Refine
Year of publication
Language
- English (210)
Has Fulltext
- yes (210)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (210)
Keywords
- BESIII (14)
- Branching fraction (9)
- e +-e − Experiments (9)
- Hadronic decays (5)
- Particle and Resonance Production (5)
- Branching fractions (4)
- Lepton colliders (4)
- Quarkonium (4)
- Charm Physics (3)
- Charmed mesons (3)
Institute
Using a sample of 106 million 𝜓(3686) decays, 𝜓(3686)→𝛾𝜒𝑐𝐽(𝐽=0,1,2) and 𝜓(3686)→𝛾𝜒𝑐𝐽,𝜒𝑐𝐽→𝛾𝐽/𝜓(𝐽=1,2) events are utilized to study inclusive 𝜒𝑐𝐽→anything, 𝜒𝑐𝐽→hadrons, and 𝐽/𝜓→anything distributions, including distributions of the number of charged tracks, electromagnetic calorimeter showers, and 𝜋0s, and to compare them with distributions obtained from the BESIII Monte Carlo simulation. Information from each Monte Carlo simulated decay event is used to construct matrices connecting the detected distributions to the input predetection “produced” distributions. Assuming these matrices also apply to data, they are used to predict the analogous produced distributions of the decay events. Using these, the charged particle multiplicities are compared with results from MARK I. Further, comparison of the distributions of the number of photons in data with those in Monte Carlo simulation indicates that G-parity conservation should be taken into consideration in the simulation.
Using 10.1 × 109 J/ψ events produced by the Beijing Electron Positron Collider (BEPCII) at a center-of-mass energy √s = 3.097 GeV and collected with the BESIII detector, we present a search for the rare semi-leptonic decay J/ψ → D−e+νe + c.c. No excess of signal above background is observed, and an upper limit on the branching fraction ℬ(J/ψ → D−e+νe + c. c.) < 7.1 × 10−8 is obtained at 90% confidence level. This is an improvement of more than two orders of magnitude over the previous best limit.
Using 10.1 × 109 J/ψ events produced by the Beijing Electron Positron Collider (BEPCII) at a center-of-mass energy √s = 3.097 GeV and collected with the BESIII detector, we present a search for the rare semi-leptonic decay J/ψ → D−e+νe + c.c. No excess of signal above background is observed, and an upper limit on the branching fraction B(J/ψ → D−e +νe + c.c.) < 7.1 × 10−8 is obtained at 90% confidence level. This is an improvement of more than two orders of magnitude over the previous best limit.
Sedimentary charcoal records are widely used to reconstruct regional changes in fire regimes through time in the geological past. Existing global compilations are not geographically comprehensive and do not provide consistent metadata for all sites. Furthermore, the age models provided for these records are not harmonised and many are based on older calibrations of the radiocarbon ages. These issues limit the use of existing compilations for research into past fire regimes. Here, we present an expanded database of charcoal records, accompanied by new age models based on recalibration of radiocarbon ages using IntCal20 and Bayesian age-modelling software. We document the structure and contents of the database, the construction of the age models, and the quality control measures applied. We also record the expansion of geographical coverage relative to previous charcoal compilations and the expansion of metadata that can be used to inform analyses. This first version of the Reading Palaeofire Database contains 1676 records (entities) from 1480 sites worldwide. The database (RPDv1b – Harrison et al., 2021) is available at https://doi.org/10.17864/1947.000345.
Background: Effective inhibition of plasma kallikrein may have significant benefits for patients with hereditary angioedema due to deficiency of C1 inhibitor (C1‐INH‐HAE) by reducing the frequency of angioedema attacks. Avoralstat is a small molecule inhibitor of plasma kallikrein. This study (OPuS‐2) evaluated the efficacy and safety of prophylactic avoralstat 300 or 500 mg compared with placebo.
Methods: OPuS‐2 was a Phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group study. Subjects were administered avoralstat 300 mg, avoralstat 500 mg, or placebo orally 3 times per day for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the angioedema attack rate based on adjudicator‐confirmed attacks.
Results: A total of 110 subjects were randomized and dosed. The least squares (LS) mean attack rates per week were 0.589, 0.675, and 0.593 for subjects receiving avoralstat 500 mg, avoralstat 300 mg, and placebo, respectively. Overall, 1 subject in each of the avoralstat groups and no subjects in the placebo group were attack‐free during the 84‐day treatment period. The LS mean duration of all confirmed attacks was 25.4, 29.4, and 31.4 hours for the avoralstat 500 mg, avoralstat 300 mg, and placebo groups, respectively. Using the Angioedema Quality of Life Questionnaire (AE‐QoL), improved QoL was observed for the avoralstat 500 mg group compared with placebo. Avoralstat was generally safe and well tolerated.
Conclusions: Although this study did not demonstrate efficacy of avoralstat in preventing angioedema attacks in C1‐INH‐HAE, it provided evidence of shortened angioedema episodes and improved QoL in the avoralstat 500 mg treatment group compared with placebo.
