Decoherence and the Quantum Detection of Classically Undetectable Phenomena

SportSense: Real-Time Detection of NFL Game Events from Twitter

Evolution Of Robust Network Topologies: Emergence Of Central Backbones

Ordinal Boltzmann Machines for Collaborative Filtering

Variation Of The Speed Of Light With Temperature Of The Expanding Universe

One of the nightmare scenarios for modern society is the possibility of a global flu pandemic like the 1918 Spanish influenza which infected about a quarter of the global population and killed as many as 130 million of them. 

An important question for policy makers is how best to limit the spread of such a disease if a new outbreak were to occur. (The Spanish flu was caused by the H1N1 flu virus that was also responsible for the 2009 swine flu outbreak.)

One obvious idea is to close international airports to prevent, or at least dramatically reduce, the movement of potentially infected individuals between countries. But is this the best approach?

Today, Jose Marcelino and Marcus Kaiser at Newcastle University in the UK, provide an answer. They say a better approach is to cut specific flights between airports because it can achieve the same reduction in the spread of the disease with far less drastic action.

These guys used a standard disease-spreading model to simulate the spread of an H1N1-type infection across a network consisting of the world's top 500 airports and the flights between them. The disease started in Mexico City.

They then reran the simulation to see how different strategies could reduce the spread. They found that shutting entire airports can obviously reduce infection. 

But they also studied less obvious strategies such as looking for cities that play an important role in the network and reducing the flights between them by 25 per cent. This turned out to be a much more effective strategy.

They found that shutting entire airports only had a significant effect on spreading if it reduced travel by 95 per cent. By contrast,  they could achieve the same effect by removing just 18 per cent of flights between cities ranked by a network measure called edge betweenness.  

At best shutting entire airports could only cut infections by 18 per cent whereas removing specific flights reduced infections by up to 37 per cent. 

"Selecting highly ranked single connections between cities for cancellation was more effective, resulting in fewer individuals infected with influenza, compared to shutting down whole airports," say Marcelino and Kaiser. This approach has the added benefit that it disrupts far fewer individuals 

Because these guys used a model of the actual global network of airports and flights they were able to identify the specific connections that would need to be targeted. For an infection that starts in Mexico City, the highest ranked routes that would need to be targeted are Sao Paulo to Beijing, Sapporo to New York and Montevideo to Paris.

That seems an eminently sensible suggestion. However, policy makers might want to study this approach in more detail to check that the conclusions still hold if outbreaks occur in other places too. 

Another idea worth checking is to see whether smaller airports could also play an important role in disease spreading.  Marcelino and Kaiser study a network consisting of the top 500 airports but the world is blessed with some 4000 airports in total. 

It's not inconceivable that some of these could play a crucial role in linking different parts of the world in a way that could facilitate disease spreading. 

Ref: http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.3245: Critical Paths In A Metapopulation Model Of H1N1: Efficiently Delaying Influenza Spreading Through Fight Cancellation

In recent years, various companies and labs have developed impressive humanoid robots that walk, shuffle and even run. Some even dance in groups of up to 20, performing sophisticated choreographed routines. 

This kind of synchronisation is no easy task. One way to do it is have one robot as the leader, broadcasting details of its movement and position over a network that the other robots all follow. 

The trouble is that network dynamics are not as predictable as choreographers would like. Small delays of half a second or so are common while some messages can be delayed by several seconds. That's clearly not good enough for a dance routine or any other type of synchronised behaviour.

So the approach preferred by roboticists is to program each robot with the dance routine, synchronise their internal clocks at the start of the performance and then leave them to it. 

The advantage is that If the performance is reasonably short, the chances of the clocks becoming desynchronised can be made small.  The disadvantage is that if the robots become desynchronised--if one falls over, for example--there is no way to regain synchronisation.

So roboticists have been searching for a better form of synchronisation that is more robust to the various trials and tribulations that befall robotic dancers. Today, Patrick Bechon and Jean-Jacques Slotine at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, reveal a new approach based on the biological phenomenon of quorum sensing.

Biologists have long puzzled over the ability of bacteria and social insects to sense not only the presence of compatriots but their number and to synchronise their behaviour.

It turns out that these creatures perform this synchronisation using a process called quorum sensing. This works by constantly releasing signalling molecules into the environment while at the same time measuring the local concentration of these molecules. 

This concentration rises as more creatures join the local population and so is an effective measure of population density. When the concentration rises over some threshold level, it triggers a different behaviour such cell division, pathogen production and nest building.  

Now Bechon and Slotine say a similar approach provides a robust way to synchronise humanoid robots. The ideal approach  to synchronisation is for each robot to have access to every other robot's position. Instead, the quorum sensing approach gives, each robot  access to a global variable such as the average position or average clock time. Each robot can also change this variable because it contributes to the average.

The idea is that if each robot attempts to synchronise with this global average, the swarm as whole should keep good time.

These guys test out their approach with a group of eight NAO robots built by the French robotics company Aldebaran. Each has an internal clock which attempts to synchronise with  a global average time maintained by a central server.

It's important to point out that the server is not acting as a master with the robots as slaves that simply follow its signal. If the connection to the central is lost, the robots simply continue with routine but without centralised synchrony. 

Instead, the central server is more like a a kind of environment that the robots can sense and interact with.

This arrangement has the significant advantage that if one robot falls over it can simply get back up and join in again when it has resynchronised its movements with the group (see video).

This work is part of a broader development in robotics. The advent of relatively cheap humanoid robots from Aldebaran and other companies means that the large-scale sychronisation of humanoid swarms is now possible.

That's interesting because while synchrony allows large numbers of robots to do the same thing at the same time--such as dancing or marching--it also allows large number so robots to do different but related tasks at the same time. 

In other words, synchrony is an enabling technology for large scale co-operation. And that opens the way to an entirely new set of tasks that robots could do--think manufacturing and construction. Perhaps even nest building.

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1205.2952: Synchronization And Quorum Sensing In A Swarm Of Humanoid Robots