Tag Archives: Marco Rolandi

Visualizing nanotechnology data with Seed Media Group and GE (General Electric)

University of Washington (UW) researchers have uploaded a number of nanotechnology infographics on the visualizing.org website, from the UW Division of Design 2010: Nanotechnology Infographics webpage,

There are more than 1/2 dozen of these nanotechnology-themed infographics available on the page. This particular infographic, Nanotechnology:  Size Really is Everything,  has the following credit line,

By Kim Shedrick. Faculty: Karen Cheng, Marco Rolandi. Part of a series of infographics explaining nanotechnology through scale, how it has integrated into society, and what products it is being used in today.

Cheng and Rolandi have been mentioned here before in a Feb. 22, 2012 posting about their University of Washington Design Help Desk and their effort to match up scientists with designers in the interest of producing better science graphics.

I have nothing against better science graphics but I would like to know what information/data is supporting this and their other visualizations. I did resize the graphic to look more closely at the text but there were no references or citations.

Btw, The website handles ‘zooming’ in to see details clumsily. Rather than a click on the zooming tool resulting in a larger image, you are presented with an infographic which is now held within an Adobe PDF reader before you can magnify the image.

For those generally interested in infographics and visualizing date, there’s a lot to choose from on the Visualizing.org website. For those who like to dig a bit deeper, this site is a public relations ploy by General Electric and Seed Media Group. From the About Visualizing.org webpage,

Visualizing.org was created by GE and Seed Media Group to help make data visualization more accessible to the general public; to promote information literacy through the creation, sharing, and discussion of data visualizations; and to provide a unique resource to help simplify complex issues through design.

Seed Media seems to be an outgrowth (pun intended) of SEED Magazine. The magazine, which was founded by Adam Bly when he lived in Montréal, Canada, has always been focused on science and culture.  Headquarters for the magazine were moved to New York and, either at the same time or later, the magazine became a strictly online publication. From the Wikipedia essay (Note: Links have been removed),

Seed (subtitled Science Is Culture; originally Beneath the Surface) is an online science magazine published by Seed Media Group. The magazine looks at big ideas in science, important issues at the intersection of science and society, and the people driving global science culture. Seed was founded in Montreal by Adam Bly and the magazine is now headquartered in New York with bureaus around the world. May/June 2009 (Issue No. 22) was the last print issue. Content continues to be published on the website.

(I first mentioned SEED magazine in a Sept. 18, 2009 posting.) Interestingly, Seed Media which publishes the magazine makes no mention of it (that I could find) on its website. From Seed Media Group’s Learn webpage,

Scientific ThinkingTM

It’s a different way of looking at the world. It’s about using data to uncover patterns and design to confront complexity. It’s about connecting things to reveal systems. It’s about traversing scales and disregarding disciplines, applying neuroscience to economics, math to global health, virology to manufacturing, and genetics to law… It’s about experimenting all the way to understanding. It’s about changing your mind with new evidence – and getting as close to truth as humanly possible.

Getting 7 billion people to think scientifically has never been a small mission. And it has never been more important.

Since 2005, we have offered ideas and stories to help people think scientifically. Now we’re taking the next big step in this journey by creating tools and services to help institutions – companies, governments, and international organizations – do the same. We’re taking our way of seeing and thinking to parliaments, courtrooms, hospitals, construction sites, boardrooms… around the world – to catalyze scientific thinking at scale.

I’m not sure how one would go about trademarking ‘scientific thinking’ as this is  a very commonly used phrase and I’m pretty sure a case could be made that it has been common language for centuries.  This oddity had me going back to the Visualizing.org for their terms and conditions, which are largely unexceptionable,

These are the general terms of use. For terms and conditions regarding the uploading of work, please read the Visualization Submission Agreement.

This Web site is owned by General Electric Company (“GE”) and operated by Seed Media Group, LLC (“Seed”). Throughout the site, the terms “we,” “us” and “our” refer collectively to GE and Seed. We offer this Web site, including all information, tools and services available from this site, to you, the user, conditioned upon your acceptance of all the terms, conditions, policies and notices stated here. Your use of this site constitutes your agreement to these Terms of Use.

When you submit material other than a Visualization, you grant us and our affiliates an unrestricted, nonexclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and fully sublicensable right to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute and display such material throughout the world in any media. You further agree that we are free to use any ideas, concepts, know-how that you or individuals acting on your behalf provide to us. [emphasis mine] You grant us and our affiliates the right to use the name you submit in connection with such material, if we so choose. All personal information provided via this site will be handled in accordance with the site’s online Privacy Policy. You represent and warrant that you own or otherwise control all the rights to the content you post; that the content is accurate; that use of the content you supply does not violate any provision herein and will not cause injury to any person or entity; and that you will indemnify us for all claims resulting from content you supply.

Interesting, non? This has me wondering if it’s possible that  these folks (GE & Seed Media) might decide to use a concept from the visualization without any permission needed. If I understand this rightly, the promise is the visualization won’t be used, all they need is the idea or concept and either company (GE/Seed) or their affiliates can find someone else to illustrate or visualize it.  I find a company (Seed) that’s trying to trademark ‘scientific thinking’ might have some credibility issues regarding their stated terms and conditions for this visualizing.org website.

