Independence and interdependence in collective decision making: an agent-based model of nest-site choice by honeybee swarms

Condorcet''s jury theorem shows that when the members of a group have noisy but independent information about what is best for the group as a whole, majority decisions tend to outperform dictatorial ones. When voting is supplemented by communication, however, the resulting interdependencies between decision makers can strengthen or undermine this effect: they can facilitate information pooling, but also amplify errors. We consider an intriguing non-human case of independent information pooling combined with communication: the case of nest-site choice by honeybee (Apis mellifera) swarms. It is empirically well documented that when there are different nest sites that vary in quality, the bees usually choose the best one. We develop a new agent-based model of the bees'' decision process and show that its remarkable reliability stems from a particular interplay of independence and interdependence between the bees.     

Leadership in Moving Human Groups

How is movement of individuals coordinated as a group? This is a fundamental question of social behaviour, encompassing phenomena such as bird flocking, fish schooling, and the innumerable activities in human groups that require people to synchronise their actions. We have developed an experimental paradigm, the HoneyComb computer-based multi-client game, to empirically investigate human movement coordination and leadership. Using economic games as a model, we set monetary incentives to motivate players on a virtual playfield to reach goals via players'' movements. We asked whether (I) humans coordinate their movements when information is limited to an individual group member''s observation of adjacent group member motion, (II) whether an informed group minority can lead an uninformed group majority to the minority''s goal, and if so, (III) how this minority exerts its influence. We showed that in a human group – on the basis of movement alone – a minority can successfully lead a majority. Minorities lead successfully when (a) their members choose similar initial steps towards their goal field and (b) they are among the first in the whole group to make a move. Using our approach, we empirically demonstrate that the rules of swarming behaviour apply to humans. Even complex human behaviour, such as leadership and directed group movement, follow simple rules that are based on visual perception of local movement.     

Voting patterns and alliance formation in the European Parliament

Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have voluntarily formed transnational political groups and invariably follow the voting instructions of these groups. This is intriguing as there are few obvious incentives for doing so. Unlike national parties, for example, the political groups in the European Parliament are not punished by the electorate if they are divided on key issues, as citizens know very little about what goes on inside the European Parliament. This paper pieces together an explanation of why the European political groups exist and why they have become so powerful by looking at the determinants of group cohesion and by undertaking a spatial analysis of voting in the European Parliament. MEPs who share preferences on a range of issues on the European Union policy agenda have an incentive to establish a division-of-labour contract and to share the costs of collecting information. Once internal party policy specialization and agenda setting has been established, MEPs have incentives to follow the voting instructions of their group owing to the advantages of cohesion in a context of repeated voting.     

INDUSTRY CALLING!—Is There a Doctor in the House?

Medical service is needed in industry by both management and labor as never before. Industry is just beginning to awaken to this need. The medical profession is largely unaware of it. Unless physicians are prepared to heed this call, there is danger that management and labor will come to a bipartisan agreement over the bargaining table which will specify the amount, quality, and price of medical service irrespective of the effects of such an agreement on the practice of medicine. Such agreements should invariably be tripartite—between management, labor and medicine—if we are to continue to strive for medicine''s traditional ideals: The best of medical care for all alike.This situation imposes at least two important obligations on organized medicine at the national level and especially at state and local levels where there is industrial concentration:1. Provision of a strong and competent committee or council whose members are especially interested in occupational medicine and who will make their presence known to management and labor alike, offering to advise with them on all medical problems, to mediate their disagreements or medical questions, and to help them attain a common goal.2. Assisting the members of organized medicine who are interested, to learn more about the medical problems peculiar to occupational health.     

Do Online Voting Patterns Reflect Evolved Features of Human Cognition? An Exploratory Empirical Investigation

Online votes or ratings can assist internet users in evaluating the credibility and appeal of the information which they encounter. For example, aggregator websites such as Reddit allow users to up-vote submitted content to make it more prominent, and down-vote content to make it less prominent. Here we argue that decisions over what to up- or down-vote may be guided by evolved features of human cognition. We predict that internet users should be more likely to up-vote content that others have also up-voted (social influence), content that has been submitted by particularly liked or respected users (model-based bias), content that constitutes evolutionarily salient or relevant information (content bias), and content that follows group norms and, in particular, prosocial norms. 489 respondents from the online social voting community Reddit rated the extent to which they felt different traits influenced their voting. Statistical analyses confirmed that norm-following and prosociality, as well as various content biases such as emotional content and originality, were rated as important motivators of voting. Social influence had a smaller effect than expected, while attitudes towards the submitter had little effect. This exploratory empirical investigation suggests that online voting communities can provide an important test-bed for evolutionary theories of human social information use, and that evolved features of human cognition may guide online behaviour just as it guides behaviour in the offline world.     

