Tag Archives: Norway

Sciencish doings: a job as a science channel showrunner, a writing workshop, a podcast, news from an AI conference, and a musical interlude

Leave a reply

I have a number of sciencish doings and a musical event that takes place at the Perimeter Institute.

YouTube science channel job

Thanks to the Science Media Centre of Canada (SMCC) and its April 14, 2026 notice for this news,

Job opening: Showrunner for YouTube science channel, What If [for]
Underknown [creator business]

The role requires a deep understanding of YouTube as a medium. This is a
hybrid role, with 2–3 days a week in our Toronto studio and head
office. It is only for permanent residents in Ontario. …

Before launching off into the job description, here’s a bit more about Underknown from its Wikipedia entry, Note: Links have been removed,

Underknown Inc. is a Canadian digital-first media production company based in Toronto that specializes in short-form educational science and factual programming.

History

Underknown was founded in 2016 by Steve Hulford, Raphael Faeh, and Peter Schmiedchen.[1][2] It began when Hulford and Faeh produced the science-explainer series What If in Hulford’s living room.[3] In 2019, Underknown received C$2.5 million in equity and debt financing, including support from Ontario Creates.[3]

…

Productions

Underknown’s programming uses hypothetical questions, survival scenarios and natural history storytelling to explain scientific concepts.[10] Core franchises include the science series What If, the how-to strand How to Survive, the nature show Animalogic and the video essay channel Aperture.[1][8]

…

From the What if showrunner careers page on underknown.com,

About the role

This is a strategic and creative leadership role where you will own the entire editorial direction and run the What If show team. You are responsible for deciding what content is produced, how it is packaged, and continuously monitoring channel and content performance.

The role requires a deep understanding of YouTube as a medium, including its unique language, audience psychology, and mechanics of attention. You must balance the art and science of production, running the channel like a financially sustainable business without sacrificing creative quality.

Day-to-day, you will act as the creative engine and keeper of the channel’s voice, primarily managing the full production lifecycle: pre-production, ideation, packaging, production, and post-production workflows. This includes finding irresistible stories, framing them effectively, and ensuring your team executes quickly at the highest quality.

NOTE: This is a hybrid role, with 2-3 days a week in our Toronto studio and head office. It is only for permanent residents in Ontario, Canada. Applicants that don’t reside in Ontario won’t be considered.

Responsibilities
Content Strategy & Channel Vision
  • Define and maintain the curious, cinematic, and scientifically grounded editorial direction of What If while identifying new growth opportunities.
  • Continuously experiment using audience data to increase watch time and reach.
  • Manage the channel’s P&L and resourcing, balancing creative ambition with financial sustainability and budget targets.
Ideation & Packaging
  • Lead the end-to-end ideation and packaging process, generating and ruthlessly filtering a high volume of concepts into irresistible titles, thumbnails, and hooks.
  • Develop comprehensive episode briefs that provide the production team with a clear creative north star and narrative direction.
Editorial Oversight & Production Management
  • Oversee all editorial and production execution by defining clear creative direction (visual style, tone), managing project timelines, resourcing, and scheduling, and ensuring narrative intent is maintained through clear briefs.
  • Drive continuous improvement and profitability by running data-driven performance experiments, monitoring pacing and profitability, and overseeing branded content executions with external partners.
Team Leadership
  • Lead and mentor a team of producers, writers, editors and our VFX team. Set clear expectations, give actionable feedback, and create the conditions for your team to do their best work.
  • Support team learning and career growth.
Qualifications you bring
  • Five or more years of experience in YouTube content creation, video production, digital media production, or content strategy.
  • A demonstrated track record of contributing to high-performing YouTube content (share examples).
  • Deep familiarity with YouTube’s mechanics: retention, CTR, packaging, algorithm dynamics.
  • Strong writing and editorial instincts.
  • Experience working across the full production pipeline from ideation to publication.
  • Located in Ontario, Canada (required).
  • Passion for science, technology, and speculative storytelling (bonus, but strongly preferred).
  • Experience working with VFX teams is preferred.
How to Apply

Please submit your resume, cover letter, and a portfolio of your previous work, specifically highlighting your video creation work.

Apply

…

Good luck!

You can find Underknown here.

Writer’s workshop: April 15, 2026 deadline!

Another thanks to the Science Media Centre of Canada (SMCC) and its April 14, 2026 notice for this news about a writer’s workshop (wish I’d gotten this a bit sooner),

Banff Mountain Writers Intensive Workshop 2026

Banff Centre for Arts and Creativity
Program dates: October 28 to November 17, 2026
Application deadline: April 15, 2026

This three-week residency for writers in fiction, nonfiction,
journalism, or poetry who are working on mountain narratives,
environmental journalism, stories of adventure, or projects with an
environmental theme provides dedicated time to create, connect with
peers, and receive mentorship.

Here’s a bit more information from the Banff Centre’s Mountain Writers Intensive 2026 webpage,

Overview  

The Mountain Writers Intensive is a three-week residency for twelve writers in fiction, nonfiction, journalism, or poetry. Ideal for projects on mountain narratives, adventure, environmental journalism, and the human connection to landscape, the program emphasizes literary excellence and narrative development. Writers enjoy dedicated time to create, connect with peers, and receive mentorship in Banff’s inspiring mountain setting. The residency overlaps with the Banff Centre Mountain Film and Book Festival, offering opportunities to engage with visiting authors, editors, and publishers. Lodging and meals are included, allowing participants to fully focus on their craft and creative growth.

…

Good luck!

Modem Futura podcasts (a reminder)

I just got a friendly note (via email) from Andrew Maynard, “scientist, author, and professor of advanced technology transitions at Arizona State University,” which reminded me of one of his science communication ventures, the Modem Futura podcast. Before getting to Andrew’s note, here’s more about Modem Futura, Note: I have made some formatting changes so the following is not identical to what you will find on the page,

The Podcast that explores the possible, probable, and preferred futures

Modem Futura is your weekly guide to the future of science, technology, and society—where futures and foresight meets real-world impact. Hosts Sean Leahy and Andrew Maynard—educators, futurists, and public scholars—dive into the breakthroughs and big questions shaping tomorrow: AI ethics, space exploration, climate tech, bio-engineering, digital media, STEM education, and the shifting future of work. In candid, banter-filled conversations with innovators, scholars, and storytellers, they unpack how emerging technologies influence human values, creativity, and culture—and what these trends mean for you today.

Whether you’re curious about quantum computing, electric air taxis, or the sociology of robots, Modem Futura connects cutting-edge research with the narratives that drive innovation. Join us each week to explore possible, probable, and preferred futures, and discover practical insights for navigating an increasingly tech-driven world. Follow and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts and be part of the conversation exploring what it will mean to be human in the future!

Listen & Subscribe

[Latest episode: April 14, 2026]

Artemis II: The Science, the Wonder, and the Future of Being Human

For the first time since 1972, human beings have traveled to the vicinity of the moon — and on this episode of Modem Futura, Sean and Andrew sit with what that actually means. Recorded while the Artemis II crew was still in transit, this conversation is less a mission briefing and more a meditation on wonder: what it feels like to watch a tiny spacecraft carry four people a thousand times …

Here’s the message from Andrew’s friendly email April 13, 2026 note,

Just a quick FYI that, if you occasionally listen to the Modem Futura
podcast hosted by myself and Sean Leahy, you can now sign up for regular
email updates:

https://andrewmaynard.net/modemfutura/

Notifications just include info on new episodes – nothing else (and you
can obviously unsubscribe at any time once signed up)

And if you’re not a podcast person, apologies for the email intrusion
but hope you’re keeping well anyway.

Cheers

Andrew

Human and artificial creativity

Kate Pullinger, Professor of Creative Writing and Digital Media, Director of the Centre for Cultural and Creative Industries at Bath Spa University (UK), had some thoughts about the recent Aarhus University’s (Denmark) TEXT – Center for Contemporary Cultures of Text conference “AI and the Creative Condition,” which I’ll get to after this from the About the Center webpage,

TEXT: Center for Contemporary Cultures of Text is organized to understand the impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) and Large Language Models (LLMs) on writing cultures at this pivotal moment in history, in which — after more than 6,000 years of handcrafted text production — we see all aspects of text creation and use are being altered. We are convinced that a research-based understanding of the role of text in a new technological environment is a condition for a prevailing human-centered control of the production and usage of text.

The center works on the evaluation and development of language technology based on linguistic research, as well as on investigating when the introduction of new practices and technologies contributes to a better text culture—and when something valuable is lost. Learn more out the researchers involved and the organization of our work packages.

