/1 ATLAS ST/M001407/1 1334588 ST/L003414/1 PP/E000355/1 1366364 ST/M007103/1 ATLAS Upgrades ST/M003213/1 ST/M002306/1 ATLAS Upgrades ST/M002306/1 ST/M001431/1 ST/K001310/1 LHCb Upgrades 1082012 ST/L000970/1 ATLAS Upgrades ST/K00140X/1 ST/K001310/1 ATLAS Upgrades ST/H00100X/2 1575161 PP/D002915/1 ST/I005803/1 ST/I000178/1 ST/I00372X/1 ST/J00474X/1 ST/G50228X/1 PP/E002846/1 ST/L001179/1 ATLAS Upgrades ST/I006056/1 ATLAS Upgrades ST/I000186/1 PP/E003087/1 ST/K00073X/1 ST/K001310/1 ATLAS ST/K003658/1 ST/I006080/1 ST/I006056/1 ATLAS Upgrade ST/I00372X/1 GRIDPP ST/K001418/1 ST/J005525/1 1366825 ST/J004928/1 ATLAS Upgrade ST/K001310/1 ST/K001329/1 ST/K001361/1 MINOS/MINOS+ ST/L003112/1 ST/L000970/1 ATLAS Upgrade ST/K003658/1 GRIDPP ST/J004928/1 ST/K000705/1 ST/K001426/1 ATLAS ST/M000664/1 ST/M000761/1 ATLAS ST/L001209/1 ATLAS Upgrades ST/L000970/1 ST/K001361/1 ATLAS Upgrades PP/E000347/1 ; ICREA ; GNSF, Georgia
President Obama enters the second half of his first year with very high approval ratings (high 50s to mid-60s) and nearly unanimous support within his own party. He continues to fight his battles for long-term change with discipline and rigor, ignoring possible distractions but also exercising pragmatism and the art of compromise. After his initial successes on the stimulus bill, tobacco regulation, employment discrimination and children's' health coverage, and in spite of questions raised on the mounting deficit, he recently managed to get the House to pass major legislation on energy and climate change, albeit by a narrow vote (219 to 212). His main strategy has been to lay out the general principles and parameters of his final objective and then let Congress write the legislation and fill in the details, thus giving legislators some latitude. Some question whether this strategy involves too much compromise, too many concessions to the other party and to interest groups, to the point that the final product is a watered down version of his initial proposal which will result too weak to solve the core problems. The irony for Obama is that some parts of his proposals that were considered central and non-negotiable are now on the table. A main example is the public option in health care legislation, according to which a government plan would compete with the rest of the private insurers, and consumers would be able to choose which one to buy. This type of competition would bring down the costs, which is one main purpose of health care reform. Republicans are adamantly opposed to this, but even some Democrats in Congress are becoming skeptical about it (the latter, mostly because they will have to face conservative constituencies in the next legislative elections of 2010), and even Obama now appears ready to compromise, if absolutely necessary. In contrast, there is immense support for this initiative all across the country. Does that mean that the actual center of the political public spectrum is today more to the Left than Congressmen and Senators of both parties recognize it to be? Or just that people really want change in health care, and cannot any longer be cowed into a corner by the boogey man of Big Government? Of course, there is a third and perhaps more obvious interpretation and that is that health industry groups exert more influence on Congress than the public itself. But at this time and on this issue the public is more mobilized and demanding than ever before, so Congress should take heed.Similarly, while Obama gets a positive response from the public as he continues to stitch together a broader view of how his proposals on health, energy and the stimulus package all fit together in the creation of a new foundation for the economy, the Republican Party appears bent on opposing him indiscriminately, denying him every possible venue to bipartisanship. That is the only position of strength for a weakened party.The "Party of No", as Rahm Emmanuel calls it, continues to block, sometimes successfully, every initiative the Democrats put on the table. There is a total absence of alternative policy proposals; instead, Republicans are just saying no to comprehensive change. Even as most interest groups convinced that change in health care and energy policies is inevitable are taking part in the negotiations, the Republican Party directive to its senators in the Senate Finance Committee -where health legislation is being discussed- is not to deal at all. The result is that Democrats are being pushed toward one concession after another, and that bad politics are getting in the way of good policy. The Republican strategy, if any, is to instill fear in moderate voters about the mounting deficit, and arouse skepticism