14 research outputs found

    Radio-emitting engines in M dwarfs

    No full text
    Radio observations are excellent probes of supra-thermal charges and magnetic fields in the coronae/magnetospheres of the coldest stars and brown dwarfs, and they are vital for identifying the impact of stellar plasma on exoplanet atmospheres and the coronal heating mechanism. Their strong magnetic field leads to radio emission via different mechanisms such as gyrosynchrotron emission, electron cyclotron maser instability, and plasma emission. As the ongoing LOFAR Two-metre Sky Survey (LoTSS) is the largest radio sky survey ever conducted (by source counts), I shall present the latest results on our effort to identify cyclotron maser emission from stellar and brown-dwarf candidates in the LoTSS data using optical and infrared catalogues from Gaia and Pan-STARRS. By using radio-detected population’s properties, we shall differentiate the two possible acceleration mechanisms: (a) chromospheric or coronal acceleration similar to that observed on the Sun, and (b) magnetospheric acceleration occurring far from the stellar surface similar to that observed on Jupiter

    A tomographic spherical mass map emulator of the KiDS-1000 survey using conditional generative adversarial networks

    No full text
    Large sets of matter density simulations are becoming increasingly important in large-scale structure cosmology. Matter power spectra emulators, such as the Euclid Emulator and CosmicEmu, are trained on simulations to correct the non-linear part of the power spectrum. Map-based analyses retrieve additional non-Gaussian information from the density field, whether through human-designed statistics such as peak counts, or via machine learning methods such as convolutional neural networks. The simulations required for these methods are very resource-intensive, both in terms of computing time and storage. Map-level density field emulators, based on deep generative models, have recently been proposed to address these challenges. In this work, we present a novel mass map emulator of the KiDS-1000 survey footprint, which generates noise-free spherical maps in a fraction of a second. It takes a set of cosmological parameters (ΩM,σ8)(\Omega_M, \sigma_8) as input and produces a consistent set of 5 maps, corresponding to the KiDS-1000 tomographic redshift bins. To construct the emulator, we use a conditional generative adversarial network architecture and the spherical CNN DeepSphere\texttt{DeepSphere}, and train it on N-body-simulated mass maps. We compare its performance using an array of quantitative comparison metrics: angular power spectra CC_\ell, pixel/peaks distributions, CC_\ell correlation matrices, and Structural Similarity Index. Overall, the average agreement on these summary statistics is <10%<10\% for the cosmologies at the centre of the simulation grid, and degrades slightly on grid edges. Finally, we perform a mock cosmological parameter estimation using the emulator and the original simulation set. We find good agreement in these constraints, for both likelihood and likelihood-free approaches. The emulator is available at https://tfhub.dev/cosmo-group-ethz/models/kids-cgan/1.Comment: 38 pages, 17 figures, 2 tables. Link to software: https://tfhub.dev/cosmo-group-ethz/models/kids-cgan/

    Translation and validation of the Pharmacy Services Questionnaire (PSQ) in a Chinese population

    No full text
    BackgroundThe Pharmacy Services Questionnaire (PSQ) was developed to measure patient satisfaction with pharmaceutical care. However, it has not been translated into Cantonese-Chinese and validated in the Hong Kong population. To develop and validate a Cantonese-Chinese-translated PSQ among native Chinese patients who have used pharmacy services at community pharmacies in Hong Kong.MethodsThe PSQ was developed and translated into Cantonese-Chinese using iterative forward-backwards translation. Subjects were recruited by convenience sampling at three community pharmacies. Internal consistency, construct validity, discriminant validity, known-group comparison and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) were performed to confirm that the Cantonese-Chinese-translated PSQ is a valid measure of its intended constructs. Qualitative think-aloud interviews were carried out to test for comprehension and content validity. The subjects' views and interpretation of each questionnaire item were also explored to determine the relevance, comprehensiveness, and adequacy of the response options.ResultsA total of 236 adult subjects were recruited to complete the Cantonese-Chinese PSQ and the Chinese 5-Level EuroQol 5-Dimension (EQ-5D-5L HK) questionnaire. Additionally, think-aloud interviews were carried out with 15 subjects. Most subjects were able to understand and interpret the Cantonese-Chinese PSQ with relative ease. The internal consistency of Cantonese-Chinese PSQ was excellent (Cronbach's α > 0.96) for the full-scale, Friendly explanation (FE) subscale and Managing therapy (MT) subscale. CFA confirmed the hypothesised two-factor structure of the Cantonese-Chinese PSQ. Individuals with higher education levels showed statistically significantly higher satisfaction levels in the overall PSQ score and MT scale score compared to those with lower levels of education. Additionally, there was no statistically significant correlation between the Cantonese-Chinese PSQ and EQ-5D-5L HK scores, demonstrating discriminant validity.ConclusionThe Cantonese-Chinese translation of the PSQ is a validated, reliable, and semantically equivalent instrument used to assess satisfaction towards services provided by community pharmacies