TEXT is based at Aarhus University and funded by the Danish National Research Foundation. The center’s partners include It-vest, Danish Foundation Models, and Rhetor, with external participants from Cornell University, UC Berkeley [University of California Berkeley], UC Davis [University of California Davis], and the University of Oslo.

…

I wasn’t able to find too many details about the conference but there is this from the allai.events AI and the Creative Condition Conference 2026 webpage,

Event Details:

  • Date: [sic]
  • Time: 09:00 AM-06:00 PM (expected)
  • Location: Denmark , Aarhus
  • Type: Conference

Description

The AI and the Creative Condition Conference, held at the Aarhus Institute of Advanced Studies in Aarhus, Denmark, aims to explore the transformative impacts of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) and Large Language Models (LLMs) on writing cultures. As we transition from over 6,000 years of handcrafted text production to a [sic]

Highlights

  • Keynote by Karin Kukkonen: ‘Contingency and the Proxies of Literary Writing’.
  • Panel discussion on ‘Creativity in the AI Era: Perspectives from the 7Cs’ by Florent Vinchon and Todd Lubart.
  • Keynote by Roger Beaty: ‘Measuring and enhancing human creativity with AI’.
  • Panel on ‘Uncovering the Patterns of Our Collective Unconscious’ by Ulf Dalvad Berthelsen.
  • Keynote by Kyle Booten: ‘Designing Negative Spaces for Human Minds’.
  • Conference dinner at Det Glade Vanvid on March 23, 2026.
  • Registration deadline: March 8, 2026.
  • Call for papers deadline: December 15, 2025.
  • Hosted by Center for Contemporary Cultures of TEXT and Human-AI Collaboration (HAIC-III).
  • Focus on the impact of Generative AI and Large Language Models on writing cultures.

Anna Katrine Mathiassen wrote a March 25, 2026 conference summary for TEXT, which provides a little more context for Kate Pullinger’s April 8, 2026 posting on Kate’s Newsletter provocatively titled “I Would Prefer Not to Be Publicly Shamed”, Note 1: She leads with a three item introduction, Note 2: Links have been removed, Note 3: Kate Pullinger co-led a writing and digital media masters programme with Sue Thomas at de Montfort University (UK) and I studied with them,

AI and the Creative Condition

Item One: Poetic forms are technologies: a sonnet is an algorithm, which is another word for a set of instructions. If you don’t follow the rules, your poem will not be a sonnet1.

Item Two: The relationships people form with AI chatbots follow recognisable masterplots as the chatbot works to both affirm and entertain the user to keep them coming back for more. This infinite chat spiral can lead in many directions, including human-AI romantic entanglements and, in the worst cases, suicide2.

Item Three: Alan Turing might have formulated the Turing Test (can a computer programme convince you that it is human?) after watching ‘Pygmalion’ by his favourite playwright, George Bernard Shaw. In this play Dr Higgins dialogue-coaches the flower-seller Eliza Doolittle until London’s upper classes are convinced she is one of them3.

In March [2026] I attended AI and the Creative Condition, a two-day conference at Aarhus University in Denmark, and the ideas above came from some of the papers and keynote presentations. Hosted by TEXT: Centre for Contemporary Cultures of Text, the conference brought together a vibrant mix of computer scientists, neuroscientists, psychologists, critical theorists from the humanities, literary studies people, educationalists, writers, artists, and poets. I attended because I’ve followed the work of TEXT for a decade or so now, and because I thought I could do with a dose of well-informed, critical, and engaged thinking on the potential for a world where we ‘write with’ AI, where we figure out how to use language models to enhance and support our writing and researching processes.

Anything positive about the current discussion of AI needs to come with many caveats, the biggest of which is the environmental and energy costs of the data centres and computational power required by these systems. The acronym ‘AI’ has become synonymous with the billionaire tech bros of OpenAI, Meta, X, Google, Anthropic4, etc as they fight it out for market dominance4. The term ‘artificial intelligence’ is so broad no one really seems to know what it actually means. It is present in our lives in multiple ways, deeply embedded within the apps we use on our smartphones, responsible for remarkable advances in medicine as well as, for example, the way the traffic lights on the high street work better than they used to do.

But these days a lot of the media buzz around AI is focussed on LLMs (large language models), the vast datasets composed of human-created language and images that both threaten livelihoods throughout the creative industries while promising huge benefits in increased productivity and, as was the focus of the conference, enhanced creativity. LLMs support ‘generative AI’ which is often referred to as ‘genAI’ – AI models that will generate text, images, and video when prompted.

One of the most interesting presentations at the conference was called ‘Yes! Yes! I Absolutely Love This Insight!’ Affirmative Narrative as Interactional Strategy in Dialogues with LLM Chatbots. The three scholars, Refsum, Walker-Rettberg, and Roin, who co-wrote this paper are part of AI Stories, a research project based in the Centre for Digital Narratives at the University of Bergen, Norway. Their study looked at a court case in the USA where the families of chatbot users who have committed suicide are suing the AI company they see as responsible for these deaths. The scholars analysed the chatbot transcripts from these users, made publicly available due to the litigation. Drawing on their knowledge of literary forms, linguistics and, in particular, narratology, these scholars have shown that the transcripts contain deeply embedded ‘masterplots’ – the myths and stories that are foundational in western culture like, for example, the brave warrior quest plot and the Cinderella love story. It is the combination of these powerful plots, the constant affirmation chatbots offer to the user, and the way chatbots refer to themselves in the first person as ‘I’, that in many cases leads to anthropomorphism and the assumption that the chatbot is in some way sentient. Other studies have shown the dramatic increase in user engagement with chatbot-as-therapist as well as chatbot-as-best-friend and chatbot-as-romantic-partner. The paper theorises that these men killed themselves after having spent months being led by their chatbots through the brave warrior masterplot, a foundational story that often ends in a noble death.

At the same time as the conference was taking place, a debut author, Mia Ballard, was being thrown under the bus by her publishers in the UK and the US for the alleged use of AI in the writing of her novel, Shy Girl. For a balanced look at what took place, read Thad McIllroy’s excellent report on it on The Future of Publishing’s website. The NYTimes reported that Mia Ballard has denied using AI in the writing of the novel and has been so battered by this hugely public and damaging shaming that she feels her reputation as a writer is ruined. At the conference Izabella Adamczewska-Baranowska presented a paper, Talking to the Muse, on the well-respected Polish poet, Justyna Bargielska, who faced a similar scouring in the press for daring to use an AI chatbot to help her think through how best to write about grief for a new collection of poems.

In the UK the Society of Authors has come up with a badge, ‘Human Authored’, that authors can add to their books to make it clear that they have not used generative AI during the writing process. The email announcing this scheme also contained the last call for authors to register their books in the $1.5billion class action against Anthropic’s copyright-defying landgrab of hundreds of thousands of books when they created their LLM, Claude. While I’m a staunch supporter and member of the Society of Authors and am participating in the class action (fifteen of my own titles were used without my permission, six of which are included in this action), I can’t help but think that ‘Human Authored’ is a decent but flawed initiative. …

…

What the AI and the Creative Condition conference helped me think about is that it is possible to harness the power of LLMs to create a kind of playground for writing, a place where you can tap into the research capacities of the models, using them to help you think your way through problems you encounter as you write. In this more positive light generative AI is a technology to think with, a way to boost human creativity. Community-led language models were discussed by Katy Gero, one of keynote speakers; green energy data centres are already a reality in China and other parts of the world.

I’ve come away from Aarhus having eaten too many cardamon buns while undergoing a rethink on whether to engage with these technologies for my own writing practice. …

There’s more about Kate Pullinger on her eponymous website.

Physicists listen to music

The April 13, 2026 notice (received via email) about a musical performance at Canada’s Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics (PI) in Waterloo, Ontario came as a bit of a surprise since there’s no mention of physics as there would be if it were one of their art/science events,

QUATUOR MAGENTA

String quartet on tour from Paris, France

Wednesday, April 22, [2026] at 7:00 pm ET

Perimeter Institute will host the string quartet Quatuor Magenta on April 22 at 7:00 PM. The concert is presented by the Kitchener-Waterloo Chamber Music Society (KWCMS).

“A model of technical discipline, elegance and musical excellence” (La Croix, transl.), the QUATUOR MAGENTA was founded in 2021 and is already performing on France’s most prestigious stages, from the Philharmonie de Paris to the Festival de RadioFrance Montpellier. Their “remarkable balance, flexibility and spontaneity” (Diapason, transl.) not only thrills their audiences, but led them to the finals of the 8th Joseph Haydn Chamber Music Competition in Vienna and earned them prizes at the 2023 FNAPEC competition (Académie des Beaux-Arts scholarship) and the 2022 Zukunftsklang Competition Stuttgart (3rd prize). November 2024 marked the quartet’s first international tour to Canada with six concerts in Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia, generously supported by the Centre National de la Musique and SPEDIDAM. 