about the President's ability to bring about change. They have succeeded in consolidating the extreme right's opposition to everything Obama does, thereby animating an alarming hostility toward him. This is an enormous achievement, if one considers the Republicans' lack of leadership and the personal woes of some of its potential leaders. But they have made no gains in the center and very few with independents. And unexpected events continue to shake the party's foundations.During the sleepy summer days around the Fourth of July, when most Americans go on vacation or take time off to prepare their cookouts and load up on beer and fireworks, the public was jolted by two stunning political developments, both coming from the Republican side and both bringing to a melodramatic end the careers of two potential presidential candidates: the five-day disappearance of South Carolina Governor Stanford, and Sarah Palin's resignation as Governor of Alaska. Governor Stanford, a "straight arrow" Republican with a picture-perfect family which he often paraded in front of the cameras, had always portrayed himself as a family man and a model of fiscal rectitude, going to the extreme of refusing to take the money allocated to his state as part of the stimulus package. After disappearing for five days during which his wife and aides claimed not to "know his exact location, but he was probably hiking along the Appalachian Trail and had turned off his Blackberry", he re-emerged and walked straight into the trap of a press conference. In front of the cameras, he rambled for twenty minutes about his life as a governor, husband of a wonderful woman and dad of four great boys, and asked for forgiveness for letting them all down …in the pursuit of an affair with an Argentine woman he had met in the world-renown resort of Punta del Este, Uruguay, in 2001. After explaining that this was not, in the end, a reckless act of adultery nor an irresponsible abandonment of office, but "a true love story" during which he had found his "soul mate", the Governor decided not to resign and to "try to fall in love again with his wife and continue his political career". We won't cry for him, neither here or in Argentina, but we wish him good luck. While infidelity and other human foibles are not limited to one side of the aisle, for the Republican Party, which claims a monopoly on morality and family values, the last two years must have been a hard trial: from Representative Mark Foley's "sexting" of underage male pages in Congress, to Senator Larry Craig's gay sex soliciting in a public restroom, to Senator Ensign's infidelity to Governor Sanford's Rio de la Plata escapade (unknowingly paid for by South Carolina taxpayers), the party has had its hands full with spinning the unspinnable, and will have a difficult time if it insists on exclusively continue carrying the torch for family values .And then there is Sarah Palin, who, in an equally rambling, bizarre and juvenile statement delivered in her well-known unique and colorful syntax and diction, decided to stun her party, her base and the country as a whole by resigning her governorship 18 months before the end of her term. The reasons are known only to herself and her family, but she represented herself as not wanting to "milk " the State of Alaska treasury during her "lame duck" period, and preferring to bring change for "all our children's future from outside the Governor's office". Among the most commonly heard speculations: that the 16 ethics inquiries into her actions as governor by the Alaskan legislature (mainly Republicans) have put a lot of strain on her life and finances, that she wants to concentrate on a book deal, and that her governorship was getting in the way of her life as a celebrity. Less likely but also heard: that this is a move to pursue higher office, and/or that a new scandal is about to be revealed about her or her family. (Please, no more scandals!)Whatever her motive, her timing for the GOP could not have been worse: not only was Palin the most galvanizing force for the Evangelical Christian base of the party, but with her departure, the party has lost three strong presidential candidates in one month. If we add to this the lamentable performance by Governor Bobby Jindal, another Republican rising star, when he responded to Obama's first State-of-the Union address, the party's presidential candidate landscape is quite deserted. Of course it is still early to talk about 2011 primaries, but considering that the two main pillars of the party, namely fiscal responsibility and family values, have been demolished,(the first by George W. Bush and the second by the peccadilloes and tribulations