Experimental evidence for group hunting via eavesdropping in echolocating bats

Group foraging has been suggested as an important factor for the evolution of sociality. However, visual cues are predominantly used to gain information about group members'' foraging success in diurnally foraging animals such as birds, where group foraging has been studied most intensively. By contrast, nocturnal animals, such as bats, would have to rely on other cues or signals to coordinate foraging. We investigated the role of echolocation calls as inadvertently produced cues for social foraging in the insectivorous bat Noctilio albiventris. Females of this species live in small groups, forage over water bodies for swarming insects and have an extremely short daily activity period. We predicted and confirmed that (i) free-ranging bats are attracted by playbacks of echolocation calls produced during prey capture, and that (ii) bats of the same social unit forage together to benefit from passive information transfer via the change in group members'' echolocation calls upon finding prey. Network analysis of high-resolution automated radio telemetry confirmed that group members flew within the predicted maximum hearing distance 94±6 per cent of the time. Thus, echolocation calls also serve as intraspecific communication cues. Sociality appears to allow for more effective group foraging strategies via eavesdropping on acoustical cues of group members in nocturnal mammals.     

Voting Intention and Choices: Are Voters Always Rational and Deliberative?

Human rationality–the ability to behave in order to maximize the achievement of their presumed goals (i.e., their optimal choices)–is the foundation for democracy. Research evidence has suggested that voters may not make decisions after exhaustively processing relevant information; instead, our decision-making capacity may be restricted by our own biases and the environment. In this paper, we investigate the extent to which humans in a democratic society can be rational when making decisions in a serious, complex situation–voting in a local political election. We believe examining human rationality in a political election is important, because a well-functioning democracy rests largely upon the rational choices of individual voters. Previous research has shown that explicit political attitudes predict voting intention and choices (i.e., actual votes) in democratic societies, indicating that people are able to reason comprehensively when making voting decisions. Other work, though, has demonstrated that the attitudes of which we may not be aware, such as our implicit (e.g., subconscious) preferences, can predict voting choices, which may question the well-functioning democracy. In this study, we systematically examined predictors on voting intention and choices in the 2014 mayoral election in Taipei, Taiwan. Results indicate that explicit political party preferences had the largest impact on voting intention and choices. Moreover, implicit political party preferences interacted with explicit political party preferences in accounting for voting intention, and in turn predicted voting choices. Ethnic identity and perceived voting intention of significant others were found to predict voting choices, but not voting intention. In sum, to the comfort of democracy, voters appeared to engage mainly explicit, controlled processes in making their decisions; but findings on ethnic identity and perceived voting intention of significant others may suggest otherwise.     

European Ethical Review Committee: the experience of an international ethics committee reviewing protocols for drug trials.

An international ethics review committee, founded seven years ago, has several unusual features: it selects its own members, who are independent of the drug industry; it includes members with no medical or paramedical background, such as lay people and lawyers; and it reviews protocols together with the study''s sponsor. Membership of 31 from nine European countries enables frequent meetings and there is a full meeting of the committee every year to review progress and consider policy. Of the first 294 protocols for phase I, II, or III trials reviewed, 37 were admitted outright, 243 were amended (usually during the discussion of the protocol), and 14 were rejected. It is suggested that, to overcome the problem of ethics review in smaller institutions, regional health authorities in Britain might consider establishing similar committees.     

Characterizing the Impact of Category Uncertainty on Human Auditory Categorization Behavior

Categorization is an important cognitive process. However, the correct categorization of a stimulus is often challenging because categories can have overlapping boundaries. Whereas perceptual categorization has been extensively studied in vision, the analogous phenomenon in audition has yet to be systematically explored. Here, we test whether and how human subjects learn to use category distributions and prior probabilities, as well as whether subjects employ an optimal decision strategy when making auditory-category decisions. We asked subjects to classify the frequency of a tone burst into one of two overlapping, uniform categories according to the perceived tone frequency. We systematically varied the prior probability of presenting a tone burst with a frequency originating from one versus the other category. Most subjects learned these changes in prior probabilities early in testing and used this information to influence categorization. We also measured each subject''s frequency-discrimination thresholds (i.e., their sensory uncertainty levels). We tested each subject''s average behavior against variations of a Bayesian model that either led to optimal or sub-optimal decision behavior (i.e. probability matching). In both predicting and fitting each subject''s average behavior, we found that probability matching provided a better account of human decision behavior. The model fits confirmed that subjects were able to learn category prior probabilities and approximate forms of the category distributions. Finally, we systematically explored the potential ways that additional noise sources could influence categorization behavior. We found that an optimal decision strategy can produce probability-matching behavior if it utilized non-stationary category distributions and prior probabilities formed over a short stimulus history. Our work extends previous findings into the auditory domain and reformulates the issue of categorization in a manner that can help to interpret the results of previous research within a generative framework.     