You can go to the KWCMS concerts page to buy tickets (scroll down as there are other concerts also listed),

Quatuor Magenta

Wednesday, April 22, 2026

New!! The Perimeter Institute, Waterloo, 7:00 pm 
Tickets $40/$10 student on TicketScene and at the door

Haydn: String Quartet Op. 33 No. 2, “The Joke” 
Grażyna Bacewicz (1909-1969): String Quartet No. 5 
Dinuk Wijeratne (b. 1978): Two Pop Songs on Antique Poems
Fanny Mendelssohn: String Quartet in E-flat major

QUATUOR MAGENTA  Program and Artist Info 

PROGRAM

Haydn: String Quartet Op. 33 No. 2, “The Joke” 

Grażyna Bacewicz (1909-1969): String Quartet No. 5 

Dinuk Wijeratne (b. 1978): Two Pop Songs on Antique Poems

Fanny Mendelssohn: String Quartet in E-flat major

ARTISTS

Ida Derbesse, 1st violin
Elena Watson-Perry, 2nd violin
Claire Pass-Lanneau, viola
Fiona Robson, cello

“A model of technical discipline, elegance and musical excellence” (La Croix, transl.), the QUATUOR MAGENTA was founded in 2021 and is already performing on France’s most prestigious stages, from the Philharmonie de Paris to the Festival de RadioFrance Montpellier. Their “remarkable balance, flexibility and spontaneity” (Diapason, transl.) not only thrills their audiences, but led them to the finals of the 8th Joseph Haydn Chamber Music Competition in Vienna and earned them prizes at the 2023 FNAPEC competition (Académie des Beaux-Arts scholarship) and the 2022 Zukunftsklang Competition Stuttgart (3rd prize). November 2024 marked the quartet’s first international tour to Canada with six concerts in Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia, generously supported by the Centre National de la Musique and SPEDIDAM. 

The Quatuor Magenta is based in Paris, France, where they are junior artist-in-residence at the Singer-Polignac Foundation and ensemble-in-residence at Proquartet – Centre Européen de Musique de Chambre. They have been invited to perform at numerous festivals in France, including the Musikfest Parisienne, the Festival de la Chaise-Dieu, Un Temps pour Elles, Un Été en France with Gautier Capuçon and the Modigliani Quartet’s Festival Vibre!, as well as in Switzerland (Festival de la Collégiale in Neuchâtel) and in Germany (Klangraum Konzerte in Cologne). 

Last season, contemporary music had pride of place with Quatuor Magenta’s participation in the Kronos Quartet’s « 50 for the Future » Marathon at the Philharmonie de Paris’s String Quartet Biennale. This season includes six octet performances alongside the renowned Quatuor Van Kuijk, in partnership with La Belle Saison. 

The Quatuor Magenta was honoured to participate in the inaugural year of the Élite program at the École Normale de Paris, under the mentorship of the Quatuor Modigliani. They currently study with the Quatuor Ébène at their quartet academy at the University of Music and Performing Arts Munich, as well as with Rainer Schmidt of the Hagen Quartet at the Basel University of Music. They are grateful for the support of the Safran Foundation and ADAMI. They work with Chapeau l’Artiste Production. 

Enjoy!

Tamarind shells turned into carbon nanosheets for supercapacitors

Leave a reply

Fro anyone who needs a shot of happiness, this is a very happy scientist,

Caption: Assistant Professor (Steve) Cuong Dang, from NTU’s School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, who led the study, displaying pieces of tamarind shell, which were integral to the study. Credit to NTU Singapore

A July 14, 2021 news item on ScienceDaily describes the source of assistant professor (Steve) Cuong Dang’s happiness,

Shells of tamarind, a tropical fruit consumed worldwide, are discarded during food production. As they are bulky, tamarind shells take up a considerable amount of space in landfills where they are disposed as agricultural waste.

However, a team of international scientists led by Nanyang Technological University, Singapore (NTU Singapore) has found a way to deal with the problem. By processing the tamarind shells which are rich in carbon, the scientists converted the waste material into carbon nanosheets, which are a key component of supercapacitors – energy storage devices that are used in automobiles, buses, electric vehicles, trains, and elevators.

The study reflects NTU’s commitment to address humanity’s grand challenges on sustainability as part of its 2025 strategic plan, which seeks to accelerate the translation of research discoveries into innovations that mitigate our impact on the environment.

A July 14, 2021 NTU press release (also here [scroll down to click on the link to the full press release] and on EurekAlert but published July 13, 2021), which originated the news item, delves further into the topic,

he team, made up of researchers from NTU Singapore, the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences in Norway, and Alagappa University in India, believes that these nanosheets, when scaled up, could be an eco-friendly alternative to their industrially produced counterparts, and cut down on waste at the same time.

Assistant Professor (Steve) Cuong Dang, from NTU’s School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, who led the study, said: “Through a series of analysis, we found that the performance of our tamarind shell-derived nanosheets was comparable to their industrially made counterparts in terms of porous structure and electrochemical properties. The process to make the nanosheets is also the standard method to produce active carbon nanosheets.”

Professor G. Ravi, Head, Department of Physics, who co-authored the study with Asst Prof Dr R. Yuvakkumar, who are both from Alagappa University, said: “The use of tamarind shells may reduce the amount of space required for landfills, especially in regions in Asia such as India, one of the world’s largest producers of tamarind, which is also grappling with waste disposal issues.”

The study was published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Chemosphere in June [2021].

The step-by-step recipe for carbon nanosheets

To manufacture the carbon nanosheets, the researchers first washed tamarind fruit shells and dried them at 100°C for around six hours, before grinding them into powder.

The scientists then baked the powder in a furnace for 150 minutes at 700-900 degrees Celsius in the absence of oxygen to convert them into ultrathin sheets of carbon known as nanosheets.

Tamarind shells are rich in carbon and porous in nature, making them an ideal material from which to manufacture carbon nanosheets.

A common material used to produce carbon nanosheets are industrial hemp fibres. However, they require to be heated at over 180°C for 24 hours – four times longer than that of tamarind shells, and at a higher temperature. This is before the hemp is further subjected to intense heat to convert them into carbon nanosheets.

Professor Dhayalan Velauthapillai, Head of the research group for Advanced Nanomaterials for Clean Energy and Health Applications at Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, who participated in the study, said: “Carbon nanosheets comprise of layers of carbon atoms arranged in interconnecting hexagons, like a honeycomb. The secret behind their energy storing capabilities lies in their porous structure leading to large surface area which help the material to store large amounts of electric charges.”

The tamarind shell-derived nanosheets also showed good thermal stability and electric conductivity, making them promising options for energy storage.

The researchers hope to explore larger scale production of the carbon nanosheets with agricultural partners. They are also working on reducing the energy needed for the production process, making it more environmentally friendly, and are seeking to improve the electrochemical properties of the nanosheets.

The team also hopes to explore the possibility of using different types of fruit skins or shells to produce carbon nanosheets.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Cleaner production of tamarind fruit shell into bio-mass derived porous 3D-activated carbon nanosheets by CVD technique for supercapacitor applications by V. Thirumal, K. Dhamodharan, R. Yuvakkumar, G. Ravi, B. Saravanakumar, M. Thambidurai, Cuong Dang, Dhayalan Velauthapillai. Chemosphere Volume 282, November 2021, 131033 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.131033 Available online 2 June 2021.

This paper is behind a paywall.

Because we could all do with a little more happiness these days,

Caption: (L-R) Senior Research Fellow Dr Thambidurai Mariyappan, also from NTU’s School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, who was part of the study, and Asst Prof Dang, holding up tamarind pods. Credit to NTU Singapore

Toronto’s (Canada) ArtSci Salon offers: Naturalized Encounters (a series of international, networked meals known as “Follow the Spread” starting Sunday, October 3, 2021

Leave a reply

My September 26, 2021 Art/Sci Salon notice (received via email) provides these details,

Naturalization = The ecological phenomenon in which a species, taxon, or population of exotic (as opposed to native) origin integrates into a given ecosystem, becoming capable of reproducing and growing in it, and proceeds to disseminate spontaneously. In some instances, the presence of a species in a given ecosystem is so ancient that it cannot be presupposed whether it is native or introduced
How does adaptation through naturalization occur? What happens to the native population? How does coexistence happen?

Our first event will revolve around the Solanum Melongena, a plant species in the nightshade family Solanaceae commonly known as the eggplant. This plant (and the many different names it goes by Aubergine, Melanzana, Brinjal, Berenjena, باذنجان, vânătă, 茄子,بادمجان) uncertain origins, grown worldwide for its edible fruit. Eggplants exist in many shapes, sizes and colors.

