To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
A healthy diet includes a variety of nutritious foods, and dietary diversity, defined as the consumption of a sufficient variety of nutritious food groups, is an important indicator of nutritional adequacy and is associated with reduced risk of noncommunicable diseases(1). However, definitions and measurement of diversity vary, with most approaches using simple counts(2). This study proposes capturing both the number of food groups consumed (coverage) and the distribution of intake across these groups (evenness) by examining diversity at eating occasions (EOs), where contextual factors may influence dietary choices(3). Furthermore, this study aims to use machine learning (ML) models to predict dietary diversity at EOs. Data from the Measuring Eating in Everyday Life Study, a cross-sectional study of young adults (n = 675, 18–30 years), were analysed. Dietary intake was recorded over 3–4 non-consecutive days via a mobile app. Foods were classified into the five Australian Dietary Guidelines (ADG) food groups. An EO was defined as all foods and drinks starting within 15 minutes and totalling at least 210 kJ. Between-food group diversity score for each EO was calculated using the Shannon index. Vegetable variety (within-group diversity) was also assessed. K-means clustering partitioned EOs into diverse or less diverse groups. Person- and EO-level contextual factors were compared using Welch’s t-tests and chi-squared tests. Gradient boosting (GBM) and random forest (RF) ML models predicted EO diversity, with model performance and variable importance assessed using Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations (LIME). Results showed that participants meeting physical activity guidelines and reporting greater social support from friends were more likely to have higher dietary diversity at EO (p = 0.0017 and p = 0.0038, respectively). Eating alone was more common during less diverse EOs, whereas EOs with family, friends, or others were more diverse (p < 0.0001). Diverse EOs also occurred more often at cafés/restaurants and while visiting family or friends (p < 0.0001), whereas less diverse EOs were more common at work, university, or in transit. RF outperformed GBM in predicting both between-food group diversity (accuracy: 0.83 vs. 0.64) and vegetable variety (accuracy: 0.81 vs. 0.68). Age and self-efficacy were the strongest predictors across models, with RF further highlight meal preparation and food proximity as key factors influencing dietary diversity at EOs. LIME showed that person-level factors such as income, meal preparation, physical activity, and self-efficacy had consistent but mild influence on dietary diversity across EOs. In contrast, EO-level contextual factors showed more varied and pronounced effects, with some strongly increasing dietary diversity. These findings highlight the dynamic role of contextual factors at EO in shaping dietary diversity, suggesting that interventions using ML could target EO-level factors to effectively promote diverse and nutritionally adequate diets among young adults.
Yeast species have several adaptations that enable them to survive in harsh environments. These adaptations include biofilm formation, where the secretion of extracellular polymeric substances can protect the cells from a hostile environment, or, under nutrient-limited conditions, pseudohyphal or hyphal growth, where the colony can send out long tendrils to explore the environment and seek nutrients. Recently, we observed a spiral colony morphology emerge in an isolate of the hyphae-forming yeast Magnusiomyces magnusii (M. magnusii) grown under laboratory conditions. We use an off-lattice agent-based model (ABM) that simulates colony development to investigate the hypothesis that bias in the angle between successive hyphal segments causes the spiral morphology. The model involves biologically motivated rules of hyphal extension, with key model parameters including the colony size at the onset of hyphal filaments, and the angle between the penultimate and the apical segments. Using one example of an experimentally grown colony, we use a sequential neural likelihood method to perform likelihood-free Bayesian inference to infer the model parameters. Our results indicate a mean angle between hyphal segments of ${2.3}^{\circ } [{1.1}^{\circ }, {3.6}^{\circ }]$ (95% credible interval). To confirm the model’s applicability to colony growth, we use biologically feasible parameter values to yield morphologies observed in M. magnusii experiments.
Area coverage optimisation is a hotspot in cooperative interception research for highly manoeuverable targets. In this paper, a geometric coverage-based fast approach is proposed to rapidly calculate cooperative interception regions for interceptors, achieving full coverage of the target predicted manoeuvering escape area. The method analytically derives both the required number of interceptors and the centre coordinates of each interceptable region. Simulation results verify the correctness and effectiveness of the proposed method. It demonstrates that for highly manoeuverable targets, this cooperative interception region calculation method can stably achieve full coverage of predicted manoeuvering escape areas while significantly reducing computation time, exhibiting excellent real-time performance.