Incentive design to boost health for juveniles with Medicaid coverage: Evidence from a field experiment

Augmenting incentives for juveniles with separate incentives for parents could boost juvenile efforts to reduce BMI. However, financing a parent incentive by reducing the incentives offered to adolescents could attenuate the juvenile response. In a field experiment, Medicaid-covered juveniles enrolled in a cardiac wellness program were randomly assigned to two groups: juveniles in the focused-incentive group received all earned points; juveniles in the split-incentive group split earned points with a parent. The focused-incentive group was 12.8 percentage points more likely to achieve their stipulated goals compared to the split-incentive group at the end of the 3-month active phase of the program. In contrast, members of the split-incentive group outperformed their peers in the focused-incentive group during the second quarter, and the two incentives structures were equally effective at the year-end session. Additional quasi-experimental data indicates that members of both incentivized groups significantly outperformed (focused-incentive group by 8.48 percentage points and split-incentive group by 11.0 percentage points) a pre-experiment (non-incentivized) set of juveniles enrolled in the same program at year-end.     

Organizing a PhD symposium—an inside view

Planning a symposium organized by PhD students is a challenging prospect. Insight from the organizers of three such symposia sheds light on the highs and lows of the experience.When we took on the responsibility for our respective annual PhD symposia (Sidebar A), none of us had any idea how much we would have to learn about organization, management and logistics; how many e-mails would be sent; how many deadlines missed. In the end, however, organizing a PhD symposium was in many ways the most instructive part of our first year as PhD students. We had the opportunity to meet and speak with brilliant scientists and we learnt how to coordinate, plan and execute different tasks efficiently with a good team spirit. Both the contacts we made and the skills we acquired should prove useful in our future careers. If you have the opportunity to get involved in organizing a symposium, we hope our experience will help you in making a start.

Sidebar A | The conferences we organized

The 3rd PhD Symposium in Computational Biology and Innovation hosted at the Conway Institute of Biomolecular and Biomedical Research, University College Dublin, Ireland (5–7 December 2012).The 14th European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL) PhD Symposium hosted at EMBL campus in Heidelberg, Germany (24–27 October 2012).The 8th FinBioNet PhD Symposium: Revolutionary bioscience: from advanced technologies to personalized medicine hosted at the University of Tampere, Finland (2–3 October 2012).Perhaps more than any other kind of meeting, a PhD symposium is a great opportunity for early-stage researchers to be exposed to a broad range of science and to meet fellow PhD students and potential collaborators in a friendly atmosphere. By organizing one, you will contribute both to your own career and to those of everyone involved. Many university graduate programmes and societies encourage the organization of such events.If you have the opportunity to get involved in organizing a symposium, we hope our experience will help you in making a startThe amount of work involved, however, is huge and requires the coordination and cooperation of a committee. Your first step, then, is to recruit that committee. An announcement to pique the interest of local PhD students is a good idea to get started, followed by the cooption of members from different areas, groups and institutes to improve diversity and broaden the committee''s knowledge. It also helps to divide the committee into different teams, and to elect a chair, vice-chair and team leaders to keep things on track. Defining clear responsibilities and setting deadlines is vital, but keep in mind that you will need to be flexible, as committee members might find they have more or less time than they planned. In addition to research, both internships and placements are common during the early phases of a PhD and you might unexpectedly lose core committee members along the way. In our case, losing a committee chair meant that the vice-chair had to take over most of the coordination and invest more time during his or her absence.In general, keep in mind that the people you are working with are not full-time employees. It is unlikely that anyone on the organizing committee has done something similar to this before, and so time must be set aside to bring people on board and get them up to speed. Some of your committee members will prove capable of working independently and will require little management; others might be overwhelmed by the demands of their research and will require assistance and micromanagement.In addition to research, internships and placements are common during the early phases of a PhD and you might unexpectedly lose core committee members…You therefore need to monitor people and be prepared for setbacks. As you will collectively bear responsibility for the symposium, work left undone will often fall to other committee members or to you if you are the chair or vice-chair. Just how much slack you have to pick up will depend on your management skills. As long as you have a plan and a clear overview of what needs to be done, management should be straightforward, if not always easy. A well-managed symposium will be a pleasure to organize. A poorly managed one will become a stressful and unpleasant experience.Dividing the labour correctly is the first crucial step. This should happen as early as possible. Sidebar B lists important categories of tasks that must be managed. Large areas—finance, participants and speakers—will probably need sub-committees of their own, while smaller areas such as website management and design might need only one or two people. A large symposium might require a team of 12 people for speakers alone, with one assigned to each speaker. Ideally you will have previous symposia hosted at your institution to use as a blueprint. If not, contact another institute and ask them for an outline. Above all, each task must have a committee member clearly responsible for it, as ambiguous instructions and diffusion of responsibility will result in inaction. Predicting how much work will be involved is difficult, and it is all too easy to under-estimate, leaving you understaffed on the day of the event. Too many staff is far better than too few, and you will find that the ability to be flexible and reassign people to tricky areas or problems is vital to your success.