Our event will be a harvest potluck, with dialogues, storytelling, and exchanges about and beyond food. Our guests will engage in creative interventions to reflect on the many ways food, and food mobility affects all sentient beings, both humans and non-humans; peoples and civilizations; individuals’ health and collective traditions. Food is nourishment, care, medicine, and art. Food is political. Food is ultimately about our survival.

This is the first of a series of networked meals titled “FOLLOW THE SPREAD,” which will be staged around the world and across time zones throughout Fall 2021-Spring 2022 in Canada (October 3, Spring 2022), Norway (October 7), the Netherlands and Taiwan (Spring 2022).

Join us online to meet 10 Canadian artists and scholars as they launch the series in Toronto and engage in a nourishing and inspiring feast

…

Amira Alamary
TBA

Antje Budde
Antje Budde is a conceptual, queer-feminist, interdisciplinary experimental scholar-artist and an Associate Professor of Theatre Studies, Cultural Communication and Modern Chinese Studies at the Centre for Drama, Theatre and Performance Studies, University of Toronto. Antje has created multi-disciplinary artistic works in Germany, China and Canada and works tri-lingually in German, English and Mandarin. She is the founder of a number of queerly feminist performing art projects including most recently the (DDL)2 or (Digital Dramaturgy Lab)Squared – a platform for experimental explorations of digital culture, creative labor, integration of arts and science, and technology in performance. She is interested in the intersections of natural sciences, the arts, engineering and computer science.

Charmaine Lurch
Charmaine Lurch is a multidisciplinary artist whose painting, sculpture, and social engagement reveal the intricacies and complexities of the relationships between us and our environments. Her sculptures, installations, and interventions produce enchantment as she skillfully contends with what is visible and present in conjunction with what remains unsaid or unnoticed. Lurch applies her experience in community arts and education to create inviting entry points into overwhelmingly complex and urgent racial, ecological, and historical reckonings.

Lurch’s work contends with both spatiality and temporality, enchanting her subject matter with multiple possibilities for engagement. This can be seen in the interplay between light, wire, and space in her intricate wire sculptures of bees and pollen grains, and in what scholar Tiffany Lethabo King refers to as the “open edgelessness” of Sycorax. A sensuous dynamism belies the everyday tasks reflected in her charcoal-on-parchment series Being, Belonging and Grace. Lurch’s particular evocations and explorations of space and time invite an analysis of their own, and her work has been engaged with by academics. These include King, who chose Sycorax Gesture, a charcoal illustration for the cover of her book The Black Shoals: Offshore Formations of Black and Native Studies, in which King discusses Lurch’s work in depth. Scholar Katherine McKittrick both inserted and engaged with Lurch’s work in her latest notable book, Dear Science & Other Stories.

Dave Kemp
Dave Kemp is a visual artist whose practice looks at the intersections and interactions between art, science and technology: particularly at how these fields shape our perception and understanding of the world. His artworks have been exhibited widely at venues such as at the McIntosh Gallery, The Agnes Etherington Art Centre, Art Gallery of Mississauga, The Ontario Science Centre, York Quay Gallery, Interaccess, Modern Fuel Artist-Run Centre, and as part of the Switch video festival in Nenagh, Ireland. His works are also included in the permanent collections of the Agnes Etherington Art Centre and the Canada Council Art Bank.

Dolores Steinman
Dolores Steinman is a trained pediatrician who holds a Ph.D. from the University of Toronto. She is very active in several Art/Science communities locally and internationally.

Elaine Whittaker
Elaine Whittaker is a Canadian visual artist working at the intersection of art, science, medicine, and ecology. She considers biology as contemporary art practice and as the basis for her installations, sculptures, paintings, drawings, and digital images. Whittaker has exhibited in art and science galleries and museums in Canada, France, Italy, UK, Ireland, Latvia, China, South Korea, Australia, Mexico, and the U.S. Artwork created as Artist-in-Residence with the Pelling Laboratory for Augmented Biology (University of Ottawa) was exhibited in La Fabrique du Vivant at the Pompidou Centre, Paris  in 2019.  She was one of the first Artists-in-Residence with the Ontario Science Centre in partnership with the Museum of Contemporary Art Toronto. Her work has also been featured in art, literary, and medical magazines, and books, including Bio Art: Altered Realities by William Myers (2015).

Elizabeth Littlejohn
Elizabeth Littlejohn is a communications professor, human rights activist, photojournalist, and documentary film-maker. She has written for Rabble.ca for the past thirteen years on social movements, sustainable urban planning, and climate change. As a running gun social movement videographer, she has filmed internationally. Her articles, photojournalism, and videos have documented Occupy, Idle No More, and climate change movements, and her photographs have been printed in NOW Magazine, the Toronto Star, and Our Times.

Recently Elizabeth Littlejohn has completed ‘The City Island’, a feature-length documentary she directed about the razing of homes on the Toronto Islands and the islanders’ stewardship of the park system, with the support of the Canada Council. Currently, Elizabeth is developing the Toronto Island Puzzle Tour, an augmented-reality smartphone application with five locales depicting hidden history of the Toronto Island, and funded by the City of Toronto’s Artworx Grant.

Gita Hashemi
Gita Hashemi works in visual and performance art, digital and net art, and language-based art including live embodied writing, and in publishing. Her transdisciplinary, multi-platform and often site-responsive projects explore historical, trans-border and marginalized narratives and their traces in contemporary contexts. She has received numerous project grants from Canadian arts councils, and won awards from Toronto Community Foundation, Baddeck International New Media Festival, American Ad Federation, and Ontario Association of Art Galleries among others. Hashemi is an Ontario Heritage Trust’s Doris McCarthy Artist in Residence in 2021 with a land-based project. Her work has been exhibited at many international venues including SIGGRAPH, Los Angeles; Center for Book Arts, New York; Yerba Buena Center for the Arts, San Francisco; Plug-In, Basel; Casoria Museum of Contemporary Art, Naples; Al Kahf Art Gallery, Bethlehem; Red House Centre for Culture, Sofia; Museo de Arte Contemporaneo de Yucatan, Merida; National Museum of Contemporary Art, Bucharest; Worth Ryder Gallery, Berkeley; Museo de Arte Contemporaneo de Santa Fe, Argentina; Museum of Movements, Malmo; and JolibaZWO, Berlin among others. In Canada her work has been presented at A Space Gallery, York Quay Gallery, YYZ, MAI, and Carlton University Art Gallery. She has exhibited in numerous festivals including Electroshock, France; VI Salon y coloquio internacional de art digital, Havana; New Media Art Festival, Bangkok; Biennale of Electronic Art, Perth; and New Music and Art Festival, Bowling Green and others.

Nina Czegledy
Toronto based artist, curator, educator, works internationally on collaborative art, science & technology projects. The changing perception of the human body and its environment, as well as paradigm shifts in the arts, inform her projects. She has exhibited and published widely, won awards for her artwork and has initiated, led and participated in workshops, forums and festivals worldwide at international events.

Roberta Buiani
Artistic Director of the ArtSci Salon at the Fields Institute for Research in Mathematical Sciences (Toronto). Her artistic work has travelled to art festivals (Transmediale; Hemispheric Institute Encuentro; Brazil), community centers and galleries (the Free Gallery Toronto; Immigrant Movement International, Queens, Museum of Toronto), and scientific institutions (RPI; the Fields Institute). She is a research associate at the Centre for Feminist Research and a Scholar in Residence at Sensorium: Centre for Digital Arts and Technology, at York University.

Tune in on Oct 3 [2021] at 10:30 AM EDT; 4:30 PM CET; 10:30 PM CST [Note: For those of us on the West Coast, that will 7:30 am PDT]

To view the video on Sunday, Oct. 3, 2021, just go to the ‘Naturalized Encounters’ webpage on the ArtSci Salon website and scroll down.

Equality doesn’t necessarily lead to greater women’s STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) participation?

Leave a reply

It seems counter-intuitive but societies where women have achieved greater equality see less participation by women in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) than countries where women are treated differently. This rather stunning research was released on February 14, 2018 (yes, Valentine’s Day).

Women, equality, STEM

Both universities involved in this research have made news/press releases available. First, there’s the February 14, 2018 Leeds Beckett University (UK) press release,

Countries with greater gender equality see a smaller proportion of women taking degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), a new study by Leeds Beckett has found.

Dubbed the ‘gender equality paradox’, the research found that countries such as Albania and Algeria have a greater percentage of women amongst their STEM graduates than countries lauded for their high levels of gender equality, such as Finland, Norway or Sweden.

