| 1. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2010
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 2. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 3. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2010
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 4. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2010
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2010
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
The ATLAS Simulation Infrastructure
- 2010
-
In: European Physical Journal C. Particles and Fields. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1434-6044 .- 1434-6052. ; 70:3, s. 823-874
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The simulation software for the ATLAS Experiment at the Large Hadron Collider is being used for large-scale production of events on the LHC Computing Grid. This simulation requires many components, from the generators that simulate particle collisions, through packages simulating the response of the various detectors and triggers. All of these components come together under the ATLAS simulation infrastructure. In this paper, that infrastructure is discussed, including that supporting the detector description, interfacing the event generation, and combining the GEANT4 simulation of the response of the individual detectors. Also described are the tools allowing the software validation, performance testing, and the validation of the simulated output against known physics processes.
|
|
| 10. |
- Kanai, M, et al.
(author)
-
- 2023
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 11. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(author)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
In: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.
|
|
| 12. |
|
|
| 13. |
- Wang, Zhaoming, et al.
(author)
-
Imputation and subset-based association analysis across different cancer types identifies multiple independent risk loci in the TERT-CLPTM1L region on chromosome 5p15.33
- 2014
-
In: Human Molecular Genetics. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0964-6906 .- 1460-2083. ; 23:24, s. 6616-6633
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have mapped risk alleles for at least 10 distinct cancers to a small region of 63 000 bp on chromosome 5p15.33. This region harbors the TERT and CLPTM1L genes; the former encodes the catalytic subunit of telomerase reverse transcriptase and the latter may play a role in apoptosis. To investigate further the genetic architecture of common susceptibility alleles in this region, we conducted an agnostic subset-based meta-analysis (association analysis based on subsets) across six distinct cancers in 34 248 cases and 45 036 controls. Based on sequential conditional analysis, we identified as many as six independent risk loci marked by common single-nucleotide polymorphisms: five in the TERT gene (Region 1: rs7726159, P = 2.10 × 10(-39); Region 3: rs2853677, P = 3.30 × 10(-36) and PConditional = 2.36 × 10(-8); Region 4: rs2736098, P = 3.87 × 10(-12) and PConditional = 5.19 × 10(-6), Region 5: rs13172201, P = 0.041 and PConditional = 2.04 × 10(-6); and Region 6: rs10069690, P = 7.49 × 10(-15) and PConditional = 5.35 × 10(-7)) and one in the neighboring CLPTM1L gene (Region 2: rs451360; P = 1.90 × 10(-18) and PConditional = 7.06 × 10(-16)). Between three and five cancers mapped to each independent locus with both risk-enhancing and protective effects. Allele-specific effects on DNA methylation were seen for a subset of risk loci, indicating that methylation and subsequent effects on gene expression may contribute to the biology of risk variants on 5p15.33. Our results provide strong support for extensive pleiotropy across this region of 5p15.33, to an extent not previously observed in other cancer susceptibility loci.
|
|
| 14. |
|
|
| 15. |
- Abraham, Roshan Mammen, et al.
(author)
-
Tau neutrinos in the next decade : from GeV to EeV
- 2022
-
In: Journal of Physics G. - : Institute of Physics Publishing (IOPP). - 0954-3899 .- 1361-6471. ; 49:11
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Tau neutrinos are the least studied particle in the standard model. This whitepaper discusses the current and expected upcoming status of tau neutrino physics with attention to the broad experimental and theoretical landscape spanning long-baseline, beam-dump, collider, and astrophysical experiments. This whitepaper was prepared as a part of the NuTau2021 Workshop.
|
|
| 16. |
- Ackermann, Markus, et al.
(author)
-
High-energy and ultra-high-energy neutrinos : A Snowmass white paper
- 2022
-
In: Journal of High Energy Astrophysics. - : Elsevier. - 2214-4048 .- 2214-4056. ; 36, s. 55-110
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Astrophysical neutrinos are excellent probes of astroparticle physics and high-energy physics. With energies far beyond solar, supernovae, atmospheric, and accelerator neutrinos, high-energy and ultrahigh-energy neutrinos probe fundamental physics from the TeV scale to the EeV scale and beyond. They are sensitive to physics both within and beyond the Standard Model through their production mechanisms and in their propagation over cosmological distances. They carry unique information about their extreme non-thermal sources by giving insight into regions that are opaque to electromagnetic radiation. This white paper describes the opportunities astrophysical neutrino observations offer for astrophysics and high-energy physics, today and in coming years.
|
|
| 17. |
|
|