Sidebar B | Important committee tasks

Speakers—contacting speakers, soliciting abstracts and direct assistance to speakersParticipants—selecting plenary speakers and editing abstracts for the abstract bookFinance—fundraising and book-keepingPR—marketing through e-mails and posters, and securing sponsorsPosters—organizing posters on the day and judging any competitionsCatering—providing food and refreshmentsDesign—designing abstract booklets, posters and logosTransport and accommodation—arranging transport and accommodation for speakers (and participants)Website management—ensuring that the website is updated regularly with information about speakers, sessions and travelWithout the right content—speakers, topics and networking opportunities—no symposium will succeed, whether it is organized by PhD students or seasoned professionals. With a committee formed, the most important task is to decide on a scientific theme and a title for the symposium. It is always good to seek suggestions from your peers and mentors, especially because this will raise awareness that the symposium is going to take place. How you ultimately settle on a theme is down to you, but a voting system might be helpful. Remember, however, that the people organizing the symposium need to be confident in its direction and vision. Once a theme is chosen, the next step should be to set the number of sessions and agree on topics for each of these sessions (Sidebar C).

Sidebar C | Deciding on a topic and title for your symposium

• The subject of the symposium should be broader than most academic conferences.You want to avoid competing directly with specialized conferences, and instead appeal to a broad range of PhD students.
• Avoid being vague—at the same time, it is vital that a PhD student in any field will read your poster and think ‘this conference is for me''. Moreover, they will need to be able to convince their group leader of it as well.
• Be aware of competitors—the topics of the symposium should not overlap with symposia that are going to be held around the same time.