The researchers, from Leeds Beckett’s School of Social Sciences and the University of Missouri, believe this might be because countries with less gender equality often have little welfare support, making the choice of a relatively highly-paid STEM career more attractive.

The study, published in Psychological Science, also looked at what might motivate girls and boys to choose to study STEM subjects, including overall ability, interest or enjoyment in the subject and whether science subjects were a personal academic strength.

Using data on 475,000 adolescents across 67 countries or regions, the researchers found that while boys’ and girls’ achievement in STEM subjects was broadly similar, science was more likely to be boys’ best subject.

Girls, even when their ability in science equalled or excelled that of boys, were often likely to be better overall in reading comprehension, which relates to higher ability in non-STEM subjects.

Girls also tended to register a lower interest in science subjects. These differences were near-universal across all the countries and regions studied.

This could explain some of the gender disparity in STEM participation, according to Leeds Beckett Professor in Psychology Gijsbert Stoet.

“The further you get in secondary and then higher education, the more subjects you need to drop until you end with just one.

“We are inclined to choose what we are best at and also enjoy. This makes sense and matches common school advice.

“So, even though girls can match boys in terms of how well they do at science and mathematics in school, if those aren’t their best subjects and they are less interested in them, then they’re likely to choose to study something else.”

The researchers also looked at how many girls might be expected to choose further study in STEM based on these criteria.

They took the number of girls in each country who had the necessary ability in STEM and for whom it was also their best subject and compared this to the number of women graduating in STEM.

They found there was a disparity in all countries, but with the gap once again larger in more gender equal countries.

In the UK, 29 per cent of STEM graduates are female, whereas 48 per cent of UK girls might be expected to take those subjects based on science ability alone. This drops to 39 per cent when both science ability and interest in the subject are taken into account.

Countries with higher gender equality tend also to be welfare states, providing a high level of social security for their citizens.

Professor Stoet said: “STEM careers are generally secure and well-paid but the risks of not following such a path can vary.

“In more affluent countries where any choice of career feels relatively safe, women may feel able to make choices based on non-economic factors.

“Conversely, in countries with fewer economic opportunities, or where employment might be precarious, a well-paid and relatively secure STEM career can be more attractive to women.”

Despite extensive efforts to increase participation of women in STEM, levels have remained broadly stable for decades, but these findings could help target interventions to make them more effective, say the researchers.

“It’s important to take into account that girls are choosing not to study STEM for what they feel are valid reasons, so campaigns that target all girls may be a waste of energy and resources,” said Professor Stoet.

“If governments want to increase women’s participation in STEM, a more effective strategy might be to target the girls who are clearly being ‘lost’ from the STEM pathway: those for whom science and maths are their best subjects and who enjoy it but still don’t choose it.

“If we can understand their motivations, then interventions can be designed to help them change their minds.”

Then, there’s the February 14, 2018 University of Missouri news release, some of which will be repetitive,

The underrepresentation of girls and women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields occurs globally. Although women currently are well represented in life sciences, they continue to be underrepresented in inorganic sciences, such as computer science and physics. Now, researchers from the University of Missouri and Leeds Beckett University in the United Kingdom have found that as societies become wealthier and more gender equal, women are less likely to obtain degrees in STEM. The researchers call this a “gender-equality paradox.” Researchers also discovered a near-universal sex difference in academic strengths and weaknesses that contributes to the STEM gap. Findings from the study could help refine education efforts and policies geared toward encouraging girls and women with strengths in science or math to participate in STEM fields.

The researchers found that, throughout the world, boys’ academic strengths tend to be in science or mathematics, while girls’ strengths are in reading. Students who have personal strengths in science or math are more likely to enter STEM fields, whereas students with reading as a personal strength are more likely to enter non-STEM fields, according to David Geary, Curators Professor of Psychological Sciences in the MU College of Arts and Science. These sex differences in academic strengths, as well as interest in science, may explain why the sex differences in STEM fields has been stable for decades, and why current approaches to address them have failed.

“We analyzed data on 475,000 adolescents across 67 countries or regions and found that while boys’ and girls’ achievements in STEM subjects were broadly similar in all countries, science was more likely to be boys’ best subject,” Geary said. “Girls, even when their abilities in science equaled or excelled that of boys, often were likely to be better overall in reading comprehension, which relates to higher ability in non-STEM subjects. As a result, these girls tended to seek out other professions unrelated to STEM fields.”

Surprisingly, this trend was larger for girls and women living in countries with greater gender equality. The authors call this a “gender-equality paradox,” because countries lauded for their high levels of gender equality, such as Finland, Norway or Sweden, have relatively few women among their STEM graduates. In contrast, more socially conservative countries such as Turkey or Algeria have a much larger percentage of women among their STEM graduates.

“In countries with greater gender equality, women are actively encouraged to participate in STEM; yet, they lose more girls because of personal academic strengths,” Geary said. “In more liberal and wealthy countries, personal preferences are more strongly expressed. One consequence is that sex differences in academic strengths and interests become larger and have a stronger influence college and career choices than in more conservative and less wealthy countries, creating the gender-equality paradox.”

The combination of personal academic strengths in reading, lower interest in science, and broader financial security explains why so few women choose a STEM career in highly developed nations.

“STEM careers are generally secure and well-paid but the risks of not following such a path can vary,” said Gijsbert Stoet, Professor in Psychology at Leeds Beckett University. “In more affluent countries where any choice of career feels relatively safe, women may feel able to make choices based on non-economic factors. Conversely, in countries with fewer economic opportunities, or where employment might be precarious, a well-paid and relatively secure STEM career can be more attractive to women.”

Findings from this study could help target interventions to make them more effective, say the researchers. Policymakers should reconsider failing national policies focusing on decreasing the gender imbalance in STEM, the researchers add.

The University of Missouri also produced a brief video featuring Professor David Geary discussing the work,

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

The Gender-Equality Paradox in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education by Gijsbert Stoet, David C. Geary. Psychological Studies https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617741719 First Published February 14, 2018 Research Article

This paper is behind a paywall.

Gender equality and STEM: a deeper dive

Olga Khazan in a February 18, 2018 article for The Atlantic provides additional insight (Note: Links have been removed),

Though their numbers are growing, only 27 percent of all students taking the AP Computer Science exam in the United States are female. The gender gap only grows worse from there: Just 18 percent of American computer-science college degrees go to women. This is in the United States, where many college men proudly describe themselves as “male feminists” and girls are taught they can be anything they want to be.

Meanwhile, in Algeria, 41 percent of college graduates in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math—or “STEM,” as its known—are female. There, employment discrimination against women is rife and women are often pressured to make amends with their abusive husbands.

According to a report I covered a few years ago, Jordan, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates were the only three countries in which boys are significantly less likely to feel comfortable working on math problems than girls are. In all of the other nations surveyed, girls were more likely to say they feel “helpless while performing a math problem.”

…

… this line of research, if it’s replicated, might hold useful takeaways for people who do want to see more Western women entering STEM fields. In this study, the percentage of girls who did excel in science or math was still larger than the number of women who were graduating with STEM degrees. That means there’s something in even the most liberal societies that’s nudging women away from math and science, even when those are their best subjects. The women-in-STEM advocates could, for starters, focus their efforts on those would-be STEM stars.

Final thoughts

This work upends notions (mine anyway) about equality and STEM with regard to women’s participation in countries usually described as ‘developed’ as opposed to ‘developing’. I am thankful to have my ideas shaken up and being forced to review my assumptions about STEM participation and equality of opportunity.

John Timmer in a February 19, 2018 posting on the Ars Technica blog offers a critique of the research and its conclusions,

… The countries where the science-degree gender gap is smaller tend to be less socially secure. The researchers suggest that the economic security provided by fields like engineering may have a stronger draw in these countries, pulling more women into the field.

They attempt to use a statistical pathway analysis to see if the data is consistent with this being the case, but the results are inconclusive. It may be right, but there would be at least one other strong factor that they have not identified involved.

Timmer’s piece is well worth reading.

For some reason the discussion about a lack of social safety nets and precarious conditions leading women to greater STEM participation reminds me of a truism about the arts. Constraints can force you into greater creativity. Although balance is necessary as you don’t want to destroy what you’re trying to encourage. In this case, it seems that comfortable lifestyles can lead women to pursue that which comes more easily whereas women trying to make a better life in difficult circumstance will pursue a more challenging path.

Europe’s cathedrals get a ‘lift’ with nanoparticles

Leave a reply

That headline is a teensy bit laboured but I couldn’t resist the levels of wordplay available to me. They’re working on a cathedral close to the leaning Tower of Pisa in this video about the latest in stone preservation in Europe.

