Expert Systems on Multiprocessor Architectures. Phase 1

1988 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward A. Feigenbaum ◽  
Robert S. Engelmore
1991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward A. Feigenbaum ◽  
Robert Engelmore ◽  
H. P. Nii ◽  
James P. Rice

2009 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 378 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vinicius Barreto Da Silva ◽  
Daniel Fábio Kawano ◽  
Ivone Carvalho ◽  
Edemilson Cardoso Conceição ◽  
Osvaldo Freitas ◽  
...  

PURPOSE: to discuss the contribution of psoralen and bergapten metabolites on psoralens toxicity. METHODS: Computational chemistry prediction of metabolic reactions and toxicophoric groups based on the expert systems Derek and Meteor. RESULTS: a total of 15 metabolites were suggested for both psoralen and bergapten based on phase 1 and 2 biotransformations until the 3rd generation. Five toxicophoric substructures were shared among psoralen, bergapten and their corresponding metabolites; one toxicophoric marker (resorcinol) was only identified in bergapten and its biotransformation products. CONCLUSION: Although the toxic effects of psoralens are well known and documented, there is little information concerning the role of their metabolites in this process. We believe this work add to the knowledge of which molecular substructures are relevant to the process of metabolism and toxicity induction, thus guiding the search and development of more effective and less toxic drugs to treat vitiligo.


1991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward A. Feigenbaum ◽  
Robert Engelmore ◽  
H. P. Nii ◽  
James P. Rice

1991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward A. Feigenbaum ◽  
Robert Engelmore ◽  
H. P. Nii ◽  
James P. Rice

1991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward A. Feigenbaum ◽  
Robert Engelmore ◽  
H. P. Nii ◽  
James P. Rice

1993 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. A. Bramer ◽  
R. W. Milne

2001 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 215-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Léon Beauvois

After having been told they were free to accept or refuse, pupils aged 6–7 and 10–11 (tested individually) were led to agree to taste a soup that looked disgusting (phase 1: initial counter-motivational obligation). Before tasting the soup, they had to state what they thought about it. A week later, they were asked whether they wanted to try out some new needles that had supposedly been invented to make vaccinations less painful. Agreement or refusal to try was noted, along with the size of the needle chosen in case of agreement (phase 2: act generalization). The main findings included (1) a strong dissonance reduction effect in phase 1, especially for the younger children (rationalization), (2) a generalization effect in phase 2 (foot-in-the-door effect), and (3) a facilitatory effect on generalization of internal causal explanations about the initial agreement. The results are discussed in relation to the distinction between rationalization and internalization.


1986 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 448-449
Author(s):  
Elaine A. Rich
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document