Once you have settled on your theme (or themes) and set a date—keep in mind the dates of other symposiums and any public holidays—you need to begin recruiting speakers. Invitations can be sent out by e-mail and should be followed up after a week or so either by e-mail or, preferably, by telephone. Be audacious in inviting speakers—we were often surprised how willing top-tier speakers were to attend specifically because we were organizing a PhD symposium. There are two advantages for them in attending these kinds of events: the atmosphere tends to be more relaxed than other prestigious conferences, and senior attendees can interact with and influence the emerging generation of scientists. Therefore, be confident to select and invite high-profile speakers first. They will usually have personal assistants who respond to their e-mails and invitations and manage their busy schedules. Remember that you will probably receive several rejections, so take these in your stride. You can also ask the speakers to suggest the names of other suitable people to invite. Bear in mind that good speakers tend to run on extremely tight schedules, so they need to be contacted early. They should not be expected to stick to the first deadline given, or the second, or any other deadline. They will also need to be reminded gently every now and then to send their abstracts and other information. Do not be afraid to use connections you might have for ideas and information on speakers: professors, admins, old supervisors and industry contacts will all probably help in finding people and getting them to say yes.When choosing a keynote speaker, young principal investigators and accomplished post-doctoral fellows are also excellent choices. Young investigators have often achieved success by advocating new or controversial ideas and methodologies, and their presence at a symposium can enliven debate. They can also offer advice to students more immediately relevant to success in today''s scientific climate. In this vein, it is beneficial to have speakers from different stages of their scientific careers to provide a variety of perspectives in discussions.It is a good idea to have a backup plan with a small list of local and national speakers for each session in case a speaker cancels at the last minute. In all three of the symposia that the authors were variously involved in organizing (Sidebar A), there were last minute difficulties or cancellations. For example, last minute travel changes might be too expensive for your budget to cover, or planned travel might not work out as a result of weather conditions or illness.The risk with a back-up plan, of course, is that you might end up with too many speakers and find yourself in the embarrassing position of having invited someone and not actually needing them. There is no simple answer to this, but try to have a good personal relationship with your backup speakers and be upfront with them about the circumstances in which you are inviting them.Finally, PhD student symposia should be a platform for students to acquire knowledge and present their work, so make sure you include poster sessions and student presentations. They are also an important opportunity for your peers to impress future employers, make contacts and gain insight into the ‘hot'' research areas and future opportunities. Student talks can be chosen from among the submitted abstracts.With your topic chosen, teams defined, organizers recruited and speakers selected, the real work of planning sessions, sorting out speaker invites and travel, arranging catering and so on will begin (see the timeline depicted in Fig 1). It is important to start planning early—up to a year in advance—but as every good manager knows, long-term goals will be forgotten, so short-term goals are crucial to success. Three weeks is a good rule of thumb for the maximum length of time you can set for a deadline. The whole committee should have a shared checklist of everything that needs to be done, when and by whom. You should have a clear record of who has agreed to what responsibilities and everyone should know whose job it is to chase things up if deadlines are missed. This should be enough to ensure that the work gets done. If someone seems incapable or unwilling, then simply transfer his or her responsibility to someone else.Open in a separate windowFigure 1Timeline of symposium organization.Regular meetings will allow you to check in on each committee member and will facilitate communication more effectively than e-mail. Video-conferencing will need to be well-coordinated if it is to work. Distribute an agenda before each meeting and stick to it. Minutes should also be taken during each meeting and distributed afterwards by e-mail. Above all, make sure that the various teams are communicating—ask your committee members what they are doing and what information or help they need to get it done. Special care should be taken to ensure communication if committee members are geographically separated.Predicting how much work will be involved is difficult, and it is all too easy to under-estimate, leaving you understaffed on the day of the eventThe success of your symposium will be measured in a few ways. The most obvious and important will be the quality of the talks, the networking opportunities provided and whether or not the attendees had an enjoyable and interesting time. However, you will also be judged on your finances, so you need to have a clear view of how much you can spend. Handling such large amounts of money can be intimidating, so keeping good records and staying on top of things is the only way to feel comfortable about doing this and coming out the other side.The money you obtain from fundraising, sponsorship and grant applications cannot be accurately assessed early on, but you should account for it as best as you can. If you have the luxury of blueprints from previous symposia, get hold of their final budgets for guidelines on general expenses such as food, advertisement and printing (see Fig 2 for the example of our experience).Open in a separate windowFigure 2Financial breakdown of our symposia. Two different types of symposium are represented. The ‘Example income breakdown'' and ‘Example expenses breakdown 1'' are based on the example of the University College Dublin Symposium, the funding for which was external (grants, sponsorships and registration fees). ‘Example expenses breakdown 2'' is from the FinBioNet Symposium, which is supported by several doctoral programmes in Finland and, thus, grad students from participating programmes in Finland can attend free of charge. As such, it includes full payment of accommodation for speakers and attendees, and is a special case—a 50/50 split between flights and hotels is unusual for a symposium. An important message in the charts is that catering will probably take up half of the expenses of a symposium, and keynotes and speakers probably around a quarter.The attendance fees you will receive can deviate significantly from your projected numbers. This can be mitigated to some extent by early registration deadlines with discounts to encourage the majority of your attendees to register as soon as possible, as well as an easy and efficient payment system and interesting keynote speakers. Regular discussions of the budget are also crucial to keep on top of things.In terms of raising other money, consider submitting grant applications to as many societies, universities, trusts or foundations as possible. They will have a fixed timeframe in which you can apply for grants: for example, 3–6 months in advance for smaller grants and more than 6 months in advance for substantial sponsorship. It is important to have confirmations from invited speakers and estimates of attendance numbers before applying for grants.To save money, it is also beneficial to book the flights and hotel accommodation for invited speakers well in advance, rather than leaving it to them. The organizers of the PhD symposium held in 2012 at the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL) in Heidelberg, Germany, for example, were able to cut down the transport costs of their speakers by more than half compared with the previous year simply by booking in advance and using budget airlines. Flights within Europe with the wrong non-budget airlines can cost as much as three or four times more. If the invited speakers are left to choose their own flights, the budget for speaker travel might be bigger than expected.Commercial sponsorship will also help you balance your books. When approaching sponsors, aim for a mix of sponsorship levels and offers. Do not ignore the small sponsors, but make sure that you provide the right opportunities for the big ones to pay extra for certain privileges. A large sponsor could be the essential cash injection that your symposium needs to get a brilliant keynote speaker flown in from the USA, or food that actually tastes as good as it looks.If you are lucky, your predecessors will have been able to secure one or more big companies for sponsorship in previous years, so be sure to use the contacts that you already have. If the representatives liked your event, they will probably recommend it internally. Big companies also tend to give more non-money items. Offer them the opportunity to sponsor prizes or provide items for the conference bags. Even gaming-related companies will readily provide you with gadgets if you can manage to get them interested or tie one of their products to your symposium. Smaller companies will not have a big yearly budget to fund events, but if your symposium has a specific focus, contacting related companies close to your city might give you a greater chance of getting them interested.…the atmosphere tends to be more relaxed than other prestigious conferences, and senior attendees can interact with and influence the emerging generation of scientistsIn general, you need to keep your sponsors happy. They need to have a place to interact with your attendees, a booth for product advertising and a short presentation during the symposium. For smaller symposia, it might also be better to arrange specific sponsorship deals directly with a company, rather than relying on trying to block sell traditional tiered sponsorship—silver, gold and platinum levels. For the PhD Symposium in Computational Biology and Innovation in Dublin for example, Logitech agreed to donate three of their high quality wireless presenters that we could give away as prizes. Always keep in mind that global companies often have small departments that have useful gadgets which can be used as prizes or give-aways.Spreading the word is one of the most important steps in planning your symposium and should be started as early as possible. You should have a conference website that provides information and regular updates about your event. An eye-catching logo tied to the scientific topic also helps. Social networks—especially Facebook and Twitter—and e-mails make it extremely easy to reach interested researchers and PhD students.If your scientific field has an active international society, you should apply for an affiliation. The affiliation can be purely to help with promotion, but financial sponsorship is also possible in some cases and can open the door to more advanced grant applications that require an affiliation with a scientific society.Bear in mind that advertising your symposium too early can mean that interest might wane by the time that registration opens, whilst advertising too late might mean attendees have already made other plans. A good strategy is to spread the word once the date, venue and the first invited speakers have been confirmed. Follow this up by bursts of advertisements just before you open up registration and abstract submission. Most focused research communities have dedicated mailing lists—either regional or international—that will reach a substantial group of interested researchers. Contacting supervisors or programme directors in various universities who have students in a similar field is also a good idea. Ask them to forward your advertisement e-mail to mailing lists or PhD programmes they might know of. Generally, social or viral advertisement is free of charge and can reach far more people than any other medium.On the day itself, organization and a clear division of labour will be doubly important, so if you have already established good communication and working practices in the planning stages, this will pay dividends. If possible, have backup committee members ready to fill in for important tasks. Pay particular attention to speakers and sponsors: you have the reputation of your institute to consider. If possible, each speaker should have an assigned committee member. Make sure that each person knows exactly what he or she is supposed to be doing and leave enough time to account for delays. It is a good idea to do some practice runs before the event itself, as you will not have much time on the day to accommodate major changes. Things you might want to consider include: are there enough signs that direct you from the bus stop to the right building? Is it clear what opportunities there are for social events? What else will participants need? Hopefully you will already have considered these questions when people registered and will have captured much of the information on the registration forms. Similarly, you should have asked attendees to provide the kind of information you will need to know in advance about their dietary needs, disabled access needs and so on.PhD student symposia should be a platform for students […] so make sure you include poster sessions and student presentationsRemember that you are really doing this for the participants. Although the lectures and speakers are important, they are a part of the bigger picture of poster presentations, networking and PhD student talks, which are all equally important. The best conversation starters are social events, so take the keynote speakers out to a pub and invite everyone to join, or organize a dinner for everybody. Formal dinners are nice for large conferences, but a small PhD symposium greatly benefits from its informal environment. The first night, especially, can be a great chance to use for networking and social outings.Once the final talks are finished and the prizes are given, make sure you thank everyone: speakers, attendees, sponsors and supporters, and last but not least, yourselves, the organizing committee. Taking feedback from attendees is important, but it can be equally important to provide your own feedback for the group of PhD students who will organize the symposium next year. If you are part of a recurring event, you have a responsibility to them and should keep good records and be ready to advise them when they need it.Finally, we would recommend treating yourselves to committee t-shirts or hoodies so that you are easily identifiable to the multitude of people who will have questions for you or will need your help on the day. And so that you have a souvenir of all the hard work you put in. Good luck!     