*ETA August 7, 2019: Video reinserted today.*

I have covered the topic of preserving stone monuments before (most recently in my Oct. 21, 2014 posting). The action in this field seems to be taking place mostly in Europe, specifically Italy, although other countries are also quite involved.

Finally, getting to the European Commission’s latest stone monument preservation project, Nano-Cathedral, a Sept. 26, 2017 news item on Nanowerk announces the latest developments,

Just a few meters from Pisa’s famous Leaning Tower, restorers are defying scorching temperatures to bring back shine to the city’s Cathedral.

Ordinary restoration techniques like laser are being used on much of the stonework that dates back to the 11th century. But a brand new technique is also being used: a new material made of innovative nanoparticles. The aim is to consolidate the inner structure of the stones. It’s being applied mainly on marble.

A March 7, 2017 item on the Euro News website, which originated the Nanowerk news item, provides more detail,

“Marble has very low porosity, which means we have to use nanometric particles in order to go deep inside the stone, to ensure that the treatment is both efficient while still allowing the stone to breathe,” explains Roberto Cela, civil engineer at Opera Della Primaziale Pisana.

The material developed by the European research team includes calcium carbonate, which is a mix of calcium oxide, water and carbon dioxide.

The nano-particles penetrate the stone cementing its decaying structure.

“It is important that these particles have the same chemical nature as the stones that are being treated, so that the physical and mechanical processes that occur over time don’t lead to the break-up of the stones,” says Dario Paolucci, chemist at the University of Pisa.

Vienna’s St Stephen’s is another of the five cathedrals where the new restoration materials are being tested.

The first challenge for researchers is to determine the mechanical characteristics of the cathedral’s stones. Since there are few original samples to work on, they had to figure out a way of “ageing” samples of stones of similar nature to those originally used.

“We tried different things: we tried freeze storage, we tried salts and acids, and we decided to go for thermal ageing,” explains Matea Ban, material scientist at the University of Technology in Vienna. “So what happens is that we heat the stone at certain temperatures. Minerals inside then expand in certain directions, and when they expand they build up stresses to neighbouring minerals and then they crack, and we need those cracks in order to consolidate them.”

Consolidating materials were then applied on a variety of limestones, sandstones and marble – a selection of the different types of stones that were used to build cathedrals around Europe.

What researchers are looking for are very specific properties.

“First of all, the consolidating material has to be well absorbed by the stone,” says petrologist Johannes Weber of the University of Applied Arts in Vienna. “Then, as it evaporates, it has to settle properly within the stone structure. It should not shrink too much. All materials shrink when drying, including consolidating materials. They should adhere to the particles of the stone but shouldn’t completely obstruct its pores.”

Further tests are underway in cathedrals across Europe in the hope of better protecting our invaluable cultural heritage.

There’s a bit more detail about Nano-Cathedral on the Opera della Primaziale Pisana (O₽A) website (from their Nano-Cathedral project page),

With the meeting of June 3 this year the Nano Cathedral project kicked off, supported by the European Union within the nanotechnology field applied to Horizon 2020 cultural heritage with a fund of about 6.5 million euro.

A total of six monumental buildings will be for three years under the eyes and hands of petrographers, geologists, chemists and restorers of the institutes belonging to the Consortium: five cathedrals have been selected to represent the cultural diversity within Europe from the perspective of developing shared values and transnational identity, and a contemporary monumental building entirely clad in Carrara marble, the Opera House of Oslo.

Purpose: the testing of nanomaterials for the conservation of marble and the outer surfaces of our ‘cathedrals’.
The field of investigation to check degradation, testing new consolidating and protective products is the Cathedral of Pisa together with the Cathedrals of Cologne, Vienna, Ghent and Vitoria.
For the selection of case studies we have crosschecked requirements for their historical and architectural value but also for the different types of construction materials – marble, limestone and sandstone – as well as the relocation of six monumental buildings according to European climates.

The Cathedral of Pisa is the most southern, fully positioned in Mediterranean climate, therefore subject to degradation and very different from those which the weather conditions of the Scandinavian peninsula recorded; all the intermediate climate phases are modulated through Ghent, Vitoria, Cologne and Vienna.

At the conclusion of the three-year project, once the analysis in situ and in the laboratory are completed and all the experiments are tested on each different identified portion in each monumental building, an intervention protocol will be defined in detail in order to identify the mineralogical and petrographic characteristics of stone materials and of their degradation, the assessment of the causes and mechanisms of associated alteration, including interactions with factors of environmental pollution. Then we will be able to identify the most appropriate method of restoration and testing of nanotechnology products for the consolidation and protection of different stone materials.

In 2018 we hope to have new materials to protect and safeguard the ‘skin’ of our historic buildings and monuments for a long time.

Back to my headline and the second piece of wordplay, ‘lift’ as in ‘skin lift’ in that last sentence.

I realize this is a bit off topic but it’s worth taking a look at ORA’s home page,

Gabriele D’Annunzio effectively condenses the wonder and admiration that catch whoever visits the Duomo Square of Pisa.

The Opera della Primaziale Pisana (O₽A) is a non-profit organisation which was established in order to oversee the first works for the construction of the monuments in the Piazza del Duomo, subject to its own charter which includes the protection, promotion and enhancement of its heritage, in order to pass the religious and artistic meaning onto future generations.

«L’Ardea roteò nel cielo di Cristo, sul prato dei Miracoli.»
Gabriele d’Annunzio in Forse che sì forse che no (1910)

…

If you go to the home page, you can buy tickets to visit the monuments surrounding the square and there are other notices including one for a competition (it’s too late to apply but the details are interesting) to construct four stained glass windows for the Pisa cathedral.

A jellyfish chat on November 28, 2017 at Café Scientifique Vancouver get together

Leave a reply

Café Scientifique Vancouver sent me an announcement (via email) about their upcoming event,

We are pleased to announce our next café which will happen on TUESDAY,
NOVEMBER 28TH at 7:30PM in the back room of YAGGER'S DOWNTOWN (433 W
Pender).

JELLYFISH – FRIEND, FOE, OR FOOD?

Did you know that in addition to stinging swimmers, jellyfish also cause
extensive damage to fisheries and coastal power plants? As threats such
as overfishing, pollution, and climate change alter the marine
environment, recent media reports are proclaiming that jellyfish are
taking over the oceans. Should we hail to our new jellyfish overlords or
do we need to examine the evidence behind these claims? Join Café
Scientifique on Nov. 28, 2017 to learn everything you ever wanted to
know about jellyfish, and find out if jelly burgers are coming soon to a
menu near you.

Our speaker for the evening will be DR. LUCAS BROTZ, a Postdoctoral
Research Fellow with the Sea Around Us at UBC’s Institute for the
Oceans and Fisheries. Lucas has been studying jellyfish for more than a
decade, and has been called “Canada’s foremost jellyfish
researcher” by CBC Nature of Things host Dr. David Suzuki. Lucas has
participated in numerous international scientific collaborations, and
his research has been featured in more than 100 media outlets including
Nature News, The Washington Post, and The New York Times. He recently
received the Michael A. Bigg award for highly significant student
research as part of the Coastal Ocean Awards at the Vancouver Aquarium.

We hope to see you there!

You can find out more about Lucas Brotz here and about Sea Around Us here.

For anyone who’s curious about the jellyfish ‘issue’, there’s a November 8, 2017 Norwegian University of Science and Technology press release on AlphaGallileo or on EurekAlert, which provides insight into the problems and the possibilities,

Jellyfish could be a resource in producing microplastic filters, fertilizer or fish feed. A new 6 million euro project called GoJelly, funded by the EU and coordinated by the GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research, Germany and including partners at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNNU) and SINTEF [headquartered in Trondheim, Norway, is the largest independent research organisation in Scandinavia; more about SINTEF in its Wikipedia entry], hopes to turn jellyfish from a nuisance into a useful product.

Global climate change and the human impact on marine ecosystems has led to dramatic decreases in the number of fish in the ocean. It has also had an unforseen side effect: because overfishing decreases the numbers of jellyfish competitors, their blooms are on the rise.

The GoJelly project, coordinated by the GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research, Germany, would like to transform problematic jellyfish into a resource that can be used to produce microplastic filter, fertilizer or fish feed. The EU has just approved funding of EUR 6 million over 4 years to support the project through its Horizon 2020 programme.

Rising water temperatures, ocean acidification and overfishing seem to favour jellyfish blooms. More and more often, they appear in huge numbers that have already destroyed entire fish farms on European coasts and blocked cooling systems of power stations near the coast. A number of jellyfish species are poisonous, while some tropical species are even among the most toxic animals on earth.