    Table_3_The clinical utility of Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing for direct bacterial identification in normally sterile body fluids.xlsx

    No full text
    The prolonged incubation period of traditional culture methods leads to a delay in diagnosing invasive infections. Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing (Nanopore 16S) offers a potential rapid diagnostic approach for directly identifying bacteria in infected body fluids. To evaluate the clinical utility of Nanopore 16S, we conducted a study involving the collection and sequencing of 128 monomicrobial samples, 65 polymicrobial samples, and 20 culture-negative body fluids. To minimize classification bias, taxonomic classification was performed using 3 analysis pipelines: Epi2me, Emu, and NanoCLUST. The result was compared to the culture references. The limit of detection of Nanopore 16S was also determined using simulated bacteremic blood samples. Among the three classifiers, Emu demonstrated the highest concordance with the culture results. It correctly identified the taxon of 125 (97.7%) of the 128 monomicrobial samples, compared to 109 (85.2%) for Epi2me and 102 (79.7%) for NanoCLUST. For the 230 cultured species in the 65 polymicrobial samples, Emu correctly identified 188 (81.7%) cultured species, compared to 174 (75.7%) for Epi2me and 125 (54.3%) for NanoCLUST. Through ROC analysis on the monomicrobial samples, we determined a threshold of relative abundance at 0.058 for distinguishing potential pathogens from background in Nanopore 16S. Applying this threshold resulted in the identification of 107 (83.6%), 117 (91.4%), and 114 (91.2%) correctly detected samples for Epi2me, Emu, and NanoCLUST, respectively, in the monomicrobial samples. Nanopore 16S coupled with Epi2me could provide preliminary results within 6 h. However, the ROC analysis of polymicrobial samples exhibited a random-like performance, making it difficult to establish a threshold. The overall limit of detection for Nanopore 16S was found to be about 90 CFU/ml.</p

    Table_1_The clinical utility of Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing for direct bacterial identification in normally sterile body fluids.XLSX

    No full text
    The prolonged incubation period of traditional culture methods leads to a delay in diagnosing invasive infections. Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing (Nanopore 16S) offers a potential rapid diagnostic approach for directly identifying bacteria in infected body fluids. To evaluate the clinical utility of Nanopore 16S, we conducted a study involving the collection and sequencing of 128 monomicrobial samples, 65 polymicrobial samples, and 20 culture-negative body fluids. To minimize classification bias, taxonomic classification was performed using 3 analysis pipelines: Epi2me, Emu, and NanoCLUST. The result was compared to the culture references. The limit of detection of Nanopore 16S was also determined using simulated bacteremic blood samples. Among the three classifiers, Emu demonstrated the highest concordance with the culture results. It correctly identified the taxon of 125 (97.7%) of the 128 monomicrobial samples, compared to 109 (85.2%) for Epi2me and 102 (79.7%) for NanoCLUST. For the 230 cultured species in the 65 polymicrobial samples, Emu correctly identified 188 (81.7%) cultured species, compared to 174 (75.7%) for Epi2me and 125 (54.3%) for NanoCLUST. Through ROC analysis on the monomicrobial samples, we determined a threshold of relative abundance at 0.058 for distinguishing potential pathogens from background in Nanopore 16S. Applying this threshold resulted in the identification of 107 (83.6%), 117 (91.4%), and 114 (91.2%) correctly detected samples for Epi2me, Emu, and NanoCLUST, respectively, in the monomicrobial samples. Nanopore 16S coupled with Epi2me could provide preliminary results within 6 h. However, the ROC analysis of polymicrobial samples exhibited a random-like performance, making it difficult to establish a threshold. The overall limit of detection for Nanopore 16S was found to be about 90 CFU/ml.</p

    Table_7_The clinical utility of Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing for direct bacterial identification in normally sterile body fluids.XLSX