Case control analysis of breast tissue expander (TE) infections after clinic-based expansion procedures from 2019 to 2022 in a large county hospital found no significant modifiable risk factors, including implant type. Suboptimal sterile access may be an independent contributor to TE infections following clinic procedures. Ongoing protocol adherence and monitoring are needed.
This book provides a powerful diagnosis of why the global governance of science struggles in the face of emerging powers. In the field of the life sciences, China and India are both seen as emerging ‘dragons’ and as ‘elephants’. Both countries have formidable resources and are boldly determined to have their presence felt. Yet even when transnational regulatory pledges are made, there often remains an ‘elephant in the room’. Would these scientific ‘dragons’ really abide by the agreed rules? The book provides an essential insight into the logic of science governance in the two countries through unpacking critical events in the first two decades of the twenty-first century. This includes controversies on gene research, stem cell experimental therapies, GM crops, vaccines, the CRISPR technologies and the COVID pandemic. It argues that the ‘subversiveness’ assumed in China’s and India’s rise reflects many of the challenges that are shared by scientific communities worldwide. Previously marginalised actors, both from the Global South and Global North, contest conventional thinking of how science and scientists should be governed. As science outgrows traditional colonies of expertise and authority, good governance necessarily needs to be ‘de-colonised’ to acquire the capacity to think from and with others. By highlighting epistemic injustice within contemporary science, the book extends theories of decolonisation. This book is indispensable for scientists, policy makers and science communicators who are working with or in China and India, and for anyone interested in science-society relations in a global age.
India may not yet be leading global science, but it is clear that scientific advancement in India has been pulling and pushing global science in various ways that force attention. Following an overview of Indian’s science structure, this chapter focuses on two critical events. Central to India’s Bt crops saga is the question ‘who is “worthy” of being heard’. One striking character of the Bt crops disputes was that there was no readily-available categorical term to distinguish the pro- and anti-GM camps, for they were both formed by a coalition of government institutions, scientists, civil groups and industries and both evoked a post-colonial rhetoric and the necessity for ‘good science’. Conventional ways of designing and delivering regulations can easily be trapped in a self-referential ‘bureaucratic amplification of credibility’ which has limited ability to speak, let alone respond to diverse risk preferences. Meanwhile central to the global controversies stirred up by Indian experimental stem cell therapies was the question ‘who could do science’. Geeta Shroff captured Western attention perhaps partly because she presented an enigma about who could ‘afford’ to be defiant to conventional scientific communities – communities she didn’t align herself with but whom she impacted nonetheless. For governance to be effective, it has to stay relevant to the subject it aims to govern. This chapter argues that the legitimacy and authority of the global governance of science is becoming ever more dependent on its perceived fairness and inclusivity of diverse groups of practitioners.
This final chapter brings together the themes and cases visited in the book and asks what a de-colonised global governance may look like. The book ends with an invitation to ponder the question ‘what global science will have been?’ This future anterior framing was first proposed by the feminist scholar Tani Barlow. This linguistic construct draws attention to the fact that the anticipated future is embedded in the present (or that a present scenario was embedded in the past). More than at any time in world history, the sciences, especially the life sciences, are shaped by the confluence of private pursuits, national ambition and transnational assemblages. Thus to ask the question ‘what global science will have been?’ is to draw attention to current power struggles and resource imbalances that both stimulate and confine emerging sciences. On the basis of previous chapters, the authors collect their final thoughts on how a decolonised governance of the life sciences can be achieved through reflections on topics of time, place and people.
Chapter 2 sheds light on the subaltern anxieties shared by China and India in order to help untie a Gordian knot of mutual skepticism between the West and the new powers in the East. Seen from the West, China and India often occupy a ‘geography of blame’ where their aggressive scientific agendas provide fertile ground for fraudsters and mavericks. Western observers thus argue that Chinese and Indian scientific communities need to first prove themselves as trusted players in order to win respect. Yet in the eyes of many scientific practitioners in China and India, they are unfairly condemned to a ‘geography of victimisation’ due to a long-standing epistemic injustice. They argue that the West needs to acquire a fair attitude first so as to appreciate the actual scientific contribution from the two countries. This Gordian knot leads us directly to a thorny question: can there be epistemic inequality within the contemporary life sciences? More importantly, how would this inequality shape our actions, and inactions? This chapter unpacks these questions by elucidating how China and India position themselves in the twin process of modernisation and globalisation. This provides an insight on why mutual skepticism persists and how it can be overcome. The empirical overview on the two countries’ development trajectory also contextualises discussions for subsequent chapters.