“In Europe alone, the imported American comb jelly has a biomass of one billion tons. While we tend to ignore the jellyfish there must be other solutions,” says Jamileh Javidpour of GEOMAR, initiator and coordinator of the GoJelly project, which is a consortium of 15 scientific institutions from eight countries led by the GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research in Kiel.

The project will first entail exploring the life cycle of a number of jellyfish species. A lack of knowledge about life cycles makes it is almost impossible to predict when and why a large jellyfish bloom will occur. “This is what we want to change so that large jellyfish swarms can be caught before they reach the coasts,” says Javidpour.

At the same time, the project partners will also try to answer the question of what to do with jellyfish once they have been caught. One idea is to use the jellyfish to battle another, man-made threat.

“Studies have shown that mucus of jellyfish can bind microplastic. Therefore, we want to test whether biofilters can be produced from jellyfish. These biofilters could then be used in sewage treatment plants or in factories where microplastic is produced,” the GoJelly researchers say.

Jellyfish can also be used as fertilizers for agriculture or as aquaculture feed. “Fish in fish farms are currently fed with captured wild fish, which does not reduce the problem of overfishing, but increases it. Jellyfish as feed would be much more sustainable and would protect natural fish stocks,” says the GoJelly team.

Another option is using jellyfish as food for humans. “In some cultures, jellyfish are already on the menu. As long as the end product is no longer slimy, it could also gain greater general acceptance,” said Javidpour. Finally yet importantly, jellyfish contain collagen, a substance very much sought after in the cosmetics industry.

Project partners from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, led by Nicole Aberle-Malzahn, and SINTEF Ocean, led by Rachel Tiller, will analyse how abiotic (hydrography, temperature), biotic (abundance, biomass, ecology, reproduction) and biochemical parameters (stoichiometry, food quality) affect the initiation of jellyfish blooms.

Based on a comprehensive analysis of triggering mechanisms, origin of seed populations and ecological modelling, the researchers hope to be able to make more reliable predictions on jellyfish bloom formation of specific taxa in the GoJelly target areas. This knowledge will allow sustainable harvesting of jellyfish communities from various Northern and Southern European populations.

This harvest will provide a marine biomass of unknown potential that will be explored by researchers at SINTEF Ocean, among others, to explore the possible ways to use the material.

A team from SINTEF Ocean’s strategic program Clean Ocean will also work with European colleagues on developing a filter from the mucus of the jellyfish that will catch microplastics from household products (which have their source in fleece sweaters, breakdown of plastic products or from cosmetics, for example) and prevent these from entering the marine ecosystem.

Finally, SINTEF Ocean will examine the socio-ecological system and games, where they will explore the potentials of an emerging international management regime for a global effort to mitigate the negative effects of microplastics in the oceans.

“Jellyfish can be used for many purposes. We see this as an opportunity to use the potential of the huge biomass drifting right in front of our front door,” Javidpour said.

You can find out more about GoJelly on their Twitter account.

Emerging technology and the law

Leave a reply

I have three news bits about legal issues that are arising as a consequence of emerging technologies.

Deep neural networks, art, and copyright

Caption: The rise of automated art opens new creative avenues, coupled with new problems for copyright protection. Credit: Provided by: Alexander Mordvintsev, Christopher Olah and Mike Tyka

Presumably this artwork is a demonstration of automated art although they never really do explain how in the news item/news release. An April 26, 2017 news item on ScienceDaily announces research into copyright and the latest in using neural networks to create art,

In 1968, sociologist Jean Baudrillard wrote on automatism that “contained within it is the dream of a dominated world […] that serves an inert and dreamy humanity.”

With the growing popularity of Deep Neural Networks (DNN’s), this dream is fast becoming a reality.

Dr. Jean-Marc Deltorn, researcher at the Centre d’études internationales de la propriété intellectuelle in Strasbourg, argues that we must remain a responsive and responsible force in this process of automation — not inert dominators. As he demonstrates in a recent Frontiers in Digital Humanities paper, the dream of automation demands a careful study of the legal problems linked to copyright.

An April 26, 2017 Frontiers (publishing) news release on EurekAlert, which originated the news item, describes the research in more detail,

For more than half a century, artists have looked to computational processes as a way of expanding their vision. DNN’s are the culmination of this cross-pollination: by learning to identify a complex number of patterns, they can generate new creations.

These systems are made up of complex algorithms modeled on the transmission of signals between neurons in the brain.

DNN creations rely in equal measure on human inputs and the non-human algorithmic networks that process them.

Inputs are fed into the system, which is layered. Each layer provides an opportunity for a more refined knowledge of the inputs (shape, color, lines). Neural networks compare actual outputs to expected ones, and correct the predictive error through repetition and optimization. They train their own pattern recognition, thereby optimizing their learning curve and producing increasingly accurate outputs.

The deeper the layers are, the higher the level of abstraction. The highest layers are able to identify the contents of a given input with reasonable accuracy, after extended periods of training.

Creation thus becomes increasingly automated through what Deltorn calls “the arcane traceries of deep architecture”. The results are sufficiently abstracted from their sources to produce original creations that have been exhibited in galleries, sold at auction and performed at concerts.

The originality of DNN’s is a combined product of technological automation on one hand, human inputs and decisions on the other.

DNN’s are gaining popularity. Various platforms (such as DeepDream) now allow internet users to generate their very own new creations . This popularization of the automation process calls for a comprehensive legal framework that ensures a creator’s economic and moral rights with regards to his work – copyright protection.

Form, originality and attribution are the three requirements for copyright. And while DNN creations satisfy the first of these three, the claim to originality and attribution will depend largely on a given country legislation and on the traceability of the human creator.

Legislation usually sets a low threshold to originality. As DNN creations could in theory be able to create an endless number of riffs on source materials, the uncurbed creation of original works could inflate the existing number of copyright protections.

Additionally, a small number of national copyright laws confers attribution to what UK legislation defines loosely as “the person by whom the arrangements necessary for the creation of the work are undertaken.” In the case of DNN’s, this could mean anybody from the programmer to the user of a DNN interface.

Combined with an overly supple take on originality, this view on attribution would further increase the number of copyrightable works.

The risk, in both cases, is that artists will be less willing to publish their own works, for fear of infringement of DNN copyright protections.

In order to promote creativity – one seminal aim of copyright protection – the issue must be limited to creations that manifest a personal voice “and not just the electric glint of a computational engine,” to quote Deltorn. A delicate act of discernment.

DNN’s promise new avenues of creative expression for artists – with potential caveats. Copyright protection – a “catalyst to creativity” – must be contained. Many of us gently bask in the glow of an increasingly automated form of technology. But if we want to safeguard the ineffable quality that defines much art, it might be a good idea to hone in more closely on the differences between the electric and the creative spark.

This research is and be will part of a broader Frontiers Research Topic collection of articles on Deep Learning and Digital Humanities.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Deep Creations: Intellectual Property and the Automata by Jean-Marc Deltorn. Front. Digit. Humanit., 01 February 2017 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fdigh.2017.00003

This paper is open access.

Conference on governance of emerging technologies

I received an April 17, 2017 notice via email about this upcoming conference. Here’s more from the Fifth Annual Conference on Governance of Emerging Technologies: Law, Policy and Ethics webpage,

The Fifth Annual Conference on Governance of Emerging Technologies:

Law, Policy and Ethics held at the new

Beus Center for Law & Society in Phoenix, AZ

May 17-19, 2017!

Call for Abstracts – Now Closed

The conference will consist of plenary and session presentations and discussions on regulatory, governance, legal, policy, social and ethical aspects of emerging technologies, including (but not limited to) nanotechnology, synthetic biology, gene editing, biotechnology, genomics, personalized medicine, human enhancement technologies, telecommunications, information technologies, surveillance technologies, geoengineering, neuroscience, artificial intelligence, and robotics. The conference is premised on the belief that there is much to be learned and shared from and across the governance experience and proposals for these various emerging technologies.