Modelling the Dynamics of an Experimental Host-Pathogen Microcosm within a Hierarchical Bayesian Framework

The advantages of Bayesian statistical approaches, such as flexibility and the ability to acknowledge uncertainty in all parameters, have made them the prevailing method for analysing the spread of infectious diseases in human or animal populations. We introduce a Bayesian approach to experimental host-pathogen systems that shares these attractive features. Since uncertainty in all parameters is acknowledged, existing information can be accounted for through prior distributions, rather than through fixing some parameter values. The non-linear dynamics, multi-factorial design, multiple measurements of responses over time and sampling error that are typical features of experimental host-pathogen systems can also be naturally incorporated. We analyse the dynamics of the free-living protozoan Paramecium caudatum and its specialist bacterial parasite Holospora undulata. Our analysis provides strong evidence for a saturable infection function, and we were able to reproduce the two waves of infection apparent in the data by separating the initial inoculum from the parasites released after the first cycle of infection. In addition, the parameter estimates from the hierarchical model can be combined to infer variations in the parasite''s basic reproductive ratio across experimental groups, enabling us to make predictions about the effect of resources and host genotype on the ability of the parasite to spread. Even though the high level of variability between replicates limited the resolution of the results, this Bayesian framework has strong potential to be used more widely in experimental ecology.     

