Intramural R&D Expense and Regional High Technology Industry’s Profitability–An Industry-Province Level Analysis

Author(s):  
Xiaolan Chen ◽  
Hao Ma ◽  
Ying Wu ◽  
Min Li
2017 ◽  
Vol 168 ◽  
pp. 1039-1047 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Chen ◽  
Fuquan Zhao ◽  
Zongwei Liu ◽  
Xunmin Ou ◽  
Han Hao

2017 ◽  
Vol 68 ◽  
pp. 478-489 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xu Zhang ◽  
Xunmin Ou ◽  
Xi Yang ◽  
Tianyu Qi ◽  
Kyung-Min Nam ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahan Ghafari ◽  
Bardia Hejazi ◽  
Arman Karshenas ◽  
Stefan Dascalu ◽  
Luca Ferretti ◽  
...  

Abstract Many countries with an early outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 struggled to gauge the size and start date of the epidemic mainly due to limited testing capacities and a large proportion of undetected asymptomatic and mild infections. Iran was among the first countries with a major outbreak outside China. Using all genomic sequences collected from patients with a travel link to Iran, we estimate that the epidemic started on 21/01/2020 (95% HPD: 05/12/2019 – 14/02/2020) with a doubling time of 3 days (95% HPD: 1.68 – 16.27). We also show, using air travel data from confirmed exported cases, that from late February to early March the number of active cases across the country were more than a hundred times higher than the reported cases at the time. A detailed province-level analysis of all-cause mortality shows 20,718 (CI 95%: 18,859 – 22,576) excess deaths during winter and spring 2020 compared to previous years, almost twice the number of reported COVID-19-related deaths at the time. Correcting for under-reporting of prevalence and deaths, we use an SEIR model to reconstruct the outbreak dynamics in Iran. Our model forecasted the second epidemic peak and suggests that by 14/07/2020 a total of 9M (CI 95%: 118K – 44M) have recovered from the disease across the country. These findings have profound implications for assessing the stage of the epidemic in Iran and shed light on the dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 transmissions in Iran and central Asia despite significant levels of under-reporting.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e0246715
Author(s):  
Duanbing Chen ◽  
Tao Zhou

Control measures are necessary to contain the spread of serious infectious diseases such as COVID-19, especially in its early stage. We propose to use temporal reproduction number an extension of effective reproduction number, to evaluate the efficacy of control measures, and establish a Monte-Carlo method to estimate the temporal reproduction number without complete information about symptom onsets. The province-level analysis indicates that the effective reproduction numbers of the majority of provinces in mainland China got down to < 1 just by one week from the setting of control measures, and the temporal reproduction number of the week [15 Feb, 21 Feb] is only about 0.18. It is therefore likely that Chinese control measures on COVID-19 are effective and efficient, though more research needs to be performed.


2009 ◽  
Vol 45 (9) ◽  
pp. 1494-1512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew A. Cole ◽  
Robert J.R. Elliott ◽  
Jing Zhang

Agribusiness ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 538-556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Philippe Gervais ◽  
Olivier Bonroy ◽  
Steve Couture

Author(s):  
R. Packwood ◽  
M.W. Phaneuf ◽  
V. Weatherall ◽  
I. Bassignana

The development of specialized analytical instruments such as the SIMS, XPS, ISS etc., all with truly incredible abilities in certain areas, has given rise to the notion that electron probe microanalysis (EPMA) is an old fashioned and rather inadequate technique, and one that is of little or no use in such high technology fields as the semiconductor industry. Whilst it is true that the microprobe does not possess parts-per-billion sensitivity (ppb) or monolayer depth resolution it is also true that many times these extremes of performance are not essential and that a few tens of parts-per-million (ppm) and a few tens of nanometers depth resolution is all that is required. In fact, the microprobe may well be the second choice method for a wide range of analytical problems and even the method of choice for a few.The literature is replete with remarks that suggest the writer is confusing an SEM-EDXS combination with an instrument such as the Cameca SX-50. Even where this confusion does not exist, the literature discusses microprobe detection limits that are seldom stated to be as low as 100 ppm, whereas there are numerous element combinations for which 10-20 ppm is routinely attainable.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document