Keynote Speakers:

Gillian Hadfield, Richard L. and Antoinette Schamoi Kirtland Professor of Law and Professor of Economics USC [University of Southern California] Gould School of Law

Shobita Parthasarathy, Associate Professor of Public Policy and Women’s Studies, Director, Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program University of Michigan

Stuart Russell, Professor at [University of California] Berkeley, is a computer scientist known for his contributions to artificial intelligence

Craig Shank, Vice President for Corporate Standards Group in Microsoft’s Corporate, External and Legal Affairs (CELA)

Plenary Panels:

Innovation – Responsible and/or Permissionless

Ellen-Marie Forsberg, Senior Researcher/Research Manager at Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences

Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow with the Technology Policy Program at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University

Wendell Wallach, Consultant, ethicist, and scholar at Yale University’s Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics

 Gene Drives, Trade and International Regulations

Greg Kaebnick, Director, Editorial Department; Editor, Hastings Center Report; Research Scholar, Hastings Center

Jennifer Kuzma, Goodnight-North Carolina GlaxoSmithKline Foundation Distinguished Professor in Social Sciences in the School of Public and International Affairs (SPIA) and co-director of the Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Center at North Carolina State University

Andrew Maynard, Senior Sustainability Scholar, Julie Ann Wrigley Global Institute of Sustainability Director, Risk Innovation Lab, School for the Future of Innovation in Society Professor, School for the Future of Innovation in Society, Arizona State University

Gary Marchant, Regents’ Professor of Law, Professor of Law Faculty Director and Faculty Fellow, Center for Law, Science & Innovation, Arizona State University

Marc Saner, Inaugural Director of the Institute for Science, Society and Policy, and Associate Professor, University of Ottawa Department of Geography

Big Data

Anupam Chander, Martin Luther King, Jr. Professor of Law and Director, California International Law Center, UC Davis School of Law

Pilar Ossorio, Professor of Law and Bioethics, University of Wisconsin, School of Law and School of Medicine and Public Health; Morgridge Institute for Research, Ethics Scholar-in-Residence

George Poste, Chief Scientist, Complex Adaptive Systems Initiative (CASI) (http://www.casi.asu.edu/), Regents’ Professor and Del E. Webb Chair in Health Innovation, Arizona State University

Emily Shuckburgh, climate scientist and deputy head of the Polar Oceans Team at the British Antarctic Survey, University of Cambridge

 Responsible Development of AI

Spring Berman, Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering, Arizona State University

John Havens, The IEEE [Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers] Global Initiative for Ethical Considerations in Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Systems

Subbarao Kambhampati, Senior Sustainability Scientist, Julie Ann Wrigley Global Institute of Sustainability, Professor, School of Computing, Informatics and Decision Systems Engineering, Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering, Arizona State University

Wendell Wallach, Consultant, Ethicist, and Scholar at Yale University’s Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics

Existential and Catastrophic Ricks [sic]

Tony Barrett, Co-Founder and Director of Research of the Global Catastrophic Risk Institute

Haydn Belfield,  Academic Project Administrator, Centre for the Study of Existential Risk at the University of Cambridge

Margaret E. Kosal,  Associate Director, Sam Nunn School of International Affairs, Georgia Institute of Technology

Catherine Rhodes,  Academic Project Manager, Centre for the Study of Existential Risk at CSER, University of Cambridge

…

These were the panels that are of interest to me; there are others on the homepage.

Here’s some information from the Conference registration webpage,

Early Bird Registration – $50 off until May 1! Enter discount code: earlybirdGETs50

New: Group Discount – Register 2+ attendees together and receive an additional 20% off for all group members!

Click Here to Register!

Conference registration fees are as follows:

  • General (non-CLE) Registration: $150.00
  • CLE Registration: $350.00
  • *Current Student / ASU Law Alumni Registration: $50.00
  • ^Cybsersecurity sessions only (May 19): $100 CLE / $50 General / Free for students (registration info coming soon)

There you have it.

Neuro-techno future laws

I’m pretty sure this isn’t the first exploration of potential legal issues arising from research into neuroscience although it’s the first one I’ve stumbled across. From an April 25, 2017 news item on phys.org,

New human rights laws to prepare for advances in neurotechnology that put the ‘freedom of the mind’ at risk have been proposed today in the open access journal Life Sciences, Society and Policy.

The authors of the study suggest four new human rights laws could emerge in the near future to protect against exploitation and loss of privacy. The four laws are: the right to cognitive liberty, the right to mental privacy, the right to mental integrity and the right to psychological continuity.

An April 25, 2017 Biomed Central news release on EurekAlert, which originated the news item, describes the work in more detail,

Marcello Ienca, lead author and PhD student at the Institute for Biomedical Ethics at the University of Basel, said: “The mind is considered to be the last refuge of personal freedom and self-determination, but advances in neural engineering, brain imaging and neurotechnology put the freedom of the mind at risk. Our proposed laws would give people the right to refuse coercive and invasive neurotechnology, protect the privacy of data collected by neurotechnology, and protect the physical and psychological aspects of the mind from damage by the misuse of neurotechnology.”

Advances in neurotechnology, such as sophisticated brain imaging and the development of brain-computer interfaces, have led to these technologies moving away from a clinical setting and into the consumer domain. While these advances may be beneficial for individuals and society, there is a risk that the technology could be misused and create unprecedented threats to personal freedom.

Professor Roberto Andorno, co-author of the research, explained: “Brain imaging technology has already reached a point where there is discussion over its legitimacy in criminal court, for example as a tool for assessing criminal responsibility or even the risk of reoffending. Consumer companies are using brain imaging for ‘neuromarketing’, to understand consumer behaviour and elicit desired responses from customers. There are also tools such as ‘brain decoders’ which can turn brain imaging data into images, text or sound. All of these could pose a threat to personal freedom which we sought to address with the development of four new human rights laws.”

The authors explain that as neurotechnology improves and becomes commonplace, there is a risk that the technology could be hacked, allowing a third-party to ‘eavesdrop’ on someone’s mind. In the future, a brain-computer interface used to control consumer technology could put the user at risk of physical and psychological damage caused by a third-party attack on the technology. There are also ethical and legal concerns over the protection of data generated by these devices that need to be considered.

International human rights laws make no specific mention to neuroscience, although advances in biomedicine have become intertwined with laws, such as those concerning human genetic data. Similar to the historical trajectory of the genetic revolution, the authors state that the on-going neurorevolution will force a reconceptualization of human rights laws and even the creation of new ones.

Marcello Ienca added: “Science-fiction can teach us a lot about the potential threat of technology. Neurotechnology featured in famous stories has in some cases already become a reality, while others are inching ever closer, or exist as military and commercial prototypes. We need to be prepared to deal with the impact these technologies will have on our personal freedom.”

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology by Marcello Ienca and Roberto Andorno. Life Sciences, Society and Policy201713:5 DOI: 10.1186/s40504-017-0050-1 Published: 26 April 2017

©  The Author(s). 2017

This paper is open access.

Environmentally sustainable electromobility

Leave a reply

Researchers at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology pose an interesting question in a Dec. 8, 2016 news item on Nanowerk,

Does it really help to drive an electric car if the electricity you use to charge the batteries come from a coal mine in Germany, or if the batteries were manufactured in China using coal?

Researchers at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology’s Industrial Ecology Programme have looked at all of the environmental costs of electric vehicles to determine the cradle-to-grave environmental footprint of building and operating these vehicles.

Increasingly, researchers are examining not just immediate environmental impacts but the impact a product has throughout its life cycle as this Dec. 8, 2016 Norwegian University of Science and Technology press release on EurekAlert notes,

In the 6 December [2016] issue of Nature Nanotechnology, the researchers report on a model that can help guide developers as they consider new nanomaterials for batteries or fuel cells. The goal is to create the most environmentally sustainable vehicle fleet possible, which is no small challenge given that there are already an estimated 1 billion cars and light trucks on the world’s roads, a number that is expected to double by 2035.

With this in mind, the researchers created an environmental life-cycle screening framework that looked at the environmental and other impacts of extraction, refining, synthesis, performance, durability and recyclablility of materials.

This allowed the researchers to evaluate the most promising nanomaterials for lithium-ion batteries (LIB) and proton exchange membrane hydrogen fuel cells (PEMFC) as power sources for electric vehicles. “Our analysis of the current situation clearly outlines the challenge,” the researchers wrote. “The materials with the best potential environmental profiles during the material extraction and production phase…. often present environmental disadvantages during their use phase… and vice versa.”

The hope is that by identifying all the environmental costs of different materials used to build electric cars, designers and engineers can “make the right design trade-offs that optimize LIB and PEMFC nanomaterials for EV usage towards mitigating climate change,” the authors wrote.

They encouraged material scientists and those who conduct life-cycle assessments to work together so that electric cars can be a key contributor to mitigating the effects of transportation on climate change.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Nanotechnology for environmentally sustainable electromobility by Linda Ager-Wick Ellingsen, Christine Roxanne Hung, Guillaume Majeau-Bettez, Bhawna Singh, Zhongwei Chen, M. Stanley Whittingham, & Anders Hammer Strømman. Nature Nanotechnology 11, 1039–1051 (2016)  doi:10.1038/nnano.2016.237 Published online 06 December 2016 Corrected online 14 December 2016

This paper is behind a paywall.