    No full text
    The prolonged incubation period of traditional culture methods leads to a delay in diagnosing invasive infections. Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing (Nanopore 16S) offers a potential rapid diagnostic approach for directly identifying bacteria in infected body fluids. To evaluate the clinical utility of Nanopore 16S, we conducted a study involving the collection and sequencing of 128 monomicrobial samples, 65 polymicrobial samples, and 20 culture-negative body fluids. To minimize classification bias, taxonomic classification was performed using 3 analysis pipelines: Epi2me, Emu, and NanoCLUST. The result was compared to the culture references. The limit of detection of Nanopore 16S was also determined using simulated bacteremic blood samples. Among the three classifiers, Emu demonstrated the highest concordance with the culture results. It correctly identified the taxon of 125 (97.7%) of the 128 monomicrobial samples, compared to 109 (85.2%) for Epi2me and 102 (79.7%) for NanoCLUST. For the 230 cultured species in the 65 polymicrobial samples, Emu correctly identified 188 (81.7%) cultured species, compared to 174 (75.7%) for Epi2me and 125 (54.3%) for NanoCLUST. Through ROC analysis on the monomicrobial samples, we determined a threshold of relative abundance at 0.058 for distinguishing potential pathogens from background in Nanopore 16S. Applying this threshold resulted in the identification of 107 (83.6%), 117 (91.4%), and 114 (91.2%) correctly detected samples for Epi2me, Emu, and NanoCLUST, respectively, in the monomicrobial samples. Nanopore 16S coupled with Epi2me could provide preliminary results within 6 h. However, the ROC analysis of polymicrobial samples exhibited a random-like performance, making it difficult to establish a threshold. The overall limit of detection for Nanopore 16S was found to be about 90 CFU/ml.</p

    Table_4_The clinical utility of Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing for direct bacterial identification in normally sterile body fluids.xlsx

    No full text
    The prolonged incubation period of traditional culture methods leads to a delay in diagnosing invasive infections. Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing (Nanopore 16S) offers a potential rapid diagnostic approach for directly identifying bacteria in infected body fluids. To evaluate the clinical utility of Nanopore 16S, we conducted a study involving the collection and sequencing of 128 monomicrobial samples, 65 polymicrobial samples, and 20 culture-negative body fluids. To minimize classification bias, taxonomic classification was performed using 3 analysis pipelines: Epi2me, Emu, and NanoCLUST. The result was compared to the culture references. The limit of detection of Nanopore 16S was also determined using simulated bacteremic blood samples. Among the three classifiers, Emu demonstrated the highest concordance with the culture results. It correctly identified the taxon of 125 (97.7%) of the 128 monomicrobial samples, compared to 109 (85.2%) for Epi2me and 102 (79.7%) for NanoCLUST. For the 230 cultured species in the 65 polymicrobial samples, Emu correctly identified 188 (81.7%) cultured species, compared to 174 (75.7%) for Epi2me and 125 (54.3%) for NanoCLUST. Through ROC analysis on the monomicrobial samples, we determined a threshold of relative abundance at 0.058 for distinguishing potential pathogens from background in Nanopore 16S. Applying this threshold resulted in the identification of 107 (83.6%), 117 (91.4%), and 114 (91.2%) correctly detected samples for Epi2me, Emu, and NanoCLUST, respectively, in the monomicrobial samples. Nanopore 16S coupled with Epi2me could provide preliminary results within 6 h. However, the ROC analysis of polymicrobial samples exhibited a random-like performance, making it difficult to establish a threshold. The overall limit of detection for Nanopore 16S was found to be about 90 CFU/ml.</p

    Table_6_The clinical utility of Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing for direct bacterial identification in normally sterile body fluids.XLSX

    No full text
    The prolonged incubation period of traditional culture methods leads to a delay in diagnosing invasive infections. Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing (Nanopore 16S) offers a potential rapid diagnostic approach for directly identifying bacteria in infected body fluids. To evaluate the clinical utility of Nanopore 16S, we conducted a study involving the collection and sequencing of 128 monomicrobial samples, 65 polymicrobial samples, and 20 culture-negative body fluids. To minimize classification bias, taxonomic classification was performed using 3 analysis pipelines: Epi2me, Emu, and NanoCLUST. The result was compared to the culture references. The limit of detection of Nanopore 16S was also determined using simulated bacteremic blood samples. Among the three classifiers, Emu demonstrated the highest concordance with the culture results. It correctly identified the taxon of 125 (97.7%) of the 128 monomicrobial samples, compared to 109 (85.2%) for Epi2me and 102 (79.7%) for NanoCLUST. For the 230 cultured species in the 65 polymicrobial samples, Emu correctly identified 188 (81.7%) cultured species, compared to 174 (75.7%) for Epi2me and 125 (54.3%) for NanoCLUST. Through ROC analysis on the monomicrobial samples, we determined a threshold of relative abundance at 0.058 for distinguishing potential pathogens from background in Nanopore 16S. Applying this threshold resulted in the identification of 107 (83.6%), 117 (91.4%), and 114 (91.2%) correctly detected samples for Epi2me, Emu, and NanoCLUST, respectively, in the monomicrobial samples. Nanopore 16S coupled with Epi2me could provide preliminary results within 6 h. However, the ROC analysis of polymicrobial samples exhibited a random-like performance, making it difficult to establish a threshold. The overall limit of detection for Nanopore 16S was found to be about 90 CFU/ml.</p