above recounted), there is a lot of heavy lifting the party must do to become competitive again. Like the Tories since 1997, the Republicans will probably have to lose two or three national elections before they can redefine themselves, charter a new course and become competitive again. The paradox of Republican opposition is that in the short term they have no other recourse but to strongly oppose Obama in the hope of chipping away some of his aura, while in the long term their big demographic problems with the young, women and minorities will force them to move to the center, modernize conservatism, abandon their unerring defense of pure, unrestrained capitalism and speak the language of community and common endeavors. Only then will they be able to reclaim the mantel of the Grand Old (but renewed) Party.Senior Lecturer, Department of Political Science and Geography Director, ODU Model United Nations Program Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia
A incredulidade europeia face à crise actual advém do facto de ela ser uma crise claramente produzida nos Estados Unidos da América, no coração do sistema capitalista norte-americano, que contagiou a Europa, onde as suas consequências são muito mais gravosas do que em qualquer outro ponto do planeta, ao ponto de estar a colocar em causa o modelo social europeu, a coesão social e o próprio futuro da integração regional no continente. Após esta crise – que, espante-se, Sarkozy descobriu que também é moral, após o descalabro francês no campeonato do mundo de futebol da África do Sul – o que ficará do estado de bem-estar e das leis de protecção do trabalho? O que ficará do estilo de vida europeu e da protecção da terceira idade? O que ficará da governação nacional e da democracia representativa parlamentar tradicional? Essas são as interrogações que todos colocam mas que ninguém se atreve a responder inequivocamente. Quando, dentro de uma década, as consequências mais profundas da crise – e dos seus remédios – puderem ser plenamente avaliadas e julgadas, que Europa terá sido entretanto produzida?Durante algum tempo, persistiu a pretensão de que a crise europeia não passasse de uma tragédia grega, o descalabro típico das contas dos países periféricos, sempre olhados com desconfiança pelas elites políticas e económicas do Norte europeu, uma tropa fandanga que não se sabe governar e tem de ser salva recorrentemente da bancarrota e posta na ordem. Diz muito do espírito 'europeu' com que a crise foi abordada o cordão sanitário que depressa foi lançado en torno da Grécia. Na ânsia de que a situação do seu país fosse destacada da da Grécia pelas agências de notação e instituições internacionais, os dirigentes europeus – e pasme-se, a própria Comissão europeia – foram agravando a desconfiança face à Grécia, o que equivaleu a dizer sobre toda a Europa numa lógica de contágio. A resposta a nível europeu foi tão tardia, descoordenada e inepta que ajudou a produzir o fenómeno que mais temia e que pretendia evitar, isto é, o contágio das economias estruturalmente mais – e também das menos – frágeis a partir da Grécia. A sucessão de declarações desastradas dos comissários europeus e dirigentes nacionais assustados deslocou as atenções para Portugal e Espanha e obrigou – nunca melhor dito – os seus dirigentes a apresentarem planos de austeridade que lembram os anos 1980 e a intervenção do FMI. O recorte de privilégios sociais e das medidas anti-crise previstas no plano de estabilidade e crescimento é hoje combatido na rua pelos sindicatos em verdadeiro espírito de cruzada sendo que, por enquanto, se tem evitado o populismo mais básico e a retaliação sobre os estrangeiros. Pelo menos em Portugal, onde o discurso extremista e abertamente xenófobo não colhe e se mantém sem qualquer expressão política. Mas o resultado das recentes eleições na Hungria, Bélgica e Holanda não augura nada de bom, podendo as primeiras vítimas desta crise vir a ser a coesão social e a convivência multicultural. É significativo que em Espanha tenho vindo a ser necessário agendar e aprovar, nas últimas semanas, a proibição da burka nos espaços públicos. Não está aqui em causa o mérito da questão, com a qual concordo genericamente, mas sim o que diz do momento político que vivemos e da ansiedade que em tempos de insegurança e incerteza se transmuta em instinto defensivo e reage intempestivamente contra o que é exterior e não compreende. Não é avisado redefinir as regras de convivência no interior de uma sociedade em momentos tão tumultuados, tal como se provou não ter sido avisado redefinir a relação entre segurança e liberdade sob pressão da guerra contra o terrorismo. A mesma que Obama declarou