Intraoperative radiation therapy,opportunities for clinical practice normalization: MEDTING,a scientific platform

Aim

To use a platform to analyze a subgroup specialized in evaluation of patients candidates to IOERT.

Background

Medting is a project that was initiated to support daily clinical activity, knowledge management and medical education by sharing information with other physicians. The project began at the “Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón”, which has a dedicated oncology physician''s multi-specialist committee. There are many scientific social networks all over the world. Medting is the only platform that specializes in healthcare and has been developed for hospital purposes.

Materials and methods

Medting brings all together the relevant clinical information from electronic medical records and picture archiving about the patient to study. Subplatform Medting-IORT was created on February 2, 2012 at the Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañon. It has 23 members, have been registered 18 cases with 238 multimedia images.

Results

Medting started with 28 physicians and five departments. After 6 months, proof of concept period, there are 225 physicians, more than 120 medical students and 39 departments in 3 hospitals using the scientific social network. Furthermore, the project is being extended on three more hospitals in Madrid.

Conclusion

Medting gives the opportunity to oncology physicians to access all relevant clinical information with the ability to discuss case notes and view images at any time. The impact of the Medting platform in a subgroup working team to evaluate IOERT patients candidates is included in the analysis. The use of a constantly updated repository based on real cases and the documentation of the internal activity of the tumor committee beyond the medical record, has become an extraordinary tool for teaching, training and learning.     

Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative

ObjectiveTo improve the accuracy and completeness of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy, to allow readers to assess the potential for bias in a study, and to evaluate a study''s generalisability.MethodsThe Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) steering committee searched the literature to identify publications on the appropriate conduct and reporting of diagnostic studies and extracted potential items into an extensive list. Researchers, editors, and members of professional organisations shortened this list during a two day consensus meeting, with the goal of developing a checklist and a generic flow diagram for studies of diagnostic accuracy.ResultsThe search for published guidelines about diagnostic research yielded 33 previously published checklists, from which we extracted a list of 75 potential items. At the consensus meeting, participants shortened the list to a 25 item checklist, by using evidence, whenever available. A prototype of a flow diagram provides information about the method of patient recruitment, the order of test execution, and the numbers of patients undergoing the test under evaluation and the reference standard, or both.ConclusionsEvaluation of research depends on complete and accurate reporting. If medical journals adopt the STARD checklist and flow diagram, the quality of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy should improve to the advantage of clinicians, researchers, reviewers, journals, and the public.The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) steering group aims to improve the accuracy and completeness of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy. The group describes and explains the development of a checklist and flow diagram for authors of reports     

Screening Out Controversy: Human Genetics,Emerging Techniques of Diagnosis,and the Origins of the Social Issues Committee of the American Society of Human Genetics, 1964–1973

In the years following World War II, and increasingly during the 1960s and 1970s, professional scientific societies developed internal sub-committees to address the social implications of their scientific expertise (Moore, Disrupting Science: Social Movements, American Scientists, and the Politics of the Military, 1945–1975. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008). This article explores the early years of one such committee, the American Society of Human Genetics’ “Social Issues Committee,” founded in 1967. Although the committee’s name might suggest it was founded to increase the ASHG’s public and policy engagement, exploration of the committee’s early years reveals a more complicated reality. Affronted by legislators’ recent unwillingness to seek the expert advice of human geneticists before adopting widespread neonatal screening programs for phenylketonuria (PKU), and feeling pressed to establish their relevance in an increasingly resource-scarce funding environment, committee members sought to increase the discipline’s expert authority. Painfully aware of controversy over abortion rights and haunted by the taint of the discipline’s eugenic past, however, the committee proceeded with great caution. Seeking to harness interest in and assert professional control over emerging techniques of genetic diagnosis, the committee strove to protect the society’s image by relegating ethical and policy questions about their use to the individual consciences of member scientists. It was not until 1973, after the committee’s modest success in organizing support for a retrospective public health study of PKU screening and following the legalization of abortion on demand, that the committee decided to take a more publicly engaged stance.     