The book opens by unpacking the 2018 CRISPR baby scandal and its global impacts. Jiankui He’s experiment was a perfect example which exposed the multi-layered ambiguities and contradictions in the realpolitik of the Global South’s drive for influence in frontier research and how power struggles are enmeshed with subaltern anxieties. More importantly, it illuminates why some of the ‘deviance’ manifested by China and India are not country-specific, but underlie shared challenges brought on by a growing diversity of ways of doing research outside of conventional institutions. The chapter demonstrates that bottom-up brokerage, de-territoriality of science and cosmopolitanised civic epistemology are three key trajectories of contemporary science which necessitate us to de-colonise our approach to governance. By the word ‘decolonise’, this book not only refers to the existing epistemic project of decolonial theorisation but also stresses a more fundamental meaning of being able to think outside of scientific ‘colonies’. That is, established social space and interactive order that govern a group of individuals with similar interests or are committed to a certain type of behaviour. The chapter introduces ‘national habitus’ as an analytical tool to substantiate what decolonial theorists have called the capacity to ‘think from and with’ global others.
Various conflicts and contradictions in China’s rise in the life sciences are best understood as a ‘struggle for recognition’ both domestically and globally. It first sets out the basic governing structure and major policy initiatives in China. But such structures should not be seen as static. In fact, through examination of critical events such as China’s joining of the Human Genome Project, hybrid embryo research, the Golden Rice controversy and the COVID pandemic, the chapter demonstrates that even in an authoritarian country, the national habitus of science is constantly challenged and reshaped by bottom-up initiative from scientists, bioethicists and the general public. More importantly, it highlights the de-territorised nature of these initiatives. It debunks the erroneous impression that researchers in China are passive ‘state scientists’. Rather similar to bioethicists, they actively draw on resources transnationally to establish their professional autonomy and authority within and outside of China. In cases such as the International Association of Neurorestoration, the rise of Chinese-led but transnationally organised science has formulated alternative ways of validating knowledge within contemporary Western science. By reviewing critical events Chinese life science experienced in the past 20 years, this chapter effectively examines five sets of key relations (e.g. scientist-state relation, bioethics-state relation, public-science relation, science-science relation and state-science relation) that have shaped its national habitus of science. Key themes of this chapter are further developed in the examination on India.
To comprehend the co-dependence and rivalry between China and India and their global implications, this chapter invites and enables readers to think from and with the two countries by pointing to the often ignored leftist science populism that underlines Global South societies’ management of the dual-task of modernisation and globalisation. This helps to identify the latent effects in the two countries’ selective global outreach and to understand their limits in leading South-South collaboration. The chapter first elucidates the concept of leftist science populism and its political logic. This helps to contextualise the gap between the two countries’ official views and actual practices in R&D exchanges and the latent effect of the two countries’ global expansion, which is discussed in the second section. Finally, the COVID vaccine diplomacy exhibits the two countries’ latest struggle to gain a better position in the global epistemic hierarchy. Whereas China’s vaccine diplomacy can be summarised as ‘contrast, collaborate and calumniate’, India adopted an approach that resembled ‘contest, convert and control’. Yet they both experienced some setbacks due to a deficiency in soft power, which is necessary to bring quality change in how science is applied and evaluated.