entretanto extinta. O diktat europeu a Portugal, Espanha e Grécia transforma-os nessa tropa fandanga da periferia da zona euro, muito por culpa própria – porque não perceberam as regras do jogo europeu, ou qual a margem de tolerância que tinham para o jogar – mas que também foi útil no enjeitar das responsabilidades dos definidores das regras do jogo. Passados alguns meses desde o desenrolar da tragédia grega e da aprovação das medidas de austeridade em Portugal e Espanha, os cortes orçamentais profundos já chegaram ao centro da Europa. Até 2013, a Alemanha obrigou-se a poupar 80 mil milhões de euros, a França 40 mil milhões, o Reino Unidos acaba de aprovar um pacote que pretende vir a reduzir o défice dos 10,1% de 2010 para 1,1% entre 2015 e 2016. Não nos enganemos; muita da despesa do estado europeu é inútil e perde-se no desperdício de uma máquina burocrática pouco habituada a prestar verdadeiras contas aos cidadãos. Outra parte importante da despesa é gasta na cooptação de funcionários públicos, um instrumento vital na estratégia de manutenção do poder por parte do partido político que o exerce. No desenrolar da crise, é preciso ser justo e não confundir os riscos de colapso do modelo social europeu com as oportunidades que se abrem de reforma profunda do estado. Eu diria que é um problema de metodologia e, estranhamente, de soberania. Se esta palavra ainda significa alguma coisa na Europa, significa certamente a capacidade de escolher a forma como se joga o jogo europeu. Aquilo que de mais revelador os acontecimentos últimos demonstraram foi a erosão adicional da soberania da Grécia, Portugal e a Espanha. Antes de mais, porque caíram no erro histórico de gastar muito mais do que a riqueza que são capazes de produzir e confiaram na quimera do dinheiro barato. Depois, e por causa do avolumar da dívida, perderam a capacidade para decidir quando e como pôr em prática o plano de ajustamento, o famoso plano de estabilidade e crescimento (PEC) anual que todos os países da zona euro são obrigados a apresentar à Comissão e que deve avaliza e aprovar. As pressões de Obama sobre Zapatero, e do Conselho Europeu de 6 de Maio sobre Zapatero e Sócrates mostraram a verdadeira natureza de uma decisão que ambos recusaram tomar até à última hora, por receio da inevitável degradação da sua base interna de apoio. As oposições, em ambos países, acusaram-nos de esconder durante meses a verdadeira dimensão do problema e de falta de coragem política para tomarem as medidas necessárias a tempo de evitar a imposição exterior. Finalmente, o compromisso em torno do mega fundo de resgate europeu, em troca dos planos de austeridade, acabou por transformou Grécia, Portugal e Espanha em países potencialmente resgatáveis, uma dúvida que feito subir os juros da dívida, alimentado a especulação dos mercados e reforçado as exigências dos que querem fazer aprovar a retirada do direito de voto nas instituições europeias aos países não cumpridores.Dentro de uma década, as consequências para a integração europeia já poderão ser avaliadas e deverão ter passado por um reforço considerável da governação económica. Muitos vociferam que um espaço dotado de moeda única não pode sobreviver sem política económica integrada, e a fiscalização apertada dos orçamentos nacionais está na agenda das negociações. As reacções são diversas, e pese embora muitas vozes deplorem o défice de Europa e reclamem mais Europa contra a crise, a fiscalização do orçamento por Bruxelas é um aspecto simbolicamente muito marcante no caminho para a federação, pelo que muitos governantes se pronunciaram já contra esta opção. A questão é a de saber se têm de facto opção, ou se os discursos indignados contra a limitação da soberania orçamental se dirigem exclusivamente para as audiências internas. Por muito que se oponham, o facto é que esta crise da dívida que atravessa toda a Europa colocou nas mãos da Alemanha, e da senhora Merkel, o futuro da integração do continente. Para fazer aprovar no Parlamento alemão o mega plano de resgate europeu de 750 mil milhões de euros, a chanceler alemã exigiu não só planos de austeridade credíveis aos países mediterrânicos mas, mais ainda, um verdadeiro contrato europeu de controlo das despesas dos estados que deve avançar para estabelecer maior competência comunitária sobre a política orçamental. Para dar o exemplo, a Alemanha limitou constitucionalmente a despesa pública, opção polémica e que não tem sido seguida, por razões óbvias. Por seu turno, muitos consideram que é na própria política económica da Alemanha que reside a chave para o fim da crise, designadamente no estímulo da procura interna que se traduza na redução do largo excedente da balança