To send 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 sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
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 sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent 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.
Astrophysics Telescope for Large Area Spectroscopy Probe is a concept for a National Aeronautics and Space Administration probe-class space mission that will achieve ground-breaking science in the fields of galaxy evolution, cosmology, Milky Way, and the Solar System. It is the follow-up space mission to Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope (WFIRST), boosting its scientific return by obtaining deep 1–4 μm slit spectroscopy for ∼70% of all galaxies imaged by the ∼2 000 deg2 WFIRST High Latitude Survey at z > 0.5. Astrophysics Telescope for Large Area Spectroscopy will measure accurate and precise redshifts for ∼200 M galaxies out to z < 7, and deliver spectra that enable a wide range of diagnostic studies of the physical properties of galaxies over most of cosmic history. Astrophysics Telescope for Large Area Spectroscopy Probe and WFIRST together will produce a 3D map of the Universe over 2 000 deg2, the definitive data sets for studying galaxy evolution, probing dark matter, dark energy and modifications of General Relativity, and quantifying the 3D structure and stellar content of the Milky Way. Astrophysics Telescope for Large Area Spectroscopy Probe science spans four broad categories: (1) Revolutionising galaxy evolution studies by tracing the relation between galaxies and dark matter from galaxy groups to cosmic voids and filaments, from the epoch of reionisation through the peak era of galaxy assembly; (2) Opening a new window into the dark Universe by weighing the dark matter filaments using 3D weak lensing with spectroscopic redshifts, and obtaining definitive measurements of dark energy and modification of General Relativity using galaxy clustering; (3) Probing the Milky Way’s dust-enshrouded regions, reaching the far side of our Galaxy; and (4) Exploring the formation history of the outer Solar System by characterising Kuiper Belt Objects. Astrophysics Telescope for Large Area Spectroscopy Probe is a 1.5 m telescope with a field of view of 0.4 deg2, and uses digital micro-mirror devices as slit selectors. It has a spectroscopic resolution of R = 1 000, and a wavelength range of 1–4 μm. The lack of slit spectroscopy from space over a wide field of view is the obvious gap in current and planned future space missions; Astrophysics Telescope for Large Area Spectroscopy fills this big gap with an unprecedented spectroscopic capability based on digital micro-mirror devices (with an estimated spectroscopic multiplex factor greater than 5 000). Astrophysics Telescope for Large Area Spectroscopy is designed to fit within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration probe-class space mission cost envelope; it has a single instrument, a telescope aperture that allows for a lighter launch vehicle, and mature technology (we have identified a path for digital micro-mirror devices to reach Technology Readiness Level 6 within 2 yr). Astrophysics Telescope for Large Area Spectroscopy Probe will lead to transformative science over the entire range of astrophysics: from galaxy evolution to the dark Universe, from Solar System objects to the dusty regions of the Milky Way.
The purpose of this paper is to provide further understanding into the structure of the sequential allocation (“stochastic multi-armed bandit”) problem by establishing probability one finite horizon bounds and convergence rates for the sample regret associated with two simple classes of allocation policies. For any slowly increasing function g, subject to mild regularity constraints, we construct two policies (the g-Forcing, and the g-Inflated Sample Mean) that achieve a measure of regret of order O(g(n)) almost surely as n → ∞, bound from above and below. Additionally, almost sure upper and lower bounds on the remainder term are established. In the constructions herein, the function g effectively controls the “exploration” of the classical “exploration/exploitation” tradeoff.
During the past decade, solar power has experienced transformative price declines, enabling it to grow to supply 1% of U.S. and world electricity. Addressing grid integration challenges, increasing grid flexibility, and further reducing cost will enable even greater potential for solar as an electricity source.
During the past decade, solar power has experienced transformative price declines, enabling it to become a viable electricity source that is supplying 1% of U.S. and world electricity. Further cost reductions are expected to enable substantially greater solar deployment, and new Department of Energy cost targets for utility-scale photovoltaics (PV) and concentrating solar thermal power are $0.03/kW h and $0.05/kW h by 2030, respectively. However, cost reductions are no longer the only significant challenge for PV—addressing grid integration challenges and increasing grid flexibility are critical as the penetration of PV electricity on the grid increases. The development of low cost energy storage is particularly synergistic with low cost PV, as cost declines in each technology are expected to support greater market opportunities for the other.
Palmer amaranth control has become a major challenge for multiple cropping systems across the southeastern and midwestern United States. Despite extensive research on herbicide-resistance evolution, little research has been done exploring how Palmer amaranth might also be evolving other adaptive traits in response to different selection forces present in agricultural fields and the enrichment of soils with nutrients such as nitrogen. The objective of the present study was to determine whether Palmer amaranth populations have evolved different morphology and growth patterns in response to glyphosate use and fertilization history. Ten Palmer amaranth populations, including glyphosate-resistant (GR) and glyphosate-susceptible (GS) populations, were collected from different cropping systems with histories of high and low nitrogen fertilization in the states of Florida and Georgia. All populations were grown in pots filled with soil fertilized with either 0 or 40 kgNha−1, and their response to nitrogen was compared for morphological, growth, and nutrient-use traits. Populations differed in how they modified their morphology and growth in response to N, with major differences in traits such as foliar area, branch production, leaf shape, and canopy architecture. Populations with high nitrogen-fertilization histories had higher (>43%) nutrient-use efficiency (NUE) than populations with low nitrogen-fertilization histories. Similarly, GR populations have evolved higher NUE (>47%) and changed canopy architecture more than GS populations in response to nitrogen fertilization. The results of the present study highlight the importance of paying more attention to adaptations to cultural practices that might increase weediness and how genetic changes in traits involved in morphology and metabolism might favor compensatory mechanisms increasing the fitness of the population carrying herbicide-resistant traits.