In this study, we use simulations from seven global vegetation models to provide the first multi‐model estimate of fire impacts on global tree cover and the carbon cycle under current climate and anthropogenic land use conditions, averaged for the years 2001–2012. Fire globally reduces the tree covered area and vegetation carbon storage by 10%. Regionally, the effects are much stronger, up to 20% for certain latitudinal bands, and 17% in savanna regions. Global fire effects on total carbon storage and carbon turnover times are lower with the effect on gross primary productivity (GPP) close to 0. We find the strongest impacts of fire in savanna regions. Climatic conditions in regions with the highest burned area differ from regions with highest absolute fire impact, which are characterized by higher precipitation. Our estimates of fire‐induced vegetation change are lower than previous studies. We attribute these differences to different definitions of vegetation change and effects of anthropogenic land use, which were not considered in previous studies and decreases the impact of fire on tree cover. Accounting for fires significantly improves the spatial patterns of simulated tree cover, which demonstrates the need to represent fire in dynamic vegetation models. Based upon comparisons between models and observations, process understanding and representation in models, we assess a higher confidence in the fire impact on tree cover and vegetation carbon compared to GPP, total carbon storage and turnover times. We have higher confidence in the spatial patterns compared to the global totals of the simulated fire impact. As we used an ensemble of state‐of‐the‐art fire models, including effects of land use and the ensemble median or mean compares better to observational datasets than any individual model, we consider the here presented results to be the current best estimate of global fire effects on ecosystems.
The important role of fire in regulating vegetation community composition and contributions to emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols make it a critical component of dynamic global vegetation models and Earth system models. Over 2 decades of development, a wide variety of model structures and mechanisms have been designed and incorporated into global fire models, which have been linked to different vegetation models. However, there has not yet been a systematic examination of how these different strategies contribute to model performance. Here we describe the structure of the first phase of the Fire Model Intercomparison Project (FireMIP), which for the first time seeks to systematically compare a number of models. By combining a standardized set of input data and model experiments with a rigorous comparison of model outputs to each other and to observations, we will improve the understanding of what drives vegetation fire, how it can best be simulated, and what new or improved observational data could allow better constraints on model behavior. In this paper, we introduce the fire models used in the first phase of FireMIP, the simulation protocols applied, and the benchmarking system used to evaluate the models. We have also created supplementary tables that describe, in thorough mathematical detail, the structure of each model.
The Fire Modeling Intercomparison Project (FireMIP), phase 1: experimental and analytical protocols
(2016)
The important role of fire in regulating vegetation community composition and contributions to emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols make it a critical component of dynamic global vegetation models and Earth system models. Over two decades of development, a wide variety of model structures and mechanisms have been designed and incorporated into global fire models, which have been linked to different vegetation models. However, there has not yet been a systematic examination of how these different strategies contribute to model performance. Here we describe the structure of the first phase of the Fire Model Intercomparison Project (FireMIP), which for the first time seeks to systematically compare a number of models. By combining a standardized set of input data and model experiments with a rigorous comparison of model outputs to each other and to observations, we will improve the understanding of what drives vegetation fire, how it can best be simulated, and what new or improved observational data could allow better constraints on model behavior. Here we introduce the fire models used in the first phase of FireMIP, the simulation protocols applied, and the benchmarking system used to evaluate the models. The works published in this journal are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. This license does not affect the Crown copy-right work, which is re-usable under the Open Government Licence (OGL). The Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License and the OGL are interoperable and do not conflict with, reduce, or limit each other.
Biomass burning impacts vegetation dynamics, biogeochemical cycling, atmospheric chemistry, and climate, with sometimes deleterious socio-economic impacts. Under future climate projections it is often expected that the risk of wildfires will increase. Our ability to predict the magnitude and geographic pattern of future fire impacts rests on our ability to model fire regimes, using either well-founded empirical relationships or process-based models with good predictive skill. While a large variety of models exist today, it is still unclear which type of model or degree of complexity is required to model fire adequately at regional to global scales. This is the central question underpinning the creation of the Fire Model Intercomparison Project (FireMIP), an international initiative to compare and evaluate existing global fire models against benchmark data sets for present-day and historical conditions. In this paper we review how fires have been represented in fire-enabled dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) and give an overview of the current state of the art in fire-regime modelling. We indicate which challenges still remain in global fire modelling and stress the need for a comprehensive model evaluation and outline what lessons may be learned from FireMIP.
Biomass burning impacts vegetation dynamics, biogeochemical cycling, atmospheric chemistry, and climate, with sometimes deleterious socio-economic impacts. Under future climate projections it is often expected that the risk of wildfires will increase. Our ability to predict the magnitude and geographic pattern of future fire impacts rests on our ability to model fire regimes, either using well-founded empirical relationships or process-based models with good predictive skill. A large variety of models exist today and it is still unclear which type of model or degree of complexity is required to model fire adequately at regional to global scales. This is the central question underpinning the creation of the Fire Model Intercomparison Project - FireMIP, an international project to compare and evaluate existing global fire models against benchmark data sets for present-day and historical conditions. In this paper we summarise the current state-of-the-art in fire regime modelling and model evaluation, and outline what lessons may be learned from FireMIP.