comercial alemã. Num momento de falta de liquidez interna de muitos países, do sector público mas também do privado, e de crescimento muito débil, a Alemanha tem a obrigação de funcionar como locomotora da Europa. Como sublinhou há poucos dias Rafael Poch no artigo publicado no La Vanguardia de Barcelona, "Merkel en busca de un éxito egoísta", a despesa pública alemã tem vindo a diminuir desde os 50% (do PIB) em 1990 aos 44% actuais (assim sendo, o défice orçamental neste momento deve-se afinal, não à despesa pública excessiva mas aos cortes sucessivos dos impostos). O retrocesso dos salários reais na Alemanha desde a adopção do euro contrasta com o aumento dos mesmos em Portugal, Espanha e Grécia ao longo do seu trajecto de integração europeia, o que tem causado desequilíbrios evidentes no seio da União. Assim, se a crise da Europa radica, em parte, no facto de Portugal, Espanha e Grécia se terem habituado a viver acima das suas possibilidades, também se deve ao facto de os alemães se terem eles mesmos obrigado a viver abaixo das suas possibilidades.Vista da 'periferia' da Europa, esta crise causa muitas perplexidades. A primeira delas tem que ver com o papel da Alemanha no seio da União, mas prolonga a sua sombra sobre a lógica das regras, normas e mecanismos de decisão em vigor no interior da mesma. Tomando o exemplo de Portugal. A integração assinada fez há pouco 25 anos, em 1985, provocou sem dúvida a modernização material do país e o aumento do nível de vida médio da sua população (a riqueza subiu dos 55% da média europeia – UE12 – em 1985 para 75% em 2000). Com a crise, porém, tornou-se mais evidente a outra cara da moeda, aquela que mostra que o tecido produtivo foi desmantelado, sobretudo no sector agrícola. Nos dias de hoje, o país importa 70% do que come, em grande parte devido à política agrícola comum (PAC) que subsidiou o abandono das terras agrícolas e estimulou a importação dos grandes beneficiários da PAC, a França sobretudo. A integração numa união aduaneira acelerou a importação das máquinas alemãs que, de acordo com a lógica da livre competição do mercado, foi tida como peça fundamental da paz democrática europeia. Acresce que a moeda única retirou competitividade à economia portuguesa – pela subida dos preços, pelo alto valor da cotação do euro e pela fim da soberania cambial – restando ao país o endividamento para financiar a despesa. No sector privado, a lógica foi a mesma. A baixa constante das taxas de juro, desde meados dos anos 1990 até ao nível histórico de 1% actual, foi acompanhada de um política agressiva das instituições bancárias que concederam crédito em cima de crédito – para comprar casa, carro, electrodomésticos, férias, roupa – sem exigirem muitas garantias. A ordem foi a de comprar, os produtos alemães que construíram o excedente comercial da Alemanha e produziram o excedente financeiro aplicado na compra da dívida da Grécia, Espanha e Portugal, por exemplo. Para muitos, a exposição dos investidores alemães à dívida deste países foi mesmo o factor que determinou a resposta alemã à crise da dívida do Sul e o seu compromisso relutante com o mega fundo de resgate europeu. Como escreveu o conhecido historiador e publicista português Vasco Pulido Valente, num artigo do Público de Lisboa, depois de vinte anos de fotos de família e de cegarrega da União, o que é real são as grandes potências, e os seus interesses, sempre prontos a pôr na ordem os malcomportados e desordeiros do Sul que gastam mais do que produzem e não se sabem governar. As visões cínicas do fenómeno europeu e da integração vão certamente crescer, alimentadas pela crise; e o pior é que alguma verdade há por detrás delas.*Doctor en Relaciones Internacionales. Profesor del Instituto de Ciencias Sociales y Políticas, Universidad Técnica de Lisboa.
WOS: 000435653100044 ; A search for W'-boson production in the W' -> t (b) over bar -> q (q) over bar 'b (b) over bar decay channel is presented using 36.1 fb(-1) of 13 TeV proton-proton collision data collected by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider in 2015 and 2016. The search is interpreted in terms of both a left-handed and a right-handed chiral W' boson within the mass range 1-5 TeV. Identification of the hadronically decaying top quark is performed using jet substructure tagging techniques based on a shower deconstruction algorithm. No significant deviation from the Standard Model prediction is observed and the results are expressed as upper limits on the W' -> t (b) over bar production cross-section times branching ratio as a function of the W'-boson mass. These limits exclude W' bosons with right-handed couplings with masses below 3.0 TeV and W' bosons