Rhesus macaques use probabilities to predict future events

Humans can use an intuitive sense of statistics to make predictions about uncertain future events, a cognitive skill that underpins logical and mathematical reasoning. Recent research shows that some of these abilities for statistical inferences can emerge in preverbal infants and non-human primates such as apes and capuchins. An important question is therefore whether animals share the full complement of intuitive reasoning abilities demonstrated by humans, as well as what evolutionary contexts promote the emergence of such skills. Here, we examined whether free-ranging rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) can use probability information to infer the most likely outcome of a random lottery, in the first test of whether primates can make such inferences in the absence of direct prior experience. We developed a novel expectancy-violation looking time task, adapted from prior studies of infants, in order to assess the monkeys' expectations. In Study 1, we confirmed that monkeys (n = 20) looked similarly at different sampled items if they had no prior knowledge about the population they were drawn from. In Study 2, monkeys (n = 80) saw a dynamic ‘lottery’ machine containing a mix of two types of fruit outcomes, and then saw either the more common fruit (expected trial) or the relatively rare fruit (unexpected trial) fall from the machine. We found that monkeys looked longer when they witnessed the unexpected outcome. In Study 3, we confirmed that this effect depended on the causal relationship between the sample and the population, not visual mismatch: monkeys (n = 80) looked equally at both outcomes if the experimenter pulled the sampled item from her pocket. These results reveal that rhesus monkeys spontaneously use information about probability to reason about likely outcomes, and show how comparative studies of nonhumans can disentangle the evolutionary history of logical reasoning capacities.     

Evaluating the effectiveness of ensemble voting in improving the accuracy of consensus signals produced by various DTWA algorithms from step-current signals generated during nanopore sequencing

Nanopore sequencing device analysis systems simultaneously generate multiple picoamperage current signals representing the passage of DNA or RNA nucleotides ratcheted through a biomolecule nanopore array by motor proteins. Squiggles are a noisy and time-distorted representation of an underlying nucleotide sequence, “gold standard model”, due to experimental and algorithmic artefacts. Other research fields use dynamic time warped-space averaging (DTWA) algorithms to produce a consensus signal from multiple time-warped sources while preserving key features distorted by standard, linear-averaging approaches. We compared the ability of DTW Barycentre averaging (DBA), minimize mean (MM) and stochastic sub-gradient descent (SSG) DTWA algorithms to generate a consensus signal from squiggle-space ensembles of RNA molecules Enolase, Sequin R1-71-1 and Sequin R2-55-3 without knowledge of their associated gold standard model. We propose techniques to identify the leader and distorted squiggle features prior to DTWA consensus generation. New visualization and warping-path metrics are introduced to compare consensus signals and the best estimate of the “true” consensus, the study’s gold standard model. The DBA consensus was the best match to the gold standard for both Sequin studies but was outperformed in the Enolase study. Given an underlying common characteristic across a squiggle ensemble, we objectively evaluate a novel “voting scheme” that improves the local similarity between the consensus signal and a given fraction of the squiggle ensemble. While the gold standard is not used during voting, the increase in the match of the final voted-on consensus to the underlying Enolase and Sequin gold standard sequences provides an indirect success measure for the proposed voting procedure in two ways: First is the decreased least squares warped distance between the final consensus and the gold model, and second, the voting generates a final consensus length closer to the known underlying RNA biomolecule length. The results suggest considerable potential in marrying squiggle analysis and voted-on DTWA consensus signals to provide low-noise, low-distortion signals. This will lead to improved accuracy in detecting nucleotides and their deviation model due to chemical modifications (a.k.a. epigenetic information). The proposed combination of ensemble voting and DTWA has application in other research fields involving time-distorted, high entropy signals.     

Diversity in the practice of district ethics committees.

A survey of ethics committees in district health authorities was carried out to find out the size and make up of committees and what information and guidance they offered to scientists who apply to do research. A sample (n = 28) of committees in England (n = 190), half from teaching districts and half from non-teaching districts, was contacted by post requesting this information. A high degree of diversity was found, not only in the methods that committees used but also in the ethical criteria each considered to be pertinent for research. It was also shown that published guidelines have made little impact. It is suggested that issuing more guidelines will be of limited use. Rather, the following are needed: information about why guidelines have been widely ignored, better communication between committees, some form of education for committee members, and a formal register of committees compiled.     

Science, politics, and public policy: a legislator's perspective.

Making judgments on priorities in funding is a politican's most difficult task. Scientific information is often necessary to make those judgments, so that good communication between scientist and politican is important. This is, however, difficult because the politician's usual training and working habits are different from those of the scientist. Messages to politicans must therefore be couched differently than in communications between scientists. These messages are more effective when they are concerned with the public need than when they plead for special interests. These messages are most effective when directed to those politicians serving on committees that must deal with the specified issue because Congress makes most political decisions through these committees. Committee members and committee staff members turn to scientists whom they know personally, so that getting to know the members of Congress and the key staff members of committees facilitates communication between science and public policy.