For efficient altitude transition and cruise maintenance, the wing-in-ground craft (WIG) quickly adjusts to and then stabilises at the target flight altitude, with minimal deviation during the fastest transition. Conventional methods typically rely on multi-objective functions to minimise settling time (ST) and integrated absolute error (IAE). These methods achieve the target trajectory through iterative trial-and-error adjustment on their weights that balance the two objectives, leading to time-consuming tuning. A reward function is proposed to prioritise minimising ST first, followed by minimising IAE. When trajectory points deviate from the target altitude, rewards are calculated based on absolute error (AE) values. Once the target altitude is reached, the reward takes the value of an exponential based on the current step number. The proposed reward function ensures that positive rewards for reducing ST outweigh the reward losses from adjusting previous trajectory points, and it is mathematically validated. Example of a WIG’s altitude change compares the proposed reward function and conventional multi-objective methods via deep reinforcement learning. Results show that the proposed reward function directly plans the trajectory that prioritises fast-settling requirements first and then minimising deviation, without needing to introduce or tune any parameter.
Slotted blade technology is a passive flow control strategy that can effectively suppress the boundary layer separation within compressors. To reduce the iteration time of the traditional Design-Experiment-Design method, this study innovatively proposes a fast and universal three-dimensional design method for the slotted blade technology, enabling slot modeling completion within 1 s. Furthermore, combined with machine learning (ML), the mapping relationships between eight design parameters and two key aerodynamic performances – compressor design point efficiency ($\eta$DE) and stator total pressure recovery coefficient at the near-stall point ($\sigma ^{*}_{NS}$) – were pioneeringly established. In this study, the prediction performances of six models were compared: one-dimensional convolutional neural network (1D-CNN), random forest (RF), support vector regression (SVR), Gaussian process regression (GPR), multi-layer perceptron (MLP) and long short-term memory network (LSTM). The results indicate that 1D-CNN achieves the highest prediction accuracy: for the $\eta$DE, the mean absolute error (MAE) and coefficient of determination (R2) are 0.041 and 0.987, respectively; for the $\sigma ^{*}_{NS}$, the MAE and R² are 0.479 × 10−3 and 0.955, respectively. Notably, the computational time of the 1D-CNN model is 99.11% less than that of the computational fluid dynamics (CFD). The Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method was employed to reveal the effects of design parameters on the compressor aerodynamic performance. Notably, the slot outlet axial position (Zout) exerts the most significant influence on the $\eta$DE, while the slot outlet radial position close to the casing (R1_out) has the strongest impact on the $\sigma ^{*}_{NS}$. This study provides theoretical support and valuable references for the intelligent design of slotted blade technology.
The mechanical feedback from the central active galactic nuclei (AGNs) can be crucial for balancing the radiative cooling of the intracluster medium (ICM) at the cluster centre. We aim to understand the relationship between the power of AGN feedback and the cooling of gas in the centres of galaxy clusters by correlating the radio properties of the brightest cluster galaxies (BCGs) with the X-ray properties of their host clusters. We used the catalogues from the first SRG/eROSITA All-Sky Survey (eRASS1) along with radio observations from the Australian SKA Pathfinder (ASKAP). In total, we identified 134 radio sources associated with BCGs of the 151 eRASS1 clusters located in the PS1, PS2, and SWAG-X ASKAP fields. Non-detections were treated as upper limits. We correlated the radio properties of the BCGs (radio luminosity, largest linear size/LLS, and BCG offset from the cluster centre) with the integrated X-ray luminosity of the host clusters. We utilised the concentration parameter, $c_{R_{500}}$, to categorise the clusters into cool cores (CCs) and non-cool cores (NCCs). By combining $c_{R_{500}}$ with the BCG offset, we assessed the dynamical states of the clusters in our sample. Furthermore, we analysed the correlation between radio mechanical power and X-ray luminosity within the CC subsample. We observe a potential positive trend between LLS and BCG offset, which may hint at an environmental influence on the morphology of central radio sources. We find a weak trend suggesting that more luminous central radio galaxies are found in clusters with higher X-ray luminosity. Additionally, there is a positive but highly scattered relationship between the mechanical luminosity of AGN jets and the X-ray cooling luminosity within the CC subsample. This finding is supported by bootstrap resampling and flux-flux analyses. The correlation observed in our CC subsample indicates that AGN feedback is ineffective in high-luminosity (high-mass) clusters. At a cooling luminosity of $L_{\mathrm{X},\,r} \lt \mathrm{R}_{\mathrm{cool}}\approx 5.50\times10^{43}\,\mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}}$, on average, AGN feedback appears to contribute only about $13\%-22\%$ of the energy needed to offset the radiative losses in the ICM.