with left-handed couplings with masses below 2.9 TeV, at the 95% confidence level. (C) 2018 The Author. Published by Elsevier B.V. ; ANPCyT, ArgentinaANPCyT; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, AustraliaAustralian Research Council; BMWFW, Austria; FWF, AustriaAustrian Science Fund (FWF); ANAS, AzerbaijanAzerbaijan National Academy of Sciences (ANAS); SSTC, Belarus; CNPq, BrazilNational Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq); FAPESP, BrazilFundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP); NSERC, CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada; NRC, Canada; CFI, CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation; CERN; CONICYT, ChileComision Nacional de Investigacion Cientifica y Tecnologica (CONICYT); CAS, ChinaChinese Academy of Sciences; MOST, ChinaMinistry of Science and Technology, China; NSFC, ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China; COLCIENCIAS, ColombiaDepartamento Administrativo de Ciencia, Tecnologia e Innovacion Colciencias; MSMT CR, Czech RepublicMinistry of Education, Youth & Sports - Czech RepublicCzech Republic Government; MPO CR, Czech RepublicCzech Republic Government; VSC CR, Czech RepublicCzech Republic Government; DNRF, Denmark; DNSRC, DenmarkDanish Natural Science Research Council; IN2P3-CNRS, FranceCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS); CEA-DRF/IRFU, France; SRNSFG, Georgia; BMBF, GermanyFederal Ministry of Education & Research (BMBF); HGF, Germany; MPG, GermanyMax Planck Society; GSRT, GreeceGreek Ministry of Development-GSRT; RGC, China; Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF, IsraelIsrael Science Foundation; I-CORE, Israel; INFN, ItalyIstituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare; MEXT, JapanMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan (MEXT); JSPS, JapanMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan (MEXT)Japan Society for the Promotion of Science; CNRST, Morocco; NWO, NetherlandsNetherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO)Netherlands Government; RCN, Norway; MNiSW, PolandMinistry of Science and Higher Education, Poland; NCN, Poland; FCT, PortugalPortuguese Foundation for Science and Technology; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia, Russian FederationRussian Federation; NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS, SloveniaSlovenian Research Agency - Slovenia; MIA, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC, Sweden; Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, Switzerland; SNSF, SwitzerlandSwiss National Science Foundation (SNSF); Canton of Bern, Switzerland; Canton of Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, TaiwanMinistry of Science and Technology, Taiwan; TAEK, TurkeyMinistry of Energy & Natural Resources - Turkey; STFC, United KingdomScience & Technology Facilities Council (STFC); DOE, United States of AmericaUnited States Department of Energy (DOE); NSF, United States of AmericaNational Science Foundation (NSF); BCKDF; Canada Council, Canada; Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET, European UnionEuropean Union (EU); ERC, European UnionEuropean Union (EU)European Research Council (ERC); ERDF, European UnionEuropean Union (EU); FP7, European UnionEuropean Union (EU); Investissements d'Avenir Labex and Idex, FranceFrench National Research Agency (ANR); DFG, GermanyGerman Research Foundation (DFG); AvH Foundation, GermanyAlexander von Humboldt Foundation; Herakleitos programme; EU-ESFEuropean Union (EU); Greek NSRFGreek Ministry of Development-GSRT; BSF, IsraelUS-Israel Binational Science Foundation; GIF, IsraelGerman-Israeli Foundation for Scientific Research and Development; Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; CERCA Programme Generalitat de Catalunya, Spain; Royal Society, United KingdomRoyal Society of London; Benoziyo Center, Israel; Canarie, Canada; CRC, Canada; Compute Canada, Canada; FQRNT, CanadaFQRNT; Horizon 2020, European Union; Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions, European UnionEuropean Union (EU); ANR, FranceFrench National Research Agency (ANR); Region Auvergne, FranceRegion Auvergne-Rhone-Alpes; Fondation Partager le Savoir, France; Thales programme; Aristeia programme; Generalitat Valenciana, SpainGeneralitat Valenciana; Leverhulme Trust, United KingdomLeverhulme Trust ; We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWFW and FWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; SSTC, Belarus; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC and CFI, Canada; CERN; CONICYT, Chile; CAS, MOST and NSFC, China; COLCIENCIAS, Colombia; MSMT CR, MPO CR and VSC CR, Czech Republic; DNRF and DNSRC, Denmark; IN2P3-CNRS, CEA-DRF/IRFU, France; SRNSFG, Georgia; BMBF, HGF, and MPG, Germany; GSRT, Greece; RGC, Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF, I-CORE and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan; CNRST, Morocco; NWO, Netherlands; RCN, Norway; MNiSW and NCN, Poland; FCT, Portugal; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia and NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIA, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC and Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, SNSF and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, Taiwan; TAEK, Turkey; STFC, United Kingdom; DOE and NSF, United States of America. In addition, individual groups and members have received support from BCKDF, the Canada Council, Canarie, CRC, Compute Canada, FQRNT, and the Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET, ERC, ERDF, FP7, Horizon 2020 and Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions, European Union; Investissements d'Avenir Labex and Idex, ANR, Region Auvergne and Fondation Partager le Savoir, France; DFG and AvH Foundation, Germany; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes co-financed by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; BSF, GIF and Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; CERCA Programme Generalitat de Catalunya, Generalitat Valenciana, Spain; the Royal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom.r The crucial computing support from all WLCG partners is acknowledged gratefully, in particular from CERN, the ATLAS Tier 1 facilities at TRIUMF (Canada), NDGF (Denmark, Norway, Sweden), CC-IN2P3 (France), KIT/GridKA (Germany), INFN-CNAF (Italy), NL-T1 (Netherlands), PIC (Spain), ASGC (Taiwan), RAL (UK) and BNL (USA), the Tier -2 facilities worldwide and large non-WLCG resource providers. Major contributors of computing resources are listed in Ref. [78].
WOS: 000432959900001 ; A search for the standard model Higgs boson produced in association with a top-quark pair, t(t)overbarH, is presented. The analysis uses 36.1 fb(-1) of pp collision data at root s = 13 TeV collected with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider in 2015 and 2016. The search targets the H -> b(b)overbar decay mode. The selected events contain either one or two electrons or muons from the top-quark decays, and are then categorized according to the number of jets and how likely these are to contain b-hadrons. Multivariate techniques are used to discriminate between signal and background events, the latter being dominated by ft + jets production. For a Higgs boson mass of 125 GeV, the ratio of the measured t(t)overbarH signal cross-section to the standard model expectation is found to be mu = 0.84(-0.61)(+0.64). A value of mu greater than 2.0 is excluded at 95% confidence level (C.L.) while the expected upper limit is mu < 1.2 in the absence of a t(t)overbarH signal. ; ANPCyT, ArgentinaANPCyT; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, AustraliaAustralian Research Council; BMWFW, Austria; FWF, AustriaAustrian Science Fund (FWF); ANAS, AzerbaijanAzerbaijan National Academy of Sciences (ANAS); SSTC, Belarus; CNPq, BrazilNational Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq); FAPESP, BrazilFundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP); NSERC, CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada; NRC, Canada; CFI, CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation; CERN; CONICYT, ChileComision Nacional de Investigacion Cientifica y Tecnologica (CONICYT); CAS, ChinaChinese Academy of Sciences; MOST, ChinaMinistry of Science and Technology, China; NSFC, ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China; COLCIENCIAS, ColombiaDepartamento Administrativo de Ciencia, Tecnologia e Innovacion Colciencias; MSMT CR, Czech RepublicMinistry of Education, Youth & Sports - Czech RepublicCzech Republic Government; MPO CR, Czech RepublicCzech Republic Government; VSC CR, Czech RepublicCzech Republic Government; DNRF, Denmark; DNSRC, DenmarkDanish Natural Science Research Council; IN2P3-CNRS, FranceCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS); CEA-DRF/IRFU, France; SRNSFG, Georgia; BMBF, GermanyFederal Ministry of Education & Research (BMBF); HGF, Germany; MPG, GermanyMax Planck Society; GSRT, GreeceGreek Ministry of Development-GSRT; RGC, Hong Kong SAR, ChinaHong Kong Research Grants Council; ISF, IsraelIsrael Science Foundation; I-CORE, Israel; Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, ItalyIstituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare; MEXT, JapanMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan (MEXT); JSPS, JapanMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan (MEXT)Japan Society for the Promotion of Science; CNRST, Morocco; NWO, NetherlandsNetherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO)Netherlands Government; RCN, Norway; MNiSW, PolandMinistry of Science and Higher Education, Poland; NCN, Poland; FCT, PortugalPortuguese Foundation for Science and Technology; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia, Russian FederationRussian Federation; NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS, SloveniaSlovenian Research Agency - Slovenia; MIZS, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC, Sweden; Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, Switzerland; SNSF, SwitzerlandSwiss National Science Foundation (SNSF); Canton of Bern, Switzerland; Canton of Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, TaiwanMinistry of Science and Technology, Taiwan; TAEK, TurkeyMinistry of Energy & Natural Resources - Turkey; STFC, United KingdomScience & Technology Facilities Council (STFC); DOE, USAUnited States Department of Energy (DOE); NSF, USANational Science Foundation (NSF); BCKDF; Canada Council; CANARIE; CRCAustralian GovernmentDepartment of Industry, Innovation and ScienceCooperative Research Centres (CRC) Programme; Compute Canada; FQRNTFQRNT; Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET; ERCEuropean Research Council (ERC); ERDFEuropean Union (EU); FP7; Horizon; Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions, European UnionEuropean Union (EU); Investissements d'Avenir Labex and Idex, ANRFrench National Research Agency (ANR); Region AuvergneRegion Auvergne-Rhone-Alpes; Fondation Partager le Savoir, France; DFG, GermanyGerman Research Foundation (DFG); AvH Foundation, GermanyAlexander von Humboldt Foundation; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes - EU-ESF; Greek NSRFGreek Ministry of Development-GSRT; BSF, IsraelUS-Israel Binational Science Foundation; GIF, IsraelGerman-Israeli Foundation for Scientific Research and Development; Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; CERCA Programme Generalitat de Catalunya; Generalitat Valenciana, SpainGeneralitat Valenciana; Royal Society, United KingdomRoyal Society of London; Leverhulme Trust, United KingdomLeverhulme Trust ; We thank CERN for the very successful operation of the LHC, as well as the support staff from our institutions without whom ATLAS could not be operated efficiently. We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWFW and FWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; SSTC, Belarus; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC and CFI, Canada; CERN; CONICYT, Chile; CAS, MOST and NSFC, China; COLCIENCIAS, Colombia; MSMT CR, MPO CR and VSC CR, Czech Republic; DNRF and DNSRC, Denmark; IN2P3-CNRS, CEA-DRF/IRFU, France; SRNSFG, Georgia; BMBF, HGF, and MPG, Germany; GSRT, Greece; RGC, Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF, I-CORE and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan; CNRST, Morocco; NWO, Netherlands; RCN, Norway; MNiSW and NCN, Poland FCT, Portugal; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia and NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIZS, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC and Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, SNSF and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, Taiwan; TAEK, Turkey; STFC, United Kingdom; DOE and NSF, USA. In addition, individual groups and members have received support from BCKDF, the Canada Council, CANARIE, CRC, Compute Canada, FQRNT, and the Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET, ERC, ERDF, FP7, Horizon 2020 and Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions, European Union; Investissements d'Avenir Labex and Idex, ANR, Region Auvergne and Fondation Partager le Savoir, France; DFG and AvH Foundation, Germany; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes co-financed by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; BSF, GIF and Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; CERCA Programme Generalitat de Catalunya, Generalitat Valenciana, Spain; the Royal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom. The crucial computing support from all WLCG partners is acknowledged gratefully, in particular from CERN, the ATLAS Tier-1 facilities at TRIUMF (Canada), NDGF (Denmark, Norway, Sweden), CC-IN2P3 (France), KIT/GridKA (Germany), INFN-CNAF (Italy), NL-T1 (Netherlands), PIC (Spain), ASGC (Taiwan), RAL (UK) and BNL (USA), the Tier-2 facilities worldwide and large non-WLCG resource providers. Major contributors of computing resources are listed in Ref. [100].