    Table_5_The clinical utility of Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing for direct bacterial identification in normally sterile body fluids.XLSX

    No full text
    The prolonged incubation period of traditional culture methods leads to a delay in diagnosing invasive infections. Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing (Nanopore 16S) offers a potential rapid diagnostic approach for directly identifying bacteria in infected body fluids. To evaluate the clinical utility of Nanopore 16S, we conducted a study involving the collection and sequencing of 128 monomicrobial samples, 65 polymicrobial samples, and 20 culture-negative body fluids. To minimize classification bias, taxonomic classification was performed using 3 analysis pipelines: Epi2me, Emu, and NanoCLUST. The result was compared to the culture references. The limit of detection of Nanopore 16S was also determined using simulated bacteremic blood samples. Among the three classifiers, Emu demonstrated the highest concordance with the culture results. It correctly identified the taxon of 125 (97.7%) of the 128 monomicrobial samples, compared to 109 (85.2%) for Epi2me and 102 (79.7%) for NanoCLUST. For the 230 cultured species in the 65 polymicrobial samples, Emu correctly identified 188 (81.7%) cultured species, compared to 174 (75.7%) for Epi2me and 125 (54.3%) for NanoCLUST. Through ROC analysis on the monomicrobial samples, we determined a threshold of relative abundance at 0.058 for distinguishing potential pathogens from background in Nanopore 16S. Applying this threshold resulted in the identification of 107 (83.6%), 117 (91.4%), and 114 (91.2%) correctly detected samples for Epi2me, Emu, and NanoCLUST, respectively, in the monomicrobial samples. Nanopore 16S coupled with Epi2me could provide preliminary results within 6 h. However, the ROC analysis of polymicrobial samples exhibited a random-like performance, making it difficult to establish a threshold. The overall limit of detection for Nanopore 16S was found to be about 90 CFU/ml.</p

    Table_2_The clinical utility of Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing for direct bacterial identification in normally sterile body fluids.xlsx

    No full text
    The prolonged incubation period of traditional culture methods leads to a delay in diagnosing invasive infections. Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing (Nanopore 16S) offers a potential rapid diagnostic approach for directly identifying bacteria in infected body fluids. To evaluate the clinical utility of Nanopore 16S, we conducted a study involving the collection and sequencing of 128 monomicrobial samples, 65 polymicrobial samples, and 20 culture-negative body fluids. To minimize classification bias, taxonomic classification was performed using 3 analysis pipelines: Epi2me, Emu, and NanoCLUST. The result was compared to the culture references. The limit of detection of Nanopore 16S was also determined using simulated bacteremic blood samples. Among the three classifiers, Emu demonstrated the highest concordance with the culture results. It correctly identified the taxon of 125 (97.7%) of the 128 monomicrobial samples, compared to 109 (85.2%) for Epi2me and 102 (79.7%) for NanoCLUST. For the 230 cultured species in the 65 polymicrobial samples, Emu correctly identified 188 (81.7%) cultured species, compared to 174 (75.7%) for Epi2me and 125 (54.3%) for NanoCLUST. Through ROC analysis on the monomicrobial samples, we determined a threshold of relative abundance at 0.058 for distinguishing potential pathogens from background in Nanopore 16S. Applying this threshold resulted in the identification of 107 (83.6%), 117 (91.4%), and 114 (91.2%) correctly detected samples for Epi2me, Emu, and NanoCLUST, respectively, in the monomicrobial samples. Nanopore 16S coupled with Epi2me could provide preliminary results within 6 h. However, the ROC analysis of polymicrobial samples exhibited a random-like performance, making it difficult to establish a threshold. The overall limit of detection for Nanopore 16S was found to be about 90 CFU/ml.</p
    corecore