For the icing on this visualization cake, here’s a video from Visualizing.org’s About page where there is much discussion about the importance of design and visualization of data but not one single scientist is featured,

Science images too busy/ugly? Call the University of Washington’s Design Help Desk

After several days at the AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science) 2012 annual meeting, I can definitely support the design help desk project at the University of Washington (UW). From the Feb. 22, 2012 news item by Hannah Hickey on physorg.com,

A group of University of Washington researchers has launched a unique experiment matching science students with those in design. The new Design Help Desk, similar to a writing help desk, offers scientists a chance to meet with someone who can help them create more effective figures, tables and graphs.

“In modern publications, up to half of the space can be taken up by figures,” said principal investigator Marco Rolandi, a UW assistant professor of materials science and engineering. His group studies materials at the nanometer scale, and much of the data is ultimately contained in microscope images.

“As a new faculty member, I was spending a lot of time teaching my students how to make figures for publications, even though I myself didn’t have any formal training,” Rolandi said.

It was a case of the blind leading the blind, he said. Rolandi sought out collaborators on campus, and eventually funding from the National Science Foundation, to create support that until now didn’t exist – and to study how well it works.

The research project (Design Help Desk) has two principal investigators, Rolandi and Karen Cheng, from Hickey’s Feb. 21, 2012 news release on the University of Washington website,

“We are becoming a more visual culture,” says Karen Cheng, a UW associate professor of design (who also completed a bachelor’s in chemical engineering). Still, most science visuals “could use significant improvement from a visual point of view,” she said. “It’s just not a field where design has been part of the training.”

This hasn’t always been the case. In Galileo’s time, scientists were also trained in art. These days, scientists often produce a graph using Microsoft Excel or PowerPoint’s default settings – which might look fine to them, but may have fundamental design problems. [emphasis mine]

Meanwhile, even journals are focusing on the importance of figures, often asking authors to improve them before publication.

“It’s not just about looking pretty. It’s about conveying complex information in a clear way,” Cheng said.

The point about science and art being more closely intertwined in the past was made Gunalan Nadarajan (Vice Provost at the Maryland Institute College of Art) at the AAAS 2012 annual meeting (my Feb. 20, 2012 posting). Nadarajan mentioned a new project being developed, Network for Science Engineering Art and Design. It’s so new they don’t yet have a website.

This is not being done in the wild. Scientists and designers are not set loose upon each other (from the UW news release),

Clients who arrive for a session at the Design Help Desk are first greeted by postdoctoral researcher Yeechi Chen, who earned her doctorate in physics at the UW and has completed a UW certificate course in natural science illustration. Chen can act as an intermediary between the scientist and the designer, and reassure new clients that scientists are involved in the project.

During the half-hour session, the scientist client and design consultant are alone in the room. The designer first asks the scientist about his or her goals – timeline, stage in the design process, publication venue, and main points to convey. The designers typically use pen and paper to sketch out their ideas.

The session is videotaped for use in the group’s study, if the client agrees. One camera records the face-to-face interaction, while a second camera on the ceiling records the sketching and hand movements.

Interestingly (to me anyway), the Design Help Desk appears on a UW webpage dedicated to Visual Communication in {Nano} Science. The page offers a very minimalist image, a description of the project and the team, and offers links to resources, e.g., A Brief Guide to Designing Effective Figures for the Scientific Paper ((behind a paywall)) which was published  in August 2011 in Advanced Materials.

Step closer to integrating electronics into the body

The Sept. 20, 2011 news item (Proton-based transistor could let machines communicate with living things) on Nanowerk features a rather interesting development,

Human devices, from light bulbs to iPods, send information using electrons. Human bodies and all other living things, on the other hand, send signals and perform work using ions or protons.

Materials scientists at the University of Washington have built a novel transistor that uses protons, creating a key piece for devices that can communicate directly with living things.

Here’s a diagram from the University of Washington Sept. 20, 2011 article about the proton transistor by Hannah Hickey,

 

On the left is a colored photo of the UW device overlaid on a graphic of the other components. On the right is a magnified image of the chitosan fibers. The white scale bar is 200 nanometers. (Marco Rolandi, UW)

Here’s a little more about the proton transistor (from the Hickey article),

In the body, protons activate “on” and “off” switches and are key players in biological energy transfer. Ions open and close channels in the cell membrane to pump things in and out of the cell. Animals including humans use ions to flex their muscles and transmit brain signals. A machine that was compatible with a living system in this way could, in the short term, monitor such processes. Someday it could generate proton currents to control certain functions directly.

A first step toward this type of control is a transistor that can send pulses of proton current. The prototype device is a field-effect transistor, a basic type of transistor that includes a gate, a drain and a source terminal for the current. The UW prototype is the first such device to use protons. It measures about 5 microns wide, roughly a twentieth the width of a human hair.

As for the device (from the Hickey article),

The device uses a modified form of the compound chitosan originally extracted from squid pen, a structure that survives from when squids had shells. The material is compatible with living things, is easily manufactured, and can be recycled from crab shells and squid pen discarded by the food industry.

There is a minor Canadian connection,

Computer models of charge transport developed by co-authors M.P. Anantram, a UW professor of electrical engineering, and Anita Fadavi Roudsari at Canada’s University of Waterloo, were a good match for the experimental results.

If I understand this correctly, the computer models were confirmed by the experimental  results, which means the computer models can be used (to augment the use of expensive experiments) with a fair degree of confidence.

I am finding this integration of electronics into the body both fascinating and disturbing as per my paper, Whose electric brain? More about that when I have more time.