Palmer amaranth’s ability to evolve resistance to different herbicides has been studied extensively, but there is little information about how this weed species might be evolving other life-history traits that could potentially make it more aggressive and difficult to control. We characterized growth and morphological variation among 10 Palmer amaranth populations collected in Florida and Georgia from fields with different cropping histories, ranging from continuous short-statured crops (vegetables and peanut) to tall crops (corn and cotton) and from intensive herbicide use history to organic production. Palmer amaranth populations differed in multiple traits such as fresh and dry weight, days to flowering, plant height, and leaf and canopy shape. Differences between populations for these traits ranged from 36% up to 87%. Although glyphosate-resistant (GR) populations collected from cropping systems including GR crops exhibited higher values of the aforementioned variables than glyphosate-susceptible (GS) populations, variation in traits was not explained by glyphosate resistance or distance between populations. Cropping system components such as crop rotation and crop canopy structure better explained the differences among populations. The higher growth of GR populations compared with GS populations was likely the result of multiple selection forces present in the cropping systems in which they grow rather than a pleiotropic effect of the glyphosate resistance trait. Results suggest that Palmer amaranth can evolve life-history traits increasing its growth and reproduction potential in cropping systems, which explains its rapid spread throughout the United States. Furthermore, our findings highlight the need to consider the evolutionary consequences of crop rotation structure and the use of more competitive crops, which might promote the selection of more aggressive biotypes in weed species with high genetic variability.
From grassroots conflicts to great power relations, this book explores some of the key concepts, methodologies, and dilemmas of researching Asia-Pacific affairs. The book deals with key questions about the Asia Pacific: Why should we study policy from the "ground up"? What are the human considerations for societies in conflict? Why is regionalism important and how do global powers play a role? Should Asia-Pacific researchers embrace the design-based revolution in the social sciences? Muddy Boots and Smart Suits is for students, scholars, and policymakers in the region looking for a new way to understand local, regional, and global security challenges.
The study of the societies of Asia and the Pacific through Western methods of the humanities and social sciences has always been driven by the dynamics of wealth and power. The European study of Asian and Pacific societies and cultures was central to the colonial enterprise; originally as a fascination with other wealthy and powerful societies, then as part of a Western ideological hegemony determined to demonstrate that the societies of Asia and the Pacific were in decline, in contrast to the Europeans’ own ascendancy (Anderson 1991, 163–64). The study of proud pasts and contemporary societies soon became part of dozens of independence movements across Asia and the Pacific, a vital ingredient of the intellectual emancipation of colonized peoples (Chatterjee 1993). With independence came a Cold War, a desperate zero-sum struggle between capitalism and communism that mandated the need in the rival camps to understand the particular character of the newly independent governments and the societies they ruled in Asia and the Pacific. “Area Studies”, the deep research of Asian and Pacific societies, grounded in extensive fieldwork and advanced proficiency in vernacular languages, was born. Across the Western world, Asia and the Pacific were divided into regions and studied in their own departments. In establishing a national university in 1946, the Australian government mandated that one of four areas of global excellence the new university had to achieve was in Pacific studies (which at the time was intended to include Asian studies) — precisely because of the new and unknown world of international relations that was to be ushered in by the independence of states to Australia's north and east.
The rapid economic ascent of Northeast and then Southeast Asian economies led to renewed attention to Asian societies. Debates arose over the causes of the Asian economic miracle: was it a question of culture, or institutions, or the peculiar legacy of war and colonialism (World Bank 1993; Johnson 1982; Amsden 2001)? These debates drew regional thinkers into the battle lines, as some advocated the catalytic role of distinctive Asian “values” in the stability and success of a lengthening chain of Asian economic success stories (Barr 2005). Others countered that there was in fact nothing distinctive about Asia's economic success; the stunning growth rates were a consequence of “perspiration” (meaning large infusions of investment and low-cost labour) rather than “inspiration” (meaning superior cultural values or institutional design) (Krugman 1994).
Ours is a hyper-vigilant age. Our journey through life is cushioned and buffeted by a constant stream of warnings, prohibitions and exhortations intended to make us safer. Every accident, attack, fatal disease, or tragedy is followed by a flurry of post-mortems about what went wrong and recommendations about what should be done to make sure such an event cannot happen again or at least will be much more unlikely. We refuse to be comforted by the statistics that tell us we are, on average, leading longer, healthier lives, that crime and accident rates are falling, or that extremist attacks remain very rare, and fewer and fewer of our fellow citizens can remember the last time our countries were involved in a prolonged fight to the death between powerful countries. Meanwhile, our governments believe their survival depends on reassuring us that they are doing everything they can to ensure our individual, community, and national security. And a whole ecology of research institutions — university centres, think tanks, consultants, intelligence agencies — thrive on the endless demand by governments and their citizens for reassuring research into the latest causes of their anxieties.
It is no coincidence that our hyper-vigilant age is also an age of hyper-research and hyper-information. Our society has more capacity to investigate itself and its preoccupations, and to share the results of those investigations, than ever before. Each advance in our safety and well-being yields to new anxieties and new subjects for research and risk reduction. Research into security is a major industry, an academic-policy complex that has taken its place alongside the military-industrial complex. The symbiotic relationship between security policy and security research has been much noted and discussed, though it would seem with little impact on either the research or the policymaking (Herman and O'Sullivan 1989). It is worth looking at this relationship anew, and from a different angle, to consider how security policy shapes security research and vice versa, and to make a couple of comparisons: how the research-policy nexus in the security realm compares to the research-policy nexus in the prosperity realm, and how these mutual relationships between research and policy differ from country to country. On the basis of these two brief comparative excursions, I conclude by suggesting a new, programmatic and potentially more productive relationship